作者：KEVIN DEYOUNG 译者：骆鸿铭
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2012/02/07/reasons-to-believe-in-a-historical-adam/
最近几年，有几位自称福音派的人士，或与福音派机构有关的人士，在质疑亚当和夏娃的历史性。他们说，有鉴于基因的研究，我们不再能相信整个人类是一个被称为亚当的人的后裔。
In
recent years, several self-proclaimed evangelicals, or those associated with
evangelical institutions, have called into question the historicity of Adam and
Eve. It is said that because of genomic research we can no longer believe in a
first man called Adam from whom the entire human race has descended.
在本文的末了，我会列出一些处理这个问题的科学方面的书，但最重要的问题是圣经到底是怎么教导的。我不打算很详尽而完全地回答这个问题，只是列出十个理由，看为什么我们应该要相信亚当的确是一个历史上的人物，是第一个人类。I’ll point to some books at the end which deal
with the science end of the question, but the most important question is what
does the Bible teach. Without detailing a complete answer to that question, let
me suggest ten reasons why we should believe that Adam was a true historical
person and the first human being.
1. 圣经在历史和神学之间并不是割裂的。当然，创世记不是一本历史书，也不是一个科学的教科书，但这和说我们应该把神学的麦子和历史的糟糠分开，是南辕北辙的。这种分歧来自启蒙运动的成分要远大于来自圣经。1. The Bible does
not put an artificial wedge between history and theology. Of course, Genesis is
not a history textbook or a science textbook, but that is far from saying we
ought to separate the theological wheat from the historical chaff. Such a
division owes to the Enlightenment more than the Bible.
2. 创世的圣经历史是为了取代其他古代的创世故事，而不是为了模仿它们。摩西要向神的百姓表明，“什么才是事情的真相”。摩西五经充满了与异教文化妥协的警告。那么，如果创世记是以其他近东文化中关于创世的神话记载（mythical account）来开始的，就是很奇怪的。2. The biblical story of
creation is meant to supplant other ancient creation stories more than imitate
them. Moses wants to show God’s people “this is how things really happened.”
The Pentateuch is full of warnings against compromise with the pagan culture.
It would be surprising, then, for Genesis to start with one more mythical
account of creation like the rest of the ANE.
3. 创世记开头的篇章有其风格的特色，但是没有迹象显明它们是诗歌。例如，比较创世记第一章和诗篇104篇，你会看到经文本身有多大的差别。称创世记是诗歌，是完全不正确的。即使它是诗歌，谁能说诗歌就一定不是历史的事实？3. The opening
chapters of Genesis are stylized, but they show no signs of being poetry.
Compare Genesis 1 with Psalm 104, for example, and you’ll see how different these texts are. It’s simply not
accurate to call Genesis poetry. And even if it were, who says poetry has to be
less historically accurate?
4. 从创世记第二章的亚当到创世记12章的亚伯拉罕，是一个无缝的连续。我们不能把创世记1-11章撇在一旁，说它是“前历史”（prehistory），认为它不像我们一般所理解的历史一样真实。摩西刻意地把亚伯兰和他先前的历史连在一起，一直连到伊甸园的亚当和夏娃。4. There is a
seamless strand of history from Adam in Genesis 2 to Abraham in Genesis 12. You
can’t set Genesis 1-11
aside as prehistory, not in the sense of being less than historically true as
we normally understand those terms. Moses deliberately connects Abram with all
the history that comes before him, all the way back to Adam and Eve in the
garden.
5. 历代志上和路加福音第三章把亚当视为是历史的人物。5. The genealogies
in 1 Chronicles 1 and Luke 3 treat Adam as historical.
6. 保罗相信亚当是历史人物（罗马书5：12-21；林前15：21-22，45-49）。即使是一些修正主义者也诚实地承认这点；他们只是坚持说保罗（和路加）是错的。6. Paul believed in
a historical Adam (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:21-22, 45-49). Even some
revisionists are honest enough to admit this; they simply maintain that Paul
(and Luke) were wrong.
7. 圣经的诠释历史指向亚当的历史性。第二圣殿时期的犹太文学肯定亚当的历史性。教会的诠释历史也如此认定。7. The weight of
the history of interpretation points to the historicity of Adam. The literature
of second temple Judaism affirmed an historical Adam. The history of the church’s interpretation also assumes it.
8. 如果不是一位共同的祖先，我们就没有坚实的基础相信所有的人类，不管他们的种族如何，都有同一个本质，都继承了相同的、尊贵的，神的形象，都有同样的罪的问题，而我们之间虽然有差异，但都属于同一个家族，来自同一个父母。8. Without a common
descent we lose any firm basis for believing that all people regardless of race
or ethnicity have the same nature, the same inherent dignity, the same image of
God, the same sin problem, and that despite our divisions we are all part of
the same family coming from the same parents.
9. 如果亚当不是历史的人物，保罗的原罪和原咎的教义，就是支离破碎的。9. Without a
historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of
original sin and guilt does not hold together.
10. 如果亚当不是历史的人物，保罗的第二个亚当的教义也无法成立。10. Without a
historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of the
second Adam does not hold together.
基督徒对地球的年龄可以有歧义，但亚当是否存在，是一个福音的议题。Tim Keller说的很对：Christians may disagree on the
age of the earth, but whether Adam ever existed is a gospel issue. Tim Keller
is right:
[保罗]很确定地想要教导我们，亚当和夏娃是真实的历史人物。当圣经作者明显要你按照字面来读圣经，你却拒绝这样做，你就背离了教会传统对于圣经权威的理解……如果亚当不存在，保罗的整个论述——罪和恩典是按照圣约来运作的——就垮台了。你不能说“保罗是属于他那个时代的人”，但是我们可以接受他关于亚当的基本教导。如果你不相信他所相信的关于亚当的事，你就是在否定保罗核心的教导。（Christianity Today
June 2011）[Paul] most
definitely wanted to teach us that Adam and Eve were real historical figures.
When you refuse to take a biblical author literally when he clearly wants you
to do so, you have moved away from the traditional understanding of the
biblical authority. . . .If Adam doesn’t exist, Paul’s whole argument—that both
sin and grace work ‘covenantally’—falls apart. You can’t say that ‘Paul was a
man of his time’ but we can accept his basic teaching about Adam. If you don’t
believe what he believes about Adam, you are denying the core of Paul’s
teaching. (Christianity Today June 2011)
If
you want to read more about the historical Adam debate, check out Did Adam and
Eve Really Exist? by C. John Collins.
For
more on the relationship between faith and science, you may want to look at one
of the following:
· John C. Lennox, God’s
Undertake: Has Science Buried God?
· Should Christians Embrace
Evolution: Biblical and Scientific Responses, edited by Norman C. Nevin
· God and Evolution, edited by
Jay Richards
· Vern S. Poythress, Redeeming
Science: A God-Centered Approach
· C. John Collins, Science and
Faith: Friend or Foes
诚之按：另外有几篇博文可以参考
Did
They Really Exist? A Biblical and Scientific Defence of Adam and Eve
Di
Adam and Eve Really Exist? By C. John Collins. Crossway Books, 2011.
Reviewed
by Fred G. Zaspel