Is Genesis Intended to Be a Reliable and Literal Account of Events, or Not?

[POI]

He's writing poetically, but he's not writing poetically about the sun; he is talking about a fictional love. Just like Genesis isn't claiming to be a reliable guide on the order of creation. To treat them as such is the error, not the errors mistreating them as such fabricates.

I've spoken to many smart and well-read individuals on both ends of this topic question. After thousands of years, why is this topic still not settled? What IS the SIMPLE answer?

For Debate: Is Genesis meant to be reliable and literal, as it pertains to the ordering of events/etc, or not?

[1213]

I am saying the Bible says is was day and night, dark and light, morning and evening. Either the sun was doing it of God had made a sort of imitation day and night before the sun was made.

By what is said in the Bible, God made a light before the sun. And that light was causing the daylight before the sun.

It is not because geological dating has evidence

Evidence that could mean something else than what you want to think it means.

Yes, but the Bible talks of a circle OF the earth, not ON the earth, ...

Again, in Bible earth means dry land, not the whole planet. That is why it speaks circle of earth. And it doesn't say it was on earth, because earth is just the dry land.

[TRANSPONDER]

I am saying the Bible says is was day and night, dark and light, morning and evening. Either the sun was doing it of God had made a sort of imitation day and night before the sun was made.

By what is said in the Bible, God made a light before the sun. And that light was causing the daylight before the sun.

It is not because geological dating has evidence

Evidence that could mean something else than what you want to think it means.

Yes, but the Bible talks of a circle OF the earth, not ON the earth, ...

Again, in Bible earth means dry land, not the whole planet. That is why it speaks circle of earth. And it doesn't say it was on earth, because earth is just the dry land.

We have done this already the light before the sun was light and dark, norning and evening.You know this as you said this 'cosmic light' switched on an off to imitate daylight, anticipating the creation of the sun. What a crazy theory.The creationists excuse that the sun was there but was hidden by cloud at least makes some semblance of sense, though it does have its' own problems.

if you think the various mutually supporting geologicaldatings means something else, letus hear what and how and your evidence, not just kneejerk denial.

Even creationists accept that strata was laid down in sequence with what looks like an evolutionary progression of life in it. They just try to claim this all happened in one Flood and the 'progression'they try to explain aselephants being able to sim better that Ichthyosaurs. As I said, RATE tries to invalidate radiometric data but failed (and I beleive had to admit failure).

In short Genesis - literalism is just denial of the evidence with nothing but failed attempts to explain evidence that debunks Genesis, though I have heard few as bad as your 'Comic radiation imitated daylight' theory.

Dry land in genesis does appear to mean the whole earth.The 'dry land' appeared out of the waters. That appears to be the whole thing. The waters ...hang on.... yes the waters divided into the ones in the firmament and the ones below (sea) and the dry land appeared. There is no shred of a suggestion that the earth was anything but this. I recall you tried to point to what seemed the ring of tectonic activity around the pacific but what that has to do with the Eath in genesis I can't imagine.

In any case clearly Eden wasan area from Ethiopia to Assyria, and even by 6000 BC they knew that wasn't all the earth. But the Bible reads the circleof the earth, not a circle ON the earth so if Eden was On the earth the ehole biblicalearth was a falt circle, like a seal stamp,with features (mountains and r valleys). It all fits the common circular flat earth with a domedsky over it, just as was believed by the Ehyptians, Babylonians and everyone else. It does not describe what cosmological science has told us and which even you can't take the step of denying. The earth is round, not flat.

[1213]

Even creationists accept that strata was laid down in sequence with what looks like an evolutionary progression of life in it. They just try to claim this all happened in one Flood and the 'progression'they try to explain aselephants being able to sim better that Ichthyosaurs. As I said, RATE tries to invalidate radiometric data but failed (and I beleive had to admit failure).

How do you explain that not all phases of evolution can be found in the strata?

Dry land in genesis does appear to mean the whole earth.The 'dry land' appeared out of the waters.

That is not what the Bible tells. According to the Bible, dry land was stretched over the great deep, which means this planet was covered with water in the beginning.

In any case clearly Eden wasan area from Ethiopia to Assyria,

In a way it is good that you have no idea where it is.

[TRANSPONDER]

Even creationists accept that strata was laid down in sequence with what looks like an evolutionary progression of life in it. They just try to claim this all happened in one Flood and the 'progression'they try to explain aselephants being able to sim better that Ichthyosaurs. As I said, RATE tries to invalidate radiometric data but failed (and I beleive had to admit failure).

How do you explain that not all phases of evolution can be found in the strata?

Dry land in genesis does appear to mean the whole earth.The 'dry land' appeared out of the waters.

That is not what the Bible tells. According to the Bible, dry land was stretched over the great deep, which means this planet was covered with water in the beginning.

In any case clearly Eden wasan area from Ethiopia to Assyria,

In a way it is good that you have no idea where it is.

