Welcome to Defenders, the teaching class of Dr. William Lane Craig.

Today, the creation of life and biological diversity, part 18.

For more information and resources from Dr. Craig, go to reasonable faith.org.

Last week, I promised Brad that I would would address the million-dollar question today.

If Genesis 1-211 belongs to the genre of mytho history, as I've argued,

then the question arises, is the primeval history to be understood as literally true.

Although the genealogies show a historical interest on the author's part, we've already

seen reason to think that the genealogies should not be interpreted literalistically.

Moreover, insofar as these chapters share the genre of myth, the question arises as to whether

societies which embrace a myth understand that myth to be literally true.

Now, certainly they understand it to be true,

but do they take it to be literally true?

It's so important to understand that

figurative discourse can be true

even if it is false when interpreted literalistically.

So, for example, if I come in from the outside and I am drenched with water and I tell you

it's raining cats and dogs outside, that can be true even if there are not animals falling from the sky.

And the literalistic interpretation of figurative language is often the source of jokes.

I saw a television program once where there's a knock at the door and a man tells his

robot, a robot, go answer the door. And the robot dutifully approaches the door and said,

yes, door, what was it that you asked? Obviously something can be figuratively true and yet literally false.

So were the myths of the ancient Near East intended to be taken as literally true?

...