Re: [asa] Adam and the Fall

Ian, this has been an issue I've struggled with as well. I agree with you
that Denis' work is excellent on many fronts. The notion of accommodation
for which he argues isn't original with him, but it's becoming more
prevalant even in some more conservative circles -- see, e.g., Daniel
Harlow's article in the Winter 2008 Christian Scholar's Review (
http://www.csreview.org/XXXVII2/harlow/)

However, respectfully to Denis' position, I think he's too quick to dismiss
any notion of a historical Adam. I'd commend to anyone to consider the
alternatives proposed by Denis Alexander in his new book "Creation or
Evolution: Do We Have to Choose" (some excerpts in a CiS talk here:
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/meetings/edinburgh2007/papers/Edinburgh_Alexander_text.pdf)
and in Daniel Harrell's new book "Nature's Witness: How Evolution Can
Inspire Faith" and in Loren and Deb Haarsma's book "Origins: A Reformed
Look at Creation, Design and Evolution."

David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Ian Johnston <i-johnston@bethel.edu>wrote:

> The recent thread on Adam's Ancestors (David Livingstone's new book) has
> stimulated me to encourage more of us to grapple with Denis Lamoureux's
> scholarship (Evolutionary Creation, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008, ISBN
> 9781556355813) as it bears on the biblical Adam.
> Denis (who has been a regular participant at ASA Annual Meetings for more
> than a decade, and an occasional contributor on this listserve) seems to me
> to have made significant break-throughs in arguing against a strictly
> literalist reading of the first 11 chapters of Genesis. Many of us have
> been convinced that the science of the Bible represents ancient frames of
> reference, and therefore we would not expect the scriptures to make any
> significant contribution to current scientific notions about cosmology,
> geology or even biology. But ancient science also encompasses ancient
> explanations of human origins and extends to explanations of human mortality
> (especially in the context of biological death).
>
> Denis's careful scholarship brings him to the following conclusions (on
> p319 of Evolutionary Creation):
>
> The Historicity of Adam
>
> The Bible presents overwhelming evidence that the inspired writers
> understood the physical world from an ancient phenomenological perspective.
> In fact, there is not one verse that reveals a scientific truth prior to its
> discovery by modern science. Scripture features an ancient science of the
> structure, operation, and origin of nature. In particular, the de novo
> creation of humanity has profound implications for the traditional Christian
> belief in the historicity of Adam.
>
> First, Adam never actually existed. Genesis 1 and 2 present the de novo
> creation of the heavens, earth, plants, and animals. This is an ancient
> origins science with no correspondence to physical reality. Consistency
> within these first biblical chapters demands that this is also the case with
> the origin of humans. The quick and complete creation of Adam is identical
> to the de novo creation of the firmament-neither happened in history.
> Second, Adam never actually sinned. In fact, it is impossible for him to
> have sinned because he never existed. Consequently, sin did not enter the
> world on account of Adam. Third, Adam was never actually judged by God to
> suffer and die. Again, he lacks existence, and as a result the ability to
> sin, so he was never condemned for his transgression. Thus, suffering and
> death are not divine judgments upon Adam, every other human after him, and
> the entire creation. There never was a cosmic fall.
>
> The historicity of Adam is built on an ancient conception of origins. The
> traditional belief in an actual causal connection between his sin and the
> origin of physical death is false. Adam is an incidental vessel that
> delivers inerrant foundations of the Christian faith to remind us: we are
> created in the Image of God, we are sinful, and God judges us for our sins.
> Though Adam never existed, he is the prototype of the human spiritual
> condition. In order to understand our existence, we must see ourselves in
> him - Adam is you and me.
>
>
> I hesitate to quote these conclusions without comment on how Denis gets to
> them ... knowing that the biblical literalists in the Christian community
> will certainly find these ideas to be difficult to swallow and even
> inflammatory. But I am convinced that Denis has something substantive to
> say to us as we struggle to faithfully respond to God's revelations of
> himself through the book of God's word and the book of God's works.
>
> Ian Johnston
> --
> Ian S. Johnston, Ph.D.
> Professor of Biological Sciences
> College of Arts and Sciences
> Bethel University, St Paul, MN 55112
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 12 10:43:36 2008