the theory of evolution - church of the eternal god · find evolution being taught in our schools,...

THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION

A FAIRY TALE FOR ADULTS?

This booklet is a free educational service, provided by the “Church of God, a Christian Fellowship inCanada,” in collaboration with the “Church of the Eternal God” in the United States of America.Printed in Canada in 2001. This booklet is not to be sold

Scriptures in this booklet are quoted from the New King James version (©1998 Thomas Nelson, Inc.Publishers) unless otherwise noted.

United StatesChurch of the Eternal God

PO Box 270519San Diego, CA 92198

CanadaChurch of God, ACF

Box 1480Summerland B.C V0H 1Z0

United KingdomGlobal Church of God

PO Box 2111Derby DE1 1ZR

BelgiumLe Siecle A Venir

Allee du Grand Cheniat, 30B-6280 Loverval


A FAIRY TALE FOR ADULTS?BY NORBERT LINK

34 The Theory of Evolution—A Fairy Tale for Adults?

the New Jerusalem Bible, �Becauseyou have kept my commandment topersevere, I will keep you safe in thetime of trial which is coming for thewhole world, to put the people of theworld to the test.�

The immediate future of thisearth looks grim. But if you are oneof God�s true followers, there is a wayout. Just as God protected Noah andhis family in an ark while the rest ofthe world perished in a flood, and asGod protected Lot and his daughtersby bringing them out of Sodom, soGod will protect His people here onearth. We will not have been removedfrom this earth in a secret rapture,spending our time in heaven withChrist, but we will be at a safe placehere on earth. Christ says in Luke21:28, �Now when these things begin tohappen, look up and lift up your heads,because your redemption draws near.�God is testing us today to see what�sin our hearts, to see if we will keepHis commandments. Will you be oneof those worthy of protection?

If we want to follow God, wemust believe what God says, as wepointed out at the beginning of this

booklet. And God tells us veryclearly in His inspired Word, theBible, that He created the heavensand the earth, as well as man. Wedid not evolve from animals, butman was created directly by God.

How accurately the Apostle Pauldescribed the wise and learned of hisday who believed the concept ofevolution, as we pointed out at thebeginning of this booklet! He statedin Romans 1:20-23, �For since thecreation of the world His [God�s]invisible attributes are clearly seen,being understood by the things that aremade, even His eternal power andGodhead, so that they are withoutexcuse�Professing to be wise, theybecame fools, and changed the glory ofthe incorruptible God into an imagemade like corruptible man and birds andfourfooted animals and creeping things.�

God is saying the same to all of ustoday. We also are without excuse ifwe replace the truth of God and Hiscreation with the ungodly idea ofevolution, essentially degrading manas descending from a mollusk. Whatan insult to mankind, and whatblasphemy toward man�s Creator!

Contents

What is the Theory of Evolution? 1

Is the Theory Provable? 2

Some Scientists Register Skepticism 3

“Missing Links” are Still Missing 4

No Proof for the Basic Tenets of Evolution 6

Evolution—a Fairy Tale For Grownups? 9

Is “Theistic Evolution” the Answer? 11

The Proof of Creation 13

The Earth Became Void and Empty 14

Man Created in God’s Image 15

The Barrier Between the Mind of Man and Animals 17

The Spirit in Man 19

Why Does Man Have a Spirit? 22

Do Animals Have a Spirit? 24

Why Some Animals are Extinct 26

In the Beginning… 28

Punishment for Sin 31

The Theory of Evolution—A Fairy Tale for Adults? 33

Isaiah add more insight into what isgoing to happen very soon. Isaiah29:6 tells us, �You will be punished bythe Lord of hosts with thunder andearthquake and great noise, with stormand tempest and the flame of devouringfire.� Isaiah 30:30 continues, �TheLord will cause His glorious voice to beheard, and show the descent of His arm,with the indignation of His anger andthe flame of a devouring fire, withscattering, tempest and hailstones.�

It doesn�t take a great deal ofimagination to realize the awesomedevastation that will occur again onthe earth, caused by comets, asteroidsor meteors. John writes about it inRevelation 6:12-13, �I looked whenHe opened the sixth seal, and behold,there was a great earthquake; and thesun became black as sackcloth of hair,and the moon became like blood. Andthe stars of heaven fell to the earth, as afig tree drops its late figs when it isshaken by a mighty wind.�

Revelation 8:7-12 says, �The firstangel sounded: And hail and firefollowed, mingled with blood, and theywere thrown to the earth. And a third ofthe trees were burned up, and all greengrass was burned up. Then the secondangel sounded: And something like agreat mountain burning with fire wasthrown into the sea, and a third of thesea became blood. And a third of theliving creatures in the sea died, and athird of the ships were destroyed. Thenthe third angel sounded: And a greatstar fell from heaven, burning like atorch, and it fell on a third of the riversand on the springs of water. The nameof the star is Wormwood; A third of thewaters became wormwood, and manymen died from the water, because it was

made bitter. Then the fourth angelsounded: And a third of the sun wasstruck, a third of the moon, and a thirdof the stars, so that a third of them weredarkened; A third of the day did notshine, and likewise the night.�

Darkness will again cover thewhole earth. But why? Why will Godbring such terrible destruction uponthe earth? The answer can be foundin several places in the Bible.Revelation 11:18 tells us that thetime has come that God �shoulddestroy those who destroy the earth.�Man continues to live in sin, andbecause of it, even the earth isaffected. Hosea 4:1-3 says, �The Lordbrings a charge against the inhabitantsof the land: There is no truth or mercyor knowledge of God in the land [Manwould rather believe in the atheisticconcept of evolution.] By swearingand lying, killing and stealing andcommitting adultery, they break allrestraint, with bloodshed after blood-shed. Therefore the land will mourn,and everyone who dwells there willwaste away, with the beasts of the fieldand the birds of the air, even the fish ofthe sea will be taken away.�

Man has forsaken God. He refusesto seek God and correct his sinfulways, so God will bring destructionto the entire earth. He has done itbefore, and He will do so again. Butyou need not be a victim of thosecatastrophes�there is a way ofescape if you are truly followingGod�keeping His laws, statutes andjudgments�if you love Him with allyour heart and your neighbor asyourself. How do we show love forGod? By keeping His command-ments. Note Revelation 3:10, from


The theory of evolution, teachingthat species developed graduallyinto other species, is widely

expounded to be the most logicalexplanation for the origin of plants,animals, mankind, and in fact, theentire universe. It holds that animalshave evolved over millions of yearsand that man is the latest product ofthis development�the top of theline, so to speak. Though Christian-ity was originally opposed to thisconcept, some groups graduallyembraced it, with the proviso,however, that God directed thewhole process. Other religiouspeople�Christian and non-Chris-tian alike�continue to rejectevolution in its entirety, believing inDivine creation.

While theology is divided on thesubject, many scientists no longerconsider evolution merely a theory.Rather, they regard it as fact, as ifscience had actually proven itsaccuracy. It is not surprising then tofind evolution being taught in ourschools, thus creating a conflict ofbeliefs between evolution andcreation. In our study of this subject,we will look closely at claims made tosupport this theory, as well asscientific concerns, and what theBible teaches us about God�screation. The real facts will becomequite apparent in this study, and maysurprise you!

WHAT IS THE THEORY OFEVOLUTION?

To start with, we need to under-stand what the theory of evolutionprofesses, and how the theory itselfbegan. In a nutshell, it states that,due to oxygen and other gases, alllife on earth began in an organic�soup.� Somehow, two cells devel-oped in that �soup� and all life cameinto existence through these twocells�one for plants and one foranimals. Mankind then is actuallynothing more than, as CharlesDarwin described it, �a descendantof a mollusk� or some other primor-dial life form.

This idea did not originate withCharles Darwin, although Darwinwas the creator of the present-daytheory of evolution. In ancient timesit was believed that life was con-nected to the four elements�earth,fire, water and air. Some philoso-phers thought that all things cameinto existence through water. Othersbelieved it was through air. TheGreek philosopher Aristotle [384-322 B.C.] taught that life evolvedfrom matter.

Science today teaches that ouruniverse came into being through a�big bang,� in which the universebegan as an explosion of incrediblyhot plasma from a very small pointthat then briefly expanded fasterthan the speed of light, and from


You can read about this giganticspiritual battle between the forces ofgood and the forces of evil in manyplaces in the Bible; i.e.; Isaiah 14,Ezekiel 28, Revelation 12:4, 2 Peter2:4, Luke 10:18.

Lucifer�s name, meaningLightbringer, was changed to Satan,meaning Adversary. The angelsunder him became known asdemons. And because of the sincommitted by Satan and his angels,the earth that they inhabited wasdestroyed. This physical destruction,caused by sudden catastrophes,explains part of the fossil record.Remember, fossils can only be formedin a sudden way. Gradual changesdon�t create fossils. Some fossils wereformed during other catastrophes,such as the world-wide flood. Again,such catastrophes took place becauseof sinful conduct of the inhabitantsof the earth. A lesson we shouldlearn from this is that sin has aprice�you reap what you sow. Thefossil record proves that evolution didnot take place, and could not havetaken place. Rather, fossils establishthe existence of sudden catastrophes.

But perhaps more importantly,the Bible tells us that such cataclys-mic events are not merely a thing ofthe past. Rather, because of thecontinuing sinful conduct of man-kind, they will happen again. Yes,God will surely bring destruction tothis earth again, to teach mankindthat sin does not pay. And, we arenot without warning from GodHimself.

Jesus Christ spoke repeatedly ofincreased earthquake activity justprior to His return to this earth.

Matthew 24:7 tells us that �there willbe famines, pestilences, and earthquakesin various places.� Isaiah 24:19-20warns us, �The earth is violentlybroken, the earth is split open, the earthis shaken exceedingly. The earth shallreel to and fro like a drunkard, andshall totter like a hut; its transgressionshall be heavy upon it.� Revelation11:13 tells us of a huge earthquakestill to come, in the very near future,�In the same hour, there was a greatearthquake, and a tenth of the city[Jerusalem] fell. In the earthquakeseven thousand men were killed.�

Big earthquakes can, of course,occur without any impact frommeteors. But as we saw, they can alsobe the result of such an impact. Andit is interesting that some of theseearthquakes soon to strike the earthare not �usual� earthquakes. NoteLuke 21:25-26, �And there will besigns in the sun, in the moon, and in thestars; and on the earth distress ofnations, with perplexity, the sea and thewaves roaring; men�s hearts failing themfrom fear and expectation of thosethings which are coming on the earth,for the powers of heaven will be shaken.�

Consider this account in Revela-tion 16:18, 20-21, �And there werenoises and thunderings and lightnings;and there was a great earthquake, sucha mighty and great earthquake as hadnot occurred since men were on theearth. Then every island fled away, andthe mountains were not found. Andgreat hail from heaven fell upon men,each hailstone about the weight of atalent. Men blasphemed God becausethe plague of the hail, since that plaguewas exceedingly great.�

Parallel scriptures in the book of


which the entire universe with all itsmatter and energy condensed. All ofthe planets, stars and galaxiessupposedly came from this event.

IS THE THEORY PROVABLE?Now, if one were trying to prove

the validity of statements made in acourt of law, one should ask, �arethese statements without contradic-tion?� and, �can they be proven to beaccurate?� Answering these two keyquestions relative to the subject ofevolution will help in our search ofthe truth of the matter.

So then, we must question theorigin of this small nucleus of matterand energy. We must also ask aboutthe origin of the laws of inertia andgravity that make planets rotate onan axis while orbiting the sun. Whatscientific facts prove this theory? Aclose examination reveals that thistheory indeed has many contradic-tions, and in fact, the scientificcommunity is divided on the subject.

In his book entitled �Starwatch,�author David Block, Ph.D., MSc.,and Fellow of the Royal Astronomi-cal Society, writes on page 140, �Theconventional big bang model of theuniverse is not the only possibleuniverse model. Our universe containsgalaxies and this is a serious problemin the standard big bang cosmology.Galaxies, and the nebulae insidethem, should not have formed.� Heessentially says that accepting the bigbang theory only brings up additionalperplexing questions.

Several years ago, ProfessorRobert Jastrow came to someremarkable conclusions and wrote abook entitled, �God and the As-

tronomers.� He stated, �The essenceof the strange developments is thatthe universe had, in some sense, abeginning�that it began at a certainmoment in time�Some scientistsare unhappy with the idea that theworld began in this way. Until recently,many of my colleagues preferred the�Steady State� theory, which holdsthat the universe had no beginningand is eternal. Theologians generallyare delighted with the proof that theuniverse had a beginning, butscientists are curiously upset. Theirreactions provide an interestingdemonstration of the response of thescientific mind�supposedly a veryobjective mind�when evidenceuncovered by science itself leads to aconflict with the articles of faith inour profession (pp. 3-5).

�Now three lines of evidence�the motions of the galaxies, the lawsof thermodynamics, and the life storyof the stars�pointed to one conclu-sion; all indicated that the universehad a beginning� There is noground for supposing that matter andenergy existed before and wassuddenly galvanized into action�It is simpler to postulate creation exnihilo�Scientists cannot bear thethought of a natural phenomenonwhich cannot be explained, evenwith unlimited time and money.There is a kind of religion in science�This religious faith of the scientist isviolated by the discovery that theworld had a beginning� Science hasproven that the universe explodedinto being at a certain moment. Itasks, what cause produced thiseffect? Who or what put matter andenergy into the universe? Was the


the windows of heaven, and thecanopy waters poured upon theEarth as torrential rains for 40 daysand 40 nights before slacking off tolight rain for the next 110 days��

But what started the whole thing?Here is one possible answer from thesame book. On page 62 it says, �Webelieve it�s plausible that a giganticmeteorite colliding with Earth couldhave jarred the Earth�s crust sotremendously that it set off theuniversal cataclysmic conditionsnecessary to have caused the risingof the sea beds, earthquakes,volcanoes and the collapse of thewater canopy.�

We understand, of course, that itwas God who brought about theflood. But as He used water todestroy the earth�s surface, it islegitimate to ask what else, based onBiblical evidence, God might haveused to bring about the results. Anda meteorite hitting the earth is apossible answer, since God has usedmeteorites at other times as well tobring destruction on this planet.Remember the destruction of Sodomand Gomorrah? Looking at theBiblical record describing thedestruction, we are prompted to askif perhaps God used meteorites orasteroids when destroying Sodomand Gomorrah. Let�s read Genesis19:24-28, �Then the Lord rainedbrimstone and fire on Sodom andGomorrah, from the Lord out of theheavens. So He overthrew [destroyed]those cities, all the plain, all theinhabitants of the cities, and what grewon the ground� The smoke of the land�went up like the smoke of a furnace.�

Consider also the plagues that

God poured out on Egypt at the timeof Moses. Exodus 9:22-33 says,�Then the Lord said to Moses, �Stretchout your hand toward heaven, thatthere may be hail in all the land ofEgypt�on man, on beast, and on everyherb of the field; throughout the land ofEgypt. So there was hail, and firemingled with hail, so very heavy thatthere was none like it in all the land ofEgypt since it became a nation�Thenthe thunder and the hail ceased, and therain was not poured on the earth.�

Another possible encounter witha meteor can be seen in Joshua10:11, �And it happened, as they fledbefore Israel�that the Lord cast downlarge hailstones from heaven onthem�There were more who died fromthe hailstones than those whom thechildren of Israel killed with the sword.�Also note Judges 5:20, �They foughtfrom the heavens; the stars from theircourses fought against [King] Sisera.�

PUNISHMENT FOR SINWe have seen that God, who

created the heavens and the earthand everything in them, has at timeschosen to punish sinful mankind bydestroying the entire surface of theearth, or in some cases, isolatedregions. We have seen that thesurface of the earth was destroyed, inall likelihood by asteroids, causingthe extinction of dinosaurs. Thecause for the destruction was sin.The Bible tells us that angelsoccupied the earth prior to man andtheir leader was Lucifer. But Luciferbecame proud and haughty. Heinduced the angels under him tofight against the very God whocreated them. Of course, they lost.


Universe created out of nothing orwas it gathered together out of pre-existing materials? And sciencecannot answer these questions�Thescientist�s pursuit of the past ends inthe moment of creation. This is anexceedingly strange development,unexpected by all but the theolo-gians. They have always acceptedthe word of the Bible: �In thebeginning God created heaven andearth (pp. 101-105).�� A profoundadmission indeed!

Is there scientific proof of thetheory of evolution? Let�s read somerather astonishing quotes fromleading scientists making such aclaim. Notice the arrogance andpride associated with these state-ments. Sir Julian Huxley wrote in�Evolution after Darwin�, 1960, Vol.3, p. 41, �The first point to makeabout Darwin�s theory is that it is nolonger a theory, but a fact. No seriousscientist would deny the fact thatevolution has occurred, just as hewould not deny the fact that theearth goes around the sun.� RichardGoldschmidt is quoted in �AmericanScientist,� 1952, Vol. 40, p. 84,�Evolution of the animal and plantworld is considered by all thoseentitled to judgment to be a fact forwhich no further proof is needed.�Richard Swann Lull in �OrganicEvolution,� 1948, p. 15 says, �SinceDarwin�s day, evolution has beenmore and more generally accepted,until now in the minds of informedthinking men there is no doubt thatit is the only logical way whereby thecreation can be interpreted andunderstood.�

SOME SCIENTISTSREGISTER SKEPTICISM

Although many scientists, as wellas most scientific and pseudo-scientific publications like to claimthat evolution is a fact for which nofurther proof is needed, this does notmean that it is, in fact, a fact.Increasing numbers of scientists haveuttered skepticism. Horatio Newmanwrote in �Evolution, Genetics, andEugenics,� 1932, 3rd ed., p. 57,�Reluctant as he may be to admit it,honesty compels the evolutionist toadmit that there is no absolute proofof organic evolution.� Professor ErnstMayr of Harvard wrote in 1963 in�Animals Species and Evolution,� onpp. 7 and 8, �The fact that thesynthetic [evolutionary] theory isnow so universally accepted is not initself proof of its correctness�thebasic theory is in many instanceshardly more than a postulate.�Professor of Physiology and Bio-chemistry, G.A. Kerkut, wrote in1960 in �Implications of Evolution,�on p. 157, �The evidence thatsupports it [evolution] is not sufficientlystrong to allow us to consider it asanything more than a workinghypothesis.�

In a German biology book writtenfor high schools, an insightfulstatement is made on pages 309 and310 (Schmeil, Allgemeine Biologie,10th ed., 1965): �It is doubtfulwhether experiences which havebeen made at the outer fringes ofevolution can be automaticallyapplied to the entire concept�It isalso totally unimaginable thatdesigned organs such as the eye, thenervous system, the wonderful


not too many spectacular occur-rences are necessary. For instance,Bangkok, Thailand, is located onlyone meter above sea level. A largeportion of the Netherlands is actuallyunder sea level. Many developingcountries, in fact, are threatened bythe possibility of tidal waves ortsunamis.

So it is possible, even from ascientific view, that meteors, asteroidsand comets hitting the earth, combinedwith resulting earthquakes, volcaniceruptions and sinking of the earth, aswell as huge tidal waves or tsunamis,could have resulted in the surface ofthe earth being covered with water.

However, the catastrophe thatoccurred some time between Genesis1:1 and Genesis 1:2, causing theextinction of all the creatures Godoriginally created, was not the onlyglobal catastrophe mentioned in theBible.

Perhaps the most familiarworldwide destruction is the flooddescribed in Genesis 7 and 8. Haveyou ever thought about what eventsmust have occurred to cause suchworldwide destruction? Quotingagain from the book �In Search ofNoah�s Ark,� page 58, ��[Gen.7:11] says, �On that day all thefountains of the great deep burstforth, and the windows of theheavens were opened�� A second-ary source of water on the antedilu-vian Earth existed in vast subterra-nean heated and pressurized reser-voirs either in the primeval crust orin the Earth�s mantle�The pres-sured waters below the crust sud-denly erupted at a point of weakness.Collapse at one point would cause a

chain reaction leading to similareruptions at many other pointsaround the world. The resultingatmospheric turbulence, combinedwith immense amounts of dust blownskyward from volcanoes, would begincondensation and precipitation ofthe canopy�The process would besimilar to modern day cloud seedingto cause rain.�

To interject here, many theolo-gians and scientists state that a vaporcanopy once surrounded the earth.Theologians refer to Genesis 7:11where it says that the �windows ofheaven were opened.� They feel thisis probably a reference to the pre-flood vapor canopy. Anotherreference to this canopy can be seenin Genesis 1:6-7, where we read thatGod made a firmament and dividedthe waters under the firmament fromthe waters above the firmament,giving reference to a water vaporcanopy. This canopy, scientistsexplain, would have created agreenhouse effect. This seems to beconfirmed in Genesis 2:5 where weare told that the antediluvian worldwas watered by dew or mist, not byrain. This dew would have beendependent upon humidity, satura-tion, temperature, dew point andcondensation�all made possiblethrough the water vapor canopy.

Continuing now from the book�In Search Of Noah�s Ark,� citingfrom page 59, �We see the possiblesignificance of the order of destruc-tion mentioned in Genesis 7:11.Subterranean upheavals within theoceans, volcanic eruptions andearthquakes and the gushing forth ofthose waters triggered the opening of


harmony of an organism, or thesurprisingly purposeful actions ofinstinct, just came into existencethrough accidents.�

It is interesting to note that evenDarwin himself saw the insurmount-able difficulties with his theory whenconsidering, for example, the eye.Writing in his �On the Origin ofSpecies� he says, �To suppose thatthe eye�could have been formed bynatural selection, seems, I freelyconfess, absurd in the highest degree.�One of the leading modern evolu-tionists, Harvard Professor George G.Simpson, concurs, �The origin ofsuch an organ as an eye, for example,entirely at random seems almostinfinitely improbable� (�This View ofLife,� 1964, p. 18) .

�Time Magazine� reported in1981 that former U.S. PresidentRonald Reagan remarked thatevolution was only a scientific theory,which was no longer consideredinfallible as was once thought to bethe case. He added that if schoolswanted to continue teachingevolution, they should also teachcreation at the same time.

In 1980, the late well-knownscientist at the Max-Plank Institute,Professor Joachim Illis, wrote anarticle in a German magazine, the�P.M.� In it he made some astonish-ing admissions regarding the allegedevolution of man, saying, �No seriousscientist dares to state today that weknow anything certain about theevolution of man.�

In 1996 �P.M.� published a specialedition entitled, �The Wonder ofEvolution.� It quotes Professor JosefReichhold on page 37, �Remember

the Neanderthal man? Originally, hewas portrayed as a distorted, mean-looking individual. Today, we haveuncovered more fossils, and theentire viewpoint has changed�When one day someone finds theremains of a tall Massai and of alittle Pygmy, then perhaps somescientists will declare that theybelonged to different species�Wemust remember that all designationsare nothing else but hypotheses. Thefossils that we find do not carry nametags.� This then, is the MAINproblem with the idea of evolution.Science uncovers fossils and desig-nates them in accordance withalready believed concepts. But ifthose concepts are inaccurate tobegin with, the subsequent conclu-sions are also inaccurate.

Martin Tzschschel wrote in �P.M.,��The picture of evolution consists ofmany little pieces and many bigholes. A scientist found a goodanalogy when discussing the attemptto explain evolution based on fossils.That would be like trying to recon-struct Tolstoi�s six volumes of Warand Peace out of only six unrelatedsingle pages�This reconstructiondoes not sound very convincing inlight of the many many holes. Inaddition�fossils had to be classifiedin such a way as to fit into the picture.When new fossils were found, theold picture became very often shaky.�

“MISSING LINKS” ARESTILL MISSING

As �P.M.� pointed out in itsarticle, �In Search of a New Dar-win,� science has never found fossilsthat would prove the existence of


Reading verses 14 and 15 again,�Then God said, Let there be lights inthe firmament of the heavens to dividethe day from the night�and let them befor lights in the firmament of theheavens to give light on the earth.� Inother words, let them become fullyvisible. Until then they dividednothing, as there was still a lot ofsmoke and ashes.

Commentator R.K. Harrison, inhis �Introduction to the Old Testa-ment,� points out that Genesis 1 iswritten as if the writer was on theearth at the time he wrote, anddescribes the phases of re-creation inthe way he would have seen them.From that standpoint, the writerwould have seen the sun, moon andstars on the fourth day when Godremoved the darkness caused by thefallout. All good and well, but, youmight ask, �If the darkness anddevastation on the earth described inGenesis 1:2 was the result ofasteroids hitting the earth, then whydo we read in verse 2 that the earthwas covered with water?�

Quoting again from �In Search ofNoah�s Ark,� the book describesvolcanic eruptions and the devasta-tion they cause. The book quotes theEncyclopedia Britannica, describinga volcanic eruption in 1883 on theisland of Java. It reads on pages 58and 59, �Until the night of August26-27, 1883, [the island] had an areaof about 18 square miles; at that timethe most terrific volcanic eruption ofmodern times destroyed most of theisland, so that its present area is onlysix square miles. One of the explo-sions produced the loudest noise everheard by man; the sound was heard

at a distance of 3000 miles. Theshock waves produced by the eruptionand the accompanying earthquakewere felt around the world. It wascomputed that the column of stones,dust and ashes projected from thevolcano shot up into the air for aheight of 17 miles or more. Tidalwaves produced by the eruptionattained a height of 50 feet andkilled more than 36,000 people alongthe coasts of Java and Sumatra. Thedust caused a definitive lowering oftemperature for two or three yearsand heavy rains worldwide during thesix weeks following the eruption.�

Such huge tidal waves can also becaused by earthquakes in the ocean,moving through the ocean, as onemagazine put it, with the speed of ajet airplane. For instance, in thespring of 1960, several earthquakesoccurred on the coast of Chile. Thesubsequent tidal waves causeddestruction as far away as Australiaand Japan. In Chile itself a portion ofthe coast 500 kilometers in lengthand 30 kilometers in breadth sankabout 2 meters. After the quake, saltwater from the ocean was foundinland for miles.

In December of 1811 and Februaryof 1812, several earthquakes hit theMississippi valley in Missouri, estimatedat 8.3 and 8.7 on the Richter scale.The Mississippi River changed itscourse, and because the earth sankat that location, a lake came intoexistence, called the Reelfootlake,which is located today at the borderof Tennessee and Kentucky.

As a matter of fact, scientists tellus that even today, in order to seemost of the earth flooded with water,


ANY evolution from one species intoanother species�say from a fish to areptile. But without such a transi-tion, the whole evolution theory hasno merits.

On pages 61 and 62 of the article,we read, �Never within the last 125years, has there been found a missinglink between reptile and bird, betweencrocodile and eagle, between turtleand dove. Whatever one unearthed�they were either distinctively thebones of a reptile or the bones of abird. With staged despair, theGerman scientist Otto Schindewolfremarked in 1950, �The original birdArchaeopteryx has jumped out of areptile egg.� In other words, there isno proof that nature bridged the gapbetween reptile and bird in manysmall steps, as Darwin�s teachingsdemand. To the contrary, all fossilsshow that there were in existencereptiles with scaly skin, and then,suddenly, there was the Archaeop-teryx with fully developed feathers.And what was in between? Inbetween, there was nothing�Darwin believed that, contrary tocattle breeding, changes or muta-tions between the species werepossible. He thought that in prin-ciple, the bounds and limits, whichthe cattle breeder is subject to, couldhave been crossed over by nature.

�But�we modern men cannotrely on this anymore, becauseotherwise, missing links between twospecies should have been found. Theproblem with missing links isoftentimes mentioned in the contextof the evolution from apes or monkeysto man. But the U.S. biologistGeorge Simpson complains, �Missing

links are almost a universal phenom-enon.� And his colleague RattreyTayler explains more specifically,�The evolution of approximately 26groups of mammals is totally unclear.So are the origins of insects. Theancestors of the fish are likewiseunknown. The first fish eggs whichwere found were already totallydeveloped, and the original insectscaptured in amber do not look muchdifferent than today�s specimen.��

Darwin himself, the founder ofthe modern evolution theory, wasnot unaware of the difficulties justdescribed. He thought, though, that,given enough time, missing links or,as he put it, �transitional forms,�would be found. Well, have they?Have recent news of so-calledscientific discoveries in China,linking birds and dinosaurs, changedthe picture? A popular televisionbroadcast ran a program on thisfinding, trying to show how birdsevolved from dinosaurs. They showeda dinosaur running and running,while magically losing its long tailand replacing it with wings. Thenthe dinosaur jumped and jumpeduntil he took off from the ground likean airplane. The absurdity of thiskind of thinking is laughable. Not allbirds fly. The ostrich, for example,does not fly. What happened? Didthe ostrich evolve back from a flyingbird to a non-flying one? And so itgoes with evolutionary reasoning.

There are scientists who found, orthink they found, a skeleton that, asone magazine put it, �could prove tobe the smallest known fossil of adinosaur.� But was it? Here�s what aJune 2000 article in �Der Spiegel,� a


asteroid. Yet, the program pointedout that it is more or less acceptedtoday that this asteroid destroyed atleast two-thirds of all living creatures,and that 90% of the earth was engulfedin flames and the smoke darkened thesky for months, if not years.

It is very uncomfortable to realize,as scientist Clark Chapman of theplanetary science institute explained,that an asteroid could hit the earthtomorrow. He stated that we knowthat they are out there, but that wehave not found about 90% of them.If we continue searching for them,we would need 100 years to locate99% of the asteroids that are circlingthe earth�and some of them are ahundred times bigger than the meteorthat crashed into Siberia in 1908.

Those warnings are not cheapadvertisements for Hollywood�scatastrophic movies. In July 1994,scientists viewed with astonishmentwhen 21 comets hit the planetJupiter. The second comet, calledNucleus 6, produced an explosion of6 million megatons. This catastropheoccurred within our solar system.Imagine the destruction if the comethad hit the earth! The programconcluded with a sobering remark,�The only thing that we know forsure is that one day, this earth will beonce again hit by a devastating rock.�

IN THE BEGINNING…The Bible confirms a catastrophic

event in the past that destroyed apreviously beautiful earth. This eventproduced darkness and devastationthat God had to remove when Herenewed the surface of the earth.Looking at Genesis 1 more carefully,

we can see that the darkness was theresult of comets or asteroids hittingthe earth, as well as subsequentvolcanic eruptions. Genesis 1:3 saysthat God said there should be light,and that there was light. But then weread that subsequently, God madethe sun, the moon and the stars. Isthis a contradiction? Was the greatskeptic Voltaire correct when heasked sarcastically, �How could therebe light, when there was not a sunyet?� The answer becomes clearwhen we remember what happenswhen a meteor or an asteroid or acomet hits the surface of the earth.The smoke from the flames candarken the sky for months, evenyears. Sunlight could not comethrough. God had to eliminate thedarkness so that the light of the suncould shine through to the earth.

But still, how can it be that Godmade the sun on the fourth day, afterHe had already made light on thefirst day? The answer is that theHebrew word translated �made� inverse 16 can also be translated �hadmade� or �will have made.� Onemust always consider the context.Remember in Genesis 1:1, �In thebeginning, God made the heavens andthe earth.� God did indeed make thesun, moon and stars in the beginning,though we are not told the timeframe of the original creation ofthese elements. Therefore, verse 16must be correctly translated thatGod HAD already made the sun,moon and stars. Then on the fourthday God eliminated all the smokeand dust so that the sun, moon andstars could be viewed again in fullclarity and strength.


very popular and widely respectedweekly German magazine, has to say.It quotes an article from �Science�magazine as stating, �The oldestanimal with feathers was not adinosaur.� The article points out thatanimals with feathers existed prior todinosaurs, and it concluded, �Thisfossil rules out the widely-held viewthat birds evolved from dinosaurs.�So you see, science itself is dividedon these subjects and so-called proofs.

If there is such disunity amongscientists as to the proof of theirtheories, then why has sciencetrusted in Darwin�s teaching fordecades? A good question, and theanswer is shocking. �P.M.� magazineexplains it well in its article, �InSearch of a New Darwin,� �Toexplain, one must remember theideology of the whole matter. Eventoday, scientists, if they want todepart from Darwin�s teaching ofevolution, must be afraid to receiveapplause from the wrong side�fromthe side of Bible-believing individu-als, who, even 125 years afterDarwin, still claim the accuracy ofthe Biblical story of creation.�

And so science continues toteach Darwinism and evolution,knowing full well that those conceptsare wrong. The �P.M.� article goes onto say, �Two years ago, [Professor]Illis showed that there is no knownexample of big mutations [develop-ments from one species into anotherspecies]. But Illis also pointed outthat we must not go back to theBible. The animals were not createdin six days, but in billions of years.And life does not exist on earth foronly 6000 years, although that is

what the Anglican ArchbishopJames Usher had figured out in 1860and disputed with Darwin.�

NO PROOF FOR THE BASICTENETS OF EVOLUTION

Other scientists concur regardingthe total lack of proof of �bigmutations.�

In 1903 Professor Thomas HuntMorgan wrote in �Evolution andAdaptation,� �Within the period ofhuman history we do not know of asingle instance of the transmutationof one species into anotherone�therefore it may be claimedthat the theory of descent is lackingin the most essential feature it needsto place the theory on a scientificbasis. This must be admitted� (p. 43).

Professor Dobzhansky stated in1941 in �Genetics and the Origin ofthe Species,� p. 80, �Systematicmutations [big mutations transform-ing one species into another] havenever been observed, and it isextremely improbable that speciesare formed in so abrupt a manner.�Professor George Simpson wrote in1961 in �Science Today,� on p. 36,�Obviously, such a process [ofmultiple mutations] has played nopart whatever in evolution.� And Dr.Maurice Caullery wrote in 1964 in�Genetics and Heredity,� on p. 119,�It does not seem, therefore, that thecentral problem of evolution can besolved by mutations.�

Now these are astonishingadmissions by scientists of basic flawsin their beloved theory. So it may notbe so surprising then, that theybecome very aggressive toward thosewho dare to question their validity,


The BBC presented a televisionprogram entitled, �The Doomsday-Asteroid,� reporting that in 1908 ameteor blasted into Siberia and setfree an amount of energy exceedingthe atomic bomb of Hiroshimahundreds of times. If the meteor hadcrashed into New York, half a millionpeople would have perished. Theprogram continued to explain that itcan be seen from old myths, as well asfrom the records of geology, that inthe past big objects hit the earth andproduced a lot of damage. The programstated that contrary to the records ofthe Bible talking about catastrophes,modern science had argued that thesurface of the earth was formedgradually through rain and wind.

This idea of the gradual forma-tion of the surface goes back toHuxley. Following that theory,science had rejected the concept ofany catastrophes in the past. Untilthe 20th century, so said the televi-sion program, catastrophes simplyhad no room within science. Butthen the geologist Gene Schoemakershowed that a huge crater in Arizonawas formed through an asteroid thathit the earth. More than 200 suchcraters have been identified on theearth, having been caused bymeteors.

The authors of �In Search ofNoah�s Ark,� Balsiger and Sellier,report on some of those incidents.They state on pages 62 and 63: �Themeteorite that fell in prehistorictimes near Winslow, Arizona, made ahole 4,500 feet across and 600 feetdeep. It flung out masses of rockweighing up to 7,000 tons and isestimated to have hurled out

altogether 400 million tons of rocks.The pressure of the impact exceeded1,000,000 pounds per square inch.

�The still vaster crater 15 milesacross at Ries Kessell in Bavaria alsowas made in prehistoric times by ameteorite the size of which musthave been enormous. One cannotavoid comparison with the greatmeteorite of 1908 that crashed intothe Tunguska valley in Siberia,destroying forests over a radius oftwenty miles, and producing earthtremors recorded throughout theworld. Although this meteoriteprobably weighed millions of tons, itmust have been small compared withthat that long before produced thecraters at Winslow and Ries Kessell.�

In the 1960s, geologists Louis andWalter Alvarez made an astonishingdiscovery. They found a layercontaining metals that appear on thisearth in only very small quantities,but that can be found frequently inmeteorites and asteroids. This layershowed up between the age ofdinosaurs and mammals. The ideawas compelling that asteroids wereresponsible for the extinction of thedinosaurs. But established sciencereacted to this thought with anger.On the BBC television programmentioned earlier, Schoemakerstated that science was simplyunwilling to even entertain thethought that a stone, the size of amountain, falling from the sky, wasresponsible for a global catastrophe.Schoemaker explained that theasteroid responsible for destroyingthe dinosaurs was probably 10kilometers in size, which, as he said,is still viewed as a relatively small


calling them �ignorant,� �un-learned,� �incompetent,� etc. As anold saying goes, �A good offense isthe best defense.� But we know, ofcourse, that attacking the truth doesnot make the error correct.

Since scientists admit that mutationscan�t fill the holes in evolution, whatcan? Some say, �natural selection� or�survival of the fittest� gives theanswer. Sir Julian Huxley claimed in1953 that natural selection is theONLY explanation of evolution.However, many scientists readilyadmit that this theory can NEVERexplain evolution. George Simpsonwrote in 1953 in �The MajorFeatures of Evolution,� on pp. 118and 119, �The theory [of naturalselection] is quite unsubstantiatedand has status only as a speculation.�

Gertrude Himmelfarb wrote in1962 in �Darwin and the DarwinianRevolution,� on p. 445, �A growingnumber of scientists�have come toquestion the truth and adequacy ofnatural selection.� Why is that so?Because selection, whether naturalor man-made, can create nothingnew. It only makes more of a specifictype already in existence. In otherwords, natural selection may explainthe survival of the fittest, but it cannever explain the arrival of thefittest. That�s why Professor E. W.Bride wrote in �Nature�: ��NaturalSelection� affords no explanation�ofany�form of evolution. It meansnothing more than �the survivorssurvive.� Why do certain individualssurvive? Because they are the fittest.How do we know they are the fittest?Because they survive.�

Faced with these kinds of

unanswerable problems, some haveproposed that evolution occurredthrough many small mutations thatwere passed on to the next genera-tions, until the many small mutationshad become big. This concept wasoriginally taught by Jean BaptisteLamarck and has become known as�Lamarckism.� However, science hassince proven this concept to bewrong, acknowledging that charac-teristics acquired by an individualduring his life may affect his body,but cannot bring about a correspond-ing change in his hereditary natureas carried by his reproductive cells.For example, if you lose a finger, yourchildren will still be born with tenfingers.

Some scientists claim that �thefossil record is the strongest evidenceof evolution� (Thomas Hunt Morgan,A Critique of the Theory of Evolu-tion, 1916, p. 24) or even that it is�the only evidence available� (W.R.Thompson, Journal of the AmericanScientific Affiliation, Vol. 12, March1960, p. 6). But what about thisevidence?

Professor West in �Compass,�May 1968, p. 216, writes, �Contraryto what most scientists write, thefossil record does not support theDarwinian theory of evolutionbecause it is this theory�which weuse to interpret the fossil record. Bydoing so we are guilty of circularreasoning if we say then the fossilrecord supports this theory.� Whatthe author is saying is that scientistsfind fossils and classify them asbelonging to a certain geological age.How and why? Because they �know�that evolution took place. Therefore,


much involved in the events takingplace here. Jesus Christ said that notone sparrow dies without the will ofthe Father.

Notice the question God asks Jobin Job 39:27, �Does the eagle mount upat your command, and make its nest onhigh?� This is an instinctive action, asscientists would say, but HOW doesthe eagle know when to do it? Wesee here God�s involvement in thisprocess. Let�s also note a certainanimal conduct in response to directintervention from God. Turn toJonah 2:10, �So the Lord spoke to thefish, and it vomited Jonah onto dryland.� A similar incident is recordedin 1 Kings 17:4 and 6, �And it will bethat you [Elijah] shall drink from thebrook, and I have commanded theravens to feed you there� The ravensbrought him bread and meat in themorning, and bread and meat in theevening, and he drank from the brook.�

When God wants to inspirehuman beings to do something, Heworks through their human spirit.Likewise, God deals with the spirit ofanimals when He wants them to dosomething. In any event, all theseconsiderations show how utterly falseis the theory of evolution, a theorythat only looks at physical things andtries to explain them strictly from aphysical standpoint. A spirit in man,as well as in animals, proves thatevolution cannot be true.

WHY SOME ANIMALS AREEXTINCT

Still, you might ask, doesn�textinction of certain animals supportthe evolutionary idea of �survival ofthe fittest�? Let�s take a closer look.

Many animals became extinct longbefore Noah�s flood, not because ofevolution or because of gradualadaptation and survival of the fittest,but simply because of catastrophes.Remember the Bible states that �Inthe beginning God created the heavensand earth. And the earth BECAMEvoid and empty, and it became dark onthe face of the deep.�

Here�s a quote from the magazine�The Wonder of Evolution.� Onpages 15 and 17, we read: �The massextinction 250 million years ago isperhaps the biggest catastrophe thathas ever visited our planet�90 to95% of all animals become extinct�Our clock keeps running�thensuddenly, the earth becomes shakenby another catastrophe� 65 millionyears ago, a big meteor out of spaceapproaches, ten kilometers indiameter. Near Mexico, it rams deepinto the earth and creates a giganticcrater. Huge amounts of dust andashes are thrown into the atmo-sphere. Firebrands and storms result,and volcanoes erupt, blowing evenmore ashes into the air. The earthbecomes dark. A natural catastropheof unimaginable proportions hasbegun, affecting first all the plants.Without sunlight they cannotsurvive. As a consequence, greatfamines break out, first amongst theplant eating animals, and ultimatelyamongst all living creatures on theplanet.� On page 29, it reiterates, �Itis assumed that the dinosaurs losttheir basis for living about 65 millionyears ago when a huge cometcrashed into the earth�a devastat-ing catastrophe that was accompa-nied by a winter, lasting for decades.�


the age of the rock is determined bythe fossil. If it�s a supposedly ancientfossil, the rocks are determined to beold � if it�s a supposedly more recentfossil, the age of the rock is deter-mined to be more recent as well. Canwe see how deceptive this method is?

Quoting from Professor HenryShaler Williams in �Geological Biology�,1895, p. 38, �The character of therocks themselves, their composition,or their mineral contents havenothing to do with settling thequestion as to their particular systemto which the new rocks belong. Thefossils alone are the means ofcorrelation.� But you may wonder ifin more recent years this reasoninghas changed. No, it hasn�t.

R. H. Rastall of CambridgeUniversity also observed the circularreasoning of science. Quoting himfrom the 1956 edition of the Ency-clopedia Britannica, he said, �Itcannot be denied that from a strictlyphilosophical standpoint geologistsare here arguing in a circle. Thesuccession of organisms has beendetermined by a study of theirremains buried in the rocks, and therelative ages of the rocks aredetermined by the remains of organismthat they contain.� We will laterexplain in detail the real story behindthe fossil record. Fossils were formedin a sudden way, not by gradualchanges. They do not support theevolution theoory at all, but they dosupport several catastrophic eventson this planet.

So what have we learned so far?We have learned that scientists areunable to provide any proof thatevolution did happen, and that any

so-called proofs amount to no morethan circular reasoning. Yet, sciencecontinues to teach evolution as fact,and people continue to believe it.WHY? It is because the alternative�the Biblical teaching of creation�isunacceptable to science. Such astatement may seem absurd, but iswell supported by the scientiststhemselves. Consider carefully theseadditional quotes from scientiststelling us to have faith in evolution,not in the Bible.

Dr. Louis T. More wrote in 1925in �The Dogma of Evolution,� �Themore one studies paleontology, themore certain one becomes that evolutionis based on faith alone, exactly thesame sort of faith which is necessaryto have when one encounters thegreat mysteries of religion.�

Charles Singer wrote in 1946 in�A Short History of Science,� on p.387, �Evolution is perhaps uniqueamong major scientific theories inthat the appeal for its acceptance isnot that there is evidence for it, butthat any other proposed interpreta-tion is wholly incredible.