Literal Genesis - Why?

[Achronos]

This seems like the right place for this topic but I might be wrong.  ??

I have a question that I welcome any input on, from atheists and theists alike.
 
I've been having discussions with a good friend of mine who I believe to be (more or less by his own admission) a "Young Earth creationist".  This puzzles me quite a bit since he, like me, has a very logical and scientific way of thinking.  He values rational thinking. We are the sort of friends that know what the other is thinking before they say it, and sometimes even think it.  I say that to emphasize how well we know each other, and how similar we are.  I am therefore left very confused how a mind similar in every way to my own can believe the Christian Deluge story from a literal, Young Earth, anti-evolution perspective.

The key thing about that which I don't understand is why those adhering to that belief felt compelled to take Genesis literally in the first place.  I suspect there is some way to pick and choose the right verses from the New Testament to form an argument for taking it literally, but, he was unable to articulate that argument or those verses for me.  I can't blame him for that, he's not a Biblical scholar with instant command of every argument...since he is overall a rational thinker I trust he must have heard a compelling (to him) argument somewhere.  I've tried searching for that argument online but I must be using the wrong terms, or nobody has really written about it here yet, because I haven't found much.

So, can someone here explain the argument that Genesis must absolutely be taken literally?

It seems like Christians are shifting more toward that opinion today than in recent history.  Just a decade or so ago I seem to recall my mom (a Christian) saying "a day for God isn't necessarily a day as we think of it".  But now she, too, is waxing literal/fundamentalist.  Why the shift?

I am currently re-reading Genesis, a bit at a time.  I made a pretty crude argument when talking to this friend...  I said, "God says the serpent will eat dirt forever...we know serpents don't eat dirt...so obviously God was speaking figuratively, right, not literally?"  He told me that is viewed to be Messianic prophecy.  If that is the case, I wondered where the guide is that states which verses in Genesis are to be taken literally, and which are to be taken figuratively as Messianic prophecy or some other prophecy, but our conversation did not go that route.  Can anyone explain this?

Any insight into these matters would be much appreciated!

I think the real reason for biblical literalism is insecurity. People who aren't really secure in their faith look for "THE Book" that would be absolutely inerrant and completely factual in every single word it contains. When they as much as hear that still something in THE Book does not quite correspond to reality, they say something like this: "if SOMETHING in the Word of God is not true, then how am I supposed to know that it's not like EVERYTHING there is not true?"

Personally, I could care less about factuality, historicity etc. of the Biblical account of Creation, Fall, Deluge, etc. My source of Truth is not THE Book but my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Who teaches me through my Church. The Church never made the literal understanding of Genesis a dogmat endorsed by Her Ecumenical Councils. Many wonderful men of God, bishops of this Church have made statements that they do not take Genesis as literal history and they do not advise their flock to take it literally. So I know that I am not in any kind of error in this regard.

You can see that there are two views in Orthodoxy. Some seem to take a literalistic viewpoint, and therefore anything they find in common with the Church fathers is a view that they should take on the Biblical stories.

Others try to find what effects their faith directly including the correct dogmas of the Church.  With this, they may or may not take the passages literally.  This view is not new.  It's also an old view as well.  It may not be as widely held, but we can see that there were views that were widely held that were later discarded.  Therefore, these people have no problem is accept scientific theories and maintaining their own fidelity to the Bible and Church tradition.

You will find Protestants who are very similar in diversity as Orthodox when it comes to Genesis.  There will be Protestants, like the Dr. Francis Collins, who abandoned atheism, who takes Genesis allegorically. Other Protestants take Genesis literally, and these are the famous Creationists.  In either case, both groups are also similar to the Orthodox by taking their support if not from Church fathers, from immediate influential preachers of the past. Dr. Francis Collins have gotten his influence clearly from CS Lewis as he writes in his book. Many others have attempted a compromise, like Old Earth Creationism (accepting death before Fall, but rejecting evolution), Old Earth Evolutionism except Man (accepting death, evolving creatures, but man completely separate), and Theistic Evolution within Biblical teachings (i.e. the Bible teaches evolution), all of which exist in the Protestant tradition, somewhat in the Orthodox.

[Voter]

The key thing about that which I don't understand is why those adhering to that belief felt compelled to take Genesis literally in the first place.  I suspect there is some way to pick and choose the right verses from the New Testament to form an argument for taking it literally, but, he was unable to articulate that argument or those verses for me.  I can't blame him for that, he's not a Biblical scholar with instant command of every argument...since he is overall a rational thinker I trust he must have heard a compelling (to him) argument somewhere.  I've tried searching for that argument online but I must be using the wrong terms, or nobody has really written about it here yet, because I haven't found much.

