On the Scriptural Witness to the Historicity of Adam

Moses tell us how Adam was created (Gen. 1:26; 2:5-8) and how many years he lived (Gen. 5:5)

The writer of 1 Chronicles traced humanity from Adam to David (1 Chronicles 1 and 2) by means of historical genealogy. If Adam was not a historical being then neither were all the people from Adam to David.

Job likened the hiding of his sin to Adam’s covering his sin (Job 31:33).

Luke traced Jesus’ genealogy (from Mary) back to Adam (Luke 3:38). If Adam was not a historical being then neither were all the people from Adam to Jesus.

Jesus declared that “He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ (Matthew 19:4).

Paul explained that the reason for death and condemnation was the representative, imputed guilt of Adam’s sin (Rom. 5:12-21).

Paul also explained that the external giving of the law was first with Adam and then with Moses. Those who were not given external law from Adam to Moses still had the sentence of death in them because of Adam’s sin. Paul explains, “death reigned from Adam to Moses” (Rom. 5:13). If Adam was not a historical being then neither was Moses.

Paul explained the solution to our deserved condemnation in the obedience of the second Adam, Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:12-21). He explicitly suggests that the first Adam was a “type” of the second Adam. If Adam was not a historical being then neither was Jesus.

The apostle defended the role relation of men and women in the church by the order in which Adam and Eve were created and were tempted (1 Timothy 2:13-14). Eden was the prototype of every subsequent culture. No one can say Paul’s teaching was culturally bound because he takes it back to the Garden. He takes the Genesis account as an accurate historical record of Eden.

The apostle urged the NT church to defend the Gospel by reminding them of the way in which Satan had historically deceived Eve: “I fear, lest, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Cor. 11:3).”

3 Responses

  1. Pingback : Check out | HeadHeartHand Blog

  2. The question of the continuum fallacy was raised with regard to my “If Adam didn’t exit, neither did x.” Here’s how I answer that:

    If in historical narratives/genealogies we have explicit statements of generational descent then we have to conclude that it is A) either true (based on the authority of Scripture) or it is B) untrue. Because our the trustworthiness of Scripture (the “variable of variables” in this case) we cannot conclude that part of the genealogy is true and part is untrue. Hence there is no “Continuum fallacy” as there might be with that sort of reasoning where the “inerrancy/authority” variable is not present.

    I also think that some people play the “slippery slope” argument too quickly and inappropriately. When the authority and inerrancy of Scripture is brought into the mix, our reasoning is effected in a way it is otherwise not effected in those things that are not distinctly biblical. For example Paul, in 1 Cor. 15, makes a number of logical arguments about Christ’s resurrection and our preaching, believing and future personal resurrection (1 Cor. 15:14-18). This could certainly be argued against by some as being a logical fallacy if the authority of Scripture were not behind these truths. I was doing something similar with the “then neither did…” argument.

  3. Pingback : On the Scriptural Witness to the Historicity of Adam

Leave a Reply