In response to some articles posted by Rana on Facebook regarding common descent, I replied:
"As to explaining and understanding the physical origins of humanity, I see no problem with the pattern of common descent. It’s the transition from a kind of “creaturely” pre-human to the full on sentiency and moral capacity of “imago Dei” humans that begs the question as to origins. That such was an act of endowment by God, is likely only marginally discoverable, if at all, in merely examining the physical fossils. Instead, we should look to forensically evaluate the implements of culture --artifacts made by the kind of humanity whose capacity for abstract or symbolic thought, language skills and drive for a more social and spiritual existence --for which we could discover the paleoanthropological evidence. This is exactly the kind of transition noted in Genesis 1:26 through 1:27 and forward, and the Hebrew language used there conveys absolutely no information about how long it took --only that God accomplished this completely novel work in humanity.
Now, whether you conceive of that marvel as taking place at Adam’s introduction to the story, or whether you believe as I, that Adam’s story doesn’t even begin until chapter one is closed out, on day seven --in either case, Adam is our universal geneaological ancestor by the time of the New Testament writings, and the effects of the fall come to characterize all of humanity as a result. There’s no need, in my view, to refute common descent; only to challenge it’s adequacy to explain ALL the facts of human existence. Matter is NOT all that matters. As a monthly supporter of RTB, I appreciate the ministry here!
You’re all invited to further sort out the evidence at the conversation going on at Peaceful Science, where Dr. S Joshua Swamidass scientifically defends the historicity of a geneaological Adam. See https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/"
There is another couple of potential junctures where Adam and Eve fit in, especially if we read the account as revealing that their story doesn’t even begin until the seventh “yom,” well after the creation and introduction of humans made in God’s image in the transition noted in Genesis 1:26-27. They need only to be the first humans who transgressed a “Thou shalt not” by God (thou shalt not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) in order to fit the developing story. That suggests that their story may be from as little as 15 kya or so. The endowment of a prior humanity with God’s image may derive from as little as 50 kya. There’s no reason to be dogmatic about any such dating attempts. They both just fit the data well, is the only observation.