No Adam and Eve means Paul was wrong

Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian in New York, and author of Reason for God, believes Christianity rises or falls on the historicity of Adam and Eve:

[Paul] most definitely wanted to teach us that Adam and Eve were real historical figures. When you refuse to take a biblical author literally when he clearly wants you to do so, you have moved away from the traditional understanding of the biblical authority. . . .If Adam doesn’t exist, Paul’s whole argument—that both sin and grace work ‘covenantally’—falls apart. You can’t say that ‘Paul was a man of his time’ but we can accept his basic teaching about Adam. If you don’t believe what he believes about Adam, you are denying the core of Paul’s teaching. (Christianity Today June 2011)

From Kevin DeYoung of the Gospel Coalition, “10 Reasons to Believe in a Historical Adam

So let me get this straight. If the biblical account that God placed a naked man in paradise with forbidden fruit, put him to sleep, took out his rib to make a woman, who would later get duped by a talking snake into eating the forbidden fruit, is not literally historical, then Christianity, at least of the Pauline variety, has been a big misunderstanding? Whew. What a relief.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s