The Christian who examines the geological and archaeological evidence produced by the scientists of today will often encounter intellectual problems that challenge his faith. The way these humanistically programmed scholars interpret their findings makes the historical existence of Adam and Eve appear impossible. But Reformed Christians should perceive more clearly than most, that all man’s study and investigation proceeds from some foundational perspective. As Francis Schaeffer puts it, “No man can live without a world view and this bias always affects what he perceives in the physical evidence.”* Even so, some who profess to be Reformed and appear to be devout, when faced with this impressive array of “facts,” begin to entertain dangerous thoughts. They reason that since something has to be other than it appears—wouldn’t it be easier to live with a mythical Genesis than to reject the learned conclusions of our scientific age? How can all these brilliant twentieth century minds be wrong? Why not give up a sure historical knowledge of our origin and thereby avoid the ostracism and ridicule of the scientific community? Those who yield to this train of thought also claim that it is possible to radically change one‘s interpretation of the first chapters of Genesis without altering any other teachings of Scripture, especially the thrust of the redemptive message.

But it is a delusion to think that Genesis 1–3 (at face value a factual account) can be considered a parable or symbolic myth without destroying the integrity of God’s Word. Let us consider just two of the problems this approach causes.

Of all the New Testament writers, Luke is considered outstanding for his attention to historical detail and accuracy. He introduces his Gospel account by emphasizing that he investigated carefully and thoroughly and mentions the eyewitnesses he had consulted. He was highly educated, a physician with a systematic mind. How then does one deal with his genealogy in Luke 3, where Jesus‘ human ancestry is traced back to Adam, through all of Adam’s descendants who were mentioned in Genesis including Shem, Noah, Methuselah, Enoch, Enos, and Seth? Where do the mythical sons of mythical Adam end and the real people begin? And if any of Christ’s ancestors were mythical, how can we be certain that He was historical, truly human? Or if Luke just made an error here, what does that do to his credibility? It becomes evident that the Bible and what it teaches has a complicated unity and is interrelated in unexpected ways.

Perhaps most important of all, we must consider the testimony of our Lord Jesus Christ while He was on earth. As the Belgic Confession states:

We believe that Jesus Christ according to His divine nature is the only begotten Son of God . . . co-essential and co-eternal with the Father (Art. X) . . . (He) really assum(ed) the true human nature with all its infirmities, SIN EXCEPTED (emphasis mine) . . . (Art. XVIII) (and) the divine nature always remained united with the human (Art. XIX) . . . .

The above statements are essential truths of the Christian faith. And if so, is it not necessary to maintain that Christ, the Truth embodied (Jn.14:6), could never have taught or thought anything untrue or deceiving? Scripture confirms His great insight and perfect understanding in many ways: 1) Christ often read the thoughts of the Pharisees (Lk. 6:8; Matt. 22:15–22). 2) He was acutely aware of the Purpose for which He was sent to the world (Lk. 4:18–21, 43). 3) During His years of ministry, Christ was continually correcting the faulty understanding of the religious leaders and common people in regard to the teachings of the Old Testament (Jn. 10:22–39). In the light of all this can it be alleged that the Lord Jesus could have been so “time-conditioned” that He would accept myth as fact in regard to Genesis 1–3? In Matthew 19:4–6 Christ quoted from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, as one would refer to an actual occurrence, to prove that God ordained and instituted the sexual union (marriage) at creation and did not intend it to be violated by divorce. If we can say that our Lord and Saviour was mistaken, deluded, or inaccurate in even one instance, doesn’t that deny His Diety and destroy His perfection?

The only answer for such dil emmas is the sure safeguard that God Himself has mercifully provided to protect us against doubting His Word. It is amazing how, time and again, there is recorded in the Gospels (often in the very words of Christ) the testimony to the factual nature of the very parts of Scripture satan most likes to attack in order to chip away at our faith. Just a few examples include: 1) the book of Jonah (surely “just a story”—but how can storybook people testify on Judgment Day? [Lk. 11:29–32]); 2) Moses’ authorship of the Pentateuch (Lk. 5:14; 16:29–31; Jn. 5:45–47; 7:19–23); 3) the claims of Bible critics that Isaiah 40-66 was written by someone other than Isaiah –but the Apostle John quotes from the disputed section and calls it the words of Isaiah (Jn. 13:37–41; Lk. 3 & 4; Matt. 8:17; 22:17–21).

In conclusion, each Christian today must take a serious look at where one ends up a short time after putting man’s scientific knowledge above the truth of God. Let the words of Christ our King and Final Authority ring in our ears: “FOR HAD YE BELIEVED MOSES, YE WOULD HAVE BELIEVED ME; FOR HE WROTE OF ME. BUT IF YE BELIEVE NOT HIS WRITINGS, HOW SHALL YE BELIEVE MY WORDS” (Jn. 5:46, 47)?

Sandra Heynen is the wife of Gary Heynen, a part-time farmer and employee at Siouxpreme Packing Company, Sioux Center, Iowa. Mrs. Heynen is the daughter of the G. I. Williamson, pastor in the Reformed Church of New Zealand and author of study books on the Westminster Confession and the Shorter Catechism. Mrs. Heynen attended Dordt College and is the mother offour children ages 4-16. She is a very active member of Bethel Christian Reformed Church, Sioux Center, Iowa.