None of that has anything to do with GAE, which you still seem not to understand.
Yes. And one of the premises of GAE is that Adam and Eve existed sometime before the individual who was the MRCA of everyone who was alive 2000 years ago, and they were among the many people who would also have been common ancestors of everyone alive then. IIRC, there is no specification that they were alive 6000 years or any other defined period of time prior to that.
1 Like
If you can read Lentz’s reaction to GAE, and can agree with what he says, then you can accept that if Miracles might happen, then 2 miraculous de novo creations (Adam & Eve) 6000 years ago - - to then interbreed with pre-Adamite humanity outside of “a garden” - - cannot be denied as one of the related possibilities.
Brooks
Sure. And if I agree with Last Thursdayism, I can accept that the universe is, in reality, just over a week old, and was supernaturally created last Thursday with the appearance of being over 14 billion years old.
What is your point?
(Also, does @swamidass specify that they would have been created 6000 years ago, specifically? Not to my recollection.)
I have not asked you to agree about Last Thursdayism. So I’m guessing you are lumping GAE into that same nonsense category. When Lentz wrote his long article about GAE, he gave a special place to the GAE material … not because he believed it, but because he believed it earned a certain respect.
As far as your question about @swamidass and his specific views, I guess you never watched the video of his good discussion with William Lane Craig years ago:
Youtube scores this as one of PS.org’s top 3 videos!
WL Craig and Joshua early on conclude that the difference between their two views was WL Craig was more interested in Adam and Eve being created more than 700,000 years ago (with virtually no pre-Adamites around), while Joshua believed in a large population of pre-Adamites (emerging from over millions of years of primate evolution) with Adam/Eve being created as recently as 6000 years ago. If pressed, I think Joshua would be happy to slide that time frame around from 6,000 to 12,000 (because the exact time frame is less important in the GAE scenario).
Thoughts, @Faizal_Ali ?
Brooks
So my recollection was correct. He does not specify that Adam and Eve existed 6000 years ago.
No, I have no other thoughts.
Why would it matter if @swamidass doesn’t see any evidence that would suggest something more specific than a range from 6,000 to 12,000 years?
Brooks
I am not sure if Professor Lents believes in miracles but Nathan has a new book coming out. All at Peaceful Science should pre-order a copy
It wouldn’t.
The Genesis story is clearly set in the agricultural era so GAE must be dropped into the Middle East something after agriculture and animal domestication has occurred. 12,000 years ago seems too early and 6000 years ago seems too late. Since GAE is a mythological story on a mythological story, you can just pick a place and time that makes your audience more persuadable.
There is no specification that GAE existed at all, only that science cannot rule out the possibility.
I grant that Science makes it unlikely as a scientific prospect, but then it’s never intended to be a scientific prospect. That line of argument misses the point; GAE is for people who’s faith requires A&E to have existed.
I’m not sure Last Thursday-ism applies either; there is no divine intent to deceive. Whether or not GAE actually existed is a possibility in our existing reality that cannot be ruled out by the scientific means available to us.
1 Like
Last Thursday-ism does not apply, only because (AFAIK) there are no major world religions based on it. If there was, and Joshua belonged to it, then he could make an argument similar to GAE to placate members of his faith who reject science.
It would apply whether or not there were religions, but it would be less likely for the idea to occur to anyone. 
1 Like