GENESIS: THE BOOK OF BEGINNINGS
Rev. Richard A. Bolland
Unit 1 Introduction to
the Foundation of History
Unit 2 The Very Beginning
Unit 3 The Creation vs. Evolution Debate
Unit 4 The Origin of Man
Unit 5 The Creation Account
Unit 6 The Fall of Man
Unit 7 The Lost World
Unit 8 The Days of Noah
Unit 9 The Rules of the
New World; The Rainbow Covenant
Unit 10 The Tower of Babel
Unit 11 The Call of Abram
- God's Covenant with Abram
Unit 12 Abram Visited by
Melchizedek
Unit 13 Hagar and Ishmael
Unit 14 The Covenant of Circumcision and The
Three Visitors
Unit 15 The Wrath of God is
Visited on Sodom & Gomorrah
Unit 16 Abraham Sins
against God and Abimelech
Unit 17 The Testing of
Abraham
GENESIS: THE BOOK OF BEGINNINGS
Rev. Richard A. Bolland
Unit # 1: Introduction To the Foundation of History
I. The Book of Genesis Is Probably the Most Important Book Ever Written.
A. If Genesis were removed from the Bible, the rest of the books would make no sense what-so-ever.
1. Genesis is the book which explains the origins of virtually everything that matters about history or life.
a. Without Genesis we would not know God's purposes for His creation.
b. Without Genesis we would not know why humans were created or what they were intended to do.
c. Without Genesis we would have no basis for the relationships of this world.
1.) The relationship between God and man.
2.) The character of relationships between men and women.
3.) The nature of relationships between humans and the animal world.
4.) The essence of evil and what it does.
5.) The nature of God.
B. In Genesis, (and only in Genesis), can we learn the origin of:
1. The origin of the universe:
a. It accounts for the basic space-mass-time continuum which constitutes our physical universe.
b. Genesis 1:1 is unique in all literature, science, and philosophy.
c. Every other system of cosmogony, whether ancient religious myths or modern scientific models, begins with eternal matter or energy in some form, from which other entities were supposedly, gradually derived by some process. Only Genesis accounts for the unique origin of matter, space, and time.
2. The origin of order and complexity:
a. It is man's universal observation, both in his personal experience and in his formal study of physical and biological systems that orderly and complex things tend naturally to decay into disorder and simplicity.
b. Order and complexity never arise spontaneously -- they are always generated by a prior cause programmed to produce such order.
c. We learn that the Primeval Programmer and His programmed purposes are found only in Genesis.
3. The origin of the solar system:
a. It is the experience of modern scientific cosmogonists that they have put forward one theory after another to explain the formation of the solar system only to have the most current theory be overshadowed by the latest piece of human conjecture that comes along.
b. Only in Genesis do we learn exactly how the planets of our solar system came to be.
4. The origin of the atmosphere and hydrosphere:
a. Only the earth is uniquely equipped with a great body of liquid water and an extensive blanket of an oxygen-nitrogen gaseous mixture, both of which are necessary for life.
b. It is scientific observation that tells us that these critical components have never "developed" on other planets.
5. The origin of life:
a. How living systems could have come into being from non-living chemicals is, and will undoubtedly continue to be, a total mystery to materialistic philosophers.
b. The marvels of the reproductive process, and the almost-infinite complexity programmed into the genetic systems of plants and animals, are inexplicable except by special creation.
c. If the laws of thermodynamics and probability mean anything at all, the account of creation of "living creatures" in Genesis is the only rational explanation.
6. The origin of man:
a. Man is the most highly organized and complex entity in the universe, possessing not only innumerable intricate physico-chemical structures, and the marvelous capacities of life and reproduction, but also a nature which contemplates the abstract entities of beauty and love and worship, and which is capable of philosophizing about its own meaning.
b. Man's imaginary evolutionary descent from animal ancestors is altogether illusory with the true record of his origin being given only in Genesis.
7. The origin of marriage:
a. The remarkably universal and stable institution of marriage and the home, in a monogamous, patriarchal social culture, is likewise described in Genesis as having been ordained and instituted by the Creator.
b. Polygamy, infanticide, matriarchy, promiscuity, divorce, abortion, homosexuality, and other corruption's all developed later.
8. The origin of evil:
a. Cause-and-effect reasoning accounts for the origin of the concepts of goodness, truth, beauty, love, and such things as fundamental attributes of the Creator Himself.
b. The origin of physical and moral evils in the universe is explained in Genesis as a temporary intrusion into God's perfect world, allowed by Him as a concession to the principle of human freedom and responsibility, and also to manifest Himself as Redeemer as well as Creator.
9. The origin of language:
a. The gulf between the chatterings of animals and the intelligent, abstract, symbolic communication systems of man is completely unbridgeable by any evolutionary process.
b. The book of Genesis not only accounts for the origin of language in general, but also for the various national languages in particular.
10. The origin of government:
a. The development of organized systems of human government is described in Genesis, with man responsible not only for his own actions, but also for the maintenance of orderly social structures through systems of laws and punishments.
b. The materialist philosopher concludes that man may do as he pleases and either have structure, order or not according to majority vote - which of course - requires order.
11. The origin of culture:
a. Rather than trying to explain how culture developed from one group borrowing from a neighboring group the basic concepts of various cultures, Genesis demonstrates the true origin of such things as urbanization, metallurgy, music, agriculture, animal husbandry, writing, education, navigation, textiles and ceramics.
b. In the examination of how God brought culture into being, it becomes clear that as cultures when their own way, they became corrupted and weaker rather than unified and stronger.
12. The origin of nations:
a. One problem scholars have is to explain how one race of humans who once had one race and one language could degenerate into various racial groups with a multitude of languages.
b. Only Genesis has an adequate explanation of how this could come to be.
13. The origin of religion:
a. There are many different religions among men, but all share the consciousness that there must be some ultimate truth and meaning toward which men should strive.
b. The origin of this unique characteristic of man's consciousness, as well as the origin of true worship of the true God, is given in Genesis.
14. The origin of the chosen people:
a. The enigma of the Israelites -- the people who remain a separate nation despite nineteen hundred years of dispersion -- which gave the world the Bible and the knowledge of the true God, through which Christianity came to be and which, as yet, rejects Christianity, is called into being in Genesis.
b. The Jews where God's "deliver system" for the Messiah, in whose promise of salvation all people are saved in both the Old and New Testaments.
II. WHO WROTE GENESIS?
A. The book of Genesis, in common with all other books of the canonical Scriptures, was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
1. Historical Critics argue that Moses probably did not write Genesis because:
a. Whereas the New Testament always refers to the first five books of the Old Testament, (Pentateuch), as the books of Moses or the law of Moses, it nowhere points specifically to Genesis by itself in those terms.
b. In the Pentateuch, Moses is always "he", never "I".
c. Within the Pentateuch there are "clues" to different authorship in that there are variations in the use of divine names:
1.) "J" - Jahwey (Dated 850 BC)
2.) "E" - Elohim (Dated no earlier than 750 BC.)
d. Later other scholars thought that there must be more than one "Elohist" author and thence subdivided the Elohist passages into:
3.) "D" - Deuteronomic Code, (Dated at 620 BC.)
4.) "P" - Priestly Code, (Dated after 500 BC and the destruction of the temple.)
e. There are repetitions of certain accounts:
1.) The creation account is repeated in Genesis 1 and again in Genesis 2, therefore there is likely more than one author.
2.) The Ten Commandments are noted more than once, therefore it is likely that more than one author wrote.
f. There are various points of view reflected in the writing of the Pentateuch with each viewpoint reflective of a different stage of development in the writings:
1.) Once source describes God anthropomorphically.
2.) Another stresses that God is "increasingly" monotheistic and transcendental.
3.) Another writer seems to treat Israel's history differently than others.
g. Some scholars insist that written language did not exist at the time of Moses and therefore, Moses could not serve as the author of the Pentateuch.
2. Critical Scholars, however, are not in agreement as to the authorship of the Pentateuch in that there are at least three major theories:
a. The Documentary Hypothesis: (J.E.D.P. Sources)
b. The Fragmentary Hypothesis: An unknown "editor" during Israel's Babylonian Captivity who compiled and "corrected" ancient stories and texts.
c. The Strand Hypothesis: Major strands of material, (stories and manuscripts where developed over long periods of time and were adapted to current thought by each "editor".
3. Historical - Grammatical Interpreters claim that Moses was the author of Genesis and the rest of the Pentateuch:
a. Until the mid-19th century both Christian and Jewish scholars were solidly persuaded that Moses was, indeed, the author of Genesis.
1.) It was the advent of the theory of evolution by Charles Darwin which motivated many modernist, higher critical scholars to attempt to find a way to reconcile the theory of evolution with the content of Genesis.
2.) Additionally, some higher critics desired to discount the prophet saying indicated in the Pentateuch by "rearranging the dates of authorship from the time of Moses, (1446 BC), to the later dates noted in the Documentary Hypothesis above so that predictions of future events now are written after the fact and are no longer prophesy.
b. Christ, Himself, accepted the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch in Luke 24:27, 44.
c. The writer of Acts indicates the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch in Acts 15:1
d. As to the claim that others wrote the book, it is not a problem for historical - grammatical scholars to accept that someone working as a "recorder" or "secretary" for Moses wrote what Moses told him to write in much the same way as the apostolic writers used such people to assist them.
e. At the very least, Moses undoubted wrote these book during the time of the wilderness wanderings of forty years. Given that length of time, the various on-going series of crises faced by Israel it is no wonder that changes in tone, and even literary style varies.
f. Recent archaeological finds have resounding refuted the claim that written language was not available to Moses. A noted evolutionary anthropologist Ralph Linton, who is a leader in his field said:
"Writing appears almost simultaneously some 5000 - 6000 years ago in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Indus Valley."
B. By what method did Moses receive the information he recorded in Genesis and the Pentateuch? Three Possibilities:
1. By direct revelation from God. This could have occurred either in the form of audible words dictated by God and transcribed by him or else by visions given him of the great events of the past, which he then put down in his own words, as guided subconsciously by the Holy Spirit.
2. By collecting and writing down the oral traditions handed down over the centuries. Many societies today still pass down detailed accounts of a tribe's history through specially trained people called, "rememberers" who commit to memory centuries of tribal history in great detail.
3. By collecting written records of the past and editing them into final form. This too would have been done under the immediate guidance of the Holy Spirit.
None of the above possibilities would in any way contradict a divinely given, inerrant and inspired Word of God nor lessen the trustworthiness of the Word received from God in any of these ways.
C. Is there a compilation of written records in Genesis...Probably, and they may be recognized by the key phrase that repeats itself eleven times in the book: "These are the generations of..." a translation of the Hebrew word: toledoth.
1. Genesis 2:4, "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth."
2. Genesis 5:1, "This is the book of the generations of Adam."
3. Genesis 6:9, "These are the generations of Noah."
4. Genesis 10:1, "These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth."
5. Genesis 11:10, "These are the generations of Shem."
6. Genesis 11:27: "These are the generations of Terah."
7. Genesis 25:12: "These are the generations of Ishmael."
8. Genesis 25:19: "These are the generations of Isaac, Abraham's son."
9. Genesis 36:1: "Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom."
10. Genesis 36:9: "And these are the generations of Esau the father of the Edomites in Mount Seir."
11. Genesis 37:2: "These are the generations of Jacob."
It appears that these toledoth division may well represent the original documents from which Genesis was collected and is appears that the events recorded in each division all took place before, not after, the death of the individuals so named, and so could in each case have been accessible to them.
GENESIS: THE BOOK OF BEGINNINGS
Rev. Richard A. Bolland
Unit # 2: The Very Beginning
I. THE MOST IMPORTANT VERSE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT BOOK IN THE WORLD:
A. The first verse in the Bible is the foundational verse of the Bible:
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
1. The first eleven chapters of Genesis serve as the foundation of all of earthly history.
2. The last chapters of Genesis (12 - 50) deal with the beginnings of the nation of Israel.
3. By the same token, chapter 1 of Genesis is the foundational chapter of the first 11 chapters, since it summarizes the creation of the world and all things in the world...Therefore, verse 1 of chapter 1 is the foundational verse of this foundational chapter with respect to the primeval creation of the universe itself.
4. This verse also sets forth the one single relationship from which all other relationships of every kind flows: God and His creatures.
B. If Genesis 1:1 is true, then please understand what is not true:
1. It refutes atheism because the universe was created by God.
(Atheism: rejects all religious belief and denies the existence of God.)
2. It refutes pantheism, for God is transcendent to that which He created.
(Pantheism: The doctrine that God is not a personality, but that all laws, forces, manifestations, etc., of the self-existing universe are God.)
3. It refutes polytheism, for one God created everything.
(Polytheism: The belief in or worship of many gods, or more than one god.)
4. It refutes materialism, for matter had a beginning.
(Materialism: The philosophical doctrine that matter is the only reality and that everything in the world, including thought, will, and feeling, can be explained only in terms of matter. Embraced by this philosophy is the thought that comfort, pleasure, and wealth are the only or highest goals or values.)
5. It refutes dualism, because God was alone when He created.
(Dualism: The doctrine that there are two mutually antagonistic principles in the universe, good and evil - i.e., "yin & Yang", or New Age, or physical v. spiritual.)
