What Is the Distinction Between the Literary and the Historical Adam?

Dr. Sean McDowell asks Dr. Craig to clarify differences and give examples of the literary and historical Adams.

DR. SEAN MCDOWELL: Make a distinction for us between what you call the literary and the historical Adam.

DR. CRAIG: This is a distinction which is widely made among New Testament scholars when it comes to dealing with how the New Testament treats figures in literature that the New Testament authors cite. So, for example, when they talk about Moses – is this the Moses that actually lived, or is it the Moses as described in the Pentateuch? When they talk about Adam – is this the actual historical Adam, or is this just the Adam of the story? And you cannot assume too quickly that the literary figure is the same as the historical figure. We all know examples in our own day where we will say things like “Just as Robinson Crusoe had his man Friday to help him, so I have an assistant who helps me in my research.” And that doesn't commit me to the historicity of Robinson Crusoe. It's just a reference to this literary figure. One of the contributions that my book makes that I'll be very, very interested to see how people react to is I show that the New Testament authors cite mythological and fabulous figures from Jewish folklore and Greek mythology that I think none of us want to be committed to historically. These would be prime examples of where the New Testament authors are using these literary figures to illustrate Christian doctrines and truths but they don't require us to believe in the historicity of those figures any more than my reference to Robinson Crusoe requires us to believe in the historicity of that man. In some cases it's not simply that we can't assume that it's historical because it's cited by a New Testament author, but in some cases the stories, again, are so fantastic I think we can say, “No, this is plausibly not historical.”

DR. SEAN MCDOWELL: So we can say it's not historical, but in 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 5 you say it's also not just literary, and we have reason to believe it is historical. Now, we could parse these passages in great death, but just tell us as simply as possible why you think those passages are best interpreted as requiring a historical Adam.

DR. CRAIG: Very simply because a literary figure cannot have effects outside of the literature in which that figure appears. The person Hamlet in the play by Shakespeare was supposed to be a Danish prince who actually lived, but there was no such person as Hamlet. So Hamlet can't have any sort of effects outside the play. But what Paul asserts about Adam is that through Adam sin came into the world. And because of Adam's sin, all men died and sin reigned from Adam to Moses – a historical period of time. And we're still dealing with it today, says Paul. So it seems to me that because of the extra-literary effects of this figure this figure cannot be purely literary but must be historical.