The Quest for the Historical Adam: Genesis, Hermeneutics, and Human Origins

by William VanDoodewaard

This edition of The Quest for the Historical Adam was specially prepared for the Shepherds' Conference and was not for resale. The hardcover edition with an index was made available later in 2015.

Genres: Theology, Christian, History, Church History, Science, Evolution, Nonfiction

400 pages, Hardcover

Published March 20, 2015

About the author

married to Rebecca VanDoodewaard

Reviews

[Peter Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful book, blending history, theology, and cultural analysis. The author begins in the Patristic era and works through 2013 showing what different theologians believed about the existence of Adam and Eve as the first humans created by God, as well as the age of the earth. The value of the book lies in its extensive scope, covering 2,000 years of church history and touching on all major figures. He stops discussing Roman Catholics after the Reformation. But he does discuss all branches of Protestantism, including Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Anglican, and Dutch Reformed.

This book is not an exegetical examination of Genesis 1-2, but rather a collating of various interpretations of Genesis 1-2. The author spends the bulk of the pages on the time since the Enlightenment because there is little if any disagreement on Adam and Eve prior to that time. The wealth of primary sources quoted from is overwhelming and opens numerous avenues of research for those who want more information. There are several article and books listed that I want to read. Several thoughts emerged as I read:

First, superficial appeals to church history by old earth proponents should be challenged. The author does not focus on the age of the earth, but there are enough quotes to let the reader know that simply saying "Augustine did not believe in a literal 24 hour days either" is not sufficient. Force old earth men to say how their system compares to those that came before. Doing that will help one see there are not many connections between old earth today and the more figurative approaches of the early church and even men like Bavinck and Kuyper.

Second, one question that must be answered by old earth proponents is when does the Genesis text become literal and why? Many want Genesis to become literal in 2:4 or later, but before that it is symbolic, analogical, etc. Why? Why is 2:4 literal and 1:24 not?

Third, while many old earth men still hold to a literal Adam and Eve they have no reason to in the text of Genesis. In other words, their hermeneutic of Genesis 1-2 has no brakes. If the days are not 24 hour days then why does Adam have to be a real man? And while their interpretation does not necessitate a non-literal Adam, it also does not require a literal one, which leaves the door open to some of the recent denials that Adam existed at all.

Fourth, the adoption of evolutionary theory for the origins of man is devastating to historic Christianity's view of man, sin, God, Christ, and salvation. This does not mean that all who adopt evolutionary theory take it this far. But a hermeneutic which allows evolution to squeeze into Genesis 1-2 can, and some would say logically does, lead to the denial of key tenets of the Christian faith.

Fifth, appeals to Ancient Near Eastern cosmologies must be challenged. Men like Walton, Collins, and Enns to varying degrees allow ANE literature to greatly influence their reading of Genesis 1-3 (and even beyond). Why? Why is there the implicit assumption in many discussions that Scripture is downstream from ANE literature instead of the other way around? Why does ANE literature and the Scriptures "share" their context instead of ANE literature being a godless twisting of the Genesis record?

Finally, seminaries and pastors have a duty to be clear on these issues. What is within the bounds of orthodoxy and what is not? The answer to this question is not easy, but it must be found and boldly proclaimed.

[Tim Lupo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Honestly not compelling. The bulk (~80%) of the book is spent tracing the historical interpretations of Genesis 1-2 from the early patristic period to modernity. While historical theology can be helpful, it alone can’t be a case for making an argument when in apparent conflict with general revelation (heliocentric views being a prime recent example). The very last chapter is the only one I found helpful in any way, as it discusses the alternative views of origins that attempt to harmonize current scientific understandings with early Genesis accounts. The author goes into detail about the theological issues arising out of the three primary views that attempt to harmonize general and special revelation (I wholeheartedly agree with his theological qualms here, I should add). But he makes no real attempt to offer an alternative explanation other than “these can’t be right”. Thus I find myself in essentially the same place I was before having read this book.

[Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The further one gets away from a literal reading of Gen 1-3, the more theological problems unfold. The author does a great job of going through church history to prove this. It may be helpful to know up front that this is more of a historical theology book on Gen 1-3; there is little exegetical or biblical theology done as a whole. Very powerful and helpful read.

[Steven H · Rating 3 out of 5]

A HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF (MOSTLY REFORMED) POSITIONS ON ORIGINS

Dr. William VanDoodewaard is academic dean and professor of church history at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary in South Carolina.

He wrote in the Introduction to this 2015 book, “This book narrates and assesses a vast topic while tackling ‘the quest for the historical Adam.’ It does so recognizing that engagement with evolutionary models of human origins from a scientific standpoint provides a needed and valuable contribution to Christian understanding, particularly when that engagement is undertaken with the conviction that Scripture has an authoritative and interpretive role when it speaks to comprehending human biological and geological history. Special revelation (the Bible) and general revelation (the natural order) are in harmony with one another. Thus, an accurate understanding of Scripture will in most cases not contradict accurate scientific interpretations of present natural reality, nor vice versa.

“Most Christians… agree at this point… Yet, despite such common ground, divergence among evangelicals is widening---and individuals are diverging from historical Protestant evangelicalism---over the question of how to accurately interpret general revelation in coherence with special revelation in the area of creation history and human origins---and steady debate as to which are biblically warranted.” (Pg. 2-3) He continues, “this book… stands with… those who believe sound exegesis compels one to read [Gen 1-2] ‘literally’---as a nonfigurative, detailed, historical record of events… the six days are ordinary days, the sun was created after the initial creation of light… and Adam and Eve were the first people, specially created on the sixth day, without any evolutionary ancestry…” (Pg. 6-7)

Later, he adds, “From the positive teaching of Scripture, there is no inherent ground to posit anything aside from a special, temporally immediate creation of Adam and Eve as the first humans on the sixth day of creation… no indication is given of divine use of lengthy mediate processes in their creation… References after Genesis, including those in the New Testament, view Adam and Eve as historical persons and their creation as a unique historical event… This divine testimony was revealed, proclaimed, and believed from the earliest beginnings to the days of the apostles. Now, however, a wide range of answers is given in the quest for the historical Adam… our contemporary diversity raises the questions: Why the apparent difference and discrepancy between then and now? What has changed; what has remained constant? The following chapters trace how Christians and the Christian church have understood Genesis and human origins across the nearly 20 centuries since the completion of the canon of Scripture.” (Pg. 18-19)

He recounts, “a mainstream of the European church in the medieval era viewed human origins in harmony with a literal understanding of the Genesis 1 and 2 accounts of the creation of Adam and Eve. However, a growing stream of the church, exemplified in Eriugena, Grossteste, and Aquinas, did so in … an allegorical hermeneutic that viewed much… of Genesis 1 and 2 as figurative---in continuity with earlier efforts to accommodate the text to Greek natural philosophy… A significant movement away from an allegorical approach to the Scriptures occurred with … the dawn of the Reformation, when the allegorical approach came to be seen as obscuring or denying outright the literal … sense in the scriptural texts.” (Pg. 49-51) Later, he adds, “for the Reformers, committing themselves to a literal Genesis that was occasionally at odds with Greek natural philosophy did not negate the legitimacy of using human reason to gain understanding of God’s creation.” (Pg. 65)

He acknowledges, “B.B. Warfield … moved beyond his predecessors … in granting leeway for a special creation of Adam and Eve using evolutionary processes. Like Charles Hodge, Warfield was critical of aspects of the Darwinian approach, but he was decidedly more open in stating that there is ‘no quarrel with evolution … as a suggested account of the method of divine providence.” (Pg. 148) Later, “Cornelius Van Til… did not engage in debate on the days of Genesis 1. Yet he was significantly critical of evolution.” (Pg. 182)

Still later, “Calvin College professors Loren and Deborah Haarsma argued that evolutionary origins for Adam and Eve were as much compatible with scriptural theology [as] the literal tradition of a special, immediate creation… Others within Calvin College… argued similarly. The marked trajectory of hermeneutical shift on early Genesis, with its attendant implications for human origins… within the Christian Reformed Church, was concurrent with a wider theological deterioration in the denomination.” (Pg. 206-207)

He reports, “During the late 1950s at Westminster Theological Seminary… Old Testament professor Meredith Kline… presented the literary hypothesis as a new hermeneutical alternative… Kline aimed to vindicate his suggestion for an alternative hermeneutic by challenging the literal Genesis tradition.” (Pg. 213)

He goes on, “Within the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) Calvin College biology professor Terry Gray… proposed that both the increasingly accepted hermeneutical alternatives to the literal tradition and what he viewed as the realities of the record of natural history should allow for the possibility that Adam and Eve were created through a process involving primate ancestors… Gray’s views were mainstream in his context at Calvin; colleagues including Davis Young and Howard Van Till had argued similarly, and their views stood within the contemporary latitude of the Christian Reformed Church… Charges against Gray were then brought to the Presbytery, which ruled against Gray… Some in the OPC were dismayed by the decision, including Lee Irons… who would soon become a leading proponent with Kline of the literary framework hypothesis.” (Pg. 219-220)

He summarizes, “it was abundantly clear that alternative hermeneutical approaches toward the early chapters of Genesis had gained significant support among more conservative Presbyterians. Concurrently, a proliferation of possible end-points had developed in the quest for the historical Adam. The new ‘Adams’ were significantly unlike the Adam of Genesis… At the same time, there continued to be a stream of commitment to---and even recovery of---the enduring literal tradition on Genesis and human origins.” (Pg. 249)

He observes, “Across Christianity there remains today… a strong commitment to the … literal approach toward early Genesis, which includes the special… creation of Adam and Eve… This approach survives despite the best effort of both a secularized society and those within the church who hold alternative views.” (Pg. 275) He continues, “As a result, although many proponents of these alternative approaches have sought to retain the historical Adam… others… [endorse] a range of ‘Adams and Eves’ with varying degrees of evolutionary origins. Some move to the outright rejection of the historical existence of an Adam and Eve. The … simple lack of information created by the alternative hermeneutical approaches are filled at the whim of the interpreter with either ‘the God of the gaps’ or ‘the science of the gaps.’” (Pg. 278-279)

He argues, “One challenge for these varied models comes from the Genesis 2 account of the creation of Eve, which distinctly notes her formation from the rib of Adam… [the] old-earth models that place the creation of humanity at 150,000 years ago are also challenged by the fact that ... Genesis 1-4 indicates that Adam and Eve and their children engaged in farming activities and built towns of cities… A third challenge… is the issue of whether there was an actual initial ‘human’ pair at the point of ‘becoming fully human.’ Recent arguments from the fields of genetics … have pushed some proponents … to accept the concept of a group rather than an initial pair…” (Pg. 284-286)

He concludes, “The [old-earth] models give significant indication that science… has been granted precedence over Genesis 1-2. One evidence of this is found in the ongoing efforts to engage in further reinterpretation of Genesis, as well as New Testament passages like Romans 5.” (Pg. 291) He adds, “The quest for the historical Adam---and how it is pursued---impacts a wide range of doctrinal and practical issues… there are significant theological implications in moving away from the literal … Adam and Eve of Genesis… These issues are of profound, gospel importance… The resulting multiple Adams… bear little resemblance to the historical Adam.” (Pg. 311)

This book will interest Christians studying this historical and interpretive issues.

[Lee Button · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very thorough and detailed study of how religious leaders from ages past treated the historicity of Adam. Lots of details but very rewarding.

[Bob Schilling · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very good book defending the historic, conservative, "literal six-day creationism." Appropriately VanDooewaard (a Professor at "Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary" in Grand Rapids, MI) receives the commendations of men like Noel Weeks, Richard Gaffin, Ligon Duncan, Sinclair Ferguson, Conrad Mbewe, and Iain Duguid, among others. The last chapter was not as helpful as the informative first six, but the "ten areas of doctrine connected to the literal hermeneutic and the doctrine of the historical, immediate creation of Adam and Eve" demonstrate how important this issue is.

As Carl Trueman noted in his brief, "The Real Scandal of the Evangelical Mind," the two watershed issues of our day, which define whether we are "gospel-people," genuine evangelicals or not, are the moral issue of homosexuality - do we have clear convictions about the sinfulness of sin, and secondly, the theological issue of the historicity of Adam. If there is no historical Adam, there is no gospel. William VanDooewaard acknowledges that some evangelicals waver on maintaining the traditional literal approach to Genesis 1 (Derek Kidner, Meredith Kline, Bruce Waltke, Michael Horton, Mark Futato, Robert Godfrey, C. John Collins, Bryan Chapell, Tim Keller; John Sailhamer, John Walton, John Piper, Gordon Lewis, Bruce Demarest, Millard Erikson, Wayne Grudem - note that the differences among these men form a continuum), but the critical matter is the special creation of Adam and Eve.

The Introduction and opening chapter are a terrific defense and explanation of the plain sense of Genesis 1 and 2, and a walk through the rest of the Scriptures upholding the literal interpretation of Creation. Let me quote two paragraphs, one from the Introduction, and one from near the end of the book:

"While acknowledging the varied uses of the term 'literal,' this book follows the more popular usage in its focus on Genesis interpretation and commentary. It stands with Luther, Tyndale, and other Reformers in defining those who maintain the 'literal sense' or 'literal interpretation' of Genesis 1 and 2 as those who believe sound exegesis compels one to read this passage 'literally' - as a nonfigurative, detailed, historical record of events and existence narrated as they actually were. For those who hold to the 'literal interpretation of Genesis,' the six days are ordinary days, the sun was created after the initial creation of light, the dust was real dust, the rib a real rib, and Adam and Eve the first people, specially created on the sixth day, without any evolutionary ancestry." (pg. 6)

"The Genesis 1 and 2 account of a special, direct creation of Adam and Eve as the first man and woman, without any ancestry, has seen very few exceptions in the history of Christianity. Alternatives to that account include only one or two in the patristic and medieval eras, and more in the post-Darwinian era of the last 150 years. In each case, the pressure to take up an alternative interpretation of human origins has come from sources external to Scripture and Christian theology." (pg. 277)

The book surveys the hermeneutics and the teaching of the church from the Patristic era, through the Medieval, Reformation, Enlightenment, 19th and 20th centuries down to the present. So many modern objections to a young earth and the literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 have been dealt with in Church history. The Bible's teaching about the worldwide flood is also a closely related doctrine. You'll read of Darwin's unbelief and his despising of the doctrine of hell. You'll be encouraged by faithful exegetes past and present (Thomas Boston, the Puritans, the Southern Presbyterians, moderns like Richard Belcher, John Currid, Douglas Kelly, Michael Kruger, Robert Reymond, John MacArthur, Al Mohler, Lig Duncan, etc.). You'll be informed, historically and biblically, and built up in your faith.

I definitely and heartily recommend this book.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

At this time Dr. William VanDoodewaard is Professor of Church History at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary. His book is an excellently written book that is thoroughly researched and profusely cited, providing historical and present day (within reason) information in a chronological order, quoting primary and secondary sources. This book is apologetic and a polemic against what VanDoodewaard perceives to be liberal theologians infiltrating the traditional literalist, fundamentalist, Christian Church with aberrant and heretical theological scholarship.

Vandoodewaard, a Puritan and Calvinist, introduces the reader to liberal scholars who he believes inculcated liberalism within the Christian Church and literalist scholars who he believes faithfully interpret the inspired and inerrant word of God.

VanDoodewaard quotes both sets of scholars and explains the hermeneutics used by these scholars to exegete the Biblical text in Genesis. He explains why he believes the “liberal” scholars’ new fangled hermeneutics are dangerous and lead to an incorrect interpretation of the Biblical text.

VanDoodewaard offers moderate commentary in a somewhat irenic tone in the first five chapters. At this juncture I was going give this book five out five stars. I’m not a Calvinist and before I became an apostate, I had an Arminian soteriology. Although I’m no longer a Christian, I’m still a student of the Bible. I disagree with virtually everything VanDoodewaard espouses.

In chapter six VanDoodewaard’s tenor becomes noticeably more polemic, yet tolerable. There went a star (4 out of 5). In chapter seven the polemic becomes substantially more aggressive, accusatory, and somewhat personal. And,
VanDoodewaard uses the “h” word, yes, heretic. Another star falls (3 out of 5).

Many of the liberal scholars are of the Calvinist persuasion and VanDoodewaard airs some dirty laundry. It takes courage and thick skin to be a theologian or scholar in a literalist, fundamentalist, Calvinist church or college/university.

[Michael Kelley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Solid Historical Research and Exegesis

First of all, this is not a science book. If one is looking for scientific verification of Adam and Eve, this is not the book for you and I would be highly skeptical of a book that claims to offer solid scientific evidence of such a thing considering the vast amount of time from creation to the present and true science being based on observation and experimentation.

That said, this is the best book on the historical Adam precisely because it does not dwell on trying to scientifcally substantiate the claim of the Bible. Instead, this book details the exegesis of the early chapters of Genesis by every age of Christians from the patristic era to the modern day. The final two chapters offer a present day exegesis and elucidation of the problems with theistic evolution and other common divergences from the traditional reading. If one is going to hold to a form of divinely guided evolution, one is standing apart from exegesis of all Christians for the past 2,000 years.

[sam tannehill · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked up this book at a Ligonier Conference in Kansas. This books starts and ends directly with Biblical references. The thesis is clear, what does the Bible tell us about the origin of Adam and what arguments are there in support/against the thesis and how does the author address those arguments. I loved reading this book! The forward is by Albert Mohler!

[Neh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such a thorough work. I can't give it more than 6 stars, though because it is so thorough as to be as good as Jonathan Sarfati's "Refuting Compromise." Just kidding. These two books would be an excellent gift set to Genesis compromisers. Actually, a trilogy set would be complete if Douglas Kelly's "Creation and Change" were added.

[Robert A McKissick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Origins

Detailed treatise of major theories of origins from a theistic perspective. Includes three views of theistic evolutionary origins. Good defense of special six ordinary day creation. Well researched and footnoted scholarly work for layman as well as the pastor/teacher.

[Kristopher Schaal · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. It really helped me for some studying I was doing. Especially helped me understand various views related to theistic evolution, sort out which theologians hold which views, understand some of the history behind those views, and understand the theological importance of holding to the historical account of Adam and Eve as a matter of first importance.

[Read the beginning and the end. Skimmed the middle. Would love to go back and read it more thoroughly.]

[Bennett Rogers · Rating 5 out of 5]

Superb historical survey of Christian interpretations of Adam and Eve, and Genesis 1-3 more generally.

[Craig Hurst · Rating 4 out of 5]

“If we do not know how the story of the gospel begins, then we do not know what that story means. Make no mistake: a false start to the story produces a false grasp of the gospel.”

Much of the current debate surrounding Genesis, origins, and evolution has focused on how to read the early chapters of Genesis and the creation itself in the world around us and the universe beyond. While the playing field of options might have been pretty small not even 50 years ago, today it is a much different story. Opinions as to how to read Genesis and science together, whether they can be reconciled, or even if they should be, abound.

In all of the heat produced in the discussion, what has been largely left out is the history of the discussion itself within the church. Historical theology has always played a role in the how the contemporary church deals with and addresses the issues of the day. When we look to the church of the past, we avail ourselves to the wisdom of the ages of those who have walked the road we are walking; sometimes before we even knew it existed. We stand on the shoulders of the past so we are in a better position to see the road ahead.

In regards to Genesis, origins, and evolution, it is the historical position of the church that William VanDoodewaard believes has been largely left out of the conversation. A professor of church history, VanDooewaard has written The Quest for the Historical Adam: Genesis, Hermeneutics, and Human Origins (RHB, 2015), which seeks to bring to the forefront of the contemporary churches mind how the church has viewed the relationship between Genesis and science. VanDoodewaard is writing to fill in this historical hole because “scant attention is paid to the historical understanding of Genesis and human origins within Christianity.” (7)

“The crux of the current division,” VanDoodewaard says, “on creation and human origins is found where evolutionary theory stands in conflict with the traditional, literalistic reading of Genesis 1 through 5 common to the history of Christianity.” (3) This “literal” reading is the “nonfigurative, detailed, historical record of events and existence narrated as they actually were.” (6) VanDoodewaard’s position on these matters is the position that he believes is the majority position of the church.

As the subtitle indicates, this book addresses how the church has understood Genesis exegetically and theologically, the hermeneutical principles employed in that en-devour, and how theologians and pastors handled the secular scientific consensus concerning origins. VanDoodewaard addresses all three of these issues within five historical eras, starting with the Patristic and Medieval era and ending with the present. His aim is to show that “despite some ebb and flow in the past century, there remains a substantial commitment to the literal understanding of the entire Genesis 1-2 creation narrative.” (281) History is on the side of the traditional view.

As to the title of the book, this all matters because it effects how we understand where humanity and sin (just to name a few things) came from, which hing on Adam. Was he a real person? Was he the first person? Can we trust the Bible’s presentation of Adam? If not, how does that change the way we read the rest of the story of God’s interaction with mankind in redemptive history. If we change how we understand the beginning of the story of redemption then how much of the rest of the story do we have to change?

The Quest for the Historical Adam accomplishes its purpose to shed the light of historical theology on the darkness that pervades so much of the current discussion on these issues. VanDoodewaard has written a book that needs to be widely read an widely dealt with. Those who ignore this book will do so to their detriment. This is a serious walk through church history and the Adam and Genesis question. VanDoodewaard is fair in his presentation of the variety of views throughout church history on Adam, and the acceptance and resistance detractors were given.

I received this book for free from Reformation Heritage Books for this review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

[Olanma Ogbuehi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Although it is more than a year since I read this book, I appreciated, so much, finding a book that was unabashedly a theological treatment of the person of Adam, focusing on the Biblical evidence. The book also makes a defence of a Biblical creationism base, which adheres to a literal interpretation of the Genesis account of creation, as history rather than allegory, poetry, or symbolism. Whatever else the creation account is, at a minimum it is historical narrative, according to this treatment.

This book traces the theological development of the treatment of Adam and the first three chapters of Genesis, through church history, from the early church fathers through to the reformers: it then tables the development of contemporary theological arguments.

This book, helpfully, steers the reader away from a Scientific creationism approach, because it aims to establish the theological arguments primarily, using a presuppositional approach.

I found the book clear, careful and detailed in tackling competing arguments. It was a refreshing treatment of the subject which seeks first and foremost to demonstrate fidelity to the truth and accuracy of God's word as the foundation of the Christian faith.

[Jacob O'connor · Rating 3 out of 5]

This wasn’t exactly what I was expecting. I thought this would be like those books that attempt to reconstruct Jesus from historical sources. Rather, its a survey of how the book of Genesis has been interpreted through the ages. VanDoodewaard comes from a "young earth" perspective, so Quest builds to this conclusion.

My favorite thing about the book is how often my present Seminary appears. He quotes from Bruce Walkte and Robert Reymond, who apparently had teaching stints at Knox. Seeing my school on the printed page makes me feel like a legitimate scholar.