6. It refutes humanism, because God, not man, is the ultimate reality.
(Humanism: Any system of thought or action based on the nature, dignity, interests, and ideals of man; specifically, a modern, nontheistic, rationalist movement that holds that man is capable of self-fulfillment and ethical conduct apart from God.)
7. It refutes evolutionism, because God created all things.
(Evolutionism: A philosophical theory which presupposes that all species of plants and animals arose from inorganic material, gradually developing over time into more and more sophisticated life forms of which mankind is simply a new level with more sophisticated life forms to come.)
C. Consider each word of this all important verse:
1. God: The first of over 2,000 references in the Scriptures in which the name of God is the Hebrew name, Elohim. The im ending is the Hebrew plural ending, so that Elohim can actually mean "gods". However, it is clearly used here in the singular, as the mighty name of God the Creator. Thus, Elohim is a plural name with a singular meaning, a "uni-plural" noun, thereby suggesting the uni-plurality of the Godhead. God is one, but God is three persons.
2. Created: This is the remarkable word bara, used always only of the work of God. Only God can create -- that is to call into existence that which formerly had no existence. Men can make things and form things out of that which already exists, but he cannot create anything. This word informs us that the physical universe was "spoken" into existence by God. It demonstrates some of the attributes of God; especially His omnipotence, His eternal nature, and His infinity.
3. Heaven: The Hebrew word shamayim can be translated either singular or plural depending on whether it is associated with a singular or plural verb. It does not mean the stars of heaven, which were made on the fourth day of creation, and which constitute the "host" of heaven, not heaven itself. (Gen. 2:1) It seems, however, that the essential meaning of the word corresponds to our modern term, "space" as in when we speak of the universe as a universe of time and space. Clearly, this is a reference to the entire space-mass-time universe.
4. Earth: The term, "earth", refers to the component of matter in the universe. At the time of the initial creation, there were no other planets, stars, or other material bodies in the universe; nor did any of them come into being until the fourth day of Creation. The earth itself originally had no form to it, (Gen. 1:2), so this verse must speak essentially of the creation of the basic elements of matter, which thereafter were to be organized into structured earth and later into other material, "ground" or "land."
5. In the beginning: Not only does this verse speak of the creation of space and of matter, but it also notes the beginning of time. The universe is actually a continuum of space, matter, and time, no one of which can have a meaningful existence with the other two. The term matter is understood to include energy, and must function in both space and time. The Hebrew word, bereshith,
D. Thus, Genesis 1:1 can legitimately and incisively be paraphrased as follows:
"The transcendent, omnipotent Godhead called into existence the space-mass-time universe."
II. WHAT IS THE DATE OF CREATION?
A. The vital question as to exactly when the uniquely significant event of Genesis 1:1 took place cannot be completely settled in the present state of the art of the study of Bible chronology.
1. A great number of men have labored diligently in the attempt to formulate a complete chronology of the Bible, and the very fact that they all disagree with each other demonstrates that the problems are serious and the issue is unsettled.
2. A list of the difficulties that hinder this work would include the following among others:
a. The uncertainty of accurate copying and transmission of the numbers originally recorded, since the Massoretic, Septuagint and Samaritan texts all disagree in this respect.
b. The uncertainty as to whether the length of the ancient calendar year was the same as the length of our present year.
c. The possibility of missing generations in the genealogies of the Old Testament.
d. The confusing and sometimes apparently contradictory lists of the durations of the administrations of the various judges and kings of Israel and Judah.
e. The even more unsatisfactory state of the comparable secular chronologies of Egypt and Babylonia.
f. The still less satisfactory results derived from radiocarbon and other physical methods of dating.
B. In view of the highly equivocal and contradictory data from all extra-Biblical sources, the only possibility of obtaining anything approximating an exact chronology would have to lie in the Bible itself.
1. Biblical data essentially cluster around the following framework:
a. Genesis 1 gives the time from creation of the universe to the creation of man.
b. Genesis 5 contains the chronological data from the time of the first man to the great flood.
c. Genesis 11 summarizes the chronology from the Flood to Abraham, the founder of the Hebrew nation.
d. The historical books of the Old Testament (especially Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles) contain chronological data of the nation of Israel from the time of Abraham to the captivity.
e. The chronology of the captivity and restoration is obtained from certain of the prophetical books, (especially Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel) and the post captivity historical books (Ezra and Nehemiah.)
f. The intertestamental period chronology necessarily must depend either on secular chronology (especially the very questionable Manethan chronology of Egypt) or else the chronology implicit in the seventy-weeks" prophecy of Daniel 9.
C. A word about Archbishop James Ussher (1581 - 1656).
1. The best-known chronological system based on these Biblical data is that of Bishop Ussher, who computed the date of creation as 4,004 B.C.
a. In these days of evolutionary uniformitarianism, it is fashionable to ridicule the Ussher chronology, despite the fact that Ussher was a distinguished scholar and knew a great deal more about the subject than his modern detractors do.
b. Ussher's work was pre-Darwinian, but it was not a time of scientific ignorance, as Colin Renfrew noted in his book, Before Civilization, in reference to Ussher's work:
"Nor was this belief restricted to the credulous or the excessively devout. No less a thinker than Isaac Newton accepted it implicitly, and in his detailed study of the whole question of dating, The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, took the ancient Egyptians to task, since they had set the origins of the monarchy before 5,000 BC...This criticism was meant literally; for an educated man in the seventeenth century or even eighteenth century, any suggestion that the human past extended back further than 6,000 years was a vain and foolish speculation."
2. To the modern mind, this Biblical chronology is absurdly too short, but consider the combined chronologies of other ancient nations as Renfrew continues:
"Until the discovery of radiocarbon dating, therefore, there was really only one reliable way of dating events in European prehistory...This was by the early records of the great civilizations, which extended in some cases as far back as 3,000 B.C....The Egyptian king lists go back to the First Dynasty of Egypt, a little before 3,000 B.C. Before that, there were no written records anywhere."
3. Thus, all actual historical records agree in substance with the Bible's short chronology.
a. The much longer chronology presupposed by the modern dogma of evolution, must be based on uniformitarian extrapolation of certain present physical processes...All of these calculations are necessarily based on a number of unproved and, as a matter of fact, untestable assumptions which can never be as accurate or reliable as actual historical records, of which the Bible is certainly the most accurate and reliable.
b. Ussher may not be right, but consider the work of many other scholars who have studied this issue: (All dates are B.C.)
1.) Ussher - 4,004
2.) Jewish - 3,760
3.) Septuagint – 5,270
4.) Josephus – 5,555
5.) Kepler – 3,993
6). Melanchthon – 3,964
7). Luther – 3,961
8). Lightfoot – 3,960
9). Hales – 5,402
10). Playfair – 4,008
11.) Lipman - 3,916
4. Some have argued, (in the face of absolutely no evidence), that there are gaps of unknown magnitude in the Biblical chronologies, but taking those gaps to the maximum possible lengths, (about 5,000 years), there is no possible way to make up the differences between a short-lived earth and an evolutionary earth...Consequently, the Bible will not support a date for creation earlier than about 10,000 B.C.
GENESIS: THE BOOK OF BEGINNINGS
Rev. Richard A. Bolland
Unit # 3: The Creation v. Evolution Debate
I. WHY IS THE BATTLE IMPORTANT?
A. Because the account in Genesis 1-3 is the foundation for all of Christian theology.
1. Genesis 1-3 tells us about the foundational relationship between the Creator and His creatures.
a. God is not an impersonal "force", but a person who loves and cares for that which He creates, especially the apex of His creation, humankind.
b. In Genesis we learn that God created the world that was good, perfect and sinless.
2. The Genesis account informs us the reality and entry of sin into human history.
a. Our first parent's very real disobedience, (not a symbolic poem), made redemption necessary.
b. Therefore, the Scriptural account of redemption depends on the Scriptural account of creation and fall into sin.
B. If you reject the Biblical account of creation, believing instead that the world developed through "natural" processes, (even though you are willing to concede that God was behind those natural processes - theistic evolution), you would have to believe that sin is NOT the consequence of a fall from a state of perfection but rather the heritage of man's animal ancestry.
1. Therefore, it is NOT God's mercy and grace that led Him to send His Son to redeem us; rather, it was something that He OWED mankind because He chose to create the human species by a process of development from the animal world, bringing us up from the moral standards of the jungle and barnyard.
2. If, however, you believe that God IS the author of life, then you accept the dignity and worth of the individual.
a. By extension, you are concerned for the welfare of your neighbor.
b. Further, you accept God's commandments as binding on you and as the standards for which He expects society to strive.
C. The entire philosophy of evolution runs contrary to Scripture:
1. Throughout the Scripture, God is seen as He who is the special protector of the helpless, the needy, the fatherless and the widow.
