The topic of the historicity of Adam as the first man is a hot topic today in theology since some Evangelicals have come out to deny the historicity of Adam. The following is an outline from a bigger series I have going through a Biblical view of man. I hope the following is helpful to think about how various genre that is unquestionably literal found in the Bible interprets the meaning and genre of Genesis 1-3 literally.
Purpose: To consider the arguments for the historical Adam as the first man God created.
I. Special Creation of Adam and Eve according to Genesis 1-2
a. “Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” (Genesis 1:26-31)
i. This is the more general account of the creation of man, Genesis 2 will be more specific.
ii. “Man” here is literally “Adam” in the Hebrew.
iii. Notice here the plurality within God creating man
1. “Let Us make”
2. “in Our image”
3. “according to Our likeness”
iv. Notice the role of man in God’s creation in this verse.
b. “Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7)
i. This account is more specific than Genesis 1.
ii. Again, “man” here is literally “Adam” in the Hebrew.
iii. Two details of Adam’s creation
1. Formed from the ground
2. God breathed into his nostril
c. “The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.” (Genesis 2:22)
i. This account is the creation of the first woman, later named Eve in Genesis 3:20.
ii. Note Eve was made from Adam’s rib.
II. There have been those who have questioned the historicity of the Bible’s account of the creation of man with Adam being the firstMan. For example:
a. Tremper Longman III
b. Bruce Waltke: From a headline of the news, “OT Professor Bruce Waltke resigns from RTS Orlando Faculty amid historical Adam and Eve controversy”
c. Peter Enns: “Likewise, Israel’s story was written to say something about their place in the world and the God they worshiped. To think that the Israelites, alone among all other ancient peoples, were interested in (or capable of) giving some definitive, quasi-scientific, account of human origins is an absurd logic. And to read the story of Adam and Eve as if it were set up to so such a thing is simply wrongheaded.”
III. Objections comes down to an issue of hermeneutics
a. In his book against the historical Adam, Peter Enns writes, “One cannot read Genesis literally—meaning as a literally accurate description of physical, historical reality—in view of the state of scientific knowledge today and our knowledge of ancient Near Eastern stories of origin.”
b. The role of presupposing evolution in shaping interpretation of Genesis 1-3: “If evolution is true, one can no longer accept, in any true sense of the word ‘historical,’ the instantaneous and special creation of humanity described in Genesis, specifically 1:26-31 and 2:7, 22.”
IV. Why we should interpret Genesis 1-2 and Adam literally and historically
a. Genre of Genesis 1-2 is narrative and hence it should be treated as revealing literal information.
i. The essential elements of Hebrew narratives include:
a. This is probably the most important element.
b. Scene involves sequence of event in the narrative.
c. In the Hebrew text, the component of scene can be established by the pattern of wayyiqtol.
i. Wayyiqtol is a syntactical construct of a conjunction (wow consecutive) + prefixed form/preterite/imperfect verb.
ii. Wayyiqtol is often used to establish temporal or logical sequence.
This concerns the beginning, middle and ending of the development of the narrative.
Who is involved in the narrative?
Where in space/time does this narrative takes place?
5. Point of view
ii. Genesis 1-2 has the element of the literary form of narrative
a. Sequences of days (Genesis 1), Creation of AdamàGod’s dialogueàCreation of Eve (Genesis 2)
b. Genesis 1-2 has many Wayyiqtol is a syntactical construct of a conjunction (wow consecutive) + prefixed form/preterite/imperfect verb.
2. Plot: Five days of creation then the creation of man on the sixth day and then rest (Genesis 1); Lonliness of Adam then creation of Eve (Genesis 2)
3. Character: God, Adam and Eve.
4. Setting: The newly created world (Genesis 1), Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:10-14)
5. Point of view: God’s point of view of creation chronologically (Genesis 1), God’s point of view of creation of man specifically (Genesis 2)
b. How does the rest of the Bible interpret Genesis 1-2?
i. Methodological consideration
1. Since some say that Genesis 1-2 was originally not intended to be interpreted literally, that it’s meant to be understood as symbolic, so we have to ask the question of how the rest of the Bible interpret Genesis 1-2.
2. If the rest of the Bible as God’s infallible Word interpret Genesis 1-2 literally such as believing in a literal Adam and Eve, then we ought to see this data as God’s perspective on Genesis 1-2 and purpose of writing it is literal.
ii. Within Genesis
1. Note: Adam and Evil is presuppose as historical lest the rest of Genesis becomes nonsensical.
2. Narrative of the fall in Genesis 3 presupposes a literal Adam and Eve.
3. Those that have children are real, historically existent people. Adam and Eve had children and therefore historically existed.
a. Adam and Eve is described as having children such as Cain and Abel (Genesis 4:1-2).
b. Adam described in a genealogy (Genesis 4:25, 5:1)
iii. Book of Job: “Have I covered my transgressions like Adam, By hiding my iniquity in my bosom,” (Job 31:33)
At a minimum, this presupposes the story of Genesis 3 and a reference to Adam.
iv. Book of Hosea: “But like Adam they have transgressed the covenant; There they have dealt treacherously against Me.” (Hosea 6:7)
1. Here the sin of God’s people are compared to Adam’s sin.
2. Only a real person can transgress a covenant.
v. Genealogies: 1 Chronicles 1:1, Luke 3:38.
1. Genealogy as a literally form is meant to refer to real people.
2. Adam is referred to in genealogies and therefore God’s Word is here attesting to the fact that Adam was historical.
vi. Reinforcing the historicity of genealogies, Jude 14 as a straight forward epistle indicating God’s own Word interpreted genealogies literally.
vii. Both Adam and Eve are presupposed as real in 1 Timothy 2:13-14.
1. Paul could have just invoked his apostolic authority concerning how women ought to behave.
2. The event of the fall of Adam and Eve is invoked here as the basis for Paul’s admonition.
viii. Paul’s preaching of the Gospel to Athenian philosophers presupposes Adam as the father of all: “and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation,” (Acts17:26)
1. Note that the Greeks did not believe God made all man from one person.
2. They believe that their own race (Greeks) had nothing to do with others since they were far more superior.
3. Yet Acts 17 is Paul’s sermon that lays the foundation to make the Gospel intelligible and he found it important to bring up Adam as the first man of all.
ix. Adam is presuppose as historical figure in the underpinning of the Gospel.
1. Just as Christ was historical and imputed righteousness for justification so too was Adam presupposed as historical imputing sin (Romans 5:12-21).
2. Just as Christ was historical and gave us life so too was Adam presupposed as historical giving us death (1 Corinthians 15:20-58).
 Peter Enns, The Evolution of Adam, (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2012), 137.
 Peter Enns, The Evolution of Adam, (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2012), xiv.
 The following essential elements are found in Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., “Narrative”, Cracking Old Testament Codes, (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1995), 69-76.
 The discussion about the wayyiqtol is from Robert B. Chisholm Jr., From Exegesis to Exposition, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 119-120.