Is the Genesis Account Literal?

If 2 Timothy 3:16-17 states that “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”, then all of the Bible must be taken as accurate.  The creation account and the flood account now need to be taken literally.  Why?  1 Corinthians 15:45 states that “So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.”  If Jesus is the last Adam, then there would have to be a first literal Adam.  He wouldn’t have sacrificed his life for a parable!  Also, 2 Peter 2:5 states that “if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;”.  This would indicate that there was a literal Noah.  Therefore, all of the Genesis accounts should be taken literally, and it is patently obvious to any thinking human being that science does not convolve with Biblical historicity.  God was incorrect and therefore not inerrant.  Consequently, the Bible is incorrect about these instances and therefore Judeo-Christian God does not exist, since he inspired all of this nonsense.  What say you to this logic?  I am speaking to the Judeo-Christian’s now. 

www.thetruenatureofhumannature.com

www.whendinosaursfall.com

Advertisements

Leave a Reply