Genesis is Probably Just an Allegory

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "There is great meaning in Genesis even if you don't believe any of it ever happened..." 

What meaning could that be?  You couldn't mean the atonement because without a literal Adam and a literal fall, what's the point?  When do you start believing the Bible?

So-called Christians interrogating believers on the book of Genesis again:

"Notice that in explaining why Jesus died, Paul went to the Book of Genesis and its account of Adam and the Fall. In other words, one cannot really understand the good news in the New Testament of Jesus’ death and resurrection, and thus payment for sin, until one understands the bad news in Genesis of the fall of man, and thus the origin of sin and its penalty of death.

I’ll never forget the phone call I received from a pastor’s wife. It went something like this: ‘Our church can’t come to your seminar,’ she said to me.

‘Why not?’ I replied.

‘Well, you insist on taking Genesis as literal history. But Genesis is not that important—it’s not that essential what one believes about Genesis. Why can’t we just agree on the essentials of Christianity?’

‘So what do you mean by the essentials?’ I asked.

She answered, ‘The fact that we’re all sinners and that Jesus Christ died for our sin. This is what is essential to Christianity. Believing in a literal Genesis is certainly not essential.’ She then went on and asked me, ‘If someone is born again as the Bible defines, but doesn’t believe in a literal Genesis as you do, is he saved and going to heaven?’

‘Well,’ I replied, ‘if he is truly born again, even if he doesn’t believe in a literal Genesis, of course he is saved and going to heaven.’

‘See,’ she blurted out, ‘Genesis is not essential—what Jesus Christ did on the cross is what is essential to Christianity.’

I then asked: ‘Do you mind if I ask you a question?’

‘Go ahead,’ she responded.

‘Why did Jesus die on the Cross?’

She immediately answered, ‘For our sin.’

‘And, what do you mean by sin?’ I inquired.

‘Rebellion,’ came the answer.

I then asked, ‘Could you please tell me how you came to define sin as rebellion? Is that your idea or someone else’s idea? I’ve even heard some people define sin as “a lack of self-esteem.” On what basis have you determined sin means rebellion? Where did you get that definition?’

And her response? ‘I know what you’re trying to do!’ she declared. She realized that I had her boxed in. She didn’t want to admit that without Genesis, she could not answer the question. Because the meaning of anything (like sin) is dependent on its origin, you could not define sin without referring to the literal event of the Fall in Genesis. The literal rebellion of Adam, as recorded in Genesis, is the foundation necessary to understanding the meaning of sin.

What was I trying to do? Simply this: to demonstrate that the only way we can define sin as rebellion is if there was a literal rebellion. The reason we are all sinners is because, as Paul clearly states, we are all descendants of the first man, Adam. Because there was a literal first Adam, who was in a literal garden, with a literal tree, and took a literal fruit when tempted by a literal serpent, thus there was a literal Fall, which was a literal rebellion.

As Christians, we need to answer this question: Is it essential to believe in a literal Fall? Absolutely! If there was no literal Fall, then what is sin? Who defines it? What then is Paul talking about in 1 Corinthians 15, or even Romans 5:12 where he states, ‘Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned’?

So, in explaining the gospel, Paul discusses the foundations of the gospel in Genesis and the bad news: the origin of sin and its penalty of death. He then tells us the good news of salvation in Christ..." Full text:    What is the Gospel?

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "It seems to me that it isn't necessary for there to be a literal Fall and a literal Adam because it is a myth or story which is intended to convey the truth about the reality of man.."

I think it matters a great deal.  Christ is our creator and our redeemer. 

If we do not believe Jesus who affirms the creation account, what else do we fail to believe?  (Jn 5:47).  We can trust the Bible from the very first verse (Ge 1:1-3):

"Paul also points out clearly that our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, is the Creator:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist (Col. 1:13–­17).
And so, in Revelation we are told concerning Jesus Christ: 


Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created (Rev. 4:11).
And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation (Rev. 5:9).


Our Creator became our Redeemer! The reason this was necessary is because all humans are sinners. Therefore, a sinful person could not die for sin. We needed a perfect man to die for sin. The only solution was for the perfect, sinless Creator to become a man so He could be our Savior! Thus, the doctrine of creation is vital to an understanding of the gospel..." Full text:  What is the Gospel?

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Genesis does not have to be the literal accounting or recounting of [creation]...I am arguing that those who see that Genesis as either literally true or totally false are creating a false dichotomy and have a truncated understanding of truth."

People believe God's word or they believe man's opinion (e.g. evolution).  It is important to see death as an intrusion to life due to Adam's sin in the garden.  Death, disease and suffering came after the fall not before. 

Paul...writes about the consummation of all things—the final victory that will overcome the effects of the Fall:

Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 15:46–57).

We are given more details of the consummation in 2 Peter 3 and Revelation chapters 21 and 22. We’re told there will be a new heaven and earth. There will be no more crying, no more death, and the curse (that was imposed because of sin as we read in Genesis 3) will be no more:

And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away (Rev. 21:4).

And there shall be no more curse (Rev. 22:3).

Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness (2 Pet. 3:13)..."  Full text:  What is the gospel?


Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "The only reason to reject Genesis as a literal account is because you have invented an alternative. Why do you need an alternative?"

That's right.  And the alternative is not the most logical answer.  God's account of creation is true.  What we observe in science confirms what he said all along.  The gospel makes sense when we believe God. 

"I want to explain that an understanding of the following three elements of the gospel is a prerequisite to an understanding of how to present the gospel to different people within a culture, or to different cultures. Consider this:

If one preaches the gospel without the message of the Creator, and the origin of sin and death, then one preaches it without the foundational knowledge that is necessary to understand the rest of the gospel. Without this information, who then is Jesus Christ? Why did He need to die? Why could He, and not someone else, die for sin? What is special about Christ? Where did sin come from? Why can we say that all have sinned? Why do we die?

