Adam and the Genome eBook ê Adam and PDF/EPUB ²

Adam and the Genome ❴PDF / Epub❵ ✅ Adam and the Genome Author Scot McKnight – Genomic science indicates that humans descend not from an individual pair but from a large population What does this mean for the basic claim of many Christians that humans descend from Adam and EveLe Genomic science indicates that humans descend not from an individual pair but from a large population What does this mean for the basic claim of many Christians that humans descend from Adam and EveLeading evangelical geneticist Dennis Venema and popular New Testament scholar Scot McKnight combine their expertise to offer informed guidance and answers to uestions pertaining to evolution genomic science and the historical Adam Some of the uestions they explore include Is there credible evidence for evolution Do we descend from a population or are we the offspring of Adam and PDF/EPUB ² Adam and Eve Does taking the Bible seriously mean rejecting recent genomic science How do Genesis's creation stories reflect their ancient Near Eastern context and how did Judaism understand the Adam and Eve of Genesis Doesn't Paul's use of Adam in the New Testament prove that Adam was a historical individualThe authors address up to date genomics data with expert commentary from both genetic and theological perspectives showing that genome research and Scripture are not irreconcilable Foreword by Tremper Longman III and afterword by Daniel Harrell.

10 thoughts on “Adam and the Genome

  1. Robin Robin says:

    I should start by saying that I came to this book already affirming a theistic evolutionary view despite some outstanding theological uestions because I find those uestions to be palatable and likely to be resolved than the uestions that are raised by denying the science I can't speak much to the persuasiveness of Venema's science arguments as I did not need convincing of that part But though I didn't necessarily need that part of the book for myself though I did learn some interesting details previously unknown to me I am happy to have found a book that takes both the science and the theology seriously giving eual time to each topic for those who are not yet convinced My biggest interest was to hear McKnight's theological arguments reconciling Paul's comments in Romans 5 with an evolutionary reading of Genesis and on that section I have mixed thoughts McKnight draws heavily on the work of a handful of other theologians in making his points which is uite reasonable as some of the arguments reuire an expertise in a particular field Ancient Near Eastern cosmology or Second temple Jewish literature for example that the typical theologian may not have One of the authors that McKnight cites extensively is John Walton As this is a topic that has interested me for a while I have read Walton extensively and as such I was uite familiar with the arguments that McKnight was making However in the brief amount of time that McKnight discussed Walton's points I felt that McKnight did not necessarily earn the conclusions that he was making though I believe that Walton in his writings does Thus a reader who has not read Walton may come away from McKnight's argument thinking that there is less to back it up than there actually isThe roles were reversed later in the book when McKnight discussed the many different literary ways that Second temple Jewish literature used the person of Adam I was not familiar with the writers who were the main source of McKnight's argument Here again I felt like McKnight didn't necessarily earn his conclusions but this time I was left to wonder whether his sources hadThis is not a long book and it's hard to fault McKnight for trying to summarize an extensive amount of scholarly work to make it palatable to the average reader but I wonder if the book would have been better served to be a bit longer with a bit explanation at least in the theology section At times it seemed that McKnight's confidence in his conclusion didn't match the weight of the argument given Occasionally he would state that a conclusion was obvious when it wasn't all that obvious to me and I was already theologically in agreement with him I can only imagine what a doubter would make of his argumentsFor any reader who remains unconvinced by McKnight's section I would recommend trying John Walton's Lost World of Adam and Eve It's not entirely the same argument that McKnight is making here as it focuses on proper interpretation of Genesis 1 2 with a bonus chapter on Romans 5 by NT Wright but it helps put some meat on the bones of this theological line of thought

  2. Landon Genry Landon Genry says:

    I’m giving this book 4 stars because it’s the only book I’ve read that detailed evidence for evolution so I loved that I appreciate that it was from a Christian perspective and enjoyed thinking through what this means for interpreting scripture in the second half of the book It took me awhile to get through so it didn’t deserve 5 stars I would recommend this for anyone interested in the intersection between science and faith

  3. Jennifer Jennifer says:

    Great read especially for someone struggling with science and faith issues I will not say it has all of the answers but it is very helpfulI would highly recommend reading It is not a light read It delves into science and into theology It is thought provoking with some great analogies I do have a clearer picture on some topics and uestions on others

  4. Fr. Ted Fr. Ted says:

    I thought the science in favor of genetics and evolution was presented in a very accessible and convincing fashion The interpretation of Genesis also was well presented based a great deal on recent biblical scholarship looking at Jewish interpretations of Adam and Eve from the Septuagint and Pseudepigrapha The book is one approach to bridging the gap between Christian fundamentalism and science It looks at difficult issues why a single Adam and Eve set of parents for all humans doesn't work genetically The authors are accepting science but also presenting an interpretation of Adam and Eve that doesn't pit science vs the Bible The authors do accept that the bible is not science but doesn't need to be to express the truth it represents

  5. Paul Bruggink Paul Bruggink says:

    In the first half of this book Trinity Western University biology professor Dennis Venema makes a convincing case that human beings began from a population of around 10000 rather than from a single couple Then New Testament scholar Scot McKnight makes a case for this being consistent with references to Adam in the New Testament Together they propose “accepting the reality of genetic evidence supporting a theory of evolution along with an understanding of Adam and Eve that is in tune with the historical context of Genesis” p 173 An old earth and biological evolution are presupposed in this bookDennis Venema begins by using helpful analogies in order to develop fresh explanations of what is meant by scientific hypotheses and theories followed by a fresh explanation of geocentrism vs heliocentrism all interweaved with his personal story of coming to grips with science and Christianity He then draws an interesting analogy between the evolution of language and biological evolution thereby setting the stage for his discussion of population geneticsVenema then discusses the methods that geneticists use to support their conclusion that the population of human beings has never dipped below around 10000 individuals Science can say that “if Adam and Eve were in fact historical they were not the sole parents of all humanity but part of a larger population” p 59After refuting several specific arguments for Intelligent Design in his final chapter Venema suggests that biological evolution is “God’s grand design for creating life” even though “it is not something that science can speak to” He suggests that in Romans 1 “Paul calls us to see God in what we know not in what we don’t know” paraphrasing a Dietrich Bonhoeffer uoteScot McKnight begins his half of the book by wondering “whether traditional interpretations of Genesis 1 2 were perhaps well intended but misguided and in need of rethinking” p 95 McKnight believes that science forces us to pause long enough to uestion our assumptions about how to read Genesis 1 3 He then clarifies what is meant by “historical” Adam and Eve in contrast to “archetypal” “genealogical” or “literary” Adam and Eve McKnight then discusses at length how Genesis 12 were seen in the context of Ancient Near East creation stories followed by a chapter on the many Adams of Jewish literature up to and shortly after the time of PaulIn his final chapter McKnight suggests that the primary issue is how Paul uses Adam in Romans 521 21 and 1 Corinthians 1521 22 45 49 He asks how we got to a belief in original sin aka original sin nature original guilt and whether it is necessary to have a historical Adam to have the Christian doctrine of salvation To answer these uestions McKnight focuses on Romans 512 starting by discussing the Latin mistranslation of the Greek text “in whom” vs the accurate “because” upon which Augustine build his doctrine of original sin McKnight concludes that Paul’s Adam is “the literary Adam of Genesis filtered through the Jewish tradition of interpreting Adam as the archetypal moral and exemplary Adam who both unleashes sin into the world by his own sin and at the same time forms a model for each human being” p 187 but not the historical AdamI recommend this book for any Christian who believes that they have to choose between the Bible and science particularly because of the recent developments in genetics that uestion the traditional belief in Adam and Eve as the sole progenitors of the human race This book proposes a much needed way to harmonize the Bible and scienceThis book would have been even better if it had been blessed with footnotes instead of cursed with end notes

  6. Roo Phillips Roo Phillips says:

    This book is written by two Christians one a trained biologist and the other a theologian The first half covers organic evolution and the second half covers historical Adam The two authors are extremely knowledgeable in their fields even a little too knowledgeable I withheld one star because both authors go a little too detailedacademic in their analysis and it gets a little boring or longwinded in parts That said it is interesting to read two pro evolution perspectives from Christian scholars It is particularly interesting to see how they come to the conclusion that Adam is most likely an archetypal figure and Eve rather than historical It does not diminish their faith however and they show how science and religion can still be in harmony when it comes to evolution

  7. Lucas G. Lucas G. says:

    The subtitle of this book is Reading Scripture after Genetic Science and that pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the goal of this book It is separated into two parts that largely operate independently of one anotherIn the first section Venema a biologist presents the scientific case for evolution For the most part he emphasizes the genetic evidence for common ancestry The key point in relation to Christianity is that this reuires the human population to be hundreds of thousands of years old and have always contained greater than 6000 members Of course this presents a challenge to an understanding of an historical Adam and EveMcKnight a New Testament Scholar picks up in the second half by presenting his understanding of what scripture says about Adam and Eve in light of this scientific evidence In short he takes as true everything Venema presents and explains why it shouldn't be considered a challenge to a biblical understanding of Adam and Eve The key point he makes is that we ought to interpret the text in the proper historical context The bulk of his discussion is spent demonstrating how when properly contextualized the Bible shouldn't be understood to teach an historical Adam and Eve Instead Adam and Eve are largely literary and archetypal Granted he does admit that the biblical authors probably viewed Adam and Eve as real people but he rejects the notion that any doctrine such as the doctrines of sin and salvation rely on Adam and Eve being genetic ancestors of all of humanity Parts of this book are really good Other parts are really frustrating Both Venema and McKnight do a good job at being sensible to the concerns people have when it comes to science and scripture They correctly see a problem in Christians being raised to fear science And they both clearly lay out their main points in a manner accessible to any reader With that said there was a sense of condescension from both authors Venema when criticizing his opponents in the Intelligent Design community dismissed all disagreement as coming from either ignorance or fear These types of comments are distasteful not to mention untrue and distract from the otherwise respectful content McKnight similarly comes off as condescending time and time again Before presenting his preferred approach to interpreting a passage he freuently states that it is the reuired result of any honest and respectful reading of scripture Frankly that type of judgment should be left up to the reader To throw that at the reader before providing them with the justification is intellectually abusive Now I'm sure this wasn't his intention but it really left a bad impression on me Even when I agreed with him I found myself unhappy with him Further his arguments are very brief and generally unconvincing to anyone who doesn't already agree with him Had he presented his positions as mere possibilities I think his defenses could have been sufficient But as it stands they leave too much unanswered In the end I'd still probably recommend this book to anyone wanting to see how a couple of Christian scholars handle the uestion of evolution and Christianity There certainly are some great insights both by Venema and by McKnight But it isn't the most enjoyable read on the topic so that should be considered before reading it

  8. Jeff Jeff says:

    I approached this book as an Old Earth creationist OEC but having read other books about evolutionary creationism EC I was curious to see how this book might answer both the scientific and theological uestions that theory raises I was much satisfied with the scientific answers than the theological answersThe first half of the book written by Dr Dennis Venema does a good job in laying out the genetic evidence we have for believing that humans arose through the evolutionary process Proponents of other origin theories would be wise to account for this sort of evidence in their theories because it does seem to make a strong case Venema spends almost an entire chapter addressing some particular arguments from the Intelligent Design camp though he doesn't specifically address any other viewpoints YECOEC at anywhere near the same level of detail In all Venema's half of the book was interesting and eye openingMcKnight's half of the book was disappointing not because he didn't ask the right uestions but because he didn't give a particularly great answer Critics of evolutionary origins of mankind uickly jump to Paul's passage in Romans 5 as a biblical argument for a historical Adam one who is the actual ancestor of all mankind McKnight recognizes this but his answer is of a deflection instead of a head on rebuttal McKnight goes to lengths mostly from the OT Apocrypha to show that 1st century Jewish thoughts on Adam were less of the historical Adam we think of today and of an archetypical Adam; therefore Paul would have had this archetypical Adam in mind when he wrote Romans I didn't think the linkage between McKnight's theological case and Venema's scientific case was particularly strong which made for a disappointing end to this bookI would still recommend this book to others interested in the study of human origins or the debate over various creation models not least because the scientific evidence presented in this book ought to be addressed by proponents of other creation models

  9. Laura Laura says:

    The book is written in two halvesI had hoped for conclusions from Venema but he had a lot of good insights about the conclusions of genetic biology about what DNA can tell us about the relationships between species the age of the modern human race and the size of the emerging human population at that time 35 for a bit too much explanation that didn’t seem relevantMcKnight’s half of the book was excellent as he explored the different ways that Adam has been treated historically in both biblical and extra biblical literature with special attention to Paul He concludes that Adam is overwhelmingly literary and typological also becoming viewed genealogically The main uestion I was left with was whyhow Adam would have moved from a literary to a genealogical figure I saw Dr McKnight shortly after finishing the book and asked him about this The dissatisfying but honest answer is that we don’t know 55

  10. Josh Josh says:

    Dennis Venema and Scot McKnight join together to provide an introductory examination of a topic that has become and will only become critical as we scientifically progress as a people The mapping of the human genome was a uantum leap for genetic science and the repercussions reverberated far beyond laboratories and the hard sciences With such a radical reorientation of how humans interpret the book of nature it is only appropriate to consider the impact on how we interpret the book of God's special revelation The need of a work like Adam and the Genome is undeniable and McKnight and Venema are up to the task Venema spends the first half of the book examining genetic science and presenting a positive case for naturally guided human evolution If you have been studying biology or genetics to any significant degree there is nothing groundbreaking here But it is a great summary of genetic science as it relates to evolution Its greatest uality might be the manner in which Venema presents complex scientific data and theory so that it is accessible to any willing to put in the effort More so Venema presents the basis for the following section that investigates the epistemological and ontological implications of modern biology's greatest featThis is where McKnight jumps in He is admittedly no scientist but he is a theologian with significant insight and a manner of presentation saturated with grace I significantly disagree with McKnight on a number of theological conclusions denial of original sin being a big one but the manner in which he examines these issues in light of genetic science is profitable to emulate whether the results mirror his conclusions or totally contradict them I have accused Dispensational theology of imposing itself with a hyper literal reading that ignores the historical and culture context of the author and the text I have been guilty of that myself in many ways with many Scriptural passages and even if I remain unconvinced of the certainty of evolutionary theory I am convinced of the necessity to remove as much as possible the cultural blinders that keep me from reading the Bible as it is intended to be read if that is the totality of the impact this book has upon me it will have been time well spent But I have a feeling that its reverberations will be a bit far reaching ARC provided for review

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *