I was wondering if a “high minded” podcast could touch on the greater issue at play here - - instead of
disputing a broad range of topics from origins of primates and other mammalian groups to the significance of Original Sin, I think @swamidass is a logical candidate for discussing “The Theological Bottleneck”!
As we know, Joshua is focusing on building a “theological perspective” on Evolution where Creationists get to have the “special creation” of Adam and Eve accepted (or tolerated) in the same way that Science professionals don’t stir up a fuss over the issue of Jesus being “miraculously born”, or “miraculously resurrected”.
The “miracle” of just two humans being created just a valley away from a large human population, also created by God, but by Evolutionary processes, seems inconsequential if it leads to new generations of less extreme Creationists who are inclined to want to accept the mountain of evidence supporting Evolution - - as long as it doesn’t jeopardize their Christianity!
To many of us examining this particular angle, especially to me, I find there is less to dispute with a Creationist regarding this particular scenario.
In the “old days” I used to tangle over topics like “historical Adam/Eve” vs. “Original Sin” vs. the entire Christian apparatus of Redemption and Atonement. But now, if a Creationist insists on Original Sin, I say, “Sure, no problem!” You can have Original Sin if you want, or you can skip if you are like other denominations. It’s not a barrier any more.
So, instead of Romans 5 being a virtually insurmountable “bottleneck” in most of my debates with Creationists, I don’t have to wrestle with turning my audience’s mental depiction of Adam/Eve from literally 2 humans into a figurative image of “2 ideal humans”.
And from this, the discussions are usually much less heated, and we now have the time to go over new ground. A topic that is becoming increasingly more common is the one where Noah’s Flood is seen as more regional than universal…