Albert Mohler clarifies what is at stake in the ongoing debate over whether or not Adam and Eve were really the first human beings or do we need a new way of telling the story of the Bible as people like Brian McClaren suggest. What you think about Genesis 1-2 have an impact on how you view the entire Bible including such passages as Romans 5:12-19. In brief Mohler writes:
If Adam was not a historical figure, and thus if there was no Fall into sin and all humanity did not thus sin in Adam, then Paul’s telling of the Gospel is wrong. Furthermore, Paul was simply mistaken to believe that Adam had been a real human being.
Thus, the denial of a historical Adam means that we would have to tell the Bible’s story in a very different way than the church has told it for centuries as the Bible has been read, taught, preached, and believed. If there is no historical Adam, then the Bible’s metanarrative is not Creation-Fall-Redemption-New Creation, but something very different.
To his credit, Brian McLaren affirms this very truth and agrees that the denial of Adam’s historicity requires a new way of telling the biblical story. But — and this is the essential point — he thinks this would be a very good thing.
Mohler, in his usual fashion, brings clarity to what is at stake in this debate that is affecting churches everywhere. Read it and consider the importance of Genesis 1-2 to what we believe about the Bible.