[realpatriot71]

No need to reject the creator even as you see it. There is only need to reject literalism and inerrancy in the Bible. The two are not tied.

Correct one needs to reject the literalism and inerrancy of the Bible, but to do so is to reject the God of the Bible, as the Word is his communication with a fallen world. God does NOT change, but humans have sure tried to change Him.

By the way, the early part of Genesis was polytheistic.

No it isn't.

[whattajoke]

from your profile:

"I'm a 25 year old medical student"

Can I be so bold as to ask where? (no answer necessary, just curious).

[antiRepublicrat]

Correct one needs to reject the literalism and inerrancy of the Bible, but to do so is to reject the God of the Bible, as the Word is his communication with a fallen world.

This is a debate even among faithful Christians, from those who believe every word of the Bible as God-given fact (and therefore must believe that rabbits are ruminants and bats are birds) to those who believe in it more as spiritual and moral guidance written by errant human hands through God's inspiration.

No it isn't.

Convincing argument :)

The earlier part of Genesis was formulated at a time when the Jews were still a polytheistic tribe. This polytheism is quite evident throughout the early OT, as God tries to get rid of it.