Adam and Eve: Four Views

Although there seems to be a common perception that scientific discoveries contradict the Bible, actually just the opposite is true. Instead, the things we have learned about the origin and development of the universe overwhelmingly agree with the biblical story of creation. Details about the history of the earth agree with the order and the events described in Genesis as discussed in previous posts Genesis and Science Reconciled and Unlocking Genesis One, for example. Yet within this clear overlap between science and Scripture in so many areas, there seems to me to be one issue that produces some friction between what science has discovered so far and a straightforward reading of the Bible. That has to do with exactly when Adam and Eve lived, if they were the only two humans alive at the time, and how all of humanity is related to them.

In previous posts I have affirmed that current genetic evidence shows that all humans are related to a single male and single female and that I believe it is possible that within current scientific knowledge that couple lived about 50,000 years ago and were the first two humans and the genetic ancestors of all humanity. Then in my most recent post I discussed four other possibilities for who Adam and Eve were. In this post I will summarize these views and categorize them according to archeological and scriptural consistency. So let's first label and briefly review each of the five views (which I have consolidated into four views below).

1. Ancient Traditional View: In my previous post this was called the sole-genetic progenitorship, that Adam and Eve lived about 500 to 700 thousand years ago and were  the genetic ancestors of all humans and also of all other close relatives of humans like Neanderthals and Denisovans.
2. Modern Traditional View: In my previous post this was called the genetic-interbreeding progenitorship, that Adam and Eve were the genetic ancestors of all humans and that some of Adam and Eve's ancestors interbred with non-human species. Most scientists would say this would have to be about 200,000 years ago. However, my proposal that this could have been as recent as 50,000 years ago would also fall within this category. This view would be held by Reasons to Believe, a progressive creation organization that would affirm Adam and Eve as God's special creation with no evolutionary ancestors.
3. Genealogical View: In my previous post this was called the sole-genealogical progenitorship, that Adam and Eve are the genealogical ancestors of all humans and could have lived as recent as 6000 years ago, but were not the genetic ancestors of all humans. 
4. Federal View: Adam and Eve could have lived as recent as 6000 years ago and were a representative couple among a population of humans. They are not the genetic ancestor of all humans and not necessarily even the genealogical ancestors of all humans.

For each of these views I will comment on a few things. First, I will simply state whether or not that view allows for the traditional understanding that Adam and Eve were the genetic ancestors of all humans. Second I will state whether or not the view allows us to all be related to Adam and Eve through our genealogy. Finally, I will comment on what seems to be a major problem with reconciling the biblical record with the archeological record, which is that the culture of Adam and Eve in the Bible seems to coincide with human culture that emerged about 10,000 years ago including cities, agricultural, domestic animals, and other elements of modern civilization but does not seem to coincide with how humans lived before that time.

Adam and Eve and Evolutionary Creation

Within evangelical Christianity there are many different views about how and when God created the universe and humans and about who Adam and Eve were. Very generally, we can categorize these beliefs into three options: (1) Young Earth Creationists (YEC) who believe that God created the universe about six thousand years ago and would deny that the big bang or macroscopic evolution occurred, (2) Old Earth Creationists (OEC), also called Progressive Creationists, who would say God used the big bang to create the universe about 14 billion years ago but did not use the process of macroscopic evolution to create humans or other life, so that God has supernaturally created the major classes of life over the last 4 billion years, and (3) Evolutionary Creationists (EC), also called Theistic Evolutionists, who would say that God used both the big bang and macroscopic evolution to create the universe and all life, including humans.

I personally believe that all three of the above options could be defended biblically (which I will discuss in a later blog post). I would currently classify myself as an Old Earth Creationist because I believe that the scientific case for the big bang is indisputable, but I don't believe that the scientific case for evolution is conclusive or compelling. So biblically, I could accept and defend any of the above options but scientifically I can only defend the second option at this time.

Over the last two blog posts I have presented my opinion that the current genetic and archeological scientific evidence is consistent with Adam and Eve living about 50 thousand years ago and being the first two humans and the sole genetic ancestors of all humans. I have also stated that almost all Christian and non-Christian scientists who study human ancestry would not agree with me as to that being the most likely scenario, or maybe even a viable scenario. So what are the various options for Adam and Eve that are held by Evolutionary Creationists and how do those options fit into the biblical narrative? I'll discuss the answer to the first question in this blog entry and the answer to the second question in the next.

Adam and Eve and the Cultural Big Bang

In my investigation of what science has to tell us about the existence of Adam and Eve, I am intrigued by a question that is widely disputed among the scientists who study this subject. The question is when and how modern human behavior developed. One idea that has been proposed is particularly controversial with both scientific proponents and scientific critics. The idea goes by different names including "the cultural big bang," "the late Paleolithic revolution," and "the great leap forward." The proposal is that modern human behavior began suddenly about 50,000 or so years ago. This idea was particularly popular about 15 years ago with many proponents still, though some scientists say that more recent archeological discoveries give hints of modern human behavior that began about 100,000 years ago and developed slowly not suddenly.

I am a non-expert as I try to investigate this question since I am an experimental particle physicist and not an archeologist. But as an outsider, it does seem to me that there seems to be some kind of explosion of modern behavior about 50,000 years ago. It seems that at about that time humans began to develop a way of thinking that invented new tools and developed new ideas and began to shape the environment around them.

Adam and Eve: Genetic Evidence

When I was growing up my mother would often say to me, "All your life you'll have to do things you don't want to do." This post may fall into that category of doing something I don't really want to do but I probably should do. One of my readers asked if I could comment on the genetic evidence from DNA analysis supporting an historical Adam and Eve. I think that is a great question and a very important question since the story of Adam and Eve is central to the biblical narrative. Many of my readers have affirmed that my writings and videos have made a strong case that God used the big bang as his method of creation and that both the record of nature and the biblical record support a 14 billion year old universe. My readers have indicated to me that I seem to be able to explain complex subjects in simple terms, and so I have been asked to explain the scientific evidence about human origins in simple terms. I'm certainly willing to discuss what I know about this subject, but as a particle physicist and not a geneticist I am far from an expert on understanding and critiquing genetic evidence. When I write about physics I'm confident that I can separate good arguments and good scientific analysis from poor arguments and analysis. When I write about genetics, I'm not sure I can always separate the good signal from the background noise. Nevertheless, in response to the wishes of my readers I will delve into the subject of Adam and Eve. In this post I'll talk about some of the scientific and genetic evidence regarding human origins and in the next posts I'll discuss some other options that may reconcile the scientific evidence with the biblical record and also examine some of the theological issues dealing with Adam and Eve.

Genesis and Science Reconciled

There seems to be a common belief by both Christians and non-Christians that modern scientific discoveries about the origin and development of the universe contradict the biblical account of creation in Genesis. Many people from both groups claim that any attempt to reconcile science and the Bible is a forced alliance that compromises the integrity of the Bible, science, or both. In the last few blog posts I have presented a coherent narrative that naturally reconciles the Bible and science without distorting either. I first cautioned us as Christians against using poor science to try to support the Bible. I then warned against making the same kind of biblical interpretive errors that led to the trial and persecution of Galileo. Third, I pointed out that the proper interpretation of any literature requires an examination of the language, culture, and literary context of the text. Finally, I showed from the Bible itself that the story of creation must be understood from the reference frame that is presented in Genesis 1:2, on the surface of the primordial earth. From that perspective both scientific findings and the biblical narrative agree that the environment was formless, empty, dark, and watery.

Most of the supposed discrepancies between the biblical account of creation and the scientific observations about the origin and development of the universe and our solar system are reconciled once it has been established that the creation story is told from a perspective on the surface of the earth. As such, Genesis 1:1, the creation of the heavens and the earth, takes a little over nine billion years from the big bang origin of the universe to the forming of the primordial earth. Starting in Genesis 1:2 and throughout the rest of the chapter, the story of earth's 4.5 billion year history is conveyed. In the brief description given here, we'll simply touch on how some of the alleged discrepancies are resolved by affirming that the perspective of the story is on the surface of the earth.

Unlocking Genesis One

In order to understand the meaning of any piece of literature we must consider the cultural and linguistic context of the text. By taking these important factors into consideration, it becomes clear that a straightforward reading of the account of creation in Genesis leads to creation days that are long periods of time, not 24 hours each. That realization is a critical principle for understanding the creation story in Genesis 1. But perhaps the most important key for unlocking everything in the story, from the order to the timing of creation, is to look in the passage for the proper perspective, or point of view, from which the story is being told. As discussed in a previous post, the church of the seventeenth century made a fundamental mistake by not considering the point of view of the writer in the many biblical passages that discuss the movement of the earth, sun, and moon. In each of those passages the point of view is that of an observer on the earth. From a perspective on the earth, the sun, moon, and stars, do move across the sky which is why we still say that we observe a "sunrise" or "sunset." The biblical description of the motion of the astronomical objects is accurate from the perspective of the observer.

To properly understand the creation account in Genesis 1, we must also adopt the proper point of view. That is the key to unlocking the story. Fortunately, the text itself tells us the needed perspective. It is stated in Genesis 1:2; "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." My young earth creationist friends have pointed out that there were no humans around to observe the creation of the universe so we must rely on what God says to know what happened at the beginning. I do agree that God's word will give us an accurate and truthful description of how he created the universe. Since no one was around to observe the creation, it would make sense that God's account should be given from God's perspective. Genesis 1:2 tells us where God is and, therefore, the proper vantage point from which to view the story of creation as it unfolds in the rest of the chapter: "the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." God's Spirit is hovering over the waters that cover the surface of the earth. The rest of the story of creation as told in Genesis 1 is not told from a perspective outside of the universe or from somewhere in outer space looking at the earth, sun, moon, and stars, but is told from where God is on the surface of the earth. The key to unlocking the mysteries of the rest of the creation account is a proper understanding that the story is told from God's perspective on the surface of the earth.