If the Creation Story in Genesis Is Not Literally True, Does the Rest of the Bible Fall Apart?
If the creation story in Genesis is not literally true, does the rest of the bible fall apart?
The creation story is one of the best know stories of the bible but has also been questioned on whether or not to take it literally or not and if it isn’t taken literally then should the rest of the bible also been taken literally or does it just fall apart?
Some people would agree that the bible falls apart as they think that the creation story is the basis of the earth and the base of the bible so if that story is not literally true then why should we believe any other stories the bible has? The story doesn’t have to fall apart as if you can’t even believe in the concept or theory of Adam and Eve there would be no point in the other stories in the bible so no tree of good and evil, then there can be no fall of man, (or original sin) and no separation from God. If there was no fall, then there was no reason to send Jesus as a sacrifice to reconcile man to God. And if there was no Jesus, or he wasn't a sacrifice for atonement, then doesn't that unravel all of Christianity?
On the other hand some people would disagree and believe that the bible doesn’t fall apart as many Christians would counter my first argument by saying that the entirety of the bible isn’t based on the creation story and that the creation story may have been interpreted in such a way that would help Christian teachings about God being omnipotent in our world.
To further support this view many Christians don’t even take the bible as a literal interpretation. The Bible is meant to be a book of teaching for Christians so in order to do this; stories may have to be altered in order to be interpreted in such a way to enable someone to be a good Christian
To conclude I believe Genesis is ancient literature. It seeks to explain the fundamental relationship between God and humans. To do this people need to be explained how their world was created but this way doesn’t have to be literal but just allows
The creation story is one of the best know stories of the bible but has also been questioned on whether or not to take it literally or not and if it isn’t taken literally then should the rest of the bible also been taken literally or does it just fall apart?
Some people would agree that the bible falls apart as they think that the creation story is the basis of the earth and the base of the bible so if that story is not literally true then why should we believe any other stories the bible has? The story doesn’t have to fall apart as if you can’t even believe in the concept or theory of Adam and Eve there would be no point in the other stories in the bible so no tree of good and evil, then there can be no fall of man, (or original sin) and no separation from God. If there was no fall, then there was no reason to send Jesus as a sacrifice to reconcile man to God. And if there was no Jesus, or he wasn't a sacrifice for atonement, then doesn't that unravel all of Christianity?
On the other hand some people would disagree and believe that the bible doesn’t fall apart as many Christians would counter my first argument by saying that the entirety of the bible isn’t based on the creation story and that the creation story may have been interpreted in such a way that would help Christian teachings about God being omnipotent in our world.
To further support this view many Christians don’t even take the bible as a literal interpretation. The Bible is meant to be a book of teaching for Christians so in order to do this; stories may have to be altered in order to be interpreted in such a way to enable someone to be a good Christian
To conclude I believe Genesis is ancient literature. It seeks to explain the fundamental relationship between God and humans. To do this people need to be explained how their world was created but this way doesn’t have to be literal but just allows