Is Genesis History?

This should settle the creation/evolution debate, once and for all:

creationism ken ham
 
Smellin Coffee said:
The Hebrew language makes a distinction between "created" (vs. 1) and "made" (remainder of the chapter). In essence, creation in Genesis 1:1, the condition of the earth in Genesis 1:2 and the re-establishment of the earth in Genesis 1:3.

That being said, there is a biblical argument for a gap. Remember, Genesis is not a science book and the first few chapters in Genesis were written in the form of poetry, not science. So to account a literal 6-day creation or a literal gap perspective or two assume separate creation accounts between Genesis chapters one and two, it is done so by taking the passage out of context. The problem isn't which form of creationism is correct; the problem is the literalism of the passage, turning poetry into assumed scientific fact.
Click to expand...
Coming from an unbeliever, I really don't care what you say.
 
Not only is Genesis history, but Phil Collins is too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top