Personally I hold Adam and Eve as real people who lived probably hundred and thousands of years ago through whom all humanity came. Meanwhile, it is wise to go and navigate through scholarly works that can help us to sharpen our knowledge more. Here, I tried presenting them with a concise conclusion as it is a matter of analytical and research based assessment rather than giving personal insight.
Why Adam and Eve is important to our faith? Adam's historicity reflects on Christ's divinity
Dr. Craig outlines four predominant views concerning the historical Adam:
1) The Traditional View:
a) Held by the church throughout history.
b) Adam and Eve were a real, historical couple.
c) Lived just a few thousand years ago.
d) Created by God (Adam from dust).
e) Were the universal ancestors of all mankind. (Sole-progenitors)
2) Recent, Non-Universal Ancestors View:
a) Adam and Eve were a real, historical couple.
b) Lived relatively recently (a few thousand years ago).
c) They were not the universal ancestors of all mankind.
d) God selected this specific couple out of a wider, pre-existing human population (outside the garden) to set His favor upon and bless their descendants.
e) Their descendants represent a subclass of humanity.
3) Ancient, Universal Ancestors View:
a) Adam and Eve were real, historical persons.
b) They lived "extremely anciently," perhaps hundreds of thousands of years ago.
c) They were the universal common ancestors of all humankind.
d) This universal ancestry is achieved by placing them very far into the ancient past.
4) The Mythical View:
a) Adam and Eve were not historical persons.
b) The story is a Hebrew myth about the creation of humanity and its condition.
c) It explains how every person is mortal, sinful, fallen, and in need of God's grace.
d) Adam represents "everyman"; one shouldn't look for a specific time/place for his existence.
Dr. Craig notes that within these four broad categories, there are many different alternatives and variations.
Source: https://youtu.be/0-v40m3TCSo?si=UiPD_PYg_P70Jfd1
Objection often raised against the traditional view:
a) Population Genetics
b) The great vast genetic diversity among population of today is not possible within the very short period of time-line
c) there is no support for common genetic descent from Adam and Eve.
[Source: Power point material on Adam by Ram Chaudhary, co-author with Kamal Adhikari in some books and biology teacher]
Dr. Swamidas' view [a computational biologist and Christian]:
Swamidass argues that when we think about ancestry genealogically rather than genetically, it is possible that all humans existing by the time of Jesus are descended from a pair existing only a few thousand years before. He also makes the case that this couple could have been created de novo (from beginning) and have descendants interbreeding with the surrounding population.
Evolutionary science teaches that humans arose as a population, sharing common ancestors with other animals. Most readers of the book of Genesis in the past understood all humans descended from Adam and Eve, a couple specially created by God. Swamidass explains how it’s possible for Adam and Eve to be rightly identified as the ancestors of everyone keeping the traditional view as somehow true alongside evolution.
[Source: https://peacefulscience.org/books/genealogical-adam-eve/]
He says that scientists were talking about genetic ancestry, but theologians weren’t talking about that type of ancestry. They weren’t talking about DNA; they were talking about parent/offspring relationships, without even making a distinction, because they didn’t know there was a distinction. And it turns out that from a genealogical point of view, it’s entirely possible that if Adam and Eve existed, even if they existed recently, we all descend from them. What he proposes is that if we allow for people outside the garden and if their lineage is intermixed with Adam and Eve, by A.D. 1 -- by the time that Jesus walks the earth -- if Adam and Eve existed, then we all descend from them. He has to say, if Adam and Eve existed, we all descend from them and if there’s common descent from the great apes, then creation is false. But it turns out that both can be true at the same time. no matter when they lived, they would be genealogical ancestors to everyone. He admits that despite being raised as a creationist, he could observe intense amount of evidence for evolution.
[Source: https://faithandleadership.com/joshua-swamidass-opening-the-conversation-about-adam-and-eve-science]
Additional:
From his book The Genealogical Adam:
a) genealogy is the descent of a person, family, or group from an ancestor or ancestors, lineage,
b) Scientists can use genealogy to reconstruct the possible evolutionary history of modern species.
c) Genealogists, can develop a family tree. Using these branching drawings, they can keep track of relationships.
d) Adam and Eve are real historical person, created by God, who lived nearly 10 thousands years ago.
e) God created special couple in Garden of Eden, though outside the garden, there were population of humans as a product of biological evolution.
