Q. I must confess that one of the things that has always bothered me is the absolute confidence many scientists and anthropologists, including Christian ones, place in their methods of dating. Even carbon 14 dating has a plus or minus that can be considerable, and furthermore, dating of stone objects is very iffy, especially if it is decided on the basis of: 1) the technology used to produce say a spear head (a technology which could have developed much sooner... Read more

I am a long time fan of James Bond.  Shoot, I even read various of Ian Fleming’s short thriller novels about spying  50+ years ago.  And of the various actors playing James Bond, other than Sean Connery, Daniel Craig has clearly been the very best. He brought a toughness to the role that actors like Pierce Brosnan could never achieve.  Not to mention that Craig is really in shape and can do some of his own stunts.  This particular movie... Read more

Q. We need to discuss this whole business of ‘soul’ or rational soul which at least in the Greco-Roman sense is not a Biblical concept. It’s a philosophical concept which unfortunately entered Christian theology through the Greek and Latin fathers, and not through Jewish theology. Yes, early Jews including Jesus and Paul believed that humans had a non-material spirit (e.g. Jesus on the cross says ‘Father into thy hands I commend my spirit’) a spirit that could survive death and... Read more

Q. For my money, I think it is probable that Gen. 1 is the generic universal account, and Gen. 2 is not just a further unpacking of the human part of Gen. 1, though that’s possible.  Let us suppose for a moment that Gen. 2 is the quite specific origin story about where God’s people came from in the ANE (hence the mention of 2 well known ANE rivers).  We don’t need to ponder who Cain and Abel married if... Read more

Q. Let’s talk about the two creation accounts in Gen. 1 and Gen. 2. The former is more universal in scope and on the face of it suggests a creation of male and female at the same time whenever and wherever. Gen. 2 is focused just on human creation, and I emphasize the word creation. The verb bara is only predicated of God’s activity in any case and cannot easily be read as comporting with evolutionary theory. Interestingly, in the... Read more

  Q. Let’s deal with a related subject, namely what constitutes a human being, being human? The answer in Genesis is that we are uniquely created ‘in the image of God and after his likeness’. This is a theological statement, not a statement about brain capacity, ability to reason as a personal agent etc.  It may presuppose all that sort of thing, both in terms of ontology and function, but as Mike Heiser has demonstrated to my satisfaction, the tselm... Read more

  Q. Let’s deal with the issue of the social ethos of the stories in Gen. 2-3. They seem to speak of a time when: 1) there was agriculture, and 2) animal sacrifice. As for the former, the anthropologists are pretty clear that cultivation of crops does not pre-date about 10,000 B.C. or so (i.e. a post hunter-gatherer period) nor do the genealogies in Genesis suggest some sort of date from hoary antiquity like the one you pick for Adam—... Read more

Q. I think you are right to question the notion of the imputation of original sin to the rest of humanity after Adam, and the notion of an inherited corrupt nature doesn’t really require this connection with Adam either. If in fact all have sinned, then all have been part of the corruption of humanity, which would account for the Psalmist lament that he was conceived and bore the taint of sin from the beginning. And yes, you are also... Read more

Q. You go to great lengths to stress the figurative character of the creation narratives in Gen. 1-3, and you are right about that. But figurative doesn’t mean non-referential, and as you argue, it doesn’t mean there isn’t some historical substance in a story like we find in Gen. 2-3, even if you want to put it in the category of mytho-history. The ancient view of myths was, as you point out, stories about the gods, which were thought in... Read more

Without doubt, In Quest of the Historical Adam is one of the most intriguing, challenging, and brilliant books I’ve read in a very long time, and for anyone who actually cares about human origins including whether Adam was an historical person or not, William Lane Craig’s new book is a must read for sure.  Fair warning up front— it is not an easy read because of the depth and breadth that Bill Craig covers in this 380 some page book.... Read more