Southern Seminary Magazine (Vol 90.1) The Light of Truth: Apologetics in the 21st Century

seeking the historical adam
himself (see Matthew 19:1–10) did indeed believe Adam
to be historical.
Inerrancy Compromised,
Original Sin Scuttled
Such Christians argue that Jesus’ and Paul’s mistaken belief
about the historicity of Adam does not affect the theology
of the point being made by the story of Adam concerning
human sin, judgment, and redemption. However, this raises
an entirely new problem. The inspiration of Scripture as
the word of God (2 Tim. 3:16–17) and the trustworthiness
of Jesus as God the Son who speaks the word of God (John
3:34) is dramatically undermined by this argument. If Jesus
and Paul affirmed as historical that which is not historical,
then the word of God communicates as true that
which is false. Thus, a denial of the historicity of Adam
requires a radical retooling of the traditional doctrine of
the inspiration of Scripture and a denial of the inerrancy
of Scripture, a fact that those who reject the historicity of
Adam are willing to admit.
Another problem with denying the historicity of Adam
while affirming the theological claims made in the New
Testament about him has to do with the enduring effect
of the sin of Adam and Eve. The theological point being
made by Paul through his allusion to Adam is not only
the fact that Jesus succeeds where Adam failed but that all
of humanity is condemned and corrupted on account of
Adam’s sin. Paul is explicit that all of humanity is under
condemnation and corruption because of the sin of the
first man (Rom. 5:12–19). If Adam is merely a literary
figure (whether believed by Paul to be historical or not),
there can be no explanation for how the sin of a literary
character in a myth can have consequences for people in
the real world. Thus, a denial of the historicity of Adam
would completely undo the historic and very important
Christian doctrine of original sin.
Christian Interpretations of the
Early Chapters of Genesis
Among Christians committed to the historical existence
of Adam and Eve as progenitors of the human race along
with such traditional Christian doctrines as the typological
link between Adam as primal covenant failure and Christ
as Redeemer, the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture as
the word of God, and the doctrine of original sin, there
are many different interpretive strategies for the first few
chapters of Genesis.
Each view below is quite complex and nuanced, and proponents
have offered extensive treatments to defend the
views. The descriptions below are necessarily described
broadly, focusing exclusively on the view’s handling of the
historicity of Adam.
“If Adam is merely
a literary figure
(whether believed by
Paul to be historical
or not), there can be no
explanation for how
the sin of a literary
character in a myth
can have consequences
for people
in the real world.”
1Genesis 1–11 as Mythical. Some Christians take for
granted the claim that biological diversity on earth
is the result of a long process of macro-evolution by
which all known species of life today evolved from
other life forms such that all living things share a common
descent. A commitment to such an understanding of biological
life rules out the possibility that the opening chapters
of Genesis are to be interpreted as historical narrative.
Such Christians usually see the opening chapters of Genesis
(often the first 11) as bearing the character of “myth”
in the sense of non-historical primaeval stories that function
to explain why life in the world is the way that it is.
Typically, such interpreters want to preserve the historical
existence of Adam and Eve (and perhaps the other characters
in the narrative) without affirming the details of the
story. Along these lines, William Lane Craig uses the term
mytho-history to describe the genre of Genesis 1–11. 3
Others have used different terms to make similar points.
Such interpreters should be commended for insisting
on the historical existence of Adam and Eve, but the designation
of Genesis 1–11 as mytho-history is fraught with
problems. Despite protests to the contrary, there is nothing
14 the southern baptist theological seminary