Skip to content
- Theistic evolution
- Computational biologist Joshua Swamidass’ recent book, The Genealogical Adam and Eve: The Surprising Science of Universal Ancestry1, argues that when we think about ancestry genealogically rather than genetically, it is possible that all humans existing by the time of Jesus are descended from a pair existing only a few thousand years before. He also makes the case that this couple could have been created de novo2.
- therefore, there may have been an Adam and Eve in recent times
- if they were created de novo then they would not have had parents
- If they were chosen by God from an existing population then they would have had parents who were not created in God’s image.
- The question can be phrased as, “If humans gradually evolved from non-human ancestors, when did they become image bearers of God?”
- Literal-Historical Approach: Special Creation of Adam and Eve
- This view holds that God created Adam and Eve directly and uniquely, as described in Genesis 1–2.
- Adam and Eve were the first true humans, and the first to bear God’s image.
- Any hominid-like beings before or around them were not truly human, and therefore not image-bearers.
- No transitional parents: Either Adam and Eve had no biological parents, or God intervened supernaturally at their creation.
- Supporters: Traditional Young Earth and many Old Earth Creationists.
- Theological Threshold View (Image Given at a Moment in Time)
- At some point during human evolution, God conferred His image on a pair (or community) of evolving hominins.
- Their parents or predecessors were biologically similar, but not spiritual or moral beings.
- This marks a kind of spiritual threshold event, not visible biologically but real in God’s eyes.
- Supporters: Some Theistic Evolutionists (e.g., Denis Alexander, Francis Collins)
- Analogy: Just as a child suddenly becomes legally an adult at age 18, there may be a point where early humans suddenly became moral and spiritual agents.
- Gradualist or Functional View
- Some theologians (e.g., N.T. Wright, John Walton) argue that “image of God” is a vocation, not a physical or even spiritual quality.
- In this view, God gradually called humans into relationship with Him and into a role as His representatives on Earth.
- There may not be a sharp dividing line—imago Dei emerges as humans grow in moral, relational, and spiritual capacity.
- Implication: There’s no awkward moment where someone’s parents weren’t image-bearers; instead, the whole community was gradually drawn into that role.
- The Corporate or Covenantal View
- This view holds that being made in the image of God was not originally about individual biology, but about being chosen for a special relationship with God.
- Like how Israel is later chosen as God’s people, Adam (and perhaps his group) was elected to be a representative of humanity.
- Implication: Their ancestors weren’t image-bearers because the image is about divine relationship and role, not physical form.