Many Christians reject the scientific theory of evolution because they think it excludes the existence of Adam and Eve. Some scientists and theologians argue that the recent breakthrough in genetics makes a historical Adam and Eve compatible with evolution, and that this may help bridge the divide between faith and science.
The societal conflict over evolution has been going on for over 160 years. Evolutionary science is making space for Adam and Eve, in a surprise twist, according to an associate professor at the Washington University School of Medicine. The theological questions are about genealogy, not genetics. We are finding a better way forward in this paradigm shift.
In his book "The Genealogical Adam and Eve: The Surprising Science of Universal Ancestry," Swamidass argues that genetics and evolutionary theory do not conflict with the existence of Adam and Eve, universal ancestors of all humans.
The drug and the pill were not covered by the Swiss.
The story of human ancestry is only a small part of modern genetics. You only get 50 percent of your genes from your parents and 25 percent from your grandparents, which is a big discrepancy. As you go further back, you have more ancestors who contribute less and less to your DNA.
The author noted that universal genetic ancestors are rare. Population size in past generations tends to get smaller so overlap is inevitable. He believes that every person on Earth was descended from Adam and Eve.
According to the theory of evolution, Adam and Eve may still be related to apes, but God could have created them from the dust and a rib, without parents, and these two became the ancestors.
"Adam and Eve were ancestors of us all, and miraculously created without parents of their own," said Swamidass. We share common ancestors with apes, and we arise from a large population, not a single couple, according to evolution. The conflict of fact only seemed to be solved by revising Christian theological beliefs or rejecting evolution.
"Now that we know that all four of these things can be true at the same time, we know that clearing up some big scientific understandings is the right thing to do," he said. If Adam and Eve lived 6,000 years ago, they would be the ancestors of everyone by AD 1. They could have been created from the dust and a rib. We would descend from people outside the Garden who were created by a process of evolution.
The Bible Museum in Germany presents Jesus as a prophet weeks before Christmas.
The GAE model has already made waves. The BioLogos Foundation, a Christian nonprofit founded by Francis Collins that embraces the scientific theory of evolution, deleted articles that claimed genetics ruled out a historical Adam and Eve and posted articles that were in line with the model of Swamidass. Fox News Digital asked for comment from BioLogos, but they didn't reply.
The book "In quest of the Historical Adam: A Biblical and Scientific Exploration" was published in September by William Lane Craig, a Christian philosophy professor at Houston Baptist University. His book is similar to Swamidass' arguments, but he places Adam and Eve further back in history.
Anjeanette Roberts wrote in the book Reasons to Believe that the model of Swamidass provides a way for biblical interpretations.
Michael Murray, a Christian philosophy professor at Franklin and Marshall College, recently said at an evangelical conference that due to the work of Swamidass, Craig, and others, "we have arrived at the point where we can confidently affirm that the basic evolutionary story is not the threat to Christian orthodoxy
Recent findings in genetics and paleontology show that our best scientific theories and data do not rule out a historical Adam and Eve, according to Murray. He said the developments don't make Adam and Eve more or less likely, but they show that there might have been a pair that is the ancestors of all humans.
The case of the SPLC is being appealed to the Supreme Court.
The data was inconsistent with an ancestral pair, according to Murray, who noted that there was an emerging consensus among both secular scientists and scientists of faith. Recent developments have shown that an ancestral pair is not completely ruled out.
According to Nathan Lents, a secular professor of philosophy at John Jay College, recent developments have made Adam and Eve more plausible.
"I don't think there is any evidence that supports the existence of Adam and Eve in the Bible," Lents said. There have been developments in our understanding of ancestry and genetics that allow for the possibility of universal ancestors of the entire human population.
The impact of the GAE model does not involve "sole progenitorship of the human race from just two people", he noted.
Many Christians disagree with the model. 40 percent of Americans say God created them in their present form, and between 38 percent and 66 percent of White evangelical Protestants do the same, according to the Gallup.
The models of Craig and Swamidass suffer from theological problems despite their agreement with mainstream science, according to the vice president of research and apologetics at RTB. The models do not consider Adam and Eve to be the sole progenitors of humanity, Rana said, which could put key Christian doctrine in harm's way.
Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, a Christian Biologist with the young-earth creationist organization Answers in Genesis, told Fox News Digital that the definition of Adam and Eve is almost unrecognizable from a Young Earth perspective.
The Washington Post article about abortion was criticized by Christian leaders.
Jeanson's book "Traced: Human DNA's Big Surprise" uses the same developments in genetics to show that the history of mankind makes sense from a young-earth perspective.
Rana and Jeanson admitted that the GAE model may decrease the public perception of a conflict between science and religion.
Jeanson said that it may help the evolutionary community.
Rana said that the developments are good for the Church because they offer models that preserve the biblical narrative of human origins for people who are persuaded by evidence for human evolution. The GAE models do not offer anything that distinguishes them from materialistic evolutionary models, so they will have little or no impact in the scientific community.
The secular Lents noted that science and Christianity have been put against each other. Conflicts over evolution have bred distrust on both sides, like skepticism about vaccines.
"When Christians and evolutionary science find harmony and common ground, or at least a peaceful truce, we can build trust and begin to work together on matters that threaten the healthy, safety, and flourishing of us all," Lents said. I applaud the work that Christian scientists are doing to bring greater acceptance and understanding of science into their communities. We don't need to be at war with each other.
Ken Keathley, a theology professor at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, said that the efforts of Swamidass, Craig, and others have been very fruitfrul.
"One doesn't have to agree with every assertion or conclusion made by Craig, Rana, and Ross to appreciate the advances in thinking", according to Fox News Digital. The work being done by these scholars shows that there is no conflict between faith and science.
The scientific community and the conservative Christian theological community were at odds over the issue of an ancestral human pair, but thanks to the GAE models, this standoff has now been solved. Some scientists might think that the scenarios that involve belief in an ancestral pair are implausible.
Secular scientists can offer an olive branch to religious communities by making space for Adam and Eve. I'm encouraged to see that many religious leaders are eager to take the olive branch. This is good news for those who want to advance science in a fractured society.
