Wednesday, February 8, 2012

adam and eve

In one of his recent blog postings at,  Kevin DeYoung shares ten reason to believe in a historical Adam ....

1. The Bible does not put an artificial wedge between history and theology.

2. The biblical story of creation is meant to supplant other ancient creation stories more than imitate them. Moses wants to show God’s people “this is how things really happened.”

3. The opening chapters of Genesis are stylized, but they show no signs of being poetry.

4. There is a seamless strand of history from Adam in Genesis 2 to Abraham in Genesis 12.

5. The genealogies in 1 Chronicles 1 and Luke 3 treat Adam as historical.

6. The Apostle Paul believed in a historical Adam.

7. The weight of the history of interpretation points to the historicity of Adam.

8. Without a common descent we lose any firm basis for believing that all people regardless of race or ethnicity have the same nature, the same inherent dignity, the same image of God, the same sin problem, and that despite our divisions we are all part of the same family coming from the same parents.

9. Without a historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of original sin and guilt does not hold together.

10. Without a historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of the second Adam does not hold together.

(Oh, and one more - because Jesus said so.  That's good enough for me.)

No comments: