User:Colin/PQRC 1
References linked by me, November 2023. This was the first of our "Reconciliation Challenge" topics. — BP
Acts 17/26 shows clearly that all nations of men arose from one source, and it is clear from a careful reading of Genesis 1-3 who that one was – Adam. This has Biblical evidence in support, viz., Luke 3/38 (“… the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God”); 1Chronicles 1/1 (“Adam, Sheth, Enosh,…Noah”); and Jude 14 (“And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam…”). To interpret this verse as referring to other evolved ancestral humans or hominid-derived humans is reading into the text and should not be used to demonstrate that the Bible allows for others than Adam as the sole progenitor of the human race. Other Scriptures confirm the plain fact that Adam is the first of the human race, for example, Romans 5/12; 1 Tim 2/13; 1 Corinthians 15/45.
Paul is not capitulating to Greek religious notions of the day nor is he appropriating Greek culture into his arguments. Rather Paul was delivering his speech in answer to the question of v19 - “May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?” They believed he was a herald preaching “strange gods” (v18 - Greek: ‘daimonion’ which here refers to the Greek idea of intermediary gods who were considered by them to be deified humans). In other words, Paul’s speech had to defend the Truth concerning Jesus and the resurrection (v18).
Hence his remarks had to cover who Jesus was (the doctrine of God and His Son) and the purpose of resurrection from the dead. The points he raised, although his audience was unaware of this, were heavily founded on OT language. His remarks recorded in verses 24-31 draw copiously from the Old Testament, not to Greek cultural ideas.[see at Acts 17/26 - Paul's Areopagus message in Athens and its direct Old Testament basis]. His speech introduces the origin of all nations (v24) and with the events of creation in mind, he explains that God ‘made’ the world and .all things therein (v24) and He ‘made’ out of one (blood) all nations. He used the same Greek word for ‘made’ to describe both events. They are references to God’s creative activity. Verse 29 “we (Paul as a Jew and his Gentile audience) are the offspring of God” is also a reference to the creation record where Adam was made in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1/26). It cannot refer to a secondary race of evolved beings derived from lower life-forms and could not be considered the offspring of God. When we see the parallels between what Paul is saying in Acts 17 and other parts of scripture, especially Genesis, it’s not hard to conclude that he has nothing but scripture in mind. Even his reference to the sentiments of Greek poets is to find agreement with a scriptural principle that we are God’s offspring (‘Our Father which art in heaven’) for we would not exist without Him.
If the omission of the word “blood” is accepted as not in the original Greek text, then we need to establish what “made of one” means. If it means “one race” or “one mankind” then the verse would read “He hath made of one the races of all nations.” But for Paul to say this would involve him making a lie, because it would mean two or more races (Adam’s and the evolving humans) are the foundation of “all nations.” If there were two races of men, Paul would have said “God made of several races all nations.” But he didn’t because his theology is firmly based on the Old Testament where we read of Adam being the only progenitor of mankind. Science becomes bad science where it contradicts what God, who cannot lie (Titus 1/13), says in His word. Conflict with scientific understandings is not something we should be afraid of. Understandings have come and gone over time, as new replaces old, but the “word of the Lord abides forever” 1 Peter 1/25. Science is not an accurate yardstick by which we are required to reconcile God’s word with it where the particular science is at variance with it.
It does no credit to God’s inspired word in the creation account to misapply the Hebrew word for “man” to mean “humankind” to the exclusion of the one man, Adam. It makes no sense, when the tenor of God’s word demonstrates Adam was the first man of the human race, and that God formed Eve from Adam’s side after there was found no help meet for him among the beasts of the field that the angels brought before him. Jesus accepted the Genesis teaching that God first made Adam and Eve in the beginning, and instituted marriage on the basis of that union (Mark 10/6-9), whereby Eve became the mother of all living (Gen 3/20 ).
I therefore conclude I cannot accept an EC or kindred interpretation of this verse.
