I've learned over the years of scouring arguments in the philosophy of religion that no proof for or against God is decisive, though, of course, some are better than others. Their best service is to offer plausibility to faith.
My previous post highlighted mere Christians like C. S Lewis (and I've written more on CSL here), who understood Adam and Eve as typological (or paradigmatic), but not historical. I'll call this Position A. Having read the comment section on that post, I realize many reject this position. And some vehemently!
Can you be what C. S. Lewis described as a "mere Christian" and believe in human evolution? Put another way: Christians believe that Adam is an archetype of all humankind and a type of Christ--thus Adam is "typological"--but does he also have to be historical?
Assistant Medical Professor at Stanford University and widow of neurosurgeon/author Paul Kalanithi, Lucy Kalanithi, discusses the ways in which her husband's death and her subsequent grief have surprised her most.