Metaphor or not, if not, what

[Willum]

So if it is a metaphor, and not how things were really created, how does this not invalidate the creation entirely?

For it claims God created everything.
But if this is only a metaphor, then what actually happened?
Since we can't say, then how many of all claims relating to it are valid, and how?

[JJ50]

I think the creation story is a myth, and not credible.

[bjs]

[Replying to Willum]

I am confused by your wording. You posted a poll question about the Garden of Eden, but then in your first post you wrote about creation. In the biblical account the Garden of Eden came after the creation story. They are separate. Which did you intend to discuss?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 3 by bjs]

I don't know how to answer this question delicately. So I apologize...
An assumption of the topic is that the reader is familiar enough with the Book of Genesis, that they understand how Creation, Genesis and the Garden-Story overlap so as they can be drawn upon.

If you don't, just bow out.
Respectfully yours,

[bjs]

[Replying to Willum]

If I might also be a little indelicate…

To treat the first three chapters of Genesis as one passage would reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of literary styles in general and this narrative specifically. Notably, the first chapter of Genesis is liturgical prologue with several significant markers that set it apart from the pericope beginning in Genesis 2:4 and continuing to the end of chapter three.

Any attempt to treat the opening three chapters of Genesis as a single pericope is certain to give an inaccurate view of the passage.

I will also note that there are more kinds of symbolism than just metaphor. Saying that something is either a metaphor or the way it really happened is a false dichotomy.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 5 by bjs]

GREAT!
Though I would have liked you to respect the topic enough in the beginning to not comment.
You could be right, let us see if anyone else is capable of integrating the three concepts from the same story into a considerate reply.

[Tart]

im not voting for the reason of you need an "im not totally sure" vote, which is what most people should be pressing, in my opinion

[Tart]

Since we can't say, then how many of all claims relating to it are valid, and how?

That depends what you are talking about, like we have much more different evidence for the Resurrection (for example) where i dont think anyone could conclude it was a metaphor (id be happy to discuss why), then we do for the Garden of Eden.

[SallyF]

I suspect the "Garden of Eden" is a metaphor for a temple scriptorium.

[SallyF]

[Replying to Willum]

If I might also be a little indelicate…

To treat the first three chapters of Genesis as one passage would reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of literary styles in general and this narrative specifically. Notably, the first chapter of Genesis is liturgical prologue with several significant markers that set it apart from the pericope beginning in Genesis 2:4 and continuing to the end of chapter three.

Any attempt to treat the opening three chapters of Genesis as a single pericope is certain to give an inaccurate view of the passage.

I will also note that there are more kinds of symbolism than just metaphor. Saying that something is either a metaphor or the way it really happened is a false dichotomy.

I note that you have not given us the benefit of your knowledge of the understanding of the symbolism in the biblical creation myths.

I started a thread so you could do just that ….