Thursday, 9 June 2011

Christianity Today Re-interprets Adam and Eve

Answers in Genesis has a biblical view on Adam and Eve. We cannot say the same of the version that Christianity Today has recently embraced.

Joel Kontinen

Christianity Today (CT), an evangelical magazine that Billy Graham founded in 1956, has recently discussed how one could believe in both evolution and Genesis. In its editorial, CT acknowledges:

Darwinian evolution challenged the belief that human beings were created in the image of God” and “the entire story of salvation hinges on the obedience of the Second Adam”.

Paul actually speaks about the Last Adam, but compared with CT's view of the first Adam, this is a minor point.

The editors go on to say:

This understanding, that Christ's obedience undoes Adam’s disobedience, is not some late development, but is integrated with the earliest interpretations of what God did and is doing in Christ. This conceptual framework is almost impossible without a first human couple.”

However, CT does not want to reject naturalistic interpretations of science but reminds its readers of Copernicus, Galileo and B. B. Warfield, an early 20th century theologian who embraced theistic evolution, and Pope John Paul II, who likewise partly accepted the Darwinian view of the origin of life.

In any case, Christianity Today attempts to cling on to a historical Adam and Eve. The editors remembered that the Bible at times uses the name of a nation’s leader as the name of the nation (Israel, Canaan). They concluded that Adam and Eve could be the leaders of the early human population.

CT’s choice is deplorable. One cannot find support for it in the Bible even by reading between the lines.

The need for collective Adams and Eves stems from the view promoted by the BioLogos Foundation known for its theistic evolution.

CT’s view is based on outdated data for instance on the genetic similarities of humans and chimpanzees. Moreover, 150 years after Darwin, we now have more valid evolution criticism than ever before.

There is no need to re-interpret Adam and Eve.


No Adam, No Eve, No Gospel. Christianity Today 6 June 2011.