Article: Adam, Eve, Evolution, Theories, Problems

Discussions on creation beliefs within Christianity, and topics related to creation.
Post Reply
User avatar
Philip
Board Moderator
Posts: 8901
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:45 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Betwixt the Sea and the Mountains
Has liked: 425 times
Been liked: 670 times

Article: Adam, Eve, Evolution, Theories, Problems

#1

Post by Philip »

This is an interesting article, not typically seen in the mainstream press. It examines whether the idea of an actual Adam and Eve conflicts with current science - but are the theories in sync with Biblical theology?

Image

https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ch ... -evolution

While I don't believe Adam and Eve were the very first biological humans, I also don't believe mankind - or ANY humans - were created via evolution via the animal kingdom. To me, the article doesn't address other possibilities and issues. Of those, are: The Flood of Noah - did it wipe out ALL of humanity or merely a large regional population of humans and animals (i.e., were there OTHER humans that preceded Adam and Eve's miraculous / instant creations by God; Also it doesn't really address ancient archaeology dates for early human settlements that FAR (many thousands of years) that would have preceded all credible dates for Adam and Eve (based upon the Bible's genealogy information).

Nor does the article note it possible that God INSTANTLY created BOTH the very first humans, AND, MUCH later, Adam and Eve - with ALL of these having been created instantly and NOT as a result of evolutionary mechanisms connected to the animal kingdom. And lastly, there seems to be no acknowledgement whether any evolutionary sequences (simple organisms to complex species with complex predator / prey relationships) might have existed that they did NOT necessarily have to have been connected to ANY humans - whether a prior (to Adam and Eve) ancient humanity or (to later) Adam and Eve. Nor is considered that a common Creator could explain the similarities between species and their changes as well as any supposed MACRO-evolutionary scenarios.

And the most obvious omission the article fails to address are theological issues related to a evolution-caused humanity.

Thoughts? DB?
DBowling
Ultimate Member
Posts: 2029
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 8:23 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Has liked: 32 times
Been liked: 211 times

Re: Article: Adam, Eve, Evolution, Theories, Problems

#2

Post by DBowling »

As you said... Interesting Article...
Some thoughts...
Philip wrote: Sun Jan 02, 2022 6:29 pm This is an interesting article, not typically seen in the mainstream press. It examines whether the idea of an actual Adam and Eve conflicts with current science - but are the theories in sync with Biblical theology?
I think the Biblical Adam and Eve are consistent with what we find in ANE and Mesopotamian history around 6000 BC.
So I don't think there is any conflict between the Scriptural Adam and Eve and history (or science).

The scientific conflict is with the tradition that Adam and Eve were the genetic progenitors of all human beings.
As the article notes (and I have frequently mentioned) there are a number of indications that other humans existed at the time of Adam and Eve. For example, where did Cain's wife come from? and who did Cain build the city of Enoch (Uruk) for?

So while Scripture and history have no conflict with a historical Adam and Eve who lived in Mesopotamia around 6000 BC. The extrascriptural tradition that Adam and Eve were the genetic progenitors of all humans directly contradicts the scientific evidence that humans (species homo sapiens sapiens) have been around for 150,000 to 200,000 years.

According to Scripture, God created mankind in his image in Genesis 1:26-27. Adam and Eve don't show up in the Scriptural narrative until some undetermined time later in Genesis 2.
https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ch ... -evolution

While I don't believe Adam and Eve were the very first biological humans, I also don't believe mankind - or ANY humans - were created via evolution via the animal kingdom. To me, the article doesn't address other possibilities and issues.
I am probably a little more nuanced in my position regarding evolution... depending on what one means by 'evolution'.

If by 'evolution' one means
- common descent
- RANDOM mutation
- Natural Selection
Then I flatly reject that RANDOM mutation is an adequate cause for what we find in the fossil record or in the DNA of life today. In my discussion with Nils I discuss in detail the empirically observed behavior of RANDOM mutation that demonstrates the inadequacy of RANDOM mutation.

However, I am more open to (although not necessarily embracing) a definition of 'evolution' that involves
- common descent
- GUIDED mutation
- Natural selection
If mutations that exceed the capability of random mutations are evidence of GUIDED mutations by an Intelligent Creator, then there is no difference between a GUIDED mutation and a Creative Act, and I see no conflict between GUIDED mutations and God's creative acts described in Scripture.

Regarding humans in particular, my discussions with ACB brought a very interesting thing to light in Genesis 1:26-27.
26 Then God said, “Let us make (asah) mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So God created (bara) mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created (barah) them.

I think it is interesting that Genesis uses both asah (working on something) and bara (creating something new) to refer to the creation of mankind in Genesis 1.
One implication of this COULD possibly be that Scripture is indicating that part of mankind's creation involved working on something that was preexisting (modifying hominid DNA to create species homo sapiens sapiens) and part of mankind's creation involved the creation of something brand new (instilling mankind with a spirit... ie making mankind an image bearer of God).

So again I am open to (but not convinced of) the premise that mankind's physical body is a function of God 'working on' (asah) a previously existing hominid species, while mankind's 'spirit' is a special unique creation of God that is unique to species homo sapiens sapiens.

But again I see no conflict between the Scriptural account of the creation of mankind in Genesis 1 and the possibility that species homo sapiens sapiens might be genetically related to other hominid species, while also being the result of creative acts by God both physically (GUIDED mutation) and spiritually (the creation of mankind's spirit)
Nor does the article note it possible that God INSTANTLY created BOTH the very first humans, AND, MUCH later, Adam and Eve - with ALL of these having been created instantly and NOT as a result of evolutionary mechanisms connected to the animal kingdom.
Might as well stir the pot once more...
Once again I am not necessarily convinced of this, but I think it is a Scriptural possibility.
In Genesis 2:7 Scripture says that the Lord God formed Adam "from the dust of the ground".
What does that mean?
Is being 'formed from dust' unique to Adam, or is it a description of the fundamental nature of all humans?

I think Psalm 103:14 might give us a possible clue
for he knows how we are formed,
he remembers that we are dust.
According to Psalm 103:14, all humans are formed from dust, not just Adam.
And the context of Psalm 103:14 demonstrates that being 'formed from dust' refers to the mortality of all humans.

We see Paul discuss this same principle in 1 Cor 15:42-49
In this passage Paul contrasts the physical, mortal, 'dusty' bodies that humans currently possess with the spiritual, immortal bodies that we shall receive after the Resurrection of the Dead.
Thoughts? DB?
Those are some thoughts... :P
User avatar
1over137
Technical Admin
Posts: 5234
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 6:05 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Undecided
Location: Slovakia
Has liked: 141 times
Been liked: 301 times

Re: Article: Adam, Eve, Evolution, Theories, Problems

#3

Post by 1over137 »

Let me jump in too.

I was curious what Hugh Ross's take is on Genesis 1.
Here it is, with some notes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj4p_NLIzhI Oct 4, 2018

8:10 - Genesis 1:1
9:35 - word 'create' meaning: to bring into existence something brand new that never existed before
15:19 - Genesis 1:2
20:26 - on the 7th day there is no 'evening and morning'
- 6 days are finished, 7th is not
- we are still in the 7th day
- when young he read thick book on evolutionary biology and numbers did not add up until when being older he read Genesis 1
25:10 - Genesis 1:3
25:54 - Genesis 1:6-7
28:50 - Genesis 1:9
31:12 - Genesis 1:11
- scientists recently discovered there were plants before animals which Bible told us so before having these scientific data
32:16 - Genesis 1:14
36:03 - Gensis 1:20 (creation day 5)
- Cambrian explosion - outstading problem for macroevolution
41:00 - Genesis 1:21
44:40 - creation of humans
- God made us and God created us - there is something that is not brand new (made us), what is brand new (created) is we are spiritual
46:00 - book "Who was Adam" (published 2005) - latest scietific news that time
- all humanity is descended from one man and one woman
51:20 - Q&A section
But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
-- 1 Thessalonians 5:21

For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.
-- Philippians 1:6

#foreverinmyheart
User avatar
Philip
Board Moderator
Posts: 8901
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:45 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Betwixt the Sea and the Mountains
Has liked: 425 times
Been liked: 670 times

Re: Article: Adam, Eve, Evolution, Theories, Problems

#4

Post by Philip »

Great posts, guys! I have some thoughts - but they'll have to wait until I get home - in California traveling!
Post Reply