Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

Did Adam and Eve really exist? Who they were and why it matters

Rate this book
Examines the biblical-theological evidence for a real Adam and Eve and asserts their importance for modern life.

"We need a real Adam and Eve if we are to make sense of the Bible and of life," argues C. John Collins. Examining the biblical storyline as the worldview story of the people of God, Collins shows how that story presupposes a real Adam and Eve and how the modern experience of human life points to the same conclusion.

Applying well-informed critical thinking to questions raised by theologians and scientists alike, Collins asserts that only a real man could participate in God's plan to use his human partners to bring blessing to the whole creation, a blessing that requires "redemption" for all people since sin entered the world.

Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? addresses both biblical and Jewish texts and contains extensive appendices to examine how the material in Genesis relates to similar material from Mesopotamian myths. Collins's detailed analysis of the relevant texts will instill confidence in readers that the traditional Christian story equips them better than any alternatives to engage the life that they actually encounter in the modern world.

Paperback

First published March 1, 2011

19 people are currently reading
267 people want to read

About the author

C. John Collins

34 books34 followers
C. JOHN COLLINS (PhD, University of Liverpool) is professor of Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary in St Louis. With degrees from MIT and Faith Evangelical Lutheran Seminary, he pursues such research interests as Hebrew and Greek grammar, science and faith, and biblical theology. He is the author of The God of Miracles.

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
34 (15%)
4 stars
90 (40%)
3 stars
73 (33%)
2 stars
19 (8%)
1 star
4 (1%)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews
Profile Image for Mitchell Dixon.
148 reviews18 followers
May 31, 2023
Supplementary book for SU '23 Pentateuch class at Covenant Seminary.

Jack is a spectacular blend of someone who has been formally trained in science and biblical studies, making him an expert speaking in the field. This book is not going to tell you what to think but rather show you how to think. Jack gives a wide array of views and shows how each can be held in tension with the Biblical narrative. Crucial to any argument, though, is yes: Adam and Ever were real people.
Profile Image for Jose Ovalle.
132 reviews11 followers
September 7, 2022
3.5- because I wish there was more. Introduced good ideas but did not at all produce enough information to leave me feeling like I fully understood the implications of all those ideas
105 reviews5 followers
June 17, 2011
C. John Collins, (Phd, University of Liverpool) professor of Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary, St Louis, has written a good book on the subject of the historical Adam. From the very beginning, he lays out plainly what he believes. The introduction declares that the historical belief was that Adam and Eve were literal, historical people and that creation occurred in six days. He then states that we may change our views on the length of time in which creation took place without changing our core beliefs, but that we are in danger of disrupting the story line of the Bible.
Collins begins by looking at the shape of the biblical story. Understanding that the biblical story is one of worldview, Collins examines it to determine whether or not the account of Adam and Eve is a myth. In doing so, he takes on Peter Enns of Biologos saying, "One difficulty in Enn's definition is its apparent triumphalism: it seems to imply that we in the modern scientific world are more sophisticated than the ancients. This overlooks the astounding achievements of ancient peoples in areas that we would call mathematics and engineering." (pg 29) He goes on to say that the story of Adam has theological implications as well as historical tones. In fact, he tells us that the theology is based upon the history. The story of Adam is part of the grand narrative of Scripture.
Having established that the Genesis Creation Account is not a-historical, but historical and theological, Collins examines other mentions of Adam in Scripture and determines that the biblical writers considered Adam to be a historical individual. He proceeds from there to show that the image of God in which Adam was made gives all of humanity uniqueness and dignity. He expresses that Scripture teaches that the image of God is "transmitted by procreation." (pg. 99) This shows us that the Scriptures connect us seminally to Adam.
The question is asked whether or not science can pinpoint Adam and Eve. Collins states, "...sooner or later we will have to decide whether the Bible can actually refer to real persons and events or not." (pg. 108) He concludes that the Bible does refer to real persons and events. Collins does tell us that there are times that Scripture uses various literary devices such as imaginative description to refer to actual events. He does believe that the Bible informs us of events, but does not necessarily believe that it does so according to the conventions of science. He also informs us that, though it may be possible that humanity came from more than just Adam and Eve in the beginning, we should understand that there are still ways in which we can see Adam and Eve as historical individuals and not disrupt the grand narrative of Scripture. After examining some of the possibilities, he states that they leave us with some uncertainties, but that they are not of such a character as to undermine our ability to hold fast to the biblical story line with confidence.
Collins concludes that a major part of the Christian story is to enable us to make sense of the world, and that abandoning the conventional way of telling the story if a "very good" creation, fall, and redemption as part of God's ongoing plan will certainly disrupt the story line and leave us with little confidence "that any relief is headed our way." (pg. 134) It also will give us little understanding of sin as an alien invader if we abandon Adam and Eve as being literal, historical individuals. Sin and death are not natural, and they came into the world via Adam's and Eve's sin. Also, if we lose the common origin for mankind, how shall we affirm the common dignity of all people, and how shall we stand on biblical authority? These are good questions, and conclusions that we must consider. At the end of the concluding chapter, Collins deals with grief. This is a good thing, as we must consider how theology affects practice. It certainly shows us how that something that seems so dry as a discussion of science, literary genre, and so on truly impact how we live.
Collins also includes an appendix in which he compares the Genesis Creation Account with the Ancient Near Eastern texts. He is wise enough to declare that similarities do not make for absolute correspondence between texts. He also states that the "biblical writings are coherent texts in Hebrew, and not simply instantiations of things we find elsewhere." (pg. 139) Appendix 2 is a book review, and appendix 3 discusses the date of Genesis and concludes that it is Mosaic with some final updates being made during the times of David and Solomon.
Assessment: I think that this book is good for someone who is established in the faith. It is not an easy read, and it is not necessarily one for novices. In fact, to be honest, only my interest in the material kept me going. The writer's style did not engage me as much as the subject matter. I am glad to find some solid foundation for a belief in Adam and Eve as literal, historical individuals, but I do wish that Collins were more accepting of a six calendar day Creation. Never the less, this book is certainly a good resource on the subject matter that it covers, and is worthy of four stars.
Profile Image for L.S..
601 reviews56 followers
April 27, 2021
The historicity of Adam is fundamental in Pauline theology. Furthermore the unity of all mankind is restored in redemption.
Profile Image for Vincent Derr.
205 reviews2 followers
October 30, 2024
I came into this book having read the authors "Reading Genesis Well" earlier this year. After having read that very scholarly work I was left with some unanswered questions. Given Collins' framework for interpreting Genesis what does this mean for Adam and Eve? The knock on questions are obvious. I did not know where Collins would come down on this question. This book is short and accessible. You can still tell that it's written by a scholar, but it clearly or more lay level treatment of the issues. Collins is a good writer and often is well reasoned, even when you disagree with him. I have enjoy his work and it has equipped with new ways of discussing what can be a very emotional subject for believers. I find a great deal of merit in his perspective, but there are areas of disagreement. Collin in this book leaves the door open for several views of creation. His base conclusions can accommodate most young earth creationist and even old earth creationist. He states his more exclusionary conclusions with humility. This is a good addition to the conversation around how to interpret the early chapters of Genesis.
Profile Image for Jack Smith.
82 reviews1 follower
August 6, 2024
Excellent defence of a historical Adam and Eve. Particularly enjoyed seeing how the apocryphal/ancient texts viewed Adam and Eve, as well as Collin’s treatment of the image of God, and his conclusion.
110 reviews
Read
July 30, 2024
Really helpful read with clear writing and solid arguments.
Profile Image for Paul Bruggink.
122 reviews15 followers
November 3, 2012
This is a well-written and informative book, although it does not answer the question, which probably won't ever be answered this side of Heaven. Collins basically presents 120 pages of helpful and insightful explanatory material, leading up to nine pages which describe six existent scenarios for preserving the historicity of Adam and Eve, which are:

1. Adam and Eve as fresh, de novo creations, with no animal forebears.
2. Adam and Eve as the first members of the genus Homo, approximately two millions year ago.
3. Adam and Eve as historical individuals--the first human beings--originating by God's miraculous intervention approximately 70,000 to 50,000 years ago.
4. Adam as a specially created Neolithic farmer (c. 10,000 B.C.), the first homo divinus.
5. Adam and Eve as a couple of Neolithic farmers to whom God chose to reveal himself in a special way.
6. An unknown number of creatures that God perfected from the animal form, which became the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself, and which were given a new kind of consciousness which knew God, and subsequently fell.

His discussion includes a critique of Denis Alexander's Models as described in Alexander's book "Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose?" He concludes by stating, "I admit that these scenarios leave us with many uncertainties, but these uncertainties in no way undermine our right to hold fast to the Biblical story line with full confidence. In fact, this holding fast actually helps to think well about the scientific questions."

This book is for the most part an expansion of his article "Adam and Eve as Historical People, and Why it Matters," published in the September 2010 issue of the American Scientific Association's journal Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith. It includes three appendices, a bibliography, a general index, and a scripture index. It is a good introduction to the issue of the historicity of Adam.
Profile Image for Nate Claiborne.
85 reviews56 followers
November 25, 2012
Overall, I found Collins’ book to be helpful in defending a traditional account of Adam of Eve. I am perhaps more open to revising that account than Collins is, but at the moment, I would still be inclined to follow the big picture of the biblical story which suggests man as directly created by God rather than evolved from a lower life form.

To me, Collins comes across as a scholar who is endeavoring to evaluate the evidence from as many angles as possible, and his work benefits from that underlying attitude. To borrow an example from Alvin Plantinga, someone uncommitted on the question of evolution has more available explanatory options. Collins has not committed himself to a position on the scientific question, so he is more free to follow the evidence wherever it may go.

