While some insist upon a literal interpretation, we can see by the simplicity of the offerings that they were NOT meant to be taken literal.
When man was first formed, you can believe that it was a much more INTRICATE occasion than that offered in words. For the words offer merely that man was formed of dust. We KNOW that, even if this is a basic truth, the formation of the life of men was MUCH more involved than merely, 'being formed of dust'.
No different than EACH account involving creation. The words are offered NOT to show HOW it was done, but that it was 'done by God'.
If we look back through the OT at the miracles performed by God, in almost EVERY case, it was accomplished THROUGH natural means. It is NO different with creation. While the words over simplify the events that took place, it is apparent NOW that there was MUCH more to creation than the mere words describe in The Bible.
I have offered NOTHING that goes AGAINST faith. I have simply pointed out that there are oft times that we are given information for a DIFFERENT reason than to know the DETAILS of what actually happened. When the walls fell at Jericho you can believe that there was a SCIENTIFIC REASON that it happened. When 'wormwood' destroys a third of the worlds population, you can BELIEVE that it will entail MORE than a 'mountain falling into the sea'. Whether it be a meteor, asteroid, island or whatever, when it happens it will certainly entail more than the few words offered in description in Revelation.
So many seem to have such a difficult time accepting what science has PROVEN. And MOST of the time it has NOTHING to do with going against the Word. It has MORE to do with improper interpretation.
The Creation account IS LITERAL so far as what was MEANT to be conveyed at the time. God DID Create. But the TIME and the intricate events are NOT portrayed in scripture, for at the TIME, it didn't really matter HOW it was done so much as THAT it was performed BY GOD.
Blessings,
MEC