If one preaches a gospel without the message of Christ crucified and raised from the dead, then one preaches a gospel without power. After all, as Paul said, ‘And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins’ (1 Cor. 15:17). The only reason our personal sins can be forgiven and our relationship with our Creator be restored is because of what Christ did on the cross. The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is central to the gospel. That’s why the message of the ‘Jesus Seminar’ movement is so destructive. A leading scholar in this group, Marcus Borg, denies the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, and many other non-negotiables of the Christian faith. He identifies himself as a Christian, and is received in many churches, yet according to Scripture, his faith is in vain. Interestingly, Borg often begins his lectures by trying to assign Genesis to the realm of myth.

A gospel that is preached without the message of the new heaven and earth is a message preached without hope. What point is there to a gospel with no future sinless state? Because of sin and the judgment of the curse, the creation is ‘groaning’ (Rom. 8:22). There is death, sickness, and suffering all around us. However, we need to understand that death is an intrusion in our world.

In 1 Corinthians 15:26, Paul states it this way: ‘The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.’

Death, then, is an enemy that is to be destroyed some time in the future. Peter informs us that we are to look forward to this future time: ‘Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness’ (2 Pet. 3:13).

And we are given a glimpse of what this future state will be like in the Book of Revelation:

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea (Rev. 21:1).

And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away (Rev. 21:4).

And there shall be no more curse (Rev. 22:3).

What a time to look forward to, when we will be free from death, pain, sickness, and suffering..."  Full text:  What is the Gospel?

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "[U]nlike SD.  Every post of his comes exclusively from AiG, with perhaps a sentence or two of introduction."

Not true.  I include a variety of sources.  AiG has papers written by many creation scientists.  We know, you discount them all.  You claim to be a Christian, yet you seem to make a sport of arguing against Christians who believe in young earth creation.

Being our resident "scientist" should we dismiss you like you dismiss other scientists who do not agree with your worldview?    We are still waiting for you to admit your bias.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  [Claim:  sin not connected with death...sin entered the world but not thru Adam]

Nice satanic strategy.  You do not have a biblical worldview.  Sin entered the world through one man, Adam.  Originally, in the garden the world was perfect--no death, disease or suffering.  Death is an intrusion to our world.  That is why Jesus came.  That is why he died.  When you believe man's opinion (e.g. evolution and "millions of years" of death, disease and suffering) there is no need for the atonement and God is cruel.  No, that is not the case--believe God in his word (Ge 1:1).    

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Satanic? You're off your rocker."

Of course it's Satanic:  "...has God indeed said?..." (Ge 3:1). 

"...[T]he videos I posted in this case, do not necessarily represent my PERSONAL views, they are OPTIONS for people to consider."

It's sort of like "I don't personally like killing babies, but if you want to..."

"I think there's a different scenario for human death which may or may not have involved a literal Adam."

You "think", is the point--man's opinion over God's word.  If human death is a part of life and evolution is fact, then God is a cruel ogre.  However, that is not the case.  Death is an intrusion to the perfect world that God created.  The paradise that Adam and Eve knew will be restored.  It can be restored because of Christ.  Your view is cruel.  The history God gave reveals his mercy.  You can believe him.      

"Human beings and animals cannot survive without killing other living things..."

In the garden man and animals were vegetarian (Ge 9:3).  There was no death before Adam's sin.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Science shows us conclusively that there was animal death long before there were human beings."

Science is man's best guess.  It does not show "conclusively" the origins of man.  It is a theory.  Scientists were not there.  God was.

You have it backward if you believe man's opinion.  His word says that death, disease and suffering came after the fall not before.

"I do not believe evolution is cruel or evil..."

So you believe that God called death, disease and suffering "very good"? (Ge 1:31).

"...a story of the triumph and beauty of living things."

A story of death, disease and suffering is good and just a part of life we must deal with?  No.  God created a perfect world and called it "very good" (Ge 1:31) .  Death is the consequence of Adam's sin (Ge 2:17; Ro 5:12).  We are all born in Adam and therefore sin.  Because of Christ's death (Ro 6:9; Re 1:18), men can be saved.  Death is an enemy if you believe the Bible (1 Cor 15:26).  It is not beautiful.  It will finally be destroyed (Ho 13:14; 1Co 15:26).

"But if that's the box you're in feel free to live in it, but I'm not going to join you."

That is your choice.  It does affect one's worldview.  If you would like to be right, you will believe the Bible.

"...[I]f Adam stepped on an ant it wouldn't die?"

The was no death before Adam's sin.  Ants probably stayed near the trees where they belong.  They probably did not ruin Adam's picnics.  The world changed after Adam's sin--picnics ruined--death, disease and suffering.  Did Adam ever step on an ant?  I don't know.  Genesis is jam-packed with our history but God does not mention ants in the creation account. 

"If Adam is tending the garden and slices a worm apart, does it die?"

Did Adam slice a worm?  Worms are not mentioned until Job and Exodus.  I can tell you what I know.  I cannot tell you what I don't know.  I know that worms did not die before the fall of man.  There was no death, disease or suffering before Adam's sin.  Perhaps he never ran into the situation because it would seem that Satan's temptation occurred quickly.  Adam lived a long time after the fall and probably became the first evangelist.  He knew the consequence of his sin.  He had to be escorted out of the garden and cherubim were placed at the gate so that he could not return (Ge 3:24).  He must have grieved and repented.  He likely raised his children to trust and obey God.

Genesis Probably an Allegory