Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve

[scandal 951]

This post is dedicated to LI. Actually, it's a really great piece. Highly recommended listening/reading for everyone.

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/09/138957812/evangelicals-question-the-existence-of-adam-and-eve

Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve

by Barbara Bradley Hagerty

August 9, 2011

Let's go back to the beginning — all the way to Adam and Eve, and to the question: Did they exist, and did all of humanity descend from that single pair?

According to the Bible (Genesis 2:7), this is how humanity began: "The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." God then called the man Adam, and later created Eve from Adam's rib.

Polls by Gallup and the Pew Research Center find that four out of 10 Americans believe this account. It's a central tenet for much of conservative Christianity, from evangelicals to confessional churches such as the Christian Reformed Church.

But now some conservative scholars are saying publicly that they can no longer believe the Genesis account. Asked how likely it is that we all descended from Adam and Eve, Dennis Venema, a biologist at Trinity Western University, replies: "That would be against all the genomic evidence that we've assembled over the last 20 years, so not likely at all."

Researching The Human Genome

Venema says there is no way we can be traced back to a single couple. He says with the mapping of the human genome, it's clear that modern humans emerged from other primates as a large population — long before the Genesis time frame of a few thousand years ago. And given the genetic variation of people today, he says scientists can't get that population size below 10,000 people at any time in our evolutionary history.

To get down to just two ancestors, Venema says, "You would have to postulate that there's been this absolutely astronomical mutation rate that has produced all these new variants in an incredibly short period of time. Those types of mutation rates are just not possible. It would mutate us out of existence."

Venema is a senior fellow at BioLogos Foundation, a Christian group that tries to reconcile faith and science. The group was founded by Francis Collins, an evangelical and the current head of the National Institutes of Health, who, because of his position, declined an interview.

And Venema is part of a growing cadre of Christian scholars who say they want their faith to come into the 21st century. Another one is John Schneider, who taught theology at Calvin College in Michigan until recently. He says it's time to face facts: There was no historical Adam and Eve, no serpent, no apple, no fall that toppled man from a state of innocence.

"Evolution makes it pretty clear that in nature, and in the moral experience of human beings, there never was any such paradise to be lost," Schneider says. "So Christians, I think, have a challenge, have a job on their hands to reformulate some of their tradition about human beginnings."

'Fundamental Doctrines Of The Christian Faith'

To many evangelicals, this is heresy.

"From my viewpoint, a historical Adam and Eve is absolutely central to the truth claims of the Christian faith," says Fazale Rana, vice president of Reasons To Believe, an evangelical think tank that questions evolution. Rana, who has a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Ohio University, readily admits that small details of Scripture could be wrong.

"But if the parts of Scripture that you are claiming to be false, in effect, are responsible for creating the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, then you've got a problem," Rana says.

Rana and others believe in a literal, historical Adam and Eve for many reasons. One is that the Genesis account makes man unique, created in the image of God — not a descendant of lower primates. Second, it tells a story of how evil came into the world, and it's not a story in which God introduced evil through the process of evolution, but one in which Adam and Eve decided to disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit.

Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, says that rebellious choice infected all of humankind.

"When Adam sinned, he sinned for us," Mohler says. "And it's that very sinfulness that sets up our understanding of our need for a savior.

Mohler says the Adam and Eve story is not just about a fall from paradise: It goes to the heart of Christianity. He notes that the Apostle Paul (in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15) argued that the whole point of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection was to undo Adam's original sin.

"Without Adam, the work of Christ makes no sense whatsoever in Paul's description of the Gospel, which is the classic description of the Gospel we have in the New Testament," Mohler says.

Intellectual Rift

That's only true if you read the Bible literally, says Dennis Venema at Trinity Western University. But if you read the Bible as poetry and allegory as well as history, you can see God's hand in nature — and in evolution.

"There's nothing to be scared of here," Venema says. "There is nothing to be alarmed about. It's actually an opportunity to have an increasingly accurate understanding of the world — and from a Christian perspective, that's an increasingly accurate understanding of how God brought us into existence."

This debate over a historical Adam and Eve is not just another heady squabble. It's ripping apart the evangelical intelligentsia.

"Evangelicalism has a tendency to devour its young," says Daniel Harlow, a religion professor at Calvin College, a Christian Reformed school that subscribes to the fall of Adam and Eve as a central part of its faith.

"You get evangelicals who push the envelope, maybe; they get the courage to work in sensitive, difficult areas," Harlow says. "And they get slapped down. They get fired or dismissed or pressured out."

Harlow should know: Calvin College investigated him after he wrote an article questioning the historical Adam. His colleague and fellow theologian, John Schneider, wrote a similar article and was pressured to resign after 25 years at the college. Schneider is now beginning a research fellowship at Notre Dame.

'A Galileo Moment'

Several other well known theologians at Christian universities have been forced out; some see a parallel to a previous time when science conflicted with religious doctrine.

"The evolution controversy today is, I think, a Galileo moment," says Karl Giberson, who authored several books trying to reconcile Christianity and evolution, including The Language of Science and Faith, with Francis Collins.

Giberson — who taught physics at Eastern Nazarene College until his views became too uncomfortable in Christian academia — says Protestants who question Adam and Eve are akin to Galileo in the 1600s, who defied Catholic Church doctrine by stating that the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa. Galileo was condemned by the church, and it took more than three centuries for the Vatican to express regret at its error.

"When you ignore science, you end up with egg on your face," Giberson says. "The Catholic Church has had an awful lot of egg on its face for centuries because of Galileo. And Protestants would do very well to look at that and to learn from it."

Abandoning Theology?

Fuzale Rana isn't so sure this is a Galileo moment: That would imply the scientists are correct. But he does believe the stakes are even higher in today's battle over evolution. It is not just about the movement of the earth, but about the nature of God and man, of sin and redemption.

"I think this is going to be a pivotal point in Church history," he says. "Because what rests at the very heart of this debate is whether or not key ideas within Christianity are ultimately true or not."

But others say Christians can no longer afford to ignore the evidence from the human genome and fossils just to maintain a literal view of Genesis.

"This stuff is unavoidable," says Dan Harlow at Calvin College. "Evangelicals have to either face up to it or they have to stick their head in the sand. And if they do that, they will lose whatever intellectual currency or respectability they have."

"If so, that's simply the price we'll have to pay," says Southern Baptist seminary's Albert Mohler. "The moment you say 'We have to abandon this theology in order to have the respect of the world,' you end up with neither biblical orthodoxy nor the respect of the world."

Mohler and others say if other Protestants want to accommodate science, fine. But they shouldn't be surprised if their faith unravels.

[웃 910]

"Rana and others believe in a literal, historical Adam and Eve for many reasons. One is that the Genesis account makes man unique, created in the image of God — not a descendant of lower primates. Second, it tells a story of how evil came into the world, and it's not a story in which God introduced evil through the process of evolution, but one in which Adam and Eve decided to disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit."

Humans have been around for 400,000 years ---> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1341973/Did-humans-come-Middle-East-Africa-Scientists-forced-write-evolution-modern-man.html

In regards to the bold, last time I checked dinosaurs roamed the earth for 160 thousand MILLION years ----> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology_evolution/article6848291.ece

And rumor has it certain dinosaurs were quite vicious (made in Gods image?) -----> http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/typesofdinosaurs/tp/deadlydinos.htm

[one...two...tree 2,762]

"This stuff is unavoidable," says Dan Harlow at Calvin College. "Evangelicals have to either face up to it or they have to stick their head in the sand. And if they do that, they will lose whatever intellectual currency or respectability they have."

There are a lot Christian Churches who accept human evolution and are not biblical literalists. In fact, most Christians outside of the U.S. have no qualms about evolution.

[웃 910]

And rumor has it certain dinosaurs were quite vicious (made in Gods image?) -----> http://dinosaurs.abo...deadlydinos.htm

From the 10 Weirdest Dinos (made in Gods image?)

