ever symbolism is involved in Genesis 3 and the story of Adam’s sin – and there is surely plenty! – it would be an ungrounded presupposition indeed that demands that where symbolism is employed the account cannot therefore convey real history. Similarly, the claim that “The Bible is not intended to teach science but ‘timeless theological truths’” is an acceptable characterization of Scripture. The Bible is not meant to be a textbook of science. But by no reason of logic can this be made to mean that various historical and/or “scientific” claims by the biblical authors are therefore unreliable. The Bible story is presented as real history in the real world, and (unlike other religions) its teachings presume the truthfulness of its historical claims. Indeed, Scripture’s “timeless theological truths” are historically grounded, and their usefulness and reliability depend upon the truthfulness of those historical claims. In few places is this more evident than in the case of Adam. The question of his historical existence shapes the very storyline of Scripture. Adam is presented in Genesis as the head of the human race, our father into the consequences of whose sin we have all fallen, awaiting a New Adam who, unlike the first Adam, obeyed God faithfully and as a true representative of us all offered himself in sacrifice for our sin. The Bible story is a story of sin and redemption – the sin of Adam and the redemption by Christ – and in the Biblical story the latter rests on the former. Beyond serious question, this is the teaching of the apostle Paul in Romans 5:12-21 (cf. 1 Cor. 15:22, 45), a doctrine it would seem he learned, simply, from a careful reading of the Genesis narrative. No one, understanding the Bible story, can deny that a denial of the historical Adam carries serious gospel consequences. The question is fundamental to the Bible story and, therefore, to Christianity itself.
expression in God’s promise to Abraham (Gen. 12:3). Luke adds his affirmation of Adam in naming him as the primal ancestor of Jesus (Luke 3:38), and our Lord himself expresses this conviction in Matthew 19:4-5 (cf. Gen. 2:24) and John 8:44 (cf. Gen. 3). And of course the apostle Paul several times over affirms the same, often resting his theological argument on it (Acts 17:26; Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:22, 45; 1 Tim. 2:13-14). Collins combs the Scriptures in careful detail (both Old and New Testaments) to demonstrate the shared conviction among the Biblical writers concerning the historicity of Adam and Eve, who were very clearly understood by them as historical figures, even if historical figures with theological significance. Certainly it would be impossible to understand Acts 17:26 in any other sense, where Paul affirms that God made all the nations “from one man.” These passages and many others Collins adduces to establish his argument firmly.
What makes this point such a serious one is that it necessarily entails questions of the very nature and character of Scripture. Simply put, the basic question at issue is, Does the Bible teach that Adam really existed? If so, then if we will call ourselves Christian we are bound to believe it. We welcome challenges, and we are happy to reevaluate our interpretations. Christians have often erred in their understanding of Scripture, just as scientists have often erred in their interpretations of “natural” phenomena, and our love of truth necessarily leaves us willingly open to challenges both from within the professing church and without. But having established a given claim of Scripture, we are bound to believe it. At the end of the day we do not measure Scripture by the “findings” of a given “scientist” whose most recent studies have led him to make certain pronouncements. As Christians we just cannot think or work in that direction. Given the docBiblical Affirmations trine of Scripture – “What Scripture says, God says” – we The Genesis account of Adam (chapters 1-5) is plainly acknowledge its priority in measuring all other truth intended as historical, a history taken up in the larger claims. We measure every “new thought” against what historical narrative of Genesis 1-11 and its portrayal of God has said, and once we are assured of a given Biblical the continued moral decline of humanity born in Adam’s claim we are equally assured of its truthfulness and that image (Gen. 5:3), the answer to which is given first every opposing thought is necessarily mistaken (1 Tim.