7 days...simply not 7 consecutive 24 hour periods of time.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Genesis 1 is often called a "creation hymn" because that's what it is: a hymn, a poem, a metaphor. It's not meant to convey literal, scientific information.  It was a poetic hymn honoring God for creating the universe.  The seven days do not relate to actual periods - they represent poetic stanzas.  No need to correlate it to science at all - it's a different genre of literature.

[Sandra Craft]

Genesis 1 is often called a "creation hymn" because that's what it is: a hymn, a poem, a metaphor. It's not meant to convey literal, scientific information.  It was a poetic hymn honoring God for creating the universe.  The seven days do not relate to actual periods - they represent poetic stanzas.  No need to correlate it to science at all - it's a different genre of literature.

From your lips to the fundies ears.

[Genericguy]

Genesis 1 is often called a "creation hymn" because that's what it is: a hymn, a poem, a metaphor. It's not meant to convey literal, scientific information.  It was a poetic hymn honoring God for creating the universe.  The seven days do not relate to actual periods - they represent poetic stanzas.  No need to correlate it to science at all - it's a different genre of literature.

Please provide proof because if that's the case, then the bible traced jesus' lineage to a "metaphor". What better proof of Jesus not existing could there be?

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Genesis 1 is often called a "creation hymn" because that's what it is: a hymn, a poem, a metaphor. It's not meant to convey literal, scientific information.  It was a poetic hymn honoring God for creating the universe.  The seven days do not relate to actual periods - they represent poetic stanzas.  No need to correlate it to science at all - it's a different genre of literature.

Please provide proof because if that's the case, then the bible traced jesus' lineage to a "metaphor". What better proof of Jesus not existing could there be?

This has nothing to do with Jesus' actual existence. The fact that some later biblical writers traced his lineage to Genesis (but not Genesis 1, to my knowledge) just shows their interpretation.  Jesus' historical existence, IMO, is fairly well established by Paul and some of the gospel writings.

[Stevil]

Is there a special decoder ring that tells us which bits are literal and which bits are metaphorical or do we simply take your word for it?

[fester30]

I think part of the problem for theists is that there is no one unifying idea about creation.  Some believe it was six literal days (remember, the Bible says God rested on the 7th day).  Others ascribe to the idea that in heaven a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day, so God time might be different than our current man time.  Some see what science has taught us and concede that perhaps creation took a very long time, but tell us there is still a miracle in that.  Others say it had to be six literal days, and to say anything else takes away from the great miracle and God's power and God's word.  Those are the ones that would tell you if you give in to the idea the world isn't several thousand years old, you are giving in to science, which is of the world, and therefore of the devil.

I'm talking of the Biblical creation simply because I don't know the creation stories in the other religions.

[McQ]

Genesis 1 is often called a "creation hymn" because that's what it is: a hymn, a poem, a metaphor. It's not meant to convey literal, scientific information.  It was a poetic hymn honoring God for creating the universe.  The seven days do not relate to actual periods - they represent poetic stanzas.  No need to correlate it to science at all - it's a different genre of literature.

This particular notion is not agreed upon by all christian or jewish scholars and theologians.

Sorry for the Wiki link, but it directs to a Hebrew scholar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emunoth_ve-Deoth#i_The_creation_of_the_world
St. Augustine:  http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.toc.html

Then you have those of the literalist view:

http://www.beyondthefirmament.com/preface.pdf
http://www.blog.beyondthefirmament.com/about-the-book/

Those two by the same author.

And pretty much every evangelical, fundamentalist christian group in North america argues for a literal interpretation of not just Genesis, but the entire bible. Exceptions are some of the groups which have split off from the evangelical roots.

[Genericguy]

Is there a special decoder ring that tells us which bits are literal and which bits are metaphorical or do we simply take your word for it?

I would really like know as well. How did you discover genesis 1 is metaphorical?

Genesis 1 is often called a "creation hymn" because that's what it is: a hymn, a poem, a metaphor. It's not meant to convey literal, scientific information.  It was a poetic hymn honoring God for creating the universe.  The seven days do not relate to actual periods - they represent poetic stanzas.  No need to correlate it to science at all - it's a different genre of literature.

Please provide proof because if that's the case, then the bible traced jesus' lineage to a "metaphor". What better proof of Jesus not existing could there be?

This has nothing to do with Jesus' actual existence. The fact that some later biblical writers traced his lineage to Genesis (but not Genesis 1, to my knowledge) just shows their interpretation.  Jesus' historical existence, IMO, is fairly well established by Paul and some of the gospel writings.

The same gospel writings, in which you acquired your evidence of jesus' existence, have traced his lineage to a fictional being... Adam.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

The same gospel writings, in which you acquired your evidence of jesus' existence, have traced his lineage to a fictional being... Adam. [/quote]

The gospel that I rely upon mainly for historical purposes is Mark.  I also rely on some of Paul's writings. Mark has no genealogy.  The genealogies in Matthew and Luke conflict, so I assign relatively little historical weight to them. Also, Adam is not mentioned in the creation hymn of Genesis 1, where the 7 days are mentioned.

My decoder ring tells me that the best way to determine whether a passage is intended to be literal or metaphorical is to examine the genre of literature. Genesis 1 is written in hymnic, poetic style, increasing the odds that it was intended to be seen as metaphorical, not strictly literal.

[Stevil]

My decoder ring tells me that the best way to determine whether a passage is intended to be literal or metaphorical is to examine the genre of literature. Genesis 1 is written in hymnic, poetic style, increasing the odds that it was intended to be seen as metaphorical, not strictly literal.

Are there any repercussions if you are wrong?
If so, then you ought to resolve your assumptions. If not, then Genesis 1 is irrelevant.

[Genericguy]

My decoder ring tells me that the best way to determine whether a passage is intended to be literal or metaphorical is to examine the genre of literature. Genesis 1 is written in hymnic, poetic style, increasing the odds that it was intended to be seen as metaphorical, not strictly literal.

You're providing an arbitrary analysis. Someone could contest that anything in the bible, written in that style, is the true word of god.

How did you come to the conclusion that poetic style of text equals metaphor?

[superfes]

My parents raised me to believe that the 7 days where God's days (Like 7,000 years or something like that).

That's why Noah lived to be like 900 or whatever, because God's days are longer or stuff things >_>

I wish I was raised by atheist parents -_-

[Sandra Craft]

Is there a special decoder ring that tells us which bits are literal and which bits are metaphorical or do we simply take your word for it?

I would really like know as well. How did you discover genesis 1 is metaphorical?

Because that's the only way it makes sense?  Of course, that could apply to most of the bible, including the parts considered historical.

[fester30]

The same gospel writings, in which you acquired your evidence of jesus' existence, have traced his lineage to a fictional being... Adam.

The gospel that I rely upon mainly for historical purposes is Mark.  I also rely on some of Paul's writings. Mark has no genealogy.  The genealogies in Matthew and Luke conflict, so I assign relatively little historical weight to them. Also, Adam is not mentioned in the creation hymn of Genesis 1, where the 7 days are mentioned.

My decoder ring tells me that the best way to determine whether a passage is intended to be literal or metaphorical is to examine the genre of literature. Genesis 1 is written in hymnic, poetic style, increasing the odds that it was intended to be seen as metaphorical, not strictly literal.
[/quote]

Then again Mark is the one that doesn't mention the virgin birth, which seems rather important to the divinity of Jesus.

[Sweetdeath]

My parents raised me to believe that the 7 days where God's days (Like 7,000 years or something like that).

That's why Noah lived to be like 900 or whatever, because God's days are longer or stuff things >_>

I wish I was raised by atheist parents -_-

Ugh, my dad said that same thing about Noah. And Adam lived to 2,000.

We all wish our parents were atheists. Well, my mom was fine, but my dad is pretty religious.