2. In Scripture, there is no place for, "the survival of the fittest."
3. Secular Humanism, the prevailing philosophy of our time, arose out of a denial not only of the Biblical account of creation but also of the Biblical doctrine of preservation.
a. Evolution, at best, postulates a "watchmaker" God who has withdrawn from the world - if, indeed, He was involved in its creation at all.
b. God, if He did exist, works only through natural laws and thus it becomes a moot question whether He exists because it makes absolutely no difference so far as the lives of men are concerned.
D. The theory of evolution calls into question the validity of the Scriptures.
1. If Genesis 1-3 is not true, but is only a moral lesson, then what other part of the Bible can be believed?
a. If our "fall" is only symbolic, then it is quite possible that our redemption and resurrection is only symbolic as well.
b. The integrity of the Scriptures is as stake - If you can't believe all of it, then you can't believe any of it.
2. Next on the chopping block is the flood, then the Old Testament miracles, then the New Testament miracles and then the person and work of Christ.
E. The integrity of the scientific inquiry and method are at stake.
1. If science is to be science, then the free course of all scientific thought must be permitted and all scientific evidence must be considered.
a. Evolutionary uniformitarianism is the "orthodoxy" which cannot be violated in today's world of scientific thought.
b. Although there is massive evidence for special creation the debate is not being permitted to be heard - only ridicule and scorn for existing evidence is offered by much of the scientific community.
2. We do not ask that public school teachers be forced to teach creationism - that would only result in a caricature of creationism.
a. What we seek is an even-handed review of different viewpoints and evidence supportive of both evolution and special creation.
b. Our children deserve all the evidence for such obviously divergent views.
GENESIS: THE BOOK OF BEGINNINGS
Rev. Richard A. Bolland
Unit 4: The Origin of Man
I. AN EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE THAT MAN EVOLVED FROM APES:
A. Time and time again, publication after publication offers a variety of colorful pictures showing a line of apes and ape-like creatures beginning as stooped over figures slowly growing into more and more erect and human-like forms.
1. Problem: Was man created in the image of God, or did he evolve from an inferior beast into an advanced primate? If so, when did the image of God become a part of the human race?
2. The line of our so-called "ancestors" is presented as evidence that man evolved from apes, but let's examine each proported creature and see what the evidence is.
B. The Problem of A Line Without the Links:
1. In the Reader's Digest Book, The Last Two Million Years, the following quote appears:
"In Darwin's time there was little evidence to support his theory; but since then a whole chain of 'missing links' ...shows how, over 40 million years, descendants of the early primates gradually evolved to produce modern man."
2. The charts demonstrate different kinds of animals within a species but do not show any transitional forms...They are not "links" they are separate creatures within a species.
3. How can, "a whole chain" be established when the links are missing?
C. "Common Ancestor"
1. In the book, The Last Two Million Years, we find the first entry in the line of so-called human ancestry simply entitled, "Common Ancestor".
2. The caption of this creature says: "This creature is believed to have been a forest-dwelling creature, the ancestor from which modern apes and man both descend. No traces of such a creature have yet been found"
3. Other charts include the name "Gigantopithecus" as first in the line. However, this creature has been discovered to be nothing more than an extinct ground ape. Famed anthropologist, Richard Leakey, has taken it off the chart leading to man and placed it on a totally separate line. (Time Magazine, Nov. 7, 1977)...Scratch him off the charts!
D. Ramapithecus:
1. Next in the line is Ramapithecus, an animal described as, "a more advanced primate...appearing about 14 million years ago."
2. Ramapithecus was reconstructed on the basis of one skeletal fragment: a piece of jawbone about two inches long!
3. This initial find was made in India during the 1930's, but some time later another small piece of jawbone was dug up in Africa and identified as coming from the same species.
4. Interestingly, a little jawbone can go a long way since we now have complete drawings of Ramapithecus including his height, posture, length of limbs, shape of head and amount of body hair.
5. Evolutionary experts now concede that Ramapithecus was merely an extinct ape.
6. Scientists have now discovered evidence that some living baboons have similar tooth and jaw structures, hence, in Science Digest of April, 1981, p. 36, we read, "A reinterpretation of...(this)...jaw now suggests that Ramapithecus was an ancestor of neither modern humans or modern apes. Instead we think it represents a third lineage that has no living descendants."...Scratch Ramapithecus off the chart!
E. Australopithecus:
1. Australopithecus is one of the long-standing and well-known creatures in the familiar chart of human "descendants". The name literally means "southern ape"...That should tell us a lot.
2. A number of skulls have been found of Australopithecus, the most famous of which is the find of Dr. Louis Leakey in Africa which he called Zinjanthropus bosei. Here there are two types of Australopithecus: "africanus and "robustus".
