Christianity is Dead, Long live the rEvolution!

[SteveII]

The point is that you claim that Genesis 1-3 was supposed to be taken literal. To support your claim, you must be able to tell us who wrote it and when. Otherwise it is called an assertion. Because you found someone to make the same assertion does not make it any less of an assertion. 

Assertions don't need to be defeated--only pointed out.

Ok then, I point out that the entire bible is an assertion.
And so I disregard it in its entirety.

That's a stupid statement for two reasons. 

1. Your statement is not connected in any way to BBZ's very strong claim that Genesis was intended to be literal (and it is telling that he thinks it is) and 
2. By your simplistic reasoning, all historical documents are assertions, and so should be disregarded in their entirety.

Good job undermining all of history!