Second, so… are you contending scientists should drive our theology? What if some well-qualified scientists disagree with other well-qualified scientists as in the creation.com link? Do we just choose which group we prefer to believe or the ones that support our presuppositions? Who then is the final arbiter? Science or the holy Scripture? The god of reason or the God of the Bible?

Believe what you will, sir. We all are free to make our own choices. I personally will side with the eye-witness and historical narrative of the historicity of Adam and Eve and creation account of Scripture, which science does in fact support.

As indicated by the quotations I provided above, Calvin, Luther and Melanchton believed in the authority of Holy Scripture and used it to dogmatically defend their preaching about a geocentric earth; yet scientists proved them wrong.

Furthermore, the error was widespread, as indicated by the 1615 trial of Galileo by the Roman Catholic Church, who like the Reformers, also held a high view of Holy Scripture.

http://creation.com/historical-adam-biologos

You are correct, Jeff. It is basically an authority of Scripture issue.

Perhaps, too, we should quote Reformed theologians more in touch with today’s reality, rather than Benjamin B. Warfield who died in 1921 and knew nothing of DNA, sequencing, extinct hominids who bred with Homo sapiens, and unique genes shared with chimpanzees but not with other primates.

Lest we forget, John Calvin and other Reformed theologians used “inspired, inerrant, infallible Scripture” to preach a geocentric universe, with an immobile earth, about which the firmament of heaven with sun, moon and stars attached revolves, and above which waters are reserved for judgment.

Permit me to quote:

John Calvin: “Those who assert that ‘the earth moves and turns’…[are] motivated by ‘a spirit of bitterness, contradiction, and faultfinding;’ possessed by the devil, they aimed ‘to pervert the order of nature.'” (Sermon no. 8 on 1st Corinthians);

Martin Luther: “People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool [or ‘man’] wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth.” (Table Talk);

Philipp Melanchton: “The eyes are witnesses that the heavens revolve in the space of twenty-four hours. But certain men, either from the love of novelty, or to make a display of ingenuity, have concluded that the earth moves; and they maintain that neither the [stars] nor the sun revolves…Now, it is a want of honesty and decency to assert such notions publicly, and the example is pernicious. It is the part of a good mind to accept the truth as revealed by God and to acquiesce in it.”

Perhaps we should take note that ‘natural revelation’ as discerned by scientists in a ‘fallen state’ has in the past and even continues to force theologians of ‘special revelation’ to recant.

Almost on a daily basis geneticists are discovering evidence that the genome of modern Homo sapiens is a mixture of hominids now extinct, a mixture that varies by nationality. In short, there was no one Adam of modern humans in the biblical sense. Reformed theologians are desperately trying to deny this, but the handwriting is already on the wall. N.T. Wright in response to the emerging scientific evidence is simply attempting to re-postulate a biblical view, much the same as had to be done for the errors of John Calvin, etal.

Our first instinct always seems to be to criticize any point of view contrary to our tradition. Rather than jump to open criticism, perhaps we need to pause, so that when we too must re-postulate, we have left ourselves with some options not previously attacked.

Thank you for your review. The last paragraph should be read by every christian.