3. Since the brain case and skull form of this animal is distinctly ape, we may wonder why it is included in the chart of man's ancestry? Here's the reason:
a. Tiny supposed stone tools were found nearby.
b. These "finds" were so small, it is doubtful that they were tools of any kind.
c. Please note: Raccoons and Otters also use small stone tools...Does that mean they're ancestors too?
4. Dr. Richard Leakey, in his book called Origins, has removed Australopithecus from the chart leading to Homo sapien.
5. Dr. Donald Johanson dug up another Australopithecus in 1976, which he named "Lucy". (National Geographic, December, 1976).
a. One of the interesting things about Lucy is that it is no different than some modern chimpanzees that walk upright.
b. It's clear that modern chimps are not man's ancestor, so why suppose that this long dead specimen has anything to do with man?...Scratch Australopithecus off the chart!
F. Homo habilis:
1. Next on the chart is Homo habilis.
2. In June, 1973, National Geographic published an article that was devastating to conventional ideas about human evolution when it reported a new find in Kenya, Africa by Richard Leakey, called "Skull 1470". Leakey said:
"Either we toss out this skull or we toss out our theories of early man."
3. The article went on to say that this skull was 2.8 million years old, yet belonged to man's genus...In other words, it was claimed to be more man-like than any of the other near-man relics on the chart! The main problem with this was that the skull was dated to be more than two million years older than other creatures on the chart that were supposed to precede it.
4. It is amazing that artists have completely reconstructed this skull to have clearly ape-like/human-like characteristics including ears, nose, cheeks, chin, and facial hair in detail, all creatively recreated to convey an intended conclusion.
5. Homo habilis is currently considered to be simply another ape, australopthecine, (similar to a small chimpanzee or an orangutan.)...Scratch Homo habilis off the chart!
G. Homo Erectus: (At last, a true man!)
(Please notice what has happened thus far...All the ape-like creatures have been scratched-off the chart leaving now only human-like creatures.)
1. Homo Erectus is based on two finds: Peking Man and Java Man.
2. Peking Man was discovered in 1921 in a limestone hill 25 miles from Peking, (now Beijing), China.
a. The original find consisted of two molar teeth.
b. Six years later a third tooth was found and over the next several years dozens of pieces of broken up skulls were found.
c. In 1936 a man named Franz Weidenreich fashioned a model of what Peking Man supposedly looked like.
d. Unfortunately, during World War II, all the fragmentary evidence except for two teeth was lost. Now there was no way to subject Peking Man to critical modern analysis.
3. In 1937, a French scientist, Marcellin Boule, examined the actual fragments of skull, and published his opinion that the find was decidedly monkey-like and reported that the model did not correspond objectively to the fossils
4. The find was dated to about of a half million years old, but this is complicated by the problem of modern human bones having been excavated from the same sight. Plant and animal remains are similar from the top to the bottom of the 160 foot deep dig. Man-made tools are also found there...Scratch Peking Man off the chart!
5. Java Man:
a. In 1891, a Dutch physician named Eugene Dubois found an ape-like skullcap near the Solo River in Java, which he named "Java Man".
b. A year later Dubois return to the site and found a leg bone. Two molar teeth 50 feet away from the original site...He assumed that the skullcap, the leg bone and the two teeth were all part of the same creature.
c. Before Dubois died he admitted that he had found two truly human skulls at nearby Wadjak in roughly the same level as his other fragments. These he had failed to mention since he had loudly advertised himself as going to Java to find the missing link...Scratch Java Man off the chart!
H. Cro-Magnon Man: (Pronounced: KRO-MAN-YO)
1. In 1940, two French boys near Lacaux, rescued their dog, which had fallen into a crack in the ground. What they found was an ancient cavern whose walls were covered with paintings of horses, deer, and bison. The name "Cro-Magnon" simply refers to the local name of the cave.
2. According to evolutionary theorists, these Cro-Magnon people were supposed to date back 12,000 to 30,000 years.
a. This assumption was based in part to the fact that these people lived in caves.
b. Do people still live in caves today? Does that make them less human?
3. According to Smithsonian Magazine, (October, 1986), "Cro-Magnon hunters were really us, working out strategies for survival."
4. Cro-Magnon Man was simply modern man living in caves...Do Not Scratch him off the chart!
I. Neanderthal Man:
1. The very name of Neanderthal Man evokes images of hunch-backed, primitive brutes with heavily overhanging foreheads and a gorilla-like face, but this is a totally incorrect concept of Neanderthal Man.
