Hi. I accept Adam and Eve as a literal first couple because to me it is obvious scripture teaches that, the Church teaches that and salvation history and the work of Christ are both tied to it. I agree with you that these are not easy to dismiss. I take a different approach that I think is more consistent with the evidence (it’s almost miraculous in how good it is).
I wrote an article https://www.vincentsapone.com/articles/reconcilinggenesis.pdf It was discussed on the forum here:
How to Reconcile Adam and Eve and Noah’s Flood with Modern Science
I find many modern Christians under appreciate the soul in these discussions or worse yet, erroneously and disastrously dismiss the concept altogether. Unfortunately, many modern Christians are captives to materialism. In my view, Adam and Eve were the first ensouled humans placed into a special sacred space by God. Here is a lengthy excerpt of the resolution:
The Reconciliation.
Keep in mind that I do not claim to be able to prove everything I mention below. This is an exercise in showing how we can harmonize a specific interpretation of scripture with what we know from science. It assumes that both provide true descriptions of reality and works out a compatible solution from there. I do not think it is far-fetched as it does not revise any doctrine but changes how we understand the facts leading to that doctrine. James Chastek from the Just Thomism blog notes, “The revision that is called for is not a revision in doctrine but a move from the simplest set of facts congruent with a doctrine to a less simple set of facts congruent with the same doctrine.” With that caveat out of the way, here is the story of humanity’s genesis.
Human evolution is said to have occurred over millions of years as our apelike ancestors evolved into anatomical modern humans known as homo sapiens. Homo means humanand sapien means wise. Some key traits of this evolution involved bipedalism, increasing brain size and the use of tools. There are a number of species that can be classified as biological humans (e.g. homo erectus) but anatomically modern humans seemed to have originated in Africa around 300,000 years ago. It is my belief from careful metaphysical arguments that abstract thought is not reducible solely to the material world. Our physical brains are necessary but not sufficient alone to explain abstract thought. In other words, the rational soul could not be a product of evolution. That God elevates a human animal into a full theological human created in his image with a rational soul is a key component of my view.
At some point during the process of human evolution, in the fullness of time, God chose two biological humans and supernaturally endowed them with souls. This makes them not simply animals or biological humans, but full metaphysical humans capable of abstract thought. These two individuals are the first two true metaphysical humans that are made in
the image of God (imagio dei). When creating their souls, God also gives them preternatural gifts, access to him their natures otherwise do not permit and if these two individuals do not sin, they would not taste death. Neither would their offspring who would be born in that same state of grace. Though I do not accept a literal garden story, this belief draws on the theme of a special garden with a tree of life, and God’s covenant with Adam. Walton considers the garden a “sacred space”:
“When we understand the garden as sacred space and see that the presence of God (and all that he has to offer) is the main point, we can begin to comprehend that the account in Genesis 2 is not essentially about material human origins. God reveals to Adam that he (Adam) is mortal, but then sets up sacred space (the garden) where relationship to God can bring the remedy, life. God puts Adam into this sacred space, commissioned to serve there.” – The Lost World of Adam and Eve
This view provides a portrait consistent with Paul’s punctiliar understanding of sin and death as stemming from one man. In the narrative, Adam and Eve are cut off from the tree of life which I take as indicting the story saw them as living forever otherwise. Since God supernaturally creates each human soul, we can easily imagine that after choosing Adam and Eve, God continued creating souls for all their children and children’s children. This makes Adam and Eve not the genetic ancestor of all full metaphysical humans alive today, but the genealogical ancestor of all full metaphysical humans alive today.
This alleviates the genetic difficulties, and it also allows us to affirm that while biological death was a natural part of life since it first formed, death came into the world for metaphysical humans as a result of sin. The original humans were aware of death but had access to life. For those of us who think scripture teaches original sin, we do not need to view it as a positive punishment God inflicts on us so much as a privation of the gifts bestowed to the first couple. Since Adam and Eve disobeyed God and were banished from
Eden (Sacred Space) as the story goes, we lose access to the preternatural gifts God granted them. This is similar to a wealthy couple squandering away their money. Their children will now grow up lacking access to the wealth that otherwise would have been theirs had their parents not screwed up.
Hope this helps.
These scholars often reconstruct a palatable
view that they can live by, not what ancient people actually believed. As an example, that death came into the world for humans via a literal Adam is a pretty widely held view. I mean, there are Genealogies tracing back to Adam. How much more obvious can one get? But you are right in that scholars have done well in expanding our understanding of Genesis 1 (forming and filling, use of 7s) and the Garden as a sacred space. How the accounts rearrange Mesopotamian furniture is quite informative and tells us a significant portion of the details are not intended literally. But at the same time, ancient audiences certainly accepted as literal many of the details Christians today are quick to reject while sitting in ivory towers constructed on the sands of modern literary criticism.
Vinnie