Originally Posted by krobbyzw
As to the last point, yes, I am. The discussion is not whether or not the supernatural exists. On that ground any of those individuals can participate, and to a considerable degree. The discussion, however, was whether Genesis is to be taken as a literal historical creation account within this specific tradition (hence the reference to Jesus as possibly authoritative in an interpretation).
If you remain outside of the community in which this is discussed (the monotheistic three), the height of your contribution is "I do not believe in the bible, hence I have no say in whether we take Genesis as a historical occurrence, or myth fabrication." Sure, that's somewhat of a contribution, but it does little to even address the question besides speak of a grander objection. It's like a man posing the question "Should I wear a red or blue shirt," and you responding with "I don't believe in wearing clothes". Sure, your response would be some type of contribution, but it would do little to answer whether your friend should wear red or blue.
I'm an atheist now but I was a Christian for most of my life which I think makes my viewpoint valid here. Also, I've read most of the Old Testament which also makes my contribution to this discussion valid.
Your question was whether any of the members here believe that Genesis was written as a literal history of God's creation of the world. I am a member of this group. My opinion is that since I don't see any evidence that the supernatural exists, I don't believe the Old Testament is literal history.
You also said that you believed that Balaam's donkey talked. My opinion was that no matter what the Bible says, the belief that animals can talk is irrational and doesn't meet with reality.
You asked a question, I gave you my answer. But because you were disturbed by my answer, you said my viewpoint didn't fit this discussion.