Paul and the Historicity of Adam and Eve Peter Enns & Denis Lemoureux versus C. John Collins & D.A. Carson
Transcript
1. Paul and the Historicity of Adam and Eve Peter Enns &
Denis Lemoureux versus C. John Collins & D.A. Carson
2. Where We are focusing Before I begin, Ill go ahead and
reveal my own cards. I am an Old Earth Creationist who holds to a
literary framework view of Genesis 1. I agree with the best science
of the day that says the earth is 4 billion years old and the
universe is 13 billions years old. The Creation account(s) has some
historical referent in our space-time history. I think there are
good reasons to believe in a historical Adam and Eve. I do not
intend to discuss the whole Creation/Evolution debate. Too big of a
topic for an hour Hermeneutics, theology & church history,
philosophy, science, and other fields Too big of an issue for my
feeble, mental faculties Too controversial of an issue for me to
ramble about
3. Where We are focusing We will look at two theistic
evolutionists handlings of the historicity of Adam and Eve in
Pauline literature We will focus of the work of Peter Enns and
Denis Lemoureux with responses by D.A. Carson and C. John
Collins.
4. Adam & Eve Existed. Dr. D.A. Carson is Research
Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
in Deerfield, IL. Adam in the Epistles of Paul Dr. C. John Collins
is the professor of Old Testament at Covenant Seminary. Did Adam
and Eve Really Exist?
5. Adam & Eve Never Existed Peter Enns is a Senior Fellow
of Biblical Studies for The BioLogos Foundation. The Evolution of
Adam Denis O. Lemoureux is a professor of science and religion at
St. Joseph's College at the University of Alberta, Canada.
Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution
6. Introduction- Waltke Controversy Bruce Waltke, after
appearing on a Biologos video discussing theistic evolution,
resigned from RTS amidst an evangelical firestorm. Prof. Bruce
Waltke is a preeminent Old Testament scholar, holding doctorates
from Dallas Theological Seminary (Th.D.), Harvard University
(Ph.D.), and Houghton College (D. Litt.). His teaching appointments
at Dallas Theological Seminary, Regent College, Westminster
Theological Seminary, Reformed Theological Seminary Orlando, and
currently at Knox Theological Seminary have earned him a reputation
as a master teacher with a pastoral heart. In addition to serving
on the translation committee of the NIV and TNIV and as editor of
the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible, Waltke has written
commentaries on Genesis, Proverbs, and Micah. His latest
publication, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical
and Thematic Approach, earned the Christian Book Award in
2008.
7. Introduction- What he said If the data is overwhelmingly in
favor of evolution, to deny that reality will make us a cultsome
odd group that is not really interacting with the world. And
rightly so, because we are not using our gifts and trusting Gods
Providence that brought us to this point of our awareness. His
statements were conditional
8. Introduction-What is Theistic Evolution? What is theistic
evolution? The best harmonious synthesis of the special revelation
of the Bible, of the general revelation of human nature that
distinguishes between right and wrong and consciously or
unconsciously craves God, and of science is the theory of theistic
evolution. By theory, I mean here a coherent group of general
propositions used as principles of explanation for the origin of
species, especially Adam, not a proposed explanation whose status
is still conjectural. By theistic evolution I mean that the God of
Israel, to bring glory to himself, (1) created all the things that
are out of nothing and sustains them; (2) incredibly, against the
laws of probability, finely tuned the essential properties of the
universe to produce Adam, who is capable of reflecting upon their
origins; (3) within his providence allowed the process of natural
selection and of cataclysmic interventions-such as the meteor that
extinguished the dinosaurs, enabling mammals to dominate the
earth-to produce awe-inspiring creatures, especially Adam; (4) by
direct creation made Adam a spiritual being, an image of divine
beings, for fellowship with himself by faith; (5) allowed Adam to
freely choose to follow their primitive animal nature and to usurp
the rule of God instead of living by faith in God, losing
fellowship with their physical and spiritual Creator; (6) and in
his mercy chose from fallen Adam the Israel of God, whom he
regenerated by the Holy Spirit, in connection with their faith in
Jesus Christ, the Second Adam, for fellowship with himself. Bruce
Waltke, An Old Testament Theology
9. Introduction Dr. Waltkes resignation brought Biologos &
the theistic evolution controversy to the forefront of the
evangelical community. Since then, numerous books have come out on
the subject. The center of the evolution debate has shifted from
asking whether we came from earlier animals to whether we could
have come from one man and one woman.
10. Introduction Denis Lemoureuxs and Peter Enns works serve as
an apologetic endeavor to accommodate the findings of science with
the truths of inspired Scripture. In the process, many evangelical
leaders, scholars, and theologians have said theyve gone too far
and have compromised on a key doctrine.
11. Both Agree on Paul in One Sense Paul believed that Adam and
Eve really existed.
12. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul "My central conclusion in this book
is clear: Adam never existed and this fact has no impact whatsoever
on the foundational beliefs of Christianity." Evolutionary Creation
What is essential to Christianity? God created humans Humans bear
the image of God Humans are sinful God judges humanity for sin
Jesus died for humans Salvation is found through Jesus Christ
alone
13. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Evolutionary creation claims that the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit created the universe and life through
an ordained, sustained, and design- reflecting evolutionary
process. Evolution is intelligently designed to bring about what
God wants.
14. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Dr. Lemoureux rejects scientific
concordism. Scientific concordism is the assumption that God
revealed scientific facts in the Bible thousands of years before
their discovery in modern history. He rejects this notion because
of the presence of a three-tier universe in the Bible.
15. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Genesis 1 and the firmament or
expanse. They thought it was a hard dome because it appeared that
way. All ANE cultures believed this idea. God places the sun, moon,
and stars in the firmament because it appears that way. It is an
ancient understanding of the physical world.
16. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul
17. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Other biblical passages Acts 4:12
"Under heaven" This reflects a three tier universe Phil. 2:10-11
"in heavenon earthand in the underworld" This passage uses an
ancient understanding of the entire universe that is three-tiered.
Gen. 1:7 Waters under the earth Ancients would travel in all
directions and would eventually come to a body of water. It made
perfect sense to assume they were surrounded by a body of water.
This is where we get the phrase "ends of the earth." Ends of the
earth Isa. 41:8 Jesus himself uses this same ancient mindset of the
day in Matt. 12:42
18. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Is concordism true? We find an
ancient understanding of the physical world. What we find in
scripture does not align with the scientific facts. Did God lie?
No. Lying requires deception and malice. God simply accommodates
himself. The Holy Spirit descended to the level of ancient humans
and used their ideas (Ancient Science) in order to reveal messages
of faith.
19. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Creation in Genesis 1 We find an
ancient understanding of the creation of the world. De novo
Creation Creation that is brand new. Quick and complete origin of
life. Things are made quickly and fully formed. This is the origins
science of the world. This is the best understanding for the
ancient peoples. Message-incident principle We find a message in
Scripture that is timeless, good truth that is carried by the
vessel of an ancient understanding of an incident. We find the
message amidst ancient understandings of things.
20. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul
21. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Biology in the Bible Implication of
the three-tier universe If the astronomy is ancient If the geology
is ancient Is the biology not ancient? This is a consistency
argument. Ancient biology in Scripture The creation of life is
mentioned to be "according to their kinds" in the Creation accounts
ten times. This is an ancient phenomenological perspective of the
ancients. Cows make cows Sheep make sheep Birds make birds People
make people This is the taxonomy-of-the-day. Implication? The
ancients would have asked is "where do humans come from?"
Retrojection Taking present experience and casting it back in time
to explain the past.
22. Denis Lemoureuxs Paul Adam? A human gives birth to a human
who gives birth to another human and so on and so forth. Origins
implication: Adam is the retrojection of the ancients. This is an
ancient biology of origins. Adam is an extension of adding people
all the way back to the first "humans." Adam is simply a
retrojective conclusion (de novo creation according to their kinds)
of an ancient taxonomy, which is based on an ancient
phenomenological perspective of biology. Adam is an incidental
vessel that delivers inerrant foundations of the Christian faith to
remind us: We are created in the Image of God, we are sinful, and
God judges us for our sins. Though Adam never existed, he is the
prototype of the human spiritual condition. In order to understand
our existence, we must see ourselves in himAdam is you and me. Adam
= three tiers Adam was never created de nova like the Scriptures
say.
23. Rebuttals to Dr. Lemoureuxs Paul 1. Anticoncordism, which
tends to reject concordism out of hand, is not the only
alternative. Anti-concordism, as applied to Genesis, tends to
assume that the Biblical account has little or no historical
referent. 2. He assumes historical or scientific concordism
requires literalism. 3. He assumes a timeless message can be
abstracted from a story. 4. He assumes that Pauls argument is not
somehow contingent upon facts of history. 5. Some of the statements
could be poetic. 6. He assumes a level of ethnocentrism.
24. Peter Enns Paul "The conversation between Christianity and
evolution would be far less stressful for some if it were not for
the prominent role that Adam plays in two of Paul's lettersIn these
passages Paul seems to regard Adam as the first human being and
ancestor of everyone who lived. This is a particularly vital point
in Romans, where Paul regards Adam's disobedience as the cause of
universal sin and death from which humanity is redeemed through the
obedience of Christ. Many Christians, however creative they might
be willing to be interpreting Genesis, stop dead in their tracks
when they see how Paul handles Adam. 79 Paul really does believe
this fact he is discussing in Romans and First Corinthians. What
Paul has to say is not based upon the OT.
25. Pauls Adam and the OT Adam is relatively absent from the
Old Testament story. From a Christian point of view, we talk about
Genesis 3 as a turning point. We call it "the Fall." This is not a
major turning point within the Hebrew bible. Outside of genealogies
within Chronicles, Adam is never really brought up too much. The
Fall isn't seen as a cause of anything really. We assume that
depravity comes from the fall. The text does not blame Adam like
Paul does.
26. Pauls Adam and the OT If Adam's disobedience lies at the
root of universal sin and death, why does the Old Testament never
once specifically refer to Adam this way? Adam is mentioned in 1
Chronicles 1:1. Hosea 6:7 should not be viewed as referring to Adam
as person's name. It should be viewed as a place's name. Hosea is
not concerned with the sin of all humanity. He is concerned with
Israel's failure to repent. Adam is the first of three places
listed where Israel failed to repent (Gilead and Shechem in vv.
8-9). Hosea 6:7 is not a brief allusion to the fall of man.
27. Pauls Adam and the OT Adam's punishment from God listed in
Genesis 3:17-18 does not mention his posterity would be born in a
state of sinfulness from which all efforts to eradicate oneself are
in vain. Cain's disobedience is not causally linked with Adam's
disobedience. Noah would be exempt from Adam's sinfulness that is
passed down because he is described as "a righteous man, blameless
in his generation. (6:9)" Why is Adam's disobedience not causally
linked to the flood? Israel is given a choice whether or not to
obey God's law- much like Adam and Cain. The choice offered to Adam
and Cain is the same choice later offered to Israel: obedience
yields blessing and disobedience yields cursing. The Old Testament
does not tie Israel's disobedience, or that of humanity at large,
to Adam's one act of disobedience.
28. Pauls Adam and the OT Paul's use of Genesis is clearly
rooted in something else other than a simple reading of the story.
Paul's view of the depth of universal, inescapable human alienation
from God is completely true, but it is also beyond what is
articulated in the OT in general or Genesis specifically. We read
Genesis like we do because of the influence of Augustine in the
Western Church. Humanity's state was transformed because of Adam
and Eve's transgression. The depraved and guilty nature of the
first couple was passed onto their offspring and all of the rest of
humanity. All of humanity was in some sense present in Adam's
actions and disobedience
29. Pauls Adam and the OT We do not have to read it like this.
The Eastern Church, following Irenaeus of Lyons, sees the story
from a different angle. The garden story is not about a descent
from a pristine, untainted original state of humanity. Rather, it
tells the story of navet and immaturity on the part of Adam and Eve
and the loss of childlike innocence in an illicit move to grasp at
a good thing, wisdom, represented by the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil. Adam and Eve are like children placed in a paradise,
where they are to learn to serve God and grow in wisdom and
maturity, to move to spiritual perfection.
30. Pauls Adam and the OT The story is about the how (how
wisdom is obtained) knowledge is to be pursued. Knowing the
difference between good and evil, right and wrong, is desirable.
This is found in Israel's wisdom literature. Becoming like God in
knowing good and evil is precisely what God wants for Adam and Eve.
The issue is not the knowledge should be avoided lest one claim to
be like God. The problem is the illicit way in which Eve tries to
attain wisdom- quickly, prematurely, impatiently. A wisdom reading
of Genesis 3 does not address, and so in no way negates, the
universal and inescapable reality of sin and death and the need for
a savior to die and rise.
31. Paul as an Ancient Interpreter Although Paul's gospel was
fresh, radical, and counterintuitive to both Jew and Gentile alike,
Paul was an ancient man and naturally held widely accepted views on
a good number of things. Paul had a cultural context. Paul believed
in a three-tiered universe (Phil. 2:10-11; 2 Cor. 12:2). Paul's
world did not include the Western hemisphere or the arctic poles;
reproductive barrenness is solely the woman's fault; the world was
created by a discreet act of God in relatively recent history, not
through an evolutionary process over millions or billions of years
(Paul would not have a category for the astronomical numbers we
casually toss about). Just because Pauls access to knowledge about
the origins led him to use the language he did to make a
theological claim, that does not mean we need to accept the
scientific accuracy of his statements in order to agree with his
theological conclusion. Paul does not have to be right
scientifically for us to agree with him theologically.
32. Paul as an Ancient Interpreter Pauls handling of his
Scripture is marked throughout by a creative engagement of his
tradition. That creativity stems from two factors: (1) the Jewish
climate of his day, likewise marked by imaginative ways of handling
Scripture; and (2) Pauls uncompromising Christ-centered focus. In
other words, Pauls understanding of the Adam story is influenced
both by the interpretive conventions of Second Temple Judaism in
general and by his wholly reorienting experience of the risen
Christ. Paul is not doing straight exegesis of the Adam story.
Rather, he subordinates that story to the present, higher reality
of the risen Son of God, expressing himself within the
hermeneutical conventions of the time.
33. Paul as an Ancient Interpreter By the time Jesus came on
the scene, Jews had already been steeped in several hundred years
of careful reflection on their own now sacred and inscripturated
story. This process already began within the pages of the OT
itself, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as "inner biblical
interpretation," where Israel's latter literature shows evidence of
transforming its older texts in view of changing circumstances
(Chronicles). During this time, the Qumran community was writing
books, the Pseudepigrapha and OT apocrypha was written, and the
Hebrew scriptures were translated into other languages. There was
tremendous literary output by faithful Jews in trying to come to
grips with how their scriptures and current events intersected. The
NT was written amid this flurry of interpretive output.
34. Paul as an Ancient Interpreter There are various "Adams" of
Jewish Interpreters that do not agree with Paul's unique view. The
Wisdom of Solomon refers to Adam as one who was "delivered from his
transgressions" (10:1). Adam was a master of all things, but
transgressed God's command. Adam is presented as some sort of
victim of the death that entered the world "through the devil's
envy," not through Adam's disobedience (2:23-24). Ecclesiasticus
talks about Adam being formed from the dust, but there is no
mention of a fall or sinful nature inherited by his offspring
(17:1-14; 33:10). Sirach places the blame not on Adam for the
misery of all humanity but solely on Eve (25:24 [1 Tim. 2:14?]). In
the book of Jubilees, Adam is a priestly figure who actually offers
sacrifices for his own transgressions. In On the Creation of the
World, Philo understands Adam to have been made perfect and
immortal, fully possessing the image of God (134-135). The further
the human race extends from him, the less of the image they posses
(141).
35. Paul as an Ancient Interpreter Paul's Adam is an example of
the rich interpretive activity, where Adam is called upon to
address various theological concerns. Paul's handling of Adam is
hermeneutically no different from what others were doing at the
time: appropriating an ancient story to address pressing concerns
of the moment.
36. Paul as an Ancient Interpreter Paul does not use the OT
with exact precision of the original context. The crucifixion and
resurrection changes how he interprets his Bible. The text is not
the master; it serves a goal- the absolute and uncompromised
centrality of what God has done here and now in the crucified and
risen Christ. 2 Cor. 6:2 and Isaiah 49:8 The "seed" in Gal. 3:16,29
Gal. 3:11 and Hab. 2:4 Rom. 11:26-27 and Isa. 59:20 Rom. 4 and Gen.
15:6
37. Paul as an Ancient Interpreter Paul had an interpreted
Bible. How Paul understood the OT was affected by interpretive
traditions that were older than Paul but shaped his thinking more
subtly. 2 Tim. 3:8 mentions Jannes and Jambres, the magicians in
Pharaoh's court during Moses' day. Gal. 3:19 mentioned the law
being mediated by angels. 1 Cor. 10:4 mentions a moving well that
followed the Israelites' during the desert experience. We cannot
and should not assume that what Paul says about Adam is necessarily
what Genesis was written to convey. Paul was an ancient man with
ancient thoughts, inspired though he was.
38. Pauls Adam Paul's Adam: The historical first man,
responsible for universal sin and death. Adam is a vital
theological and historical figure for Paul. But, Adam is also
typological and symbolic in Paul (Rom. 5:14; 1 Cor. 15:44-49). What
makes Paul difficult to read for us today. All the extrabiblical
factors mentioned earlier. We do not know the full context of the
situations. They original hearers know something we lack. There are
grammatical challenges to reading Paul. His thoughts tend to come
with such a flurry of energy and passion that his pen can hardly
keep up with his heart and head. He is not as logical, systematic,
and clinical as he is made out to be.
39. Pauls Adam The reason Paul uses Adam the way he does
reflects his Christ-centered handling of the OT in general. Paul's
understanding of Adam is shaped by Jesus, not the other way around.
The uncompromising reality of who Jesus is and what he did to
conquer the objectively true realties of sin and death do not
DEPEND on Paul's understanding of Adam as a historical person.
40. Pauls Adam We can leave behind the cause of sin with
leaving behind the fact of sinfulness. There are three core
elements that remain: The universal and self-evident problem of
death. The universal and self-evident problem of sin. The
historical event of the death and resurrection of Christ. What we
lose: Paul's cultural answer to how those things came about. We can
hold to a "sin of origin" without believing in Augustine's doctrine
of "original sin." The former is the absolute inevitability of sin
that affects every human being from their beginnings, from
birth.
41. Pauls Adam Paul's goal is to show that what binds these two
utterly distinct groups together is their equal participation in a
universal humanity marked by sin and death and their shared need of
the same universally offered redemption. Paul's Adam serves that
role. Everything else is subservient to that goal. The New
Perspective gets Paul's thinking right. Paul is combating
covenantal nomism within his letters, doing the law out of
gratitude to stay in the covenant. The Jews did not think of
themselves as earning God's favor through the observation of the
Law. The law and other Jewish markers "kept them" in the covenant
community.
42. Pauls Adam Paul is saying that the Gentiles do not have to
become Jewish to stay in the covenant community. The resurrection
of the Son of God is a game changer; gentiles can now be part of
the covenant as gentiles. Paul pushes Adam to the forefront in a
brand new way to address the problem of sin and death, a problem
the resurrection defeated. Any attempt to retain the old
distinctions the resurrection did away with are met with the full
arsenal of Paul's rhetorical skills, passionate personality, and
theological insights.
43. Rebuttals to Dr. Enns Paul 1. He ignores the OTs use of the
Adam story in other pericopes. 2. He does not consider other Second
Temple Literature concerning Pauls issue of where sin originated.
3. He assumes because of his commitment to the New Perspective that
Pauls arguments do not depend on a historical Adam. 4. He abuses
Irenaeus of Lyons account. 5. His viewpoint concerning how the
apostles used the OT is not the only way to interact with those
texts. 6. His view of inspiration may place undue emphasis on human
frailty.
44. 1-Adam in the OT Forest and the Trees Problem: How does our
perception of the big picture (the forest) interact with our
interpretations of the text (the trees)? There are several
difficulties with this claim: the first is, what exactly
constitutes a "citation," presumption, or echo? Does an allusion to
any part of Genesis 1-5 count as one of the echoes? Does not the
presence or absence of allusions depend on the communicative
intentions of the writers? The later writer may or may not find an
echo of this passage useful to what he is trying to do in a later
text-which means the perceived rarity of citation hardly implies
that this story has no bearing on the rest of the Hebrew
Bible.
45. 1-Adam in the OT Narrative rarely tells the reader what the
he or she should believe outright. Rather, it shows one the
consequences and ends of actions and decisions within the flow of
the plotline. We do not need a statement from the writer that Adams
disobedience affects all people who follow him because the text
shows this fact. Cranfield says (Original Sin) is a natural
inference drawn from the Genesis narrative and surely its
intention. Peter Enns reverses the prototype of seeing Adam as
representational of Israel instead of seeing Israel as
representational of Adam. Adam and Eve, as persons in covenant with
God who disobey the LORD, become types or symbols of divine will
and intention throughout Torah and the rest of the OT. N.T. Wright
in his The New Testament and the People of God says that "If
Abraham and his family are understood as the Creator's means of
dealing with the sin of Adam, and hence the evil in the world,
Israel herself becomes to the true Adamic humanity
46. 1-Adam in the OT Commands issued to Adam are given to
Abraham and others (1:28; 12:2; 17:2,6,8; 22:16). The "blessing"
idea is explicit in 12:2-3 and is combined with being fruitful and
multiplying in 17:20; 22:17-18;26:3-4; 28:3: these echo God's
blessings upon the original pair (1:28). The idea of "offspring"
and "seed" ties the rest of Genesis with the first eleven chapters
(3:15; 4:25; 12:7; 13:15-16; 17:7-9). Abraham, Abel, Noah, and
Israel mirrors Adam by building altars to sacrifice to the LORD.
Israel is to be a nation of priests over God's earth much like Adam
and Eve were priests and vice-regents over the earth (Exo. 19). The
prophets call Israel to be the people through whom the LORD will
act in relation to the whole world. Outside of Genesis 1-5,
explicit references to Eden as a prototypical place of fruitfulness
occur in Gen.13:10; Isa. 51:3;Joel 2:3, and Ezek. 28:13; 31:8-9;
36:35. Adam is mentioned in the genealogy of 1 Chronicles 1
as-well-as the genealogies in the earlier chapters of Genesis and
Luke (3:38). The tree of life receives further mention in the OT
& NT (Prov. 3:18; 11:30; 13:12; 15:4; Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14, 19).
Numerous passages refer back to creation (Psa. 8; 104) Human rest
on the Sabbath imitates God's rest after his work on creation (Exo.
20:11, echoing 2:2-3). Malachi 2:15 is likely referring to God's
intent in marriage (Gen. 2:24).
47. 1-Adam in the OT Hosea 6:7 is disputed but good reasons
exist to translate the verse as But like Adam they transgressed the
covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me. Ecclesiastes 7:29
may be an echo of the Fall. See, this alone I found, that God made
man upright, but they have sought out many schemes. [many schemes
7:20?] Job 31:33 could be an allusion. if I have concealed my
transgressions as others do (margin: As Adam did) by hiding my
iniquity in my bosom.
48. 2-Second Temple Literature on Adam Various Apocryphal and
Pseudepigraphal texts link Adams disobedience with a universal
punishment of death. Apocalypse of Moses-Adam said to Eve, Why have
you wrought destruction among us and brought upon us great wrath,
which is death gaining rule over all our race? (14:2) 4 Ezra- Ezra
speaking to God says: And you laid upon him one commandment of
yours; but he transgressed it, and immediately you appointed death
for him and his descendants. (3:7)
49. 2-Second Temple Literature on Adam 2 Baruch-When Adam
sinned and death was decreed against those who were to be born, the
multitude of those who would be born was numbered. (23:4) 2 Baruch-
Adam sinned first and brought death upon all who were not in his
own time. (54:15)For when he transgressed, untimely death came into
being. . . (56:6). 4 Ezra 7:118-199- O Adam, what have you done?
For though it was you who sinned, the fall was not yours alone, but
ours also who are your descendants. For what good is it to us, if
an immortal time has been promised to us, but we have done deeds
that bring death?
50. 2-Other Mentions of Adam Jesus refers to Adam or the events
of creation in some historical sense. Matt. 19:4-5 He answered,
"Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made
them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his
father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall
become one flesh (Gen. 2:7)'? Matt. 23:35- so that on you may come
all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent
Abel (Gen. 4:8) to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah,
whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. (Luke 11:51)
John 8:44- You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do
your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and
has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him.
When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar
and the father of lies. (Wisdom of Solomon 2:24 Nevertheless
through envy of the devil came death into the world: and they that
do hold of his side do find it.)
51. 3-Pauls Arguments and Adam Genesis 1-3 is mentioned in
passing by Paul in 1 Cor. 11:7-12; 2 Cor 11:3; and 1 Tim. 2:13-14.
Although there is no reason to doubt that these references share
the usual assumption of Second Temple Jews that Adam and Eve were
historical, it is not easy to insist that the argument depends on
this assumption for its validity. Not only must we conclude that
Paul himself believed in the historicity of Adam, but that the
structure of his argument requires the historicity of Adam. In
other words, for Paul Adam is more than an optional extra, a
mythological accretion which may be excised without loss. Far from
it; Paul so tightly relates the saving cross- work of Christ to the
significance of historical Adam that it is difficult to see how one
can preserve the former if the latter is jettisoned. Carson
52. 3-Pauls Arguments and Adam Enns work shows a sense of
scholarly arrogance. The traditional view concerning the message of
Romans is Paul confessed his sin and inability to save himself and
accepted Jesus as his savior, and led others to do likewise. The
Protestant reading of Paul reflects medieval theological debates,
not Paul or the Judaism of his time. Romans is often read within
Protestantism as a tract for how an individual can get saved; we
are justified by grace through faith, not by works Getting saved
may be part of the application of Romans, but if one makes it the
whole message, much of Pauls argument will be missed.
53. 3-Pauls Arguments: Romans 5 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. (Rom. 5:12-14)
54. 3-Pauls Arguments: Romans 5 Paul's reference to the time
period from Adam to Moses (5:13-14) certainly presupposes a
historical figure (i.e. Adam) at the beginning of the period,
corresponding to a historical figure at the end of the period
(Moses). Moreover, this period in world history is not simply an
abstract, bounded, temporal entity---we are not dealing with a
"time" in the abstract; rather, this period is portrayed as a time
during which (a) the "law" (of Moses) had not yet been given; (b)
sin was in the world; and (c) death reigned. This threefold
description can only refer to the Old Testament period stretching
from the fall of Adam to the giving of the law to Moses; and it
treats the period as real history inasmuch as all die within it.
Not only does Rom. 5:12-14 lay considerable emphasis on the one
sin, one trespass, or one act of disobedience which brought ruin to
the race; but implicitly the argument depends on the notion that
before that one act of disobedience there was no sin in the race.
This accords very well with Gen. 1-3; it cannot be made to cohere
with any evolutionary perspective which denies the centrality of a
fall in space-time history.
55. 3-Pauls Arguments: Romans 5 Adam is portrayed as the "type"
(tupos, NIV "pattern," 5:14) of one to come. The relationship
between type and antitype in the Scriptures is complex; but Ellis
correctly insists that New Testament typology cannot be thought of
apart from God's saving activity in redemptive history, as
determined by God's definite plan of redemption which is moving
toward a predetermined goal from a specific point of beginning. As
Versteeg comments, "Thus a type always stands at a particular
moment in the history of redemption and points away to another
(later) moment in the same history. . . . To speak about a type is
to speak about the fulfillment of the old dispensation through the
new." Adam is not portrayed as the first sinner, of which other
sinners are later copies; but as the representative sinner, whose
first sin affected the race. This distinction is crucial if the
parallel between Adam and Jesus is to be maintained; for Jesus is
certainly not portrayed as the first man to perform some definitive
righteous act, but as the representative man whose definitive
righteous act affects those who are in him. Preserve this parallel
between Adam and Christ, and the historicity of Adam cannot simply
be pro forma, as far as Paul is concerned.
56. 3-Pauls Arguments: Romans 5 The argument is a narratival
one: an event that happened in the past (as in, one mans trespass,
one mans sin, one trespass, one mans disobedience) had consequences
(many died), even from Adam to Moses (another character in the
story), that is, before the law of Moses. Verse 17 is explicit:
Because of one mans trespass, death reigned through one man. These
events were followed by what Jesus achieved (one act of
righteousness, one mans obedience), both in his death and
resurrection.
57. 3-Pauls Arguments:1 Corinthians 15:20-27 But in fact Christ
has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have
fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also
the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in
Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ
the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ.Then
comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after
destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must
reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last
enemy to be destroyed is death. For "God has put all things in
subjection under his feet." But when it says, "all things are put
in subjection," it is plain that he is excepted who put all things
in subjection under him.
58. 3-Pauls Arguments:1 Corinthians 15:20-27 The point of the
argument is not simply that Christ has introduced a new historical
factor into the status quo of universal sin , but that just as all
death can trace its roots back to one man, so all resurrection from
the dead can trace its roots back to one man. Contextually, Paul 's
argument for the resurrection of Christ's people depends on the
resurrection of Christ; and the structure of this resurrection
argument depends on the parallel structure, VIZ: that all
participate in death because of the introduction by Adam of death
as a kind of firstfruits. The argument of the context requires an
individual at the head of both lines the line of death and the line
of the resurrection of the dead.
59. 3-Pauls Arguments:1 Corinthians 15:20-27 Similarly,
explicit mention of Adam in v.22 argues for a historical person. It
does not help to point out that Adam in Hebrew means man, for (a)
even in the Hebrew Old Testament, one can usually distinguish in
Gen. 1-3 between Adam qua man (generically) and Adam qua first
Individual man: (b) the New Testament was written in Greek, not
Hebrew; and so if Paul had wanted to say man generically he would
have been better off using Greek anthr6pos, rather than referring
to the name of the first human being, a name which Greek-speaking
Gentiles in Corinth would certainly recognize as belonging to the
first human being ; (c) the parallel between 'Adam ' and 'Christ',
two individuals, needs to be preserved as much in this verse as in
the preceding one. The reference to death as the last enemy to be
destroyed (v.26)almost certainly casts a backward glance at the
Introduction of death into the race effected by the disobedience of
our first parent (Gen. 3) .
60. 3-Pauls Arguments:1 Corinthians 15:20-27 The first part of
v.27 (,For he "has put everything under his feet." ') is a direct
quote from Ps. 8 :6, which in turn reflects the creation narrative
of Gen . 1:26- 30. In both Gen. 1 and Ps. 8, it is man who is
vested with authority over all things. But Paul, like the author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews (2 :5ff), applies the language to Christ
as the last Adam, who retrieves the situation lost by the first
Adam.!" This backward glance is entirely lost if Paul is
unconcerned about the historicity of Adam, and the historical
reality of man's pre-fall condition.
61. 3-Pauls Arguments: 1 Corinthians 15:44-49 It is sown a
natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural
body, there is also a spiritual body. Thus it is written, "The
first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a
life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual that is first but
the natural, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the
earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man
of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man
of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have
borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of
the man of heaven.
62. 3-Pauls Arguments: 1 Corinthians 15:44-49 When Paul in
15:45a cites Gen. 2:7, he inserts the words first and Adam. These
additions make it clear that Paul does not intend to refer to man
generally, but to one specific man, the first one, Adam by name. It
is on this basis that Paul can refer to a second man, a last Adam,
as an individual figure. The argument is greatly weakened if the
first Adam may be construed as a reference to all humanity; for the
last Adam must be an individual and not a reference to the new
humanity, since the last Adam has become a life-giving (not a
life-receiving) spirit. Only about Jesus Christ, the individual
Jesus Christ, could this be said. Moreover, Paul says that "we have
borne the likeness of the earthly man" (15:49), not that we are the
earthly man; and in the same way we shall bear the likeness of the
man from heaven, which clearly cannot mean we are the man from
heaven. The language is reminiscent of the "in Adam"/"in Christ"
contrast of 15:21. Clearly, neither Adam nor Christ is here
presented in a purely private capacity. Both function as
representative heads, the one of the earthly humanity, the other of
the heavenly humanity; and it is difficult to perceive exactly what
Paul could be saying if this parallelism is destroyed. The cogency
of his argument for a resurrection body of a nature like Christ's
resurrection body is destroyed if there is no representative
entailment from Christ to us; and there is no reason to think such
entailment must exist unless the historical representative
entailment from Adam to us also exists.
63. 3-Pauls Arguments: 1 Corinthians 15:44-49 We may put this
in a slightly different fashion. As Ridderbos writes, "The
anthropological contrast is anchored in the redemptive-historical."
The "natural" mode of existence which springs from participation in
Adam is succeeded by the "spiritual" mode of existence which
springs from participation in Christ. But Christ in this passage
appears not as an a- temporal parallel to Adam, but as the later
figure, the eschatological figure, the antitypical figure, the
figure who comes in fulfillment. Such categories are meaningful
only if the first figure is a figure in history. One cannot fail to
be reminded of the argument of 2 Peter 3:1-7. There we are told
that those who scoff at the prospect of the second coming have two
historical examples of God's cataclysmic intervention to stand as
witnesses to what God can do---viz, the creation and the flood. But
to a generation which disbelieves heartily in both of these
historical events which God has designed at least in part to serve
as pointers to the far greater cataclysm of the second coming, what
can we possibly offer by way of assurance that Christ's coming will
not be forever delayed? In the same way, we may ask ourselves: To a
generation which disbelieves in the historicity of the individual
Adam who stands as representative of the race and who introduced
both death and a certain kind of body into that race, a man
designed by God to serve, at least in part, as a pointer to the
second Adam who brings a new, "spiritual" body and escape from
death, what can we possibly offer by way of assurance that there is
reality to these promises and not just pious talk?
64. 3-Pauls Arguments: Acts 17:26- 31 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, in the hope that they
might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually
not far from each one of us, for "'In him we live and move and have
our being'; as even some of your own poets have said, "'For we are
indeed his offspring.' Being then God's offspring, we ought not to
think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an
image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of
ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere
to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the
world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this
he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."
65. 3-Pauls Arguments: Acts 17:26- 31 The Athenians prided
themselves in [the fact] that they were sprung from the soil of
their native Attica. The Greeks considered themselves superior to
non-Greeks. Against such claims of racial superiority Paul asserts
the unity of all men. The unity of the human race as descended from
Adam is fundamental in Pauls theology. F.F. Bruce The making of all
kinds of people from one person is an historical statement, which
grounds the universal invitation- an invitation that itself is
established by an event (the resurrection), in the light of a
sure-to-come future event (day of judgment). Collins
66. 4-Irenaeus of Lyons For the most partthey (the Greek
Fathers) are rehearsing the clichs of catechetical instruction, so
that what they say smacks more of affirmation than explanation.
While taking it for granted that men are sinful, ignorant and in
need of true life, they never attempt to account for their wicked
plight. J. N.D. Kelley It was a natural consequence of this polemic
attitude towards Gnosticism, that the anthropology of the 2d and 3d
centuries of both the Western and the Eastern Church was marked by
a very strong emphasis of the doctrine of human freedom. At a time
when the truth that man is a responsible agent was being denied by
the most subtle opponents which the Christian theologian of the
first centuries was called to meet, it was not to be expected that
very much reflection would be expended upon that side of the
subject of sin which relates to the weakness and bondage of the
apostate will. The Gnostic asserted that man was created sinful,
and that he had no free will. The Ancient Father contented himself
with rebutting these statements, without much reference to the
consequences of human apostasy in the moral agent, and the human
will itself. W.G. T. Shedd
67. 4-Irenaeus of Lyons According to Irenaeus, the first humans
were created morally innocent, their innocence being more like that
of a child than of a full adult. Gods goal was for them to mature
into moral confirmation, but the fall interrupted the process.
Collins They (Augustine and Irenaeus) both agree that the sin of
Adam and Eve does have an effect, which presupposes our actual
descent from this original pair. Collins
68. 4-Irenaeus of Lyons Though God intended the immature Adam
and Eve to grow into maturity, this process was interrupted by the
Fall. Because Adam was not yet mature, in his weakness and
inexperience, Adam chose to listen to Satan and disobey God. Thus,
humanity lost the divine likeness, that is, the endowment of the
Spirit, and fell into the grasp of Satan. Adam's sin was
disobedience to God, but this disobedience held important
consequences for Adam's progeny. This first instance of
disobedience led to the sinfulness of the whole race. He also
believed that all of humanity shares in Adam's deed and therefore
they also share in his guilt. Though Irenaeus never defines how
this takes place, he must hold that there is some kind of mystical
solidarity within the human race. J.N. D. Kelley through the
disobedience of that one man who was first formed out of the
untilled earth, the many were made sinners and lost life. Against
Heresies 3, 18, 7 In the first Adam, we offended God, not
fulfilling his commandmentto him alone were we debtors, whose
ordinance we transgressed in the beginning. Against Heresies 5, 16,
3 In Adam disobedient man was stricken Against Heresies 5, 34,
2
69. 5-Other Ways of Handling the OT Three Views on the New
Testament Use of the Old Testament (Counterpoints: Bible and
Theology) by Peter Enns and Kenneth Berding Commentary on the New
Testament Use of the Old Testament by D.A. Carson and G. K.
Beale
70. 6-Inspiration and Incarnation His arguments are built upon
his incarnational model of inspiration. As Christ is both God and
human, so is the BibleChrists incarnation is analogous to
Scriptures incarnation.The human dimension of Scripture is,
therefore, part of what makes Scripture Scripture. But it is
precisely this dimension that can create problems for modern
Christian readers, because it can make the Bible seem less unique,
less Bible-like, than we might have supposed. Good reasons exist to
still hold to the orthodox view of inspiration.
71. What We Might Lose The grand narrative of Scripture is
somewhat different.
72. What We Might Lose The reliability of Paul may be subtly
undermined. What future parts of Paul's arguments are the result of
his ancient mindset and thus nullified because "we moved on?" What
do we do with the other Biblical writers on Adam? What other
portions of Scriptural history, ethics, and general doctrine are
the mere thoughts of ancient, unlearned people? Where does human
dignity and objective value apart from ones relation to their
socio-cultural community derive itself from?
73. Closing Admonitions I recommend the works of D.A. Carson,
Peter Enns, and C. John Collins. Possible reviews should be in the
works. We should be loving in our treatment of brothers and sister
who hold different viewpoints yet sharp in our defense of the
truth. Let us proceed with intellectual humility, Christ-exalting
attitude, and scholarly engagement regarding the issues surrounding
Gods creation.