CREATING A DARWINIAN SAFE-PLACE IN GENESIS 1-11

Trying to demonstrate that evolution is consistent with the Bible, theistic evolutionists (TEs) claim that Genesis 1-11 does not record history but instead is merely a theological statement written in the form of a myth or allegory. Seen through this lens, these “non-historical” chapters are now unable to contradict the theory of evolution. Genesis and Darwin are merely apples and oranges – two entirely non-contradicting realities. However, the NT consistently regards these chapters as historical. Just one small example of this is the genealogies:

·       The days of Adam after he fathered Seth were 800 years; and he had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died. When Seth had lived 105 years, he fathered Enosh. Seth lived after he fathered Enosh 807 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Seth were 912 years, and he died. When Enosh had lived 90 years, he fathered Kenan.  Enosh lived after he fathered Kenan 815 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enosh were 905 years, and he died. When Kenan had lived 70 years, he fathered Mahalalel. (Genesis 5:4-12)

This genealogy affirms the historicity of the creation accounts of Genesis 1 and 2 that Adam was the first man and Seth and Enosh his actual offspring (Genesis 4:25-26), contrary to the theory of evolution.

Luke’s account of the historical genealogy of Jesus is consistent with this genealogy but in reverse order and sometimes using different spellings.

·       …the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. (Luke 3:37-38)

If this account is intended as history, establishing Jesus’ genealogy, then we must also regard the Genesis 5 genealogy as history. The genealogy of 1 Chronicles also affirms the historicity of the Genesis account:

·       Adam, Seth, Enosh; Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared; Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech; (1 Chronicles 1:1-3)

Clearly, this genealogy was intended as an historical record. It is therefore unlikely that the Genesis genealogy was intended as an allegory.

In view of this and of many other instances where the NT affirms the historicity of the Genesis accounts, it seems that the TEs have reformulated the Bible to create a safe-place for Darwin.