03.01 - Chapter 12 - The Origin of Man
Part III ANTHROPOLOGY: THE STUDY of MAN
Chapter 12 THE ORIGIN OF MAN A Confession of Faith
“In the beginning it pleased God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, for the manifestation of the glory of His eternal power, wisdom, and goodness, to create or make the world, and all things therein, whether visible or invisible, in the space of six days, and all very good.” (The Confession of Faith of 1689, Chapter 4, Section 1; study John 1:2-3; Hebrews 1:2; Job 26:13; Romans 1:20; Colossians 1:16; Genesis 1:31). A Definition of the Doctrine of Anthropology
Anthropology is a word derived from the Greek words (anthropos, man, and logos, discourse). The doctrine of anthropology primarily concerns itself with the study of the beginning of man. There is no record or proof of the soul of man having a pre-existence. There is no memory or consciousness of it. The Bible declares that there was an original creation and that all of humanity sprang from Adam. If pre-existence is assumed, then man must be either eternally pre-existent, or created by God in that pre-existent state. Neither position is supported in Scripture. The Bible does teach that, “After God had made all other creatures, He created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, rendering them fit unto that life to God for which they were created; being made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfill it, and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change.” (The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689, Chapter 4, Section. 2; study Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:7; Ecclesiastes 7:29; Genesis 1:26; Romans 2:14-15; Genesis 3:6). The Soul is not a Divine Emanation The soul did not emanate from the substance of God for two reasons. First, emanation implies that the substance of God can become disturbed or changed, and this is unworthy of the character of God. God cannot become less than Himself. Second, substance is that in which attributes inhere. If men were able to partake of God’s essential substance they would possess the attributes of God, such as omniscience, infinity, omnipotence, etc. That is not possible. God will not give His intrinsic glory to anyone. (Isaiah 48:11) The Soul is not a Form of God The soul is not a form of God for that would be Pantheism. God and man are separate beings and are not to be confounded or blended. The Soul is not the Product of Spontaneous Generation The soul is not the product of spontaneous generation. Science knows nothing of spontaneous generation except as a theory. Elaborate experiments and the most painstaking efforts and observation have ruled out spontaneous generation for this reason: "Research sponsored in part by NASA (for the purpose of enabling astronauts to recognize even the most rudimentary forms of life on other planets) has shown that the simplest type of protein molecule that could be said to be "living" is composed of a chain of at least 400 linked amino acids, and each amino acid is a specific combination of four or five basic chemical elements, and each chemical element is a unique assemblage of protons, electrons, and neutrons. It is thus inconceivable (to anyone but a doctrinaire evolutionist) that a living system could ever be formed by chance. (Scientific Creationism, edited by Henry M. Morris) The Soul cannot be Accounted for by Evolution
Evolution is a process and a process does not originate anything. Evolution itself requires a beginning and a cause. Evolution requires materials to work upon and a directing "mind" to guide it to proper ends. Charles Darwin believed that God created the first few forms of life from which all genera and species arose. Later evolutionists set aside the need for God and boldly asserted that life originated from the molecular motions of dead matter and developed into all subsequent forms of living beings. How did this happen? They did not know, but were confident that it did.
What the Soul Is
According to the Old Testament usage of the word nepes, the soul is the essence of man in the totality of his being. The breath of God blown into the body of Adam created "a living nepes" (Genesis 1:20; Genesis 2:7; Exodus 1:5). The soul is something that can hunger and thirst (Psalms 107:5) and can be distressed (Genesis 42:21). It is often used for the essence of self (Job 16:4; Psalms 124:7). In the New Testament, the soul (psyche) is the life principle (Acts 20:10; Revelation 8:9) which is distinct from the body. John sees the "souls of those who had been slain," not "those who had been slain" (Revelation 6:9 cf. Revelation 20:4; Matthew 10:28; Luke 21:19; James 1:21; James 5:20).
Rational Objections to Evolution The rational objections to the evolutionary theory are legitimate because there are no examples of transmutation of species and no missing “links” that have ever been found. For evolution to be true, thousands of "links" or transitional phases would be necessary for a true movement from one species to another. To establish the doctrine of evolution a gradual, or even a provable abrupt change, must be found between:
• the cosmic and organic forms of nature;
• between the vegetable and animal kingdoms • between the invertebrate and vertebrate;
• between the lower vertebrates and the mammals;
• and between mammals and man.
" The Great Gaps. Science shows great gaps between different species and that each came without known antecedents in the lineal decent. One evolutionist, former Professor Joseph Le Conte, University Of California (c.1920), has confessed: “The evidence of geology today is that species seem to come into existence suddenly and in full perfection, remain substantially unchanged during the term of their existence and pass away in full perfection. Other species take their places apparently by substitution, not be transmutation.”
" The insufficiency of Time. When evolutionists assign millions and millions of years for the process of producing man, they do so without evidence. The Question may be justified whether the earth has been habitable millions of years. The oldest written records with verifiable chronology only dates back to the first dynasty in Egypt (c. 2200-2500 BC). There is a great discrepancy between the theory which says that man’s unknown uncommon ancestors lived 30 too 70 million years ago (true modern man arrived 1-3 million years ago), and the record of civilization. While the concept is intriguing of infinite time to form the earth and all the life that is on earth, there is no evidence to support the theory.
" The Sterility of Birds. Equally opposed to the theory of evolution is the idea of the crossing of the species. Nature herself has closed the door to this possibility (note Genesis 1:24).
" The Remains of Men. The earliest remains of man are of high development, showing that man like the other species came upon the scene in the maturity of his being. There may be evidence for devolution or man going from a higher state of existence to a lower state as per Genesis 1:1-31, Genesis 2:1-25, but there no is evidence that any man has going from a lower state to a higher form of existence. Radiocarbon dating methods have proven to be unreliable for establishing dates of antiquity, and evening more damaging is that lack of fossil evidence when population statistics are considered. From all the people that would have lived on earth in the last million years, even with a slow population growth rate, there is little evidence of the preservation of ancient man. If evolution is true, why there so little evidence in the fossil records? In the past, some extraordinary hoaxes have been offered by evolutionists to fool the public.
" Neanderthal Man. In 1856 in the Neander Valley, near Dusseldorf, Germany a creature was found that was believed to be semi-erect and sub-human. "It is now known that Neanderthal man was fully erect and in most details was indistinguishable from modern man, his cranial capacity even exceeding that of modern man." (Evolution? The Fossils Say No, Duane T. Gish)
" Java Man (Pithecanthropus erectus, "erect ape man"). It was in 1891 that Eugene Dubois, a Dutch physician made his discover of Pithecanthropus erectus in Trinil, Java. There was a single skull cap found. The next year, still digging in the same area but fifty feet away, Dubois discovered a thigh bone, along with two molar teeth. Assuming all the pieces belonged together, Dubois dated the find as a half million years old, and told the world. What he did not tell the world until thirty-one years later is that he had also found two obviously human skulls at the same time and on the same level as the digs. Just before his death, Dubois conceded that Java man was rally the remains of a large gibbon.
" Piltdown Man (Eanthropus dawsoni, "Dawn Man"). Charles Dawson is credited with the discovery of "Dawn Man" in Piltdown, England in 1912. From a skull part and a few teeth, the little chap was dated to be from 500 to 750 thousand years old! In 1950, the bones of "Dawn Man" were put under the spotlight of truth: fluoride tests were done and a grand hoax was revealed. The skull portion unearthed had been stained with iron salts and the teeth had been deliberately filed down to give it the appearance of age.
" Peking Man. Unearthed near Peking, China in 1912 by Davidson Bolack, this find consisted of the fragments of thirty skulls and 147 teeth. Today, Piltdown man is believed to be the remains of some large monkeys or baboons which were killed and eaten by those working in an ancient lime-burning quarry.
" Nebraska Man ("Western Ape Man). Harold Cook informed the world that he had made a wonderful discovery in western Nebraska in 1922. What did he find? One tooth! ONE tooth! The world was made to wonder as an imagine artist drew a mouth around the apeman that was declared to be six thousand years old. In 1927 the tooth was discovered to have really belong to an extinct pig.
" East Africa Ape (zinjathropus). In 1959, National Geographic Magazine was all to happy to tell the world that Louis S.B. Leakey have made a marvelous discovery in Olduvia, Tanzania. A skullcap and a few bone fragments were produced and dated to be 2-4 million years old. Here at last was a real missing link. Or was it? Just prior to his death, Leakey admitted that he felt his find was nothing more than a variety of australopithecus (Southern ape) found in 1924.
" The Discrepancies between Kingdoms. Nature today, and the fossil records of the past continue to testify against evolution by demonstrating that some kingdoms in nature are vastly superiority to others. This would not be the case if evolution were true. Rather, there would be some sort of connection between the kingdoms to form a unified ecosystem. However, there cannot be found in the vegetable kingdom anything from which the characteristic features of animal life could be developed or vice versa. So too there is a vast gulf between the animal and man, despite the attempts of modern science since 1859 to show how similar man and animal are. Some dramatic differences may be noted.
! Man alone is a rational creature. Animals may solve problems based on a biological urge but only man sits down to think, the way that a philosopher, professor, theologian, or someone in love does.
! Man alone makes things by reason and free will, not according to instinct. "The instincts of animals remain the same from age to age. The bird still builds her nest and the bee her cell as they did at the Gate of Eden. There has been no progress in their mental development." (David Clark)
! Only men build machines, which are in themselves productive. Animals may use tool, but no animal makes a pattern or die press to stamp out other tools for mass production.
! Man alone communicates thoughts based upon words and reasons. Animals communicate with sounds and grunts. They communicate emotions and impulses but nothing that can be asserted to be true or false.
" The Law of Entropy. There is a universal law of degeneration, which argues against the evolutionary model. The law of entropy says that everything goes from order to disorder.
There is a natural breakdown of all things. Physically, modern men is believed to be inferior to the ante-diluvian civilization (and mentally we may not be above the ancient Egyptians either; their inventions rival ours. It will be interesting to see if modern buildings will stand the test of time like the pyramids.) Rather than ascend ever upward, the body of man is wearing down just like all the things he builds and the universe itself.
One day, the sun will stop shining, the earth will rotate no longer, and the starlights shall disappear. The universe is winding down, not up.
" The Lack of Visual Evidence. If evolution is a cosmic process, it should be everywhere apparent and in actual operation before our eyes. Why is there no discernable evolutionary processes going on? Has everything in the evolutionary model reached such a stage of perfection that no advance is possible? Evolutionary science is strangely silence before such questions.
" The Logical Impossibility of the Evolutionary Process. If intelligent cross breeding has failed to produce a single new species in ideal laboratory conditions, what probability is there that blind chance or natural selection could do so? Natural selection will not be able to do what intelligent selection cannot do. A theory of Recapitulation The Embryological Recapitulation Theory argues that the unborn child passes through the various forms that the race is supposed to have traversed. It is argued that each person in the womb moves from the protoplasmic cell, through invertebrate life, to fish, quadrupeds, and finally to man. This theory was once held to be the most convincing demonstration of the evolutionary claims. In response, it is admitted that there is a cursory resemblance between the fetus of a human and that of some animal forms. But the resemblances are only superficial for one can see life similarities in other things such as unusual cloud formation, rain puddles, and rock formations. King Ahab said that he saw, "a little cloud out of the sea, like a man’s hand." (1 Kings 18:44) The following points are worthy of consideration.
• It is only a pre-suppositional thought that says that the human embryo in its early stages is an actual representation of a mass of protoplasm that is the same as the lower form of life, which is little more than a globule of protoplasm.
• It is only a pre-suppositional thought that say that the elongation into the form of an infant must necessarily reflect the shape of a fish.
• It is only a pre-suppositional thought which supposes that as the as legs and arms develop, they have the same likeness to a quadruped.
• It is only a pre-suppositional thought that sees the folds in the skin of the neck resembling the gills of a fish. In reality, all these things are superficial and prove nothing as to the background of the human race. Besides, the real difference in fetal development lies in that which is not physical but spiritual. The Recapitulation theory Does not Matter
Even if somehow the recapitulation theory of evolution could be proven true, “what has been accomplished in building the long stairway from the ameba to man if every man must begin for himself at the lowest point, a cell of protoplasm? If man could begin where the animal development left off, there might be some purpose discerned in the evolutionary process. But how absurd it is to suppose that it took the cosmic forces millions and millions of years to do what the human embryo does in nine months! “ (David Clark). The Harm of Change The truth of the matter is that the whole science of reproduction demonstrates that cross breeding small hereditary changes do not accumulate to the making of a species. In addition, both macro and micro-mutations have been proven to be essentially harmful to a species over a period of time. Macro mutation refers to the sudden change in a organism such as an arm, eye, or leg suddenly appearing. Micro-mutation refers to small incremental differences from in a species over a prolonged period. The Fossils Say No!
Evolutionists have always suspected that nature has destroyed millions of life forms. If these discarded life forms could be recovered, they would prove the evolutionary theory to be correct. (Perhaps nature has a sense of humor in that it destroys the very forms needed by its advocates while preserving the rest.) The truth of the matter is that the fossil record bears witness against evolution. In some fossil sites with a continuous deposit being made of nearly two thousand species, all of them appeared suddenly. No fossil has ever been shown as having passed away to be superseded by other forms. Though embarrassing to the evolutionist, some geological sites in the world reverse the order in which life was supposed to appear on the globe. PreCambrian strata (alleged to be the earliest of geological history) and fossils supposedly old lie in complacent conformity to underlying cretaceous (chalky) strata (of the Mesozoic era) and fossils supposedly young. Why is this? The answer is simple: there are no credible signs of the most infinitesimal, let alone intermediate, variations in the fossil records between one species and another. In the beginning, God created all the animals and all forms of life within a six literal day period. Therefore, the Creationist (Christian) would expect to find things together. As far as the rock formations being mixed up, the Bible explains this better than the evolutionist. The Biblical answer is that there was a flood that churned up the earth. (Genesis 6:1-22, Genesis 7:1-24) The Genesis model of reveals the Catastrophism of the Flood and is more consistent with the known facts than the evolutionary model of Uniformtarianism that teaches that the earth was formed by layers of rock upon layers.
Questions Raised by the theory of Evolution The theory of evolution raises a number of religious questions that are not easily dismissed by conscientious Christians. (proposed by David Clark) • “Is there a beginning as recorded in Genesis 1:1, or is there only an eternal becoming?”
• “Is God infinite and eternal, according to the Scriptures, or only a finite and developing deity, a figment of the minds of men who are themselves only the product of time plus space plus chance?”
• “Does God reign supreme over His universe, or does He even exist?”
• “Is God subject to a higher power or a community of powers?”
• “Was man, in his entirety, created in the image of God, or has his body and soul developed from the beast?”
• “Did man fall from the image of God, or did he arise from animalism and savagery?”
• “Is sin contrary to God’s will, or is sin merely the lack of full spiritual development?”
• “Are the doctrines of Judaism and Christianity a divine revelation, or only the outgrowth of innate human tendencies?”
• “Did man begin to worship God with fetishes and grew to monotheism, or did man begin worship with monotheism and fell into fetishism and animism?”
• “Did the Bible produce civilization, or did civilization produce the Bible?”
• “Are the Scriptures inerrant and infallible, a revelation from God, or are the Scriptures merely the record of progressive religious experience?”
• “Is salvation a supernatural intervention into the affairs of sinful men, or just the outgrowth of inherent natural forces seeking to feel sorrow?”
• “Does prophecy maintains its predictive element, and miracles their supernatural power or. are do these things that have a natural explanation?”