What are you even taking about? A complete strata from Archon to Pliestocene is known and the fossil record shows a convincing progression. Of course not everything is recorded. Do you think the civil war is a lie just because not every occurrence or event is recorded?

Asto genesis, it is what I said - the water was split into the water above and below the firmament, dry land (earth) appeared on or over the water. Flat and circular earth and all of it. The water below (the deeps) makes perfect sense in Biblical terms.

Eden appeared in or on that earth. The Bible says exactly where it was. (Gen 2. 8 - 14 between Cush (Ethiopia) and Mesopotamia (Assyria). It's coming to something when an atheist has to instruct you in your own Bible.

[1213]

...A complete strata from Archon to Pliestocene is known and the fossil record shows a convincing progression. ...

You are easily convinced. How do you explain that lot of intermediate forms are missing? How it is possible that vast number of intermediate forms are missing?

[The Nice Centurion]

...A complete strata from Archon to Pliestocene is known and the fossil record shows a convincing progression. ...

You are easily convinced. How do you explain that lot of intermediate forms are missing? How it is possible that vast number of intermediate forms are missing?

Since you are the One who brought it up, that part now has become your proplem alone.
I suggest you play sleuth out there an find them numbers of intermedia forms which art amiss!

[TRANSPONDER]

...A complete strata from Archon to Pliestocene is known and the fossil record shows a convincing progression. ...

You are easily convinced. How do you explain that lot of intermediate forms are missing? How it is possible that vast number of intermediate forms are missing?

There are of course many nintermediate (transitional) forms. But less than the stasis forms for the same reason as cars. We don't find many prototype or development cars, but loads of the resultant model. Thus the critter adapts over a relatively short time, 10,000 to 100, k years should do it. But the resultant species may last for millions of years with thousands of fossils.

Fossilisation is a very rare occurrence. So it is testament to how long this time was that we have so many, and transitional forms are yet more rare. But even so we have about 20 Australopithecus, a dozen Archaeopteryx and a handful of Tiktallik or related transitionals. Oh - and of course the pretty much complete transitional series of Pakicetus to whale.

I'll remind you of why that is the slam - dunk proof. It proves speciation happens. You tried every darn thing you could think of to get out of it but the evidence is conclusive and the excuses you tried (imitation leg bones are better) failed (shark cartilage fins are just as good. And here's the thing - prove One speciation and all the others are validated, even if the sequence is incomplete and many transitional forms are missing.

Just as if you could prove one Bible miracle or prophecy, that would validate all the rest. That is how it works. Both ways.

[1213]

There are of course many nintermediate (transitional) forms. But less than the stasis forms for the same reason as cars. We don't find many prototype or development cars, but loads of the resultant model. Thus the critter adapts over a relatively short time, 10,000 to 100, k years should do it. But the resultant species may last for millions of years with thousands of fossils.
...

Yeah, surely.

...and of course the pretty much complete transitional series of Pakicetus to whale.
...

Are you talking about the 5 different animals that are believed to show evolution? Why do you think they are not just 5 different species?

[TRANSPONDER]

There are of course many nintermediate (transitional) forms. But less than the stasis forms for the same reason as cars. We don't find many prototype or development cars, but loads of the resultant model. Thus the critter adapts over a relatively short time, 10,000 to 100, k years should do it. But the resultant species may last for millions of years with thousands of fossils.
...

Yeah, surely.

...and of course the pretty much complete transitional series of Pakicetus to whale.
...

Are you talking about the 5 different animals that are believed to show evolution? Why do you think they are not just 5 different species?

Because of the specific identifiable ear bones of that line of animals that are present in all the evolutions. I recall the analogy of a car -badge remaining identifiably the same 'kind' of car through its' various evolutions. Even to a total transformation from what it was like initially. And yes, surely the hypothesis of stasis (or what seems to be the misnomer 'saltatllion' - jumping) fits what we see, many gradual evolutions within kinds but relatively few transitional forms between species. It fits the evidence and I don't know what evidence you have other than denial of everything.

[Capbook]

He's writing poetically, but he's not writing poetically about the sun; he is talking about a fictional love. Just like Genesis isn't claiming to be a reliable guide on the order of creation. To treat them as such is the error, not the errors mistreating them as such fabricates.

I've spoken to many smart and well-read individuals on both ends of this topic question. After thousands of years, why is this topic still not settled? What IS the SIMPLE answer?

For Debate: Is Genesis meant to be reliable and literal, as it pertains to the ordering of events/etc, or not?

Gen 1:20-31
20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning — the fifth day.

24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground — everything that has the breath of life in it — I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning — the sixth day.
NIV

I believe Genesis is intended to be reliable and literal account specially on creation.
God made the heaven and earth and all that is written in literal six days.
If you apply the belief of some that it requires a span of time in every creation.
How would the fish on sea, birds of the air and everything that has breath of life created in the fifth day of creation know what their food is?
God only informed them what their food is on the sixth day of creation.