Kind of like Big Bird crossed with Count Dracula, Therizinosaurus was a large type of theropod dinosaur known as a therizinosaur, with a squat trunk, a long neck, a tiny head, and a trio of three-foot-long claws on each of its hands (hence its name, Greek for "reaping lizard"). Despite its fearsome appearance (which may or may not have included brightly colored feathers), Therizinosaurus was a strict vegetarian, or at worst an omnivore. More about Therizinosaurus

Edited August 10, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[mawilson 2,133]

In fact, most Christians outside of the U.S. have no qualms about evolution.

If they don't accept the Bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God, what makes them "Christian"?

[scandal 951]

If they don't accept the Bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God, what makes them "Christian"?

Presumably, they can have faith in God and accept Jesus as their salvation, and still not deny the plain facts of our observable world. Christians, and not-obtuse. It is possible.

But now some conservative scholars are saying publicly that they can no longer believe the Genesis account. Asked how likely it is that we all descended from Adam and Eve, Dennis Venema, a biologist at Trinity Western University, replies: "That would be against all the genomic evidence that we've assembled over the last 20 years, so not likely at all."

Venema says there is no way we can be traced back to a single couple. He says with the mapping of the human genome, it's clear that modern humans emerged from other primates as a large population — long before the Genesis time frame of a few thousand years ago. And given the genetic variation of people today, he says scientists can't get that population size below 10,000 people at any time in our evolutionary history.

To get down to just two ancestors, Venema says, "You would have to postulate that there's been this absolutely astronomical mutation rate that has produced all these new variants in an incredibly short period of time. Those types of mutation rates are just not possible. It would mutate us out of existence."

Venema is a senior fellow at BioLogos Foundation, a Christian group that tries to reconcile faith and science.

[Nagishkaw 510]

If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything, I guess.

That's only true if you read the Bible literally, says Dennis Venema at Trinity Western University. But if you read the Bible as poetry and allegory as well as history, you can see God's hand in nature — and in evolution.

Apostasy much ?

II Tim. 3:1-5 : This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

In regards to the bold, last time I checked dinosaurs roamed the earth for 160 thousand MILLION years ----> http://www.timesonli...icle6848291.ece

http://toptenproofs.com/article_dinosaurs.php

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If we all descended from Adam and Eve - Eve having been made from Adam's flesh - then we'd all be fcuking inbreds. Now that may be a concept that folk in Alabama can easily stomach but for me, I'd have to go with the alternate concept of evolution here.

[웃 910]

In regards to the bold, last time I checked dinosaurs roamed the earth for 160 thousand MILLION years ----> http://www.timesonli...icle6848291.ece

http://toptenproofs....e_dinosaurs.php

Thanks for the laugh.

"Unfortunately, we have been so conditioned to believe that dinosaurs are these prehistoric beasts that lived until 65 million years ago, that if you dare suggest they went on Noah's Ark, then eventually went extinct just recently, you are laughed at for following fables instead of science. "

^AS YOU SHOULD BE!!!

"Methuselah lived to be 969 years old. It was after the flood that God shortened the life span of man."

The Great Flood...You mean genocide of men, women, children, and babies by drowning?

"If God allowed man to live several hundred years, it is very plausible to believe he may have allowed animals to live that long too. Remember, we know today that reptiles never stop growing in size throughout their lifetime, so think about what a Gecko or a Komodo Dragon might look like if it lived for 500 years. Can you say “dinosaur”?"

OMG THIS IS HILARIOUS

"The fossils of the giant dinosaurs are certainly more fun to look at in the museums, but the fact is that most dinosaurs were small and only a few grew to large sizes. So, for most dinosaurs, getting on the Ark wouldn't be a problem at all, and as for the occasional larger type of dinosaur, God would have merely sent babies to Noah"

"Think about it. When God sent 2 elephants to Noah, do you really think God would have sent 2 full grown, massive, 12 foot tall, 5 ton elephants that are past their reproductive prime, or do you think maybe he would have sent a couple of babies that would eventually grow and repopulate the Earth after the flood? Common sense dictates he would have sent baby elephants, Rhinos, Giraffes, etc., as well as a couple of cute little baby Tyrannosaurus lizards, that, just like cute little lion cubs, would eventually one day grow into fierce and dangerous beasts."