Re: [asa] Interview with Denis Lamoureux

From: Dave Wallace <>
Date: Sat Jun 06 2009 - 22:00:01 EDT
I posted on this on Doug's blog:
Dave W says:

Re Question 6:
“Adding an Adam at the end would make one a Progressive Creationist that is nearly an Evolutionary Creationist.”

I would take strong exception to the above statement, although I would agree if what Denis means is that Adam/Eve were specially created. However if God selected some appropriate (likely Homo sapiens) descendant(s) of Lucy as being ready for a relationship with God and if one also assumes that the garden story is a mythological recounting of a real story then that seems to be a very reasonable interpretation to me.

(Note Lucy is an /*Australopithecus afarensis,*/ an extinct hominid which lived between 3.9 and 2.9 million years ago in Ethiopia, to which I am somewhat partial as I grew up only a few hundred miles from where she was found.)


Dick Fischer wrote:
Hi George:

His comment was that a historical Adam "rejects scientific concordism."

Only if a specially-created, Neolithic man was offered up as the first
biological human being on earth from whom all mankind descended would it
reject scientific concordism.  Genesis makes no such claim.  If ignorant
readers wish to impress upon the text what isn't there then call out the
ignorant readers.  Don't beat up on the author(s) and say that what they
wrote wasn't truthful.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message. Received on Sat Jun 6 22:00:24 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jun 06 2009 - 22:00:24 EDT