So, can someone here explain the argument that Genesis must absolutely be taken literally?

Jesus referred to the flood and A&E as historical events/persons. For example:

Matt 24
 37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

[Black36]

To the OP:

Whenever the Hebrew word "yom" appears with evening, morning, or a number it is then understood to be a 24 hour period. Genesis 1 has Not just one, but all three for each of the creation days, therefore "yom" CLEARLY means a 24 hour day in Genesis 1. Pretty straight forward I'd say, no?

[Gawen]

To the OP:

Whenever the Hebrew word "yom" appears with evening, morning, or a number it is then understood to be a 24 hour period. Genesis 1 has Not just one, but all three for each of the creation days, therefore "yom" CLEARLY means a 24 hour day in Genesis 1. Pretty straight forward I'd say, no?

No, it is not straight forward at all. And YEC'ers are quite biased in this.

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (1980, Moody Press):

"It can denote: 1. the period of light (as contrasted with the period of darkness), 2. the period of twenty-four hours, 3. a general vague "time," 4. a point of time, 5. a year (in the plural; I Sam 27:7; Ex 13:10, etc.)."

Examples:
Genesis 4:3 = growing season.
Jdg 11:40 = Four days out of a year.
Deuteronomy 10:10 = forty days.
Num 9:22 = month or year.
I Kings 1:1, 2 Chronicles 21:19 & 20, Amos 4:4, Exo 13:10 = year.
I Kings 11:42 = 40 years.
Isaiah 30:8 = forever.
Genesis 18:11 and 24:1; Joshua 23:1 and 23:2 = old age.
Samuel 9:20 = ago
Deuteronomy 5:29, 6:24, 14:23, 2 Chronicles 18:7 = Always
Genesis 40:4, Joshua 24:7, 2 Chronicles 15:3 = Season
Deuteronomy 19:9 and 18 other instances = Ever
Psalm 23:6 and 16 other instances = for ever
Deuteronomy 28:29 = Evermore
Genesis 1:3-31 = Is a bad translation in that Yom is a "long time". If YEC'ers want to go the literal "day" route, then in Genesis 2:4, all six creative days are referred to as one all-embracing "day."
Gen 1:5 = 12 hours

As I have shown, Yom can mean just about any period of time, all the way to infinity. YEC'ers conclusions to the contrary are not supported by Hebrew linguists. This strict 24 hour day only definition are linguistic rules created by Hebrew YEC'ers and their viewpoint is obviously biased. They have a specific agenda they are trying to prove, and thus cannot be objective and Christian YEC'ers have picked up on it to conform to their worldview.

[Black36]

To the OP:

Whenever the Hebrew word "yom" appears with evening, morning, or a number it is then understood to be a 24 hour period. Genesis 1 has Not just one, but all three for each of the creation days, therefore "yom" CLEARLY means a 24 hour day in Genesis 1. Pretty straight forward I'd say, no?

You have shown what? That yom can mean things other than a 24 hour period, well sure, no one denies this. What I have shown is why it means a 24 hour period in the verses I cited. Plus, some of your examples are also 24 hour periods for yom as well, so I don't get why you chose them all when some back my position.

[Ihateyoumike]

To the OP:

Whenever the Hebrew word "yom" appears with evening, morning, or a number it is then understood to be a 24 hour period. Genesis 1 has Not just one, but all three for each of the creation days, therefore "yom" CLEARLY means a 24 hour day in Genesis 1. Pretty straight forward I'd say, no?

You have shown what? That yom can mean things other than a 24 hour period, well sure, no one denies this. What I have shown is why it means a 24 hour period in the verses I cited. Plus, some of your examples are also 24 hour periods for yom as well, so I don't get why you chose them all when some back my position.

Arguing with yourself now?

[Black36]

To the OP:

Whenever the Hebrew word "yom" appears with evening, morning, or a number it is then understood to be a 24 hour period. Genesis 1 has Not just one, but all three for each of the creation days, therefore "yom" CLEARLY means a 24 hour day in Genesis 1. Pretty straight forward I'd say, no?

You have shown what? That yom can mean things other than a 24 hour period, well sure, no one denies this. What I have shown is why it means a 24 hour period in the verses I cited. Plus, some of your examples are also 24 hour periods for yom as well, so I don't get why you chose them all when some back my position.

Arguing with yourself now?

???