Q. If you disagreed with William Lane Craig on such a significant point, why did you endorse his book?
A. Despite these real disagreements, Craig’s work is important. He is pushing back on overreach by theological revisionists at BioLogos. As a scientist, I helped Craig. He had good faith questions about human origins, and really wanted to understand. In response, Biologos claimed, falsely, that his understanding of evolutionary creation conflicted with the evidence. When the ruse was found out, they stealth deleted several articles on their website.
Bill Craig understands Adam and Eve as ancient ancestors of everyone. He is proposing an “ancient genealogical Adam and Eve.” Whether we agree with him or not, I do not think science should be unfairly used against his position. It is for this reason I collaborated with him on the scientific component of the book. Pushing back on the revisionists, He shows definitively that the Catholic view of Adam and Eve is consistent with science.
So, both an ancient and a recent Adam and Eve are consistent with science. Which one makes most sense? The disagreement between us is about theology and Scripture, not science. In the end, this might be one of the most important contributions of Craig’s book. He is inviting a conversation between two important traditions in the Church. More than any individual argument he makes, this is how the impact of his book should be judged and understood.