William Lane Craig on the Historical Adam

William Lane Craig is often regarded as the most prominent living Christian philosopher on the planet defending the Christian faith today. However, a recent article that Craig wrote for the magazine First Things has resulted in a firestorm of controversy.

Craig, the founder of the apologetics ministry, Reasonable Faith, and Professor of Philosophy at Houston Baptist University and Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, has recently published a book regarding the historicity of Adam and Eve, and the literary genre of Genesis 1-11 more broadly:  In Quest of the Historical Adam: A Biblical and Scientific Exploration. His essay at First Things summarizes his thesis, and Craig concludes that the Adam and Eve of Genesis are both historical and mythological figures in the Bible, and Craig also concludes that Genesis 1-11 is an example of the literary genre of mytho-history found in the Bible. Furthermore, Craig argues that Adam and Eve go back to a common ancestor shared between modern humans and Neanderthals, between 750,000 to 1,000,000 years ago. Craig’s view can be quickly summarized in this 4-minute linked YouTube video.

Dr. Owen Strachan, Professor of Theology at Grace Bible Theological Seminary, has taken Dr. Craig to task at his Substack blog, describing Dr. Craig’s summary view as being “tortured.” According to the Substack blog, Strachan believes that Craig is not sufficiently nor clearly affirming the historicity of Adam and Eve.  The controversy provides an illustration at just how divided Christians are over the question of human origins, as it corresponds to the teaching of the Bible. This is not a new development, as such controversy extends back even to the days of Jesus.

Some Christians, such as Reformed apologist James White, of Alpha Omega Ministries, and one of the most capable Christian debaters today, hold largely to a presuppositionalist approach to Christian apologetics, where one begins one’s apologetic method with an assumption, or presupposition, that exists as revelation that can not be refuted. This is different from an evidentialist approach to Christian apologetics, that William Lane Craig tends to follow, urging Christians and non-Christians to “follow the evidence wherever it leads” towards the discovery of truth. Interestingly, White is not consistent with his own apologetic method, as White comes across as holding an evidentialist position when defending the reliability of modern Bible translations, in contrast with the presuppositionalist approach taken by KJV-Onlyists (see the comments in this linked Veracity article), who only view the King James Version of the Bible as being THE one-and-only divinely preserved version of the Bible. Nevertheless, James White gives his own broadly framed critique of William Lane Craig in this linked YouTube video, selected from one of his Dividing Line podcast programs. White’s critique here is a bit “off-the-cuff” but it can give you a flavor as to how different Christians approach apologetics differently.

Many Christians are convinced that the truthfulness of the Christian faith hangs and falls on the historical narrative of Adam and Eve. Others view Adam and Eve as merely metaphorical symbols representative of the story of humanity more broadly. Is there a common ground solution to be had here?

What makes this issue so challenging to navigate is that while many Young Earth Creationists, and even some Old Earth Creationists, will make an appeal to the beliefs of the earliest Christians among the early church fathers, in support of their views, the question of relating history and metaphor together is far from simple even among the early church fathers, when it comes to interpreting Genesis 1-11.

For example, even Philo of Alexandria, a Jewish philosopher and contemporary of Jesus, and perhaps the leading apologist for Scriptural faith in his day, had serious reservations about the literal interpretation of the “days” of Genesis, as well as the creation of Eve materially from Adam’s rib, and this was well over 1800 years before Charles Darwin ever came on the scene, well before the age of modern science!! Philo would later become a major influence upon Christian bible teachers in the early church.

In the following YouTube video, Protestant theologian Gavin Ortlund offers a friendly rebuttal to Owen Strachan’s critique of William Lane Craig, by focusing on the complex views of Saint Augustine, the most influential Christian theologian in the Western church, dating back to the early 5th century. After that, I have linked to a YouTube interview by apologist Sean McDowell with William Lane Craig about his new book. The Ortlund video is 15-minutes long. The Craig interview with McDowell is an hour long.

I would be interested in any Veracity reader feedback on any of this content. For further reading, I recommend the work of Joshua Swamidass in finding a peaceful solution to the controversy surrounding the historical Adam and Eve. For a deeper dive into the content of William Lane Craig’s book, you can follow this series of interviews with New Testament scholar Ben Witherington starting here.

 

About Clarke Morledge

Clarke Morledge -- Computer Network Engineer, College of William and Mary... I hiked the Mount of the Holy Cross, one of the famous Colorado Fourteeners, with some friends in July, 2012. My buddy, Mike Scott, snapped this photo of me on the summit. View all posts by Clarke Morledge

6 responses to “William Lane Craig on the Historical Adam

  • Clarke Morledge

    Roman Catholic bishop Robert Barron makes a similar argument about the literary genre of Genesis, as does William Lane Craig:

    Like

  • Boris Badenoff

    The biblical authors knew nothing of the recent past let alone the distant past. The story of Adam and Eve was taken from the Egyptian creation story of Geb and Nut. They disobeyed the creator deity and Nut was punished with difficulties with childbirth. Nut was made from Geb’s body. One of their sons killed his brother. The patterns between the Egyptian stories and Genesis are many and obvious.

    WLC’s book, like the rest of his arguments, is just more antiscientific nonsense. Craig has convinced himself that Adam and Eve actually existed, not from science but from the epistles of Paul, in particular the letter to the Romans. So he starts with a conclusion and then simply makes stuff up to support that conclusion. This is the hallmark of pseudoscience. If this guy is the best apologist Christianity has to offer it’s no wonder this religion is currently being laughed off the planet – gone right over the edge of its flat earth.

    Like

  • Clarke Morledge

    Answers in Genesis reviews William Lane Craig’s book. No surprise here as to what the review would say:

    https://answersingenesis.org/why-does-creation-matter/undermining-scripture-regarding-adam-initial-response-william-lane-craig/

    Here is Ken Ham’s critique from 2014:

    Like

  • Clarke Morledge

    Discovery Institute critique:

    https://evolutionnews.org/2021/11/traditional-or-not-assessing-william-lane-craigs-model-on-adam-and-eve/

    Craig solution appears to be striving towards a mid-point between Joshua Swamidass’ solution (Adam & Eve as genealogical, but not genetic sole ancestors of modern humans):

    A Genetic or Genealogical Adam and Eve? (… An Alternative to “Deconstruction”)

    and Glenn Morton’s solution (Adam & Eve as possibly Homo Erectus, sole ancestor of modern humans, 5.3 million years ago):

    Does Science Make the Biblical Doctrine of Original Sin Obsolete? … (Glenn Morton’s Last Stand)

    Like

    • Boris Badenoff

      I often wonder if any Christians have ever read through the Bible. Let me help you along here.

      Genesis 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years,

      Psalm 19:1-4 The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night declares knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words; their voice is not heard; yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In the heavens he has set a tent for the sun, which comes out like a bridegroom from his wedding canopy, and like a strong man runs its course with joy. Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them; and nothing is hid from its heat.

      Romans 10:18 But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have; for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.”

      Now what kind of a voice could be understood by everyone regardless of what language(s) they speak? “He who has ears, let him hear.” – Matthew 11:15

      The tree in the garden was the Celestial Pole. The serpent was the constellation of Draconis. This is the constellation that was in the celestial polar region at the time. This was during the astrological era of Gemini that began around. 6600 BCE. At that time Gemini came into the position at the vernal equinox and the constellation of Draconis was on the throne of the celestial pole. This is reflected in very ancient Egyptian art. The Pole of the Ecliptic represents the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
      Adam and Eve were the Egyptian deities Geb (who represents the sun) and Nut (who represents the moon). Their children were the children of the earth and heavens. The punishments God gave them and the serpent come from the Egyptian Osiris cycle. This is the Hebrew creation cycle.
      The Creation Cycle
      A. Headnote: ”These are the generations…” (2:4)
      B. No field economy “….no one to till the ground…” (2:5-6)
      C. Human beings given life, installed in the Garden (2:7-17).
      D. Man prefers human companionship over beasts. (2:18-22)
      E. Man calls his companion “Woman.” (2:23)
      F. Etiological summary “Therefore a man leaves…..” (2:24)
      G. Human couple “…naked and …not ashamed.” (2:25)
      H. Serpent promises “…eyes will be opened…” (3:1-5)
      I. Transgression. (3:6)
      H. The couple’s “eyes are opened.”(3:7a)
      G. They experience shame. ( 3:7b-10)
      F. Etiological summary “For you are dust…” (3:19b)
      E. Man calls his companion “Eve” (“Life barrier”) (3:20)
      D. Man and woman wear skins of beasts. (3:21)
      C. Humans expelled from Garden, denied and mortality. (3:22-3:24)
      B. Field economy begins (implied) see sub symmetry (3:23b)
      A. Birth of a child completes one generation (4:1)

      This is theology, NOT history.

      Like

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: