Is Genesis Allegorical or Historical?

Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:

#Creation #Science #Bible

[ochem]

The Bible is the greatest story ever written. It is both literally true with an overlay of symbology and prophecy. You can often learn something’s literally true as well as a larger meaning. Absolute masterpiece by God Almighty.

[danebultemeier]

There seems to be this line of thinking in some circles that the Bible is one large book, written for the same exact reason. One you see the diversity of books in the Bible, it’s much easy to interpret individual sections with their intended goals and meaning.

[famemontana]

Eh, I’m not down with this allegorical train IP hops on either. Comparing the parables of Jesus to the creation account is false equivalency as his parables were intended to be figurative. Genesis 1 is poetic, but nowhere in scripture does it mention if it is meant to be symbolic. It is only speculation. Also, this explanation didn’t answer his original question. Where does this line between allegory and actual history start and stop? Calling a fallacy and appealing to the belief of some of the church fathers doesn’t provide reliability in what we consider historical if we don’t have a clear understanding of how much of it’s allegorical. It is an entirely valid question.

I rock with IP on everything else besides this subject lol

[hotwax]

Also, being allegorical doesn't necessarily make them untrue. It just means they aren't 100% literal.

[josiahcruz]

I'm still gonna follow the literal interpretation. While there is symbolic/allegorical elements and meaning to the story, it still is a very literal one (as, well, we're here aren't we?).

It's a literal account that we understand the historical effects and moral implications of.

[gabetalks]

You should make a video of apologetics book recommendations. You quote so many great books that it's hard to know which ones to buy and read.

[gospeldgeek]

The Bible was written for us, but not to us. It was written in an ancient language, to an ancient people with ancient beliefs to teach us all eternal truths: God created everything, man messed it up, but God provides a way out.

[progodspeed]

Being a Christian who went from YEC to Theistic Evolutionists, I can say that I wish we wouldn’t bash each other. It’s not like the other side are being insincere and trying to purposefully deceive ppl. Both are honestly convicted in their reading of Genesis 1

[HvV_FilmRoom]

It's disingenuous to be this dismissive of the argument. It's a legitimate question to ask-

When does Genesis suddenly become literal if you say the first three chapters are allegorical? And how do you know? On what **exegetical** basis do you suddenly know that you are all of a sudden supposed to take it literally? These are not unreasonable questions.

I also don't see how you can divorce an allegorical interpretation of the first several chapters from evolution. Because what other reasons would there be to make it allegorical unless you're trying to harmonize it with modern science?

[amitynoceda]

I want to add that something being allegorical does not make it false. Scriptures have a spiritual meaning, it is important to see the deeper meaning of it. If it is not historically or scientifically true, it does not mean it is totally false. Evolution is a scientific truth and Biblical stories have a spiritual meaning.

[austinapologetics]

Exactly, I've grown tired of hearing if one part is allegorical then it all is. It just doesn't follow.

[velocitysam]

Mr.Jones please do a series on early church fathers.I just feel that we need it.please!

[randomusername]

-There is no indication of what is supposed to be allegorical and what's not. The fact that after 2000 years people are still arguing about proves it
-If there are allegories, then we have no way to determine what they say, if not by human subjective interpretations

[jimkantola]

What is your take on the genealogies from Adam to Jesus if you believe evolution is true?

[TheTimologist]

Genesis 1 is describing the spiritual organization and Genesis 2 is describing the physical formation. They are events that literally happened - not allegories.

[romeisburning]

Mike, you can't seriously be arguing the slippery slope as a fallacy in 2022. It's not even a fallacy, it's almost a fundamental law of human action. And yes people abuse the "allegorical only" interpretative framework to claim huge chunks of the Bible are not strictly factual, even up to the Resurrection. It's not a fallacy. It happens all the time.

[--i-am-root]

Most of the figurative language in the Bible is obvious, but if Genesis is, then it's not quite as plain. I'm open to the idea, but if you're using the modern macro-evolution theory, then it can not have started until after the fall because of the death necessary to sustain it (Romans 5:12). That is unless you want to say that we had every step of evolution present from a microbe to humanity living together. And either way, having sub-humans raises a lot of issues.

[BigYehudah]

I disagree with you on one point. There is no such thing as a slippery slope fallacy. The 'slippery slope' has been historically demonstrated to be virtually an iron law. Our freedoms in the US did not go away over night. It's called incrementalism. I'm not arguing with you how to interpret Genesis 1-3. I am saying that I do not believe you should use the term because "slippery slope" as fallacy, is itself a fallacy.

[iem]

Honestly I agree with everything the guy said. Why should we assume Genesis 1 is allegorical? There is no evidence in the texts says it is allegorical. Comparing it to the parables is also not a good comparison as it is very clear that those are allegorical.

[ericlestick]

If they can get you to be embarrassed by two naked people talking to a snake in a garden, then they'll get you to deny the power that saved you before you can blink.