Adam and Eve. Myth, or actual and historical? I believe in the former.
So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. -- 1 Corinthians 15:45
For Adam was formed first, then Eve. -- 1 Timothy 2:13
The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. -- 1 Corinthians 15:47
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.
For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
-- Romans 5:12, 17 and 18
Commentary
In the original Hebrew (see Genesis 1-2), Adam means "man, human being or mankind" which references the individual; and Adamah references the ground, the earth, from which originates the individual -- the man. The Book of Corinthians calls Adam the first man -- "a living being" -- actual and singular. The Book of Timothy also supports that Adam was first -- "formed first"; Eve was formed second.
Genesis 12-50 are considered to be written with historical language, unlike chapters 1-11. Although God used the hand of Moses to write this book in this manner -- using the myths of the ancient world to speak to the audience of the time -- consider the opening phrase in chapter two, "This is the account ...", which indicates historical language. In addition, subsequent chapters within 1-11 provide genealogy, which is clearly historical language. The account of Noah is included in 1-11, and theologians consider that historical, so why wouldn't Adam and Eve be also?
If Adam solely refers to "mankind", and God created many men and women prior to the Fall (see Genesis 3 regarding the Fall), then it must be asked, what was the outcome of the lives who did not take of the forbidden fruit? The Book of Romans states in chapter three that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". Therefore, the premise of Adam as mankind, the plural, a mythical metaphor for all mankind is untrue. This premise would cause doctrinal issues in that the need for redemption through Jesus Christ was not for the "all" as referenced in Romans 5.
If this story is allegorical or symbolic, then it must be asked why Jesus the Messiah is called the "second man", the second Adam? This reference of Jesus recalls an actual man, the first man in the first Temple -- the Garden. And, Jesus the second Adam, who is presently restoring His Temple through His Spirit, will complete it upon His bodily return. Myth only diminishes the connection of the first Temple and the second Temple, which also referenced as Jesus Himself.
Lastly, if the account of Adam and Eve is merely mythical, then the writings of the Apostle Paul are false. In Romans 5: 12-18, Paul specifically connects "the 'one man' through whom sin came and the 'all' to whom it was spread. If sin really didn't come in through the 'one' -- Adam -- and spread to the 'all' -- you and me -- how do we take seriously Paul's further declaration that 'one man's act of righteousness [Jesus] leads to justification and life for all'?" (Theologian Richard Gaffin, the author of "No Adam, No Gospel: Adam and the History of Redemption", see article "Did Adam Really Exist?" from Bible.org). Since "all scripture is inspired by God ...", both Genesis and Romans, it's easy to conclude Paul is correct in asserting the reality of Adam and Eve.
