I didn't say "literally historical true." I said "historically true".
There must be a factual basis for the events in Genesis. That is all I
mean. If Genesis is made up of whole cloth, then it isn't true. One can
then choose to interpret the bible as literally or not as literally as they
want after that. If there was no Noah or no Adam, then I think we have a
problem even if others don't. I prefer personally to make it as literal as
possible but I am willing to realise that my interpretation may not be the
correct one.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm