Creation or Evolution. Do we have to choose? Denis Alexander

This book comes brimmming with recommendations from the evangelical world. Denis Alexander is part of the Alexander family who formed the Lion Publishing company. I regard him as a liberal evangelical and much of Lion's publications though usually in stunning colour are of the same liberal position.

The book is an amazing display of erudition. He is leading light in the fields of Molecular Immunology and has worked in many leading positions in the field. The biological aspect of the book is intense and although written for non-biologists left me well behind in the dust. So how would I begin to judge the worth of such a book?

When I consider the position of Christians who hold an essentially Darwinian view of creation I have a litmus test, I try to discover what they think happened at the Fall and how it has affected the human race. Alexander wonders whether "Christians do not take more of their doctrine of the Fall from the pages of Milton's Paradise Lost than they do from the pages of sacred scripture." p256 This itself is an interesting statement in that it seems to ignore classical Christian teaching from the likes of Augustine, Tertullian and Calvin; all of whom predated Milton.

Alexander does not believe in the Fall in classical Christian terms; the notion of the human race under condemnation as a result of Adam's disobedience is underplayed and his position is revealed in his section on The Fall in Romans. He believes that Adam was a literal figure but sees him as having developed to the stage beyond other Neanderthals in that he became God-conscious. He does not hold however to the classical view that Adam's sin damaged the whole race. His position is stated plainly in "..although verse 12 (of Romans) makes it clear that spiritual death came to all by them actually sinning. Each person is responsible for his or her own sin." p 265

This the position of Charles Finney and his followers who do not believe in congenital sin but only acquired sin. In this view at the point of personal disobedience a man enters into Adam's condition and thus shares with him his condemnation. John Wesley famously declared that a man who did not hold to 'original sin' was still a half-heathen. The Finney view does not do justice to Paul's statement... For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, Rom 5:16 NKJV and Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation... Rom 5:18a NKJV These verses seem to make a clear statement that Adam's sin (and not Eve's) had a dynamic effect on the whole race.

It would be unfair to condemn a book on this single point perhaps but for conservative evangelicals who subscribe broadly to classical definitions of 'original sin' it does constitute a fatal flaw in Alexander's theology. For those better able to judge the biological evidence it a well worth reading but none of Alexander's suggested solutions give any adequate explanation of what it means to be 'in Adam'; a theme which has vital consequences when we examine the parallel phrase of 'in Christ'. On this point alone Alexander's thesis fails biblically.