The Genesis account was written to be interpreted literally

RebuttalsThe introduction of Pro's argument was pretty clear and correct. I basically agree with the classification he made of the biblical texts.My opponent has already expressed that the problem here is determining if Genesis was poetry or history. This is not completely true. Proving genesis is not poetry does not mean it was intended to be interpreted literally. It could have been a fantastic narrative, or an elevated prose." In order to determine whether or not it is poetry, we need to look at how poetry is written in the Bible."I do not agree with this. The bible was written by many different authors. Therefore, we can't expect stylistic consistency. "Most, if not all experts in Hebrew would agree that the Bible teaches Genesis 1-11 as history."That's not true. Actually, the scholars are divided in a more even way. Figures of speechFigures of speech are present throughout genesis. These are a way of talking in a non literal way. Genesis is full of figures of speech. Here are some examples: - "God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. " Light and darkness can't be separated, they are already separated in definition. This is not literal, this really means the creation of day and night. - "God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night." Lights cannot govern anything. Again, just figurative embellishment. - "Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being." First, we are not dust. Secondly, god cannot breath because he is not physical. Lastly, what's the breath of life? It is a figurative way of saying soul. Three figurative in one statement. “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" Another figurative. If there's so much figurative speech in genesis, how can we interpret it as literal? If the authors of genesis wanted to write a literal text, why they used so much figures of speech? Obviously, because genesis was not intended to be interpreted literally.ContradictionsA text intended to be literally interpreted must have some coherence. If a text was intended to be literal, then it had to be well written. I understand that scientific knowledge was not very developed, however some things are just common sense.- Genesis one and two contradict each other. In genesis one god created plants, then animals and then Adam and eve. In contrast, in genesis two god created Adam, then plants, then animals, and then eve. - In chapter one the creation is described as a 6 days long procedure. However, in genesis 2:4 it say the creation took one day (" in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens."- In the first day, god separated the light from the darkness. But in the fourth day he created "two great lights (...) to divide the light from the darkness" .- Thought the bible it's claimed that god is one and only. Nevertheless, the genesis uses plurals when referring to god ("And God said, let us make man in our image" ; " And the Lord God said, Behold, then man is become as one of us, to know good and evil")- God limited the human life span to 120 years in genesis 6:3 ("Yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years"). However, many humans after that lived more than 120 years( Noah 950, Shem 600, Abraham 175, Ishmael 137).How someone who intended to write an historical text had so many errors? This is conclusive evidence supporting my point.Scholars analysisThe grater piece of evidence supporting my point is, ironically, a book of the bible. Epistle to the Galatians is the 9th book of the New Testament. It's a letter from the apostle Paul to some Christian communities in Galatia.Among many things, Paul here labels the stories from genesis as allegoric (not literal).As a matter of fact, the literal interpretation of genesis is quite modern, Ancient interpretations always look at genesis as allegorical.There's actual textual account of this interpretation. Some of this may be found in the works of Saint Irenaeus, the Alexandrian school, Saint Agustine, Philo, Gregory of Nazianzus, Maimonides, and many others.Also, there are important church icons supporting my point in modern days, like Pope John Paul, Pope Francis, and others.ConclusionGenesis was not intended to be interpreted literally. It is constructed allegorically, using figures of speech, symbols, non constant stories, etc. The aim of genesis is to teach Christians that god created earth, and how is the human's fault to suffer and sin. To do so, it uses a simple story that can be understood by anyone, that is interesting, and appealing. Sources:- The bible- De Principiis - Against Heresie- Origen of Alexandria- The Literal Interpretation of Genesis- The City of God