How Do Neanderthals Fit in With the Historical Adam and Eve?

Joshua Lewis and Michael Rowntree of Remnant Radio interview Dr. Craig on his recent deep dive into Genesis and the historical Adam. Are science and the Bible at odds? Were Neanderthals part of the human race, and if so, what implications might this have for a historical Adam and Eve?

For the entirety of the discussion and Q&A time watch here:

We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:

[williammunny]

*_Isaiah 55.6 Seek the Lord while He may be found, Call upon Him while He is near. 7 Let the wicked forsake his way, And the unrighteous man his thoughts; Let him return to the Lord, And He will have mercy on him; And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon._*
_Only Jesus Christ saves. Repent and be saved. Jesus Christ loves you. God bless you, and peace be upon you and your family in the name of Jesus Christ._

[DennisNedryisStillAlive]

Please keep the comments open on all of your videos. It’s good to let people talk about stuff like this.

[barttyler]

is it possible that the historical Adam and Eve may have looked different than current humans? What about the Nephilim mentioned in Genesis? Could they correspond to some of these larger skull like human skeletons that they find?

[grapeape]

I love three minute videos that try to answer super complex issues.

[tryhardf]

Props to the channel for letting the comment section be open on this subject.

[brettbarager]

In my opinion, the Bible is more about "why" than "how." To me, it does not matter if God created the universe 6000 years ago (a perspective based on faulty math) or 15 billion years ago . . . He is still a powerful God. It does not matter if creation was 6 literal days (as we understand and define "days") or if God did everything in epochs/phases. He still did everything. What really matters, and what the Bible is clear on, is "why" God created: for the purpose of RELATIONSHIP with Him. THAT is what matters. Just like how Yeshua told the Pharisees that they were focused so much on the letter of the Law rather than on the spirit of the Law, Evangelicals are too focused on a literal interpretation to explain how when God wants us to focus on why (RELATIONSHIP!!). Get over it! Geeze.

[nomen]

I think people should stop trying to answer every question. Many are very useless. Science or whatever must not fit in scripture so don't force it. Let God be true and every man a liar. Don't idolize your knowledge.

[אריק-צר]

I'm an old earth creationist with a healthy interest in biblical Hebrew. After carefully considering the positions of scholars like Dr Walter Kaiser and scientists like Hugh Ross and Fazale Rana I accept that a day age understanding of Genesis chapter 1 is acceptable theologically. Furthermore God exists outside of time and is not bound by it. I believe when all of the information is in that scientific observations and the biblical record will harmonize. I also accept that we don't yet have all of the information and perspective. I do not doubt God, the Bible, or Jesus Christ nor do I doubt the natural record that He brought into being on His own time scale.

[trevorstieger]

200 years ago no one would have thought of this theory. Imagine what the next 200 years will bring. Truth maybe...

[thapelomaraisane]

Thumbnail is a bit strange. The San are anatomically modern humans. Heck they still inhabit some areas of the Kalahari desert.

[Didapery]

I have a genuine question because I am a bit confused: Cant we trace the lineage from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Jesus, and then to modern times? and find this to be 5-6 thousand years ago? so if adam and eve were the common ancestors for both Homo sapiens and Neanderthals this would make them have lived over 500, 000 years ago like Dr Craig said. How does this reconcile with the current biblical lineage we have? If anyone has an answer I would love to hear it!

[hunter_w]

I'd be interested to hear about species like Homo Erectus who are earlier on the human evolution chain.

[PortmanRd]

We'll done that man. I can quite easily accept this hypothesis, but I'll never accept a 6, 000 year old planet.

[techemically]

If man's sin brought death into the world (like Genesis clearly claims), then how can you believe in millions of years of evolution (and death) prior to man's sin? I love your work Dr. Craig; but this is a non-negotiable point.

[pureone]

Why are there KhoiSan people in the thumbnail? Are you trying to equate them to Neanderthals?

[AlexGiacoman]

How do you get hundreds of thousands of years if human race, when the genealogy of Adam to Jesus is on the Bible no where near that timeline you gave.. do you not believe in the genealogy of Jesus?

[GodsGirl]

creation started about 6, 000 years ago, so i find it hard to believe anyhting before that has existed. i'm basing my argument on the Berisheet prophecy, which tells the end from the very beginning of the Hebrew bible. it's basically a God-ordained timeline.

[Shadowman]

They don't fit with adam & eve - that's why the whole creation story completely falls apart and is ultimately debunked. 🤷‍♂️

[PcHabitat]

Where do you place Home Erectus in the Adam and Eve genealogy?

[ΠατέραςΙώβΡασοφόρος]

I would like to hear Dr Craig’s explanation as to how and why evolutionary theory over millions and millions of years of death and dying and disease does not sever the Biblical and clearly defined direct relationship of the sin of Adam and Eve as the cause of all the sin and death and dying and disease in the world. This direct relationship it seems to me defines the entire Soteriology of Saint Paul and in that, the entire rationale for the cross and the blood of Christ and the resurrection of the body of Christ without which we cannot be saved. Unless you can provide a good explanation that can unite things that seem to totally disagree then I have to declare that what Dr. Craig is teaching is nothing short of heresy.