Then today, I checked the CT site again, and I found their fascinating editorial No Adam, No Eve, No Gospel, wherein the editors affirm the theological necessity of a real Adam and a real Fall into sin. From the editorial:
What is at stake?That's pretty much what I've been saying. If we let go of these early chapters of Genesis, and we will be letting go of the core message of Christianity. I should note that CT is not remotely going to start favoring young-age creationism, but I am pleased to see that there are some theological truths they are not willing to relinquish in the quest to harmonize science and Scripture.
First, the entire story of what is wrong with the world hinges on the disobedient exercise of the will by the first humans. The problem with the human race is not its dearth of insight but its misshapen will.
Second, the entire story of salvation hinges on the obedience of the Second Adam.
The thing I really liked about the CT cover article? That image of Adam is probably the most historically reasonable reconstruction I've ever seen. Even better than the Creation Museum's.
Meanwhile, I was just alerted to this new article from the Southern Baptist Journal of Theology:
Caneday. 2011. The Language of God and Adam’s Genesis & Historicity in Paul’s Gospel. SBJT 15(1):26-59. Download the PDF.
I haven't finished reading it yet, but it looks like an interesting rebuttal of assertions made by Francis Collins and Peter Enns.
Feedback? Email me at toddcharleswood [at] gmail [dot] com.