Did Adam and Eve really exist? Thanks to the ebook sale at Crossway, I managed to get several of their titles for just US$5.99 each. One of books was Did Adam and Eve really exist? by C. John Collins. Collins, by the way, was one of the contributors to the ESV Study Bible.
God provided this book in a timely manner as I was engaged in an email exchange with a fellow brother in Christ about whether Adam and Eve were real or merely symbolic. I have never had an issue with Adam and Eve being true, historical people who once lived and breathed and walked the earth but many people struggle with the historicity of the first couple because they find that the Genesis account doesn't seem to fit with the scientific knowledge we have. Thus in order to make the Bible fit neatly into science, they have reinterpreted the Adam and Eve as symbolic, almost mythological people.
Is there a problem with this approach? In a word, yes. I truly believe that taking Adam and Eve as allegory makes hash out of the Bible. At stake are truths like the following examples:
Example 1
If Adam and Eve were not real people, then the geanologies in the Bible make no sense (e.g., Luke 3). When tracing the family lines of Noah, David and even Jesus, it's strange that the family tree can head back into a mythological figure. It would be akin to saying somewhere in my family line is Popeye. That doesn't make any sense. It makes it look like the Bible dabbles in mythologies whereas it claims to tell the truth.
Example 2
In 1 Corinthians 15, the apostle Paul is arguing for the histrorical resurrection of Jesus as essential to his gospel.
1 Corinthians 15:3-8
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.
You can see in these verses that Paul is laying out historical facts for the church at Corinth. He tells them that many of the witnesses to Christ's resurrection are still alive at the time of writing his letter. The Corinthians could, if they wanted, speak with living witnesses. Paul goes on to explain in 1 Corinthians 15:20-22 that Adam was the one who brought death into the world through his rebellion and it was Jesus who brings resurrection from the dead. Jesus was a historical man. And Paul talks about Adam also as a historical man. Paul is contrasting two real men: Adam and Jesus. Because of them, there is sin and forgiveness, death and resurrection. All these are realities. These realitites don't make sense if one end of history is held up by a mythological, symbolic or allegorical man.
Example 3
And in the book of Romans, we find Paul also explaining how sin and death enter the world through the rebellion of Adam.
Romans 5:12-14
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
This Romans passage is mind-blowing because it explains why all men are sinners. All men have a common ancestor in Adam. He was our chief representative (like an athlete represening his country). What he did bore consequences for the rest of mankind. What he did helps explain the state of the world today where evil is rife and the world is no longer the perfect earth that God created. If we were to take Adam as merely symbolic, then Paul's explanation of the state of the world doesn't make sense. The Bible isn't like Ruyard Kipling's Just So Stories. Genesis states historical fact.
Example 4
Then there is Paul's speech in Acts 17.
Acts 17:26-27
And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him.
This verse if part of Paul's speech to the Athenian philosophers. Collins explains that the Greeks of the day prided themselves in having sprung from the soil of their native Attica and thus they considered themselves superior to non-Greeks. But Paul comes to explain that all men descended from one common ancestor so there was no basis to feel superior towards others but instead one ought to feel a sense of unity towards all men. This argument of Paul would fall flat on its face if Adam were not a real historical person. The making of all kinds of people from one person is a historical statement which grounds the universal invitation of the gospel. In other words, if the fall were not real, then the gospel invitation is meaningless because if we didn't inherit a sin nature from Adam, there is a chance we don't need the saving work of Jesus. But no, all man have sinned because of the sin nature they inherited from ther common ancestor, Adam.
There are more examples, but the implications of a historical Adam and a non-historical Adam are clear. The author goes quite in-depth in his exploration on the different viewpoints on the historical nature of Adam and Eve and he painstakingly establishes why the first couple had to be real people. Some of his explanations were a little dense for me but fortunately, I could follow along most of it.
Collins does an excellent job of explaining how to read the first chapters of Genesis. He starts by saying there are four possible ways to view the Genesis account I quote:
(1) The author intended to relay “straight” history, with a minimum of figurative language. (2) The author was talking about what he thought were actual events, using rhetorical and literary techniques to shape the readers’ attitudes toward those events. (3) The author intended to recount an imaginary history, using recognizable literary conventions to convey “timeless truths” about God and man. (4) The author told a story without even caring whether the events were real or imagined; his main goal was to convey various theological and moral truths.
He argues that scenario 2 is the accurate one and goes on to explain why. While it's well worth reading through his explanations, what I benefitted most were these learning points.
1. When I read Scripture, I must bear in mind the original audience, i.e., who the text was first written for. The original audience had a certain worldview and knowledge that helped them interpret and understand the text. It's wrong to use my modren worldview and perspective to force an interpretation out of the text. That would be doing the text an injustice. I should instead approach the text as the original audience approached it.
2. How have other Biblical authors read the text? In other words, let Scripture interpret Scripture. Many New Testament writers, especially Paul, have explained many Old Testament passages. They were inspired by the Holy Spirit to illuminate the OT. Therefore, I should learn how they thought and what they believed.
3. How does the passage I'm reading relate to the overarching story of the Bible? The Bible fits together as a whole and there is an incredible harmony and unity that God put in place despite using 40 writers over three continents, writing in three languages over a span of 1,500 years. When I read a passage, I should look to see where and how it fits into God's overall message, rather than just trying to interpret a passage on its own.
4. The genre of Biblical writing affects the way I interpret the text. The Bible has epistles, poems, law, parables, history, prophecy and more. Each genre has its own rules. I cannot take a parable and treat it as historical. Neither can I read a psalm and take it literally. In the case of Genesis 1-3, Moses is describing history with literary devices. This means that while the facts are true (like Adam and Eve being real people), the description of events is stylised and lots of details are left out. This literary approach doesn't make it less true, we just need to be aware that the account doesn't aim at explaining in painstaking detail how the world came about. The point is to state that YAHWEH alone created the heavens and the earth by his great power. He created a rich, diverse, detailed earth as a home for the original couple and he gave them dominion over it. There were no other gods nor did he create any other person in the same manner. That helps me understand many things about God and aboutt the world we live in.
Overall, I enjoyed the book and learnt much from it. As with much of my learning, God truly provided this book in a just-in-time manner. The day I finished it, I already found myself using it to answer questions from our classes. God has an amazing way in helping us learn and grow deep in the knowledge of him. Praise be to him!
See the book at Crossway or on The Book Depository.