f) After expulsion of from Garden of Eden, they interbreed (intermingle) with outside people and predominate them due to excessive growth and eventually became the ancestor of all human race by genealogical relation.
g) Christians can accept evolution and “millions of years” and still believe there was as historical couple (Adam and Eve) that could have been created de novo somewhere between 6,000-12,000 years ago
[Source: Power point material on Adam by Ram Chaudhary, co-author with Kamal Adhikari in some books and biology teacher]
William Lane Craig's stand:
a) Genesis 1-11 belongs to a genre called Myhto-History i.e. Gen. 1-11 is about real people and real events clothed with mythical language.
b) Adam as a Historical person is significant to our faith
c) He presents Ice Age as a probable period when Adam and Eve must have lived in between 2.5 million years and 12 thousand years ago.
d) He presents a case regarding what makes certain creature to be eligible to fit in human category. After that, he goes on exploring various Hominiodea on the basis of the criteria to be human. He concludes that archaeological signatures from technology, economy and social organization and evidence from symbolic behavior places the last common ancestor with Homo Heidelbergensis about 1 million years to 750 thousand years ago.
e) he admits the quest of historical Adam can never be concluded due to incompleteness of data and provisionality of science.
[Source: https://apologeticsimpact.blogspot.com/2022/04/recommended-book-review-in-quest-of.html]
From his book 'In Quest of Historical Adam'
1) Adam and Eve were real historical people, most likely members of H. heidelbergensis, who first appeared in the fossil record before 750,000 years ago.
2) He proposes that God selected these two members of H. heidelbergensis and performed biological and spiritual renovations on them — “endowing them with rational souls” — to create two persons who bore His image.
3) Genesis 1–11 belongs to a genre called mytho-history (Though it is myth, it makes references to real people (including Adam and Eve), real geographical places, and real events in primeval history).
Is Genesis 1-11 mythical?
a) close resemblance between Genesis 1–11 and the ancient myths of Mesopotamia.
b) Despite this mythical designation, Genesis also appears to have had historical considerations in mind, as evidenced by
(1) the chronological arrangement of the narrative’s elements and (2) the genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11, which culminate with real people who actually lived.
Recent Genealogical Adam
The origin of Humanity and Evolution- Andrew Ter Ern Loke
a) Adam and eve are progenitor of entire truly humans (made on Image of God)
b) Outside of Garden, there were human but not truly Human (they were not created in the image of God)
c) That implies, nowadays there are Human created in not image of God, which is worst form racism and discrimination.
[Source: Power point material on Adam Ram Chaudhary, co-author with Kamal Adhikari in some books and biology teacher]
Dr. Hugh Ross (an astrophysicist and founder of Reasons to Believe)
a) Adam and Eve were real, historical individuals created supernaturally by God, not evolved from prior hominids. He believes they were the first humans, specially created "from the dust" (Genesis 2:7) around 24,000 to 60,000 years ago, though he allows for a range as recent as 6,000 years.
b) If a scientific theory is a good one, new discoveries should provide affirmation and greater clarity. On the other hand, if new discoveries continually shake up the human evolutionary tree it is a sure sign that the evolutionary paradigm is in trouble.
c) Ross suggests that intelligent, human-like creatures (e.g., Neanderthals, Cro-Magnons) existed before Adam and Eve but were not fully human, lacking the image of God or a soul. These "soulless hominids" engaged in activities like painting and burying their dead but were not spiritual beings. Adam and Eve, created de novo, replaced these beings as the first true humans, from whom all humanity descends.
d) Ross argues that scientific evidence supports a historical Adam and Eve as the sole progenitors of humanity. He cites genetic and anthropological data, claiming in Who Was Adam? that humanity could have originated from a single pair without contradicting population genetics.
[Source: https://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-evolution-anthropological-evidence-who-was-adam.html]
Late Dr. Michael Heiser (Old Testament scholar, specialist on Divine Council theology)
a) Heiser affirmed that Adam and Eve were real, historical figures, not merely mythological or allegorical. He argued that the biblical text, particularly Genesis 1–3, presents them as actual individuals in a real past, consistent with the theological intent of Scripture.
b) While affirming their historicity, Heiser also saw Adam and Eve as archetypal figures representing all humanity, a view he appreciated in John Walton’s work. In Genesis 2, he argued, the narrative focuses on their formation not as a biological origin story but as a theological one, emphasizing humanity’s role and relationship with God.
c) Heiser suggested that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 might describe different human groups. He proposed that Genesis 1 refers to a broader human population created by God, living in an imperfect world outside Eden, while Genesis 2 focuses on Adam and Eve, placed in Eden with access to God’s presence and the Tree of Life, which granted contingent immortality.
d) Heiser also engaged with the idea that humans outside Eden (from Genesis 1) could have interbred with Adam and Eve’s descendants, spreading the knowledge of good and evil through interaction, not requiring Adam and Eve to be the sole genetic ancestors.
e) Heiser highlighted the scarcity of references to Adam in the Old Testament, appearing only in Genesis 3–5, 1 Chronicles 1:1, and Hosea 6:7. In Hosea, Adam’s transgression is an analogy for Israel’s covenant violation, not a doctrine of original sin. This suggests the Old Testament prioritizes Adam’s story as a theological narrative over a historical or scientific one.
f) Heiser emphasized that Adam’s sin introduced mortality, not necessarily guilt, to humanity. He interpreted Romans 5:12 to mean that “death passed to all men” because all sin, not that Adam’s guilt was imputed to everyone. The active verb in the passage suggests humans sin individually due to their mortal condition, not because they inherit Adam’s sin. This view avoids theological issues with Jesus’ sinlessness, as Jesus, being fully divine, could resist sin despite being a descendant of Adam.
Sources:
1) https://drmsh.com/comments-views-historical-adam-reviews/
2) https://drmsh.com/adams-sin-and-old-testament-theology/
3) https://drmsh.com/evolution-adam-additional-thoughts/
4) https://drmsh.com/historical-adam-genetic-adam-eve-update/
5) https://drmsh.com/genesis-13-face-compatible-genome-research/
Mythical view (Alister Mc Grath and C S Lewis):
a) Adam and Eve were not historical person
b) Adam and Eve were Stereotypical figure, rather than real figure
A stereotypical figure refers to a widely held and oversimplified idea or image of a particular type of person, group, or thing. Stereotypes are often based on preconceived notions, generalizations, or assumptions about characteristics, behaviors, or attributes associated with a certain category.
c) The story of Adam and Eve is story of All humanity, all humanity has fallen, and need of salvation
Scriptural evidence to support Adam as Real person (J warner Wallace)
a) The writers of Scripture describe Adam and Eve as real, historic individuals, Based on the analysis of the Language used
b) Adam and Eve Were Regarded As Real People
Moses described them singularly (in contrast to his plural descriptions of other animal groups).
c) Adam and Eve Responded As Real People
Moses also described Adam and Eve’s behavior in a manner consistent with the behavior of real people. Moses put specific words on their lips as they interacted in the Garden, and like other real people, Adam and Eve responded to one another (and to God).
d) Adam and Eve Were Recorded As Real People
Moses placed Adam in genealogies alongside other specific individuals who we acknowledge as real, historic human beings. (Gen5:1, Luke 3:38)
e) Adam and Eve Were Referenced As Real People
Throughout the Old and New Testament, writers of Scripture referred to Adam as though he was a real person and not an allegory or representative of mankind. ((Job 31:33, Hosea 6:7, 1 Corinthians 15:45)
f) Adam and Eve Were Held Responsible As Real People
The historic Christian doctrines of sin and salvation hinge on the real existence of Adam as an individual human being, responsible for the introduction of sin into the world. (Romans 5:12,17)
Some bottom line considerations from my friend and brother Ram Chaudhary (has expertise on this subject from both theology and science):
a) Adam and Eve as Historical person is Rational and Plausible, with the support of Evolutionary idea of Human, genealogical study and scripture’s language analysis.
b) The mythical view does not go against science, rather it fails to explain science that does not mean it denies science. The narrative of genesis account must be explained with proper hermeneutics.
c) God might have assisted the evolution process or reshaped the human evolution, to make human more meaningful in relation to God’s image, sin, salvation and eternity. And Adam and Eve can be a part of those fully evolved human species, spiritually representation the whole humanity for their disobedience, salvation and eternity.
d) Genesis Creation account although Myth, does not impact our core, Faith. The story of Adam and Eve is the common story of Humanity. The sin of disobedience By Adam Eve represents the sin of All humanity and also shows the need of salvation For all humanity.
e) In Genesis 1, it does not talk about the creation of Adam and Eve, but Rather it looks like electing humanity to be the image bearer of God.
f) Contrast between Adam and Christ: The expression Points to the historicity of the Adam
.png)
0 Comments