Re: [asa] Was Adam a real person?

From: Jack <>
Date: Wed Apr 09 2008 - 22:59:45 EDT

Ok hold on one second here.

Perhaps I need to read your book. But there is a difference between
understanding big bang cosmology and evolutionary theory, and understanding
whether or not Adam was historical or mythical. What I am hearing from you
in this email is a 21st century bias against the ancients, and I think the
ancients may have known more than you seem to give them credit for.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Denis O. Lamoureux" <>
To: "Dehler, Bernie" <>; <>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Was Adam a real person?

> Hi Bernie,
> Everything you ask/state in your note is perfectly logical.
> Did the writers of Genesis believe in an Adam? Yes.
> Did Paul believe in an Adam? Yes
> Is young earth creation the closest understanding of the Biblical view of
> origins? Yes.
> So how can I as an evangelical Xian open the concluding chapter of my book
> with the following sentence:
> My central conclusion in this book is clear: Adam never existed, and
> this fact
> has no impact whatsoever on the foundational beliefs of Christianity.
> It takes me some 400 pages to get there, and obviously I can give a
> satisfying
> answer in one e-mail.
> However, the 'quick & dirty' answer is that the de novo creation (quick &
> complete)
> of humans is an ancient understanding of origins. In starting the
> revelatory process,
> the Holy Spirit accommodated to the origins science of the day. The Holy
> Spirit used de novo creation as an incidental vessel to deliver the
> Messages
> of Faith: the God of the Bible is the Creator, the creation is very good,
> and humans
> are created in God's Image.
> Another way of looking at it is to remember when we first met Christ. Did
> the
> Lord not come down to our level? So to with the ancient Hebrews. They
> would never have understood Big Bang cosmology or evolutionary biology.
> So one word: Grace.
> Hope this helps.
> Denis
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dehler, Bernie" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 10:36 AM
> Subject: [asa] Was Adam a real person?
>> Hi all-
>> I still have a question. For those who think that Adam was not a real
>> person in history, how do you answer the critic that says this idea
>> undermines the whole Bible, since likewise if Adam didn't exist then
>> other characters maybe didn't exist either (Noah, Jonah, Abraham, &
>> Moses). If the Bible is undermined, then the faith is on shaky ground,
>> since it is difficult to know what is true and what isn't.
>> I've asked before, but don't think I've gotten any straight, crisp,
>> answers. Can someone point me to some references or sources for the
>> answer? Is this a straight-forward question that is being routinely
>> ignored or shunted or re-directed?
>> I'm not looking for answers as to why Adam must have been real, but
>> looking for answers to the criticism of those who say he was not a real
>> person.
>> Here's what I think the answer is-- tell me if it looks reasonable:
>> The Bible must be studied with what we know of nature. If a Biblical
>> story conflicts with natural science, then we must pick the clearer over
>> the foggier; and if science is clearer, we must accept that. Example,
>> those who read the Bible with ancient science thought the sun revolved
>> around the earth. Now we know the earth revolves around the sun, so
>> science is therefore used to interpret Scripture. Likewise, we know
>> that evolution works on groups of people, and there was no "first,
>> unique" man... man evolved like all other life-forms, over vast amounts
>> of times within populations. Therefore, we know from science there was
>> no first man named Adam, as there is no such thing as a "first" man.
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Apr 9 23:01:12 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 23:01:12 EDT