A Literal Genesis Entails An Evil God

[Faith No More]

Yes you are correct but, in a debate the person with the more acurate narrative will allways triumph. eg: If I am debateing the non existance of an eternal hell. and my oponent who is totally convinced of its existance, explains his theory and provides the verses he thinks fit in to it , because I know the translations to be inacurate, due to badly translated words, but this also means that these verses have to fit somewhere else in the narrative , so not only can I prove these faulty translated words with physical proof via etymology , but I can also show that these verses do not contradict the narrative but add to it eg: "my" interpretation useing these same better translated verses support that {God loves us all and so He sent His Son who will save us all from sin} / my oponents use of these poorly translated verses {God does not loves us all and so sent His Son to save a few from sin and the rest he will burn for ever and ever in hell} this is a contradiction of the narrative , and so who you going to believe ?

Neither. It appears to be so much of a convoluted mess that just about any interpretation can be justified, and your opponents will simply leverage the same arguments towards you, i.e. mistranslated text.

If you feel that strongly about it, however, start a thread and take it up with one of our other Christians to see how well you fair. That's always entertaining to me.