2. The name comes to us from the Neander Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany, where in 1856 the first skeleton of Neanderthal Man was found. Since then, many such finds have been discovered in Europe and the Middle East.
3. At the time of the 1856 discovery, it was widely reported that the "missing link" had been found and that "proof" of Darwinian evolution had, at last, been found.
a. Almost immediately, drawings depicting hairy ape-men were published, but before long it was discovered that Neanderthal Man was not hunched over at all but walked erectly as we do.
b. Why, then did Neanderthal get the reputation for such brutish appearance?
c. As it turned out, it was later revealed, that one specimen seems to have suffered from severe arthritis and was advanced in age.
4. In fact, if Neanderthal Man would have had a good bath, a shave and dressed in a business suit, he would look like anybody else on Wall Street!...Do Not Scratch Neanderthal Man off the chart!
J. Piltdown Man:
1. Piltdown Man was announced to the world in 1912 as the discovery of the missing link. Dr. Charles Dawson, a physician, was the discoverer.
2. This specimen consisted of a man-like skull cap and an ape-like jawbone, unearthed near Piltdown, England. He was called "Dawn Man" and pronounced to be 500,000 years old.
3. Forty one years later, in 1953, when scientists finally got around to a critical analysis of Piltdown Man, they discovered that the teeth had been filed to fit and the bones had been stained to make them appear old...Piltdown Man was a fraud!
K. Nebraska Man:
1. In western Nebraska, a well-known anthropologist named Henry Osborn announced to the world in 1922 that a creature had been found with the characteristics of both man and an ancient chimpanzee called Pithecanthropus.
2. Imaginative drawings of Nebraska Man were published in the London News on June 24, 1922, and was hailed as an accurate representation of a pre- historic caveman.
3. When the famous Skopes Trial, ("Monkey Trial), was staged in 1925 to force the teaching of evolution in American schools, the recent discovery of Nebraska Man was used as proof that man most certainly had descended from lower animal forms.
4. In reality, the Nebraska Man discovery consisted on only one tooth...But that's not all. In 1927 the truth was revealed that the tooth belonged to an extinct pig!
5. Unfortunately, the Skopes trial was long over having made its decision on false evidence.
II. IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE TO LINK MAN TO APE-LIKE CREATURES?
A. Time Magazine, November 7, 1977, featured Dr. Richard Leakey beside a naked black human wearing a rather imaginative mask showing how "1470 Man" supposedly looked.
1. Candidly, the writer of the article made this statement:
"Still doubts about the sequence about man's emergence remain. Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record."
2. It has been observed that, taken all together, if you could gather all the fragments of skulls and other bones from all the so-called hominid relics found in the last century, the sum total of them would not fill one coffin.
B. So where is the oldest true man?
1. Dr. Richard Leakey was interviewed in March, 1982 in the Vancouver Sun, and in that interview he said that man's ancestors go back 3.75 million years to fossil footprints discovered by his mother, Mary Leakey, in Laetoli, Kenya.
a. This stunning conclusion relies on the doubtful ages determined by radiometric dating methods, but it also pushes man's earliest supposed man-like ancestors back before more primitive creatures which were once thought to be our forefathers.
b. The article goes on to say:
"The whole basis on which paleontologists classify fossil ape and humans is misleading. The time has come to admit that the system by which we name things is inadequate in dealing with things that have a time dimension."
2. In the April, 1972 issue of National Geographic, an article appears entitled, "Footprints in the Ashes of Time". This article discusses human footprints in volcanic ash together with the tracks of many other animals.
a. The man-like footprints are exactly the same as any you and I would make walking by the seashore today.
b. All of the animal prints were of animals that exist today.
c. However, the artist who drew his impressions of this scene, correctly portrayed the animals as modern giraffes, elephants and ostriches, but above the modern human footprints were man\ape-like creatures.
d. Why are the human footprints the only ones represented by creatures different from modern creatures in the picture...It seems that artist renditions of man have been most influential in forming the public's opinion of what ancient man looked like.
C. Most recently, the Leakey's have astounded the world again by issuing the claim that it appears that all humans descended from a single set of parents!
1. Without abandoning the evolutionary theory, the Leakey's are slowly coming to some accurate conclusions!
2. The fact of the matter is: THERE EXISTS NO EVIDENCE THAT MAN EVOLVED FROM APES! All finds are either of apes or of humans.
D. So what do we know for sure?
1. There is no scientific proof that modern man is now evolving.
2. There is no scientific proof that man evolved from ape-like ancestors, or from any other animal.
3. Creationists maintain that man has always been man, and apes have always been apes. There is no proof that this is wrong.