Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[Neo-Scholastic]

Before you go on about Gen 1-3, there are way way way more people that ever lived that believe Gen 1-3 was allegorical in nature than believed it to be literal.

That's irrelevant.  What matters is whether the author of Genesis intended it to be taken literally.  It's consistent with both the time period and the genre that he did.  Against that are incredibly weak textual arguments that it was intended as allegory.  The fact that some body of people treat it as allegory is more an artifact of people realizing that holding to a literal interpretation of Genesis puts them in the position of defending things like the flood, which they realize they can't reasonably defend.  It's a tactical retreat, unrelated to the facts of history which are that originally, it was accepted as literal.  You're always going on about how the authors of the gospels "would have known eye witnesses," implying that their proximity to the events is a testament to their historical validity, yet when it comes to Genesis, you implicitly argue against that standard; you seem to have a double standard here.

And you're basing this on what exactly? A contemporaneous document instructing readers to take it literally? Your entire post is pure conjecture and the product of your own hubris. You're assuming that people in ancient cultures were just shallow rubes, incapable critical thinking, when in fact it is obvious to any art historian that ancient cultures were clearly more sophisticated and adept at communicating meaning symbolically than we so called enlightened moderns...especially you.