See a more comprehensive review on my blog
Profile Image for John.
106 reviews162 followers
Read
May 22, 2011
Liked the book. He's a Christian who holds to an evolutionary understanding of creation, but holds to a historical Adam and Eve. Helpful in understanding the issues and persuasive, though already persuaded.
Profile Image for Craig Hurst.
209 reviews21 followers
January 14, 2012
Since the publications of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species the reliability of the Bible has been under vicious attack namely in the area of origins. Questions began to develop under the assumption that Darwin’s theory of evolution was correct. Is there really a God? How can we trust the Bible if it’s account of the origin of everything is false? Since we know, according to Darwinian evolutionary theory, everything evolved from nothing and man was not the first thing that evolved, then how can we trust the Bibles account of mankind’s origins?

This last question strikes at the heart of C. John Collins new book Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? Who They Were and Why You Should Care. The historicity of Adam and Eve as the first humans that God created and thus the first parents of every person who ever lived to date and beyond is the issue Collins addresses.

The fundamental issue Collins seeks to address in this regards is how literal did Moses (and God for that matter) intend for future readers to interpret his words concerning the origin of mankind? As simple as it may seem at first, the use of the word ‘literal’ is often misunderstood. When used in context of interpreting the early chapters of Genesis, it can become down right confusing. Confusing, because with every interpretation one reads of the early chapters of Genesis, you will find that everyone believes their interpretation is the literal one. Everyone believes they interpret it as literally as it was intended to be.

What Has the Church Always Believed?

Traditionally, the literal interpretation of Genesis 1-3 that dominated the church for the first 1800 years was that the words were to be taken at face value. That is, God literally exists, He spoke everything into existence in the period of seven days not years (or millions for that matter), God formed Adam from the dust of the earth and Eve from rib of Adam, they were the first people created and are the original parents of everyone who ever lived and will live, Eden was a real garden like the one in your backyard, a talking snake (Satan) tempted Eve into sinning and when Adam ate the real fruit (an apple of course) mankind died spiritually, and as part of the curse God made snakes to craw on the ground. Of course there are more details but you get the idea. Until Darwin came along, this was the traditional, orthodox and conservative view of Genesis 1-3 and origins.

But all that has changed now. Collins, who has a doctorate in Hebrew linguistics, believes the church should still interpret Genesis 1-3 literally (there’s that word again) – or at least some form of literal interpretation. Collins writes,

My goal in this study is to show why we should retain a version of the traditional view…..I intend to argue that the traditional position on Adam and Eve, or some variation of it, does the best job of accounting not only for the Biblical materials but also for our everyday experience as human beings (p. 13).

You will notice that Collins proposes a ‘version’ of the traditional view but not necessarily the traditional view as I described above. In the spirit of C.S. Lewis’s book Mere Christianity, Collins affectionately names his version “mere historical Adam-and-Eve-ism (p. 13).” Collins believes that the traditional view has been misused causing some to dismiss it out of hand (p. 15). Readers should know that Collins is only addressing the historicity of Adam & Eve in Genesis and nothing else.

So what is Collin’s version of the traditional view?

So What is History Anyways?

In chapter two, The Shape of the Biblical Story, Collins delves into the discussion of Hebrew literary techniques and how understanding them can help us better interpret Scripture, namely Genesis 1-3. Of particular interest is Collins discussion on what the term ‘history” means. While at the front the use of the word history seems pretty straight forward. To many history is the accounting of how things happened in the past whether it be a history book giving a detailed account of a battle fought in WWI or a husband telling his wife about his day at work or a weekend long work trip. Both are history because they happened in the past but both may not be told in the same fashion. Collins sees history,

Less as a literary genre, and more as a way of referring to events. That is, if we say that something is (or is not) historical, we are not so much describing the kind of literature it is, as we are the way it talks about (or does not talk about) real events (p. 35).

What Collins is trying to point out is that in the telling of history, not everyone is going to tell it the same way. You can be literalistic, metaphorical or both. The issue is determining which of the three methods did the author use and if they used both which parts are literalistic and which are metaphorical. Collins proposes that because the author of Genesis 1-3 could be (and he believes he does) using both literal and metaphorical language that we must extract from it the “historical core (p. 35).” Part of what drives this is how Collins interprets and makes use of Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) comparative material. He concludes,

If, as seems likely to me, the Mesopotamian origin and flood stories provide the context against which Genesis 1-11 are to be set, they also provide us with clues on how to read this kind of literature (p. 35).

Without going into a long discussion, ANE texts of comparative Biblical accounts are strikingly different than the Biblical accounts though they have similar features. Here is where Collins would say they have a common “historical core.” That is, though they have differences, they are still trying to write an historical account of some sort of the same event(s). Collins is not saying that Genesis is not trying to give us an account of origins. However, he is trying to be honest and fair with how the author (Moses) is recording those events and what literary devices he might be using. He wants us to interpret it as literally as it was intended to be.

What Says the Rest of Scripture?

So if Genesis 1-3 is not to be interpreted literalistically (not taking into account any literary devices when interpreting it) then how do the other authors of Scripture interpret it? When they refer to Adam and Eve and creation how literally do they interpret the recording of these events? In this section of the book I expected to see more continuity from the other authors of Scripture but Collins does not really summarize how the other OT authors viewed Genesis 1-3. On the other hand, he gives much more certainty on how the NT writers thought of Adam and Eve. Essentially, Collins believes the NT writers and Jesus thought of Adam and Even as real historical people who really sinned and whose sin affected the rest of mankind. Of Paul’s argument in Romans Collins observes, “The more clearly we perceive Paul’s narratival argument of Romans the more we will see the reality of Adam as the ancestor of all people being tied up with his argument (p. 88).”

Though the NT writers and Jesus believed in the historicity of Adam and Eve, Collins doesn’t believe they interpreted the recording of their existence in Genesis 1-3 literalistically as some do. For Collins it is enough that they existed as the fountainhead of mankind, really sinned and that their sin had lasting consequences on all of mankind.

Where Does Science Fit In?

As mentioned earlier, since the dawn of Darwin, parts of the church have read Genesis’ account of origins differently due to scientific discoveries and claims. Collins addresses this area through the use concordism. Concordism is the attempt to harmonize what the Bible says about origins with the claims of scientific theories (p. 105). Essentially, Collins argues that Genesis is not trying to answer the same kinds of detailed and scientific questions modern man is. Again, Collins presses for an historical core that needs to be held onto.

Since there are many theories (and certainly more to come) concerning the origins of mankind how are we to evaluate them in light of the nonnegotiable’s we hold from Scripture when it comes to mankind’s origins? Collins suggests four criteria in order to help us stay within the bounds of sound thinking:

We should see that the origin of the origin of the human race goes beyond a merely natural process. This follows from how hard is it to get a human being, or, more theologically, hoe distinctive is the image of God.
We should see Adam & Eve as the headwaters of the human race.
The “fall”, in whatever form it took, was both historical (it happened) and moral (it involved disobeying God), and occurred at the beginning of the human race.
If someone should decide that there were, in fact, more human beings that just Adam & Eve at the beginning of mankind, then, in order to maintain good sense, he should envisions these humans as a single tribe (p. 121).
Where Do We Go From Here?

To be honest I had a hard time separating Collins views from those of others he discusses and critiques. I had to read and re-read several portions of the book and I am still not totally sure I understand where Collins is exactly on some issues. I think there was too much was covered that was not adequately explained which might be the reason for some of my confusion. Collins did make it clear in the beginning of the book that he would not explain everything and wrote with the assumption of some prior knowledge. As such this book is not the place to start for a beginner. For sure Collins does end by saying, “Adam & Eve at the headwaters of the human family, and their fall, are not only what Jesus believed but also an irremovable part of that whole story (p. 135).”

I would also encourage readers who want to grasp a better idea of what Collins thinks to read his other book Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary.

Overall, Did Adam & Eve Really Exist? is not for the beginner to the origins debate concerning Adam & Eve. There are many good insights Collins has but not as many conclusions as I anticipated. This is a short (almost too short) introduction to the current issues surrounding the historicity of Adam & Eve.
Profile Image for John.
975 reviews59 followers
May 22, 2019
In Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? John Collins, a professor of Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary, takes on a significant question for the contemporary question wrestling with the believability of the biblical account of the creation of human beings. Collins argues that, yes, it is a tenable position to hold to the existence of a first human pair: Adam and Eve.

Collins says that there are several factors pressing on our belief in a real Adam and Eve. Among those is the contemporary scientific bent toward evolution, and religious studies, which have us deal with other Near Eastern creation myths.

In spite of that, most Christians around the world still hold to the traditional position. Collins argues that this traditional position “does the best job of accounting not only for the Biblical materials but also for our everyday experience as human beings—an experience that includes sin as something that must be forgiven (by God and our fellow human beings)) and that must be struggled against as defiling and disrupting a good human life.”

As a biblical scholar, it isn’t surprising that Collins is at his strongest when he is engaging the exegetical and hermeneutical arguments. He believes that if we take the authors seriously, then we have to understand the text through the intention of the author(s). Collins gives us some helpful questions to consider: “How does the person or event impact the basic story line?” “How have other writers, especially Biblical ones, taken this person or event?” “How does this person or event relate to ordinary human experience?”

With that in mind, Collins concludes that the text can be historical while also including figurative or imaginative elements. Ancient historical writing is also not complete in detail or “free from ideological bias,” nor “told in exact chronological sequence.”

With this in mind, Collins argues that the creation account in Genesis has all of the markers of ancient history, not mythology. Furthermore, the historic reality of the entrance of sin is critical to the entirety of the biblical story arc. Sin is not merely a part of God’s creation as a house guest: sin is unwelcome. Collins says, “The Biblical authors therefore portray sin as an alien intruder to God’s good creation.”

Collins proceeds to deal with every biblical text that references Adam and Eve and to consider what the interpretation of the biblical authors is. In short, these authors reflect the authorial intent of the author of Genesis 1-3 in reflecting an original set of humans who, through their rejection of God, introduced sin into the world.

Next, Collins considers the impact of the creation story in our understanding of the image of God in human beings. He says it is hard to imagine another way in which we can account for the splendor of human beings. As Blaise Pascal put it, “Man’s greatness is so obvious that it can even be deduced from his wretchedness…”

Finally, Collins addresses the scientific theories, which would appear to give us pause as to accept the biblical account of Adam and Eve. Unsurprisingly, this is the weakest part of Collins’s book (as Collins is a biblical scholar). Collins here tries to untangle what have been some traditional beliefs from what he would say that Bible asserts. For instance, Collins does not believe that the Bible teaches that there was no death prior to the fall. Collins next deals with the question about genetic diversity and whether human beings have a common ancestral pair. While the population models suggest that the minimal human population was in the thousands, Collins says that “Studies…show that there are apparently mechanisms by which the relevant kinds of genetic diversity can increase faster than the population size models have predicted…”

Collins then presses back at those who do not believe that we come from a shared ancestry: how do we make sense of our unified experience as human beings? How do we make sense of our unified struggle against evil and sin?

Collins does depart from more traditional readings in his dating, which he would put in the 10,000 BC+ camp.

Collins concludes, “There is indeed comfort in the Biblical story that has a real Adam and Eve at its front end: the comfort of finding assurance that we will indeed receive relief and healing and restoration and final bliss, when God has finally banished the intruder forever. This comfort helps us to live fully human lives, as God’s beloved people, even now.”

Collins book is a helpful guide, if incomplete and not as polished as one would hope. Collins crafted the book out of a series of talks and I wish that more work would have been done to make the text feel like a single fabric as opposed to a series of lectures. Furthermore, I would have loved to see Collins partner with someone who really brought the scientific chops to deal more fully with the pressing questions that are being asked. That said, I really appreciate Collins’s guidance and wisdom and how this book helped sharpen and clarify my thinking on this important topic.
Profile Image for Rebecca Ray.
972 reviews17 followers
December 20, 2018
Book 194 of 2018. I’ve been reading this book in tandem with the other one I just finished. This is a very nice introduction to the topic of the historicity of Adam and the implications of the ideas on all sides. Found this book to be a sane alternative to the shrillness of leading voices on both extremes of the argument. Note that this text merely considers the idea of whether or not Adam and Eve are historical characters. It does not take up ideas of creation and merely scratches the surface of sin and its transmission.
Profile Image for Kate M..
172 reviews2 followers
September 30, 2025
A good treatise on the issue of whether Adam and Eve really existed and why they must for Protestant theology to make sense. Read for school. It was pretty easy to get through, with simple language. Arguments backed up by a bunch of quotes from all sorts of sources. The author did repeat himself quite often and I wish the book was more theologically or philosophically deep (it was mostly detailed exegesis).
1 review
May 1, 2025
Read for College Class

I enjoyed this book a lot and think that it was helpful in helping me to think about this topic. Some parts went over my head but it also challenged me to think critically about this topic and why it is so important. Good read.
Profile Image for Adrian.
106 reviews7 followers
August 14, 2024
Concise and wide-ranging all in one. A pretty compelling argument and valuable addition to one of the oldest conversations in biblical theology.
Profile Image for Dave Courtney.
865 reviews30 followers
August 2, 2014
Collin's offers this brief work as a dialogue of his thesis regarding the historical figures of Adam and Eve. He is a professor of Old Testament Studies in St. Louis, and he takes the position of an evolutionary theory of history that can still make room for the historical Adam.

Much of what he argues can easily apply to the entire scope of Biblical history. He suggests that all mythological approach must at some point deal with the issue of the historical figures that we find in the Biblical stories. He believes that the historical figure of Adam is a central part of our Christian theology. To remove Adam and Eve from the picture is to in fact lose the entire story of God's work in history. As a theologian his points are clearly articulated, and for the most part convincing. Your feelings on the book could be swayed depending on the position you are reading from. The Biblical story is about more than moral or spiritual lessons, it is about a definite and actual hope.

I think Collins has the good sense to challenge our sense of elitism in modern culture. He suggests that we must do away with a sense of triumphalism that suggests we are more aware or more enlightened than those who came before us. We cannot so immediately separate ourselves from the traditions that our beliefs owe themselves to as if they are outdated notions of archaic ideas. It is this sort of arrogant approach that causes us to gloss over the problems we face when deconstruct the Biblical narrative (as he suggests we are doing in removing the historical adam). A part of what Collin's looks to do is weigh the highly mythologized approach with the witness of the Christian text, a process that ultimately should challenge how we approach the creation narrative. He does not decry mythology, but simply looks to express it as it would have been expressed historically. He bridges the gap between the present and the past by looking at how and why death and suffering intuitively remain as the great enemy (whether we choose to recognize it or not). Hope and suffering are dependent on one another, and what they push for is the idea of redemptive vision. This is why we continue to push to eradicate sickness, and why we remain concerned and compassionate over the sufferings of this present world. This is why we push for peace and decry our penchant for war. It is because we hope that one day it can be different, that it can be changed. Collins sees this hope in the Christian story, and believes that this hope is one that is actually being (and going to be) expressed through Christ in the created order. His conclusion is that the historical Adam is what leads us towards this hope in Christ and it is the story that brings cause and purpose to Christ's work. If we do away with Adam we force ourselves to do away with the actuality of God as one who is working to bring change and redemption, and thus we loose a grasp on our hope. And hope remains a necessary part of what it means to live.

Profile Image for Iter  Meum.
87 reviews
January 9, 2015
This has been the first book I have read on the topic of creation that I have felt is actionable. Of course, the importance of creation (however and whenever God affected it) is existential to orthodox Christianity. Thankfully, Collins does not ���take a stand��� on any of the many views of origins that Christians ferociously debate such as, young earth creation, process creation, or theistic evolution. Instead, he examines the theology of creation and attempts to establish a kind of range of orthodoxy on this important topic (not unlike Nicaea). Most important, he does not ���brush under the carpet��� the relationship that New Testament passages like Romans chapter 5 have to Genesis Chapter 3. As such, Collins posits that some kind of scenario of a real Adam and Eve at the headwaters of human history is essential to Christian Theology. He does demonstrate however that this does not rule out scenarios like them being the leaders of a larger ���tribe��� or the "tribe" being Adam and Eve, as long as humanity all descended from them. Bottom line is that the book provides a way of looking at Genesis that holds to orthodoxy but is mostly adaptable to the ebbs and flows of the messy chaos that must accompany the dynamics of scientific discovery.

Wikipedia describes the book like this:

���Collins' most recent book is 'Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?: Who They Were and Why You Should Care', in which he discusses the importance to Christian theology of believing that the Fall of man was a historical event, and explores ways in which such a belief can be compatible with a Darwinian view of human origins. Collins has been a prominent voice in recent discussion among evangelicals on this topic���.

I would highly recommend this book, but warn potential readers that the author warns that he will not ���dummy down��� what he presents, thus the book can be somewhat arcane at times. For me (not being the sharpest tool in the tool shed), that meant slow going and often reading sections of the book several times, but I felt it was worth the struggle in the end.

By way of context, as a last addition to this review Collins was Old Testament Chairman for the ESV Study Bible, served as ESV Text Editor for The English-Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament (Crossway, 2006), and is Old Testament Editor of the English Standard Version Study Bible.
Profile Image for Jonathan.
182 reviews4 followers
August 27, 2013
This book is essential reading for any Christian in today's intellectual climate. Collins attempts to establish biblical boundaries on the question of Adam and Eve and then he surveys various ways in which we can try to integrate this with contemporary views of human origins.

He sees four boundary markers:

1. Human origins is a result of a special process. Any *purely* natural explanation should be recognized as inadequate. He does think that some view of human origins involving a naturalistic process (e.g., neo-Darwinism) falls within this boundary, so long as it acknowledges that the naturalistic process isn't sufficient.

2. Adam and Eve are historical persons that were, in some meaningful way, the representatives of the entire human race. Maybe they existed 70,000 years ago and were simply the tribal covenant/federal head of the entire human population at that time. The important part is that they are historical and they can "stand-in" for the whole human race in a meaningful sense. For instance, on this last point, Collins finds Dennis Alexander's model to be unsatisfactory because he, Collins, "cannot see how [Alexander's] version of 'representation' is much more than the setting of a good or bad example." The representation of Adam for the human race should be meaningful or make sense, and not simply acknowledged with the wave of a hand.

3. The fall of man into sin is a historical event that happened near the beginning of human history. This is the only way to make sense of the overall biblical narrative as well as our human experience.

4. Apropos 2 and 3, if Adam and Eve were not the only or first human pair, Adam was the leader of the human race. Adam was perhaps a tribal leader or a king, someone who could actually function as a representative for all of humanity.

Only after arguing for these four "walls", so to speak, does Collins surveys various models which try to stay within the box. While Collins clearly thinks some are better than others, he does not argue for any specific position. His goal is more along the lines of helping people to choose among a variety of positions that stay within the theological boundaries he has established in earlier sections of the book.
Profile Image for Birgit.
Author 2 books9 followers
July 3, 2011
To some Adam and Eve are merely a myth, told in variations in different cultures. To some Adam and Eve are as real as you and me. Focusing on the latter without neglecting the former C. John Collins confronts the reader with a fascinating question in his book Did Adam And Eve Really Exist?
Taking a look on the age-old question, this is definitely an intriguing read in which the author at the same time encourages critical thinking while putting an emphasis on the importance of Adam and Eve as a "real historical couple", consequently boosting the believers faith in the Bible. While I found it to be a fascinating topic (from my atheistic perspective), with a balanced view on the biblical story, as well as human uniqueness, and lastly science, I have to admit that the book proved to be a bit of a dry read. Don't let this discourage you from reading it though, because it is a very comprehensibly written work that will be especially of importance and of interest for the Christian reader, not only to make sense of the world with its notions of sin and a common origin, but equally to broaden the world view from the perspective of a believer in Christ.
Last but not least, this short book offers additional and deeper information in its appendices and bibliography for those who want to engage in further reading.
In short: A fascinating look at the traditional understanding of Adam and Eve!
Profile Image for Jan.
1,203 reviews
October 9, 2011



Title: Did Adam and Eve really exist? : who they were and why you should care

Author: C. John Collins

ISBN 978-433524257 192 pages paperback Crossway



It is a common belief that most Christians believe that Adam and Eve were actual persons, and we are all descendants of them. C. John Collins, is a professor of Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis, MO. He invites anyone interested in this discussion to use critical thinking message to explore this question. He takes seriously both the Bible and science and presents both findings in this study. The last 60 pages of the books explain his conclusions and include 3 appendixes, a bibliography, general index and scripture and apocrypha index. The book is heavy with foot notes of all the points covered so you can follow his discussion. It is not an easy and fast read, but sensitive and well worth reading.

Dr. Collins, takes what he believes to be actual events, using rhetorical and literary techniques and helps shape readers' attitudes toward these events. The fall of man, and the theory of sin. This author spends a lot of time working with C.S. Lewis, Francis Collins and Blaise Pascal and their theories on creation. These authors don't agree with our author, but he is very fair in presenting their thoughts and arguments.

I doubt that many readers will stay with the book and agree with him but it deserves to be well read..
Profile Image for Robert Murphy.
279 reviews22 followers
December 28, 2022
First of all, I should say I got more out of this book than 3/5 would seem to indicate. That being said, this is a VERY technical book and not widely usable. It is very scholarly and full of lengthy footnotes, making use of original language and German/French/Hebrew peer-reviewed journal articles and technical tomes. But for those who are into that sort of thing, it might not work either, as it is – at times – down to earth, personal, and conversational. I don't think this works for any consistent purpose, other than for Jack to hand to his daughter's college biology professor to show that he is not some fundie bumpkin Christian, while maintaining his evangelical bona fides.

On a personal note, this book reminds me of the negative take away from my time at CTS (Covenant Theological Seminary, the flagship of the PCA). As a group, the professors there are all ardent believers, but they got their degrees from liberal institutions, where they had to fight for their right to sit at the same table, get respect and publish in JETS. It made my education center around refuting Dan Brown (really, the Baur Hypothesis) and less around the contents of the NT. I have seen many of my peers jump ship from Biblical Christianity to follow the "experts", in COVID, BLM, and the like. I'm glad Jack is such an expert in the sources for this book, but I don't think the virtues he demonstrates in this book are the ones Christ would have 99.999% of believers cultivate in their hearts.
Profile Image for Garrett Cash.
785 reviews1 follower
March 19, 2014
Really an extended essay on the title question rather than a book per se. Collins seems more interested in summarizing everyone’s questions rather than spending time on defending his positions. The book is not really for a layperson who is merely interested from the title, they would do better to Google search an apologetics site for the answers they want. The book appears to assume you are knowledgeable in the Christian religion, yet it seems too simplistic for the typical scholar. Even as an amateur apologist/theologian I found I had seen a good bit of the material in more major sources. I agree with Collins’s position, but if you blinked while reading this you could have missed it. As I said before, he spends most of the book talking about all of the theories and viewpoints on the subject out there rather than fervently defending his own ground. He’s not quite as opinionated as I would like. I don’t enjoy the “Here’s the information, see what you think” form as much as the “Here’s the information, let me tell you why it’s wrong” method. Overall, I don’t think this book adds much to the conversation, and that its purpose will be to lead people to the sources that Collins frequently quotes. Disappointing really, but I think there’s interesting things to be learned from this book. I suppose I might not enjoy it quite as much as others due to my previous knowledge of the majority of the ground he covers.
Profile Image for Andrew.
660 reviews124 followers
November 27, 2013
I thought this book brought up some unique perspectives on one of the more complicated and mythological parts of the Bible. However, I think Collins was very inconsistent and failed to make a coherent argument, and even at times shot himself down entirely. One of his main points is that the author(s) of Genesis were speaking of a very real "Adam and Eve," even if some symbolic liberties were taken. However, he then goes on to suggest the possibility of an Adam and Eve 40,000 years in the past. We know the Bible isn't remotely that old, so that would make for quite a legacy of oral recitation, and begs questions of why only in the Near/Middle East does the oral tradition survive if Collins proposes a universal origin for humankind in it? And also he uses the genealogy as an argument for a real A&E, but then that creates two irreconcilable chronologies.

The weakest point of the book came when Collins addresses scientific evidence that would contradict his theory. With genetics and paleontology he openly admits he doesn't really understand the science, and makes the unforgivable error of saying "I've talked to a lot of scientists who say I might be right." Throwing in some personal, anecdotal stories as a means of argument in a book like this is just shameful. And I've talked to a lot of theologians who all agree Collins is totally wrong.
Profile Image for Andrew.
3 reviews
September 11, 2013
A worthwhile study. Much of this book reads like a condensed version of material from Collins' Genesis 1-4 commentary; this book does not include any discussion of the Hebrew grammar involved in relevant passages, which actually makes this a great book for those who are interested in what Collins has to say about Genesis, creation, and Adam/Eve, but may not be able to access all of his discussion in his commentary. The viewpoints involved in all areas of the conversation are laid out well, and the various arguments seem to be treated equitably. If you're looking for a hardline stance on which position on Adam/Eve is the absolute right one, this book won't help you. Collins tells you what he thinks is consistent, what works with the evidence, and what seems to be intellectually honest, but he does not explicitly tell you what to believe concerning evolution or the creation week. This is, I think, as it should be. Reading scripture can be full of uncertainty at times, and Genesis is no exception. Having Collins' help in navigating some of these issues is quite valuable and the reader will more than likely be better equipped to ask the right questions after having read this book.
Profile Image for Keith.
569 reviews2 followers
January 4, 2014
While the book does not definitively answer the question "Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?" in a YES or NO fashion, it does examine the issues at stake in the question from a variety of interesting angles. Overall the impression the author gives is that he believes it is completely reasonable to form the opinion that YES Adam and Eve existed and that the Bible account in Genesis may be understood as history. Collins intellectually address the numerous scientific and academic criticisms of such a view. In many ways, his writing reminds me of C.S. Lewis, who is frequently quoted in the book as well. The best thing this book does is to underline that the account of Adam and Eve is vitally important to Christian beliefs. The theological concepts of the Fall and inherited sin nature throughout all humanity can not be set aside. Otherwise there would have been no need for Christ to come, to die on the cross, and to break the pattern of sin among our race. I recommend this book for anyone who likes a deep intellectual read about important matters.
Profile Image for Ben Zajdel.
Author 10 books17 followers
Read
February 12, 2018
This was a pretty good read, but a little too short (only 135 pages, not including the apendices) to cover what I feel he needed to go over to make this book passable. Collins mainly focuses on showing that the Biblical writers believed Adam and Eve to be historical figures. Collins does a great job of stating his case, and while this is important, I feel that it's only one tenent of proving that Adam and Eve were indeed historical. There needed to be some more legs to this table, if you will.

I believe this was written in response to the BioLogos trend, as Francis Collins (no relation) is mentioned several times throughout.

Profile Image for Susan.
50 reviews9 followers
May 30, 2013
Overall I was disappointed with the book as I felt it used circular reasoning – “The Bible says Adam and Eve existed so they existed.” I think he did a fine job of tying together the scripture passages and how they build on each other. I wish he’d tried to engage more of a scientific discussion but that wasn't part of this book.

Being disappointed in a book and being disappointed at having read a book are two different kinds of disappointment. I’m not disappointed that I read this book at all.
Profile Image for Matthew Mitchell.
Author 10 books37 followers
August 9, 2013
This was a challenging read. The author establishes a "Mere Adam-and-Eve-Ism," trying to demonstrate the least of what is essential to affirm about A&E from the Bible. Then he explores several scenarios for reconciling this data to the current scientific conclusions.

I learned a lot and was affirmed in my faith. The author knows his stuff and is a clear writer. I still have lots of questions, though I think Collins handily answered a number of the questions Enns had raised in "The Evolution of Adam." More thinking required.
Profile Image for Lee Bertsch.
200 reviews3 followers
July 13, 2019
I found his arguments convincing that there is an historical core to the Genesis accounts that cannot be jettisoned without affecting the grand narrative of scripture. Beyond that core he leaves plenty of room for orthodox Christians to understand the Genesis stories in various ways. I also found his reminders to be cautious about accepting uncritically what is presently held to be "settled science" to be well stated and personally helpful
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.