In a recent article written for the scholarly journal Religions, geologist Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute presents a very helpful overview of eight models proposed by scientists and scholars that seek to reconcile science and faith on the question of human origins. These eight models are as follows:
(1) The Theistic Evolution/Evolutionary Creationism model: Humans beings are the descendants of an ancient primate ancestor that we share with living apes. God may have been involved in some way in the overall process of evolution, but human beings were not directly created by Him. Adam and Eve were not real persons.
(2) The Homo Divinus Model: Humans evolved from ape-like ancestors as is asserted in standard evolutionary theory, but at some point in the past, God chose a particular human being (or beings) to be designated as "made in the image of God."
(3) The Genealogical Adam and Eve Model: Human beings, in general, evolved from ancient primates. However, God also directly created a human pair, Adam and Eve, whose descendants eventually interbred with those humans whose ancestors had evolved.
(4) The Homo Heidelbergensis Model: Adam and Eve were real persons who belonged to the hominid species Homo heidelbergensis, members of which lived around 750,000 years ago.
(5) The Unique Origins Design Model: Human beings are descended from a single pair of human beings who did not share a common ancestry with apes and who lived at least 500,000 years ago.
(6) The Old Earth Creationist Model: While the earth itself is billions of years old, human beings only came into existence about 100,000 years ago and were directly created by God.
(7) The Young Earth Creationist Model: The earth is only a few thousand years old and human beings are descended from a single created pair, Adam and Eve, who lived only a few thousand years ago.
(8) The Old Earth/Recent Humans Model: The earth itself is billions of years old, but God created the first humans, Adam and Eve, only about 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.
(Note that these models are held by scientists or scholars in the evangelical Protestant tradition, but may be advocated by those in other Christian traditions as well.)
In his article, Luskin explains each of these models in some detail and then discusses the strengths and weaknesses of each model. He also compares the models in terms of how they accommodate orthodox Christian beliefs about Adam and Eve, mainstream scientific ideas about human origins, and "other important scientific points." He does not indicate which model he favors, but in a blogpost at evolutionnews.org which links to the article, he states:
At present, I am somewhere between the unique origins design model and the classical old earth creationist model. But I also like elements of the Homo heidelbergensis model--without the evolutionary aspects.
However, Luskin also notes that the point of the Religions article was "not to promote one particular model, but rather to help readers evaluate the similarities and differences between models so they can decide which one they think is the strongest."
In short, for those Christians struggling with such questions as the extent to which believers should accept Darwinist theory or the historicity of Adam and Eve, there are, it would appear, a multiplicity of options (for the record, I personally lean towards the Old Earth Model). It is not simply a matter of deciding between "science" and "faith." However, unfortunately, as the late Timothy Keller pointed out in his book The Reason for God, "representatives of...different views often imply that their approach is the One True Christian Position..." (p. 97). To me, this is not a healthy attitude. Given that on this side of Heaven we cannot know with absolute certainty which model is correct, it would be better to be charitable towards those fellow believers who hold views about evolution and creation that differ from ours, as long as their fundamental theological beliefs are orthodox. We certainly have the right to argue for the view that makes most sense to us, but a measure of humility is always needed, for, as the Apostle Paul said in a different context, "now we see through a glass, darkly" (I Corinthians 13:12, King James Version).
Image of Casey Luskin from the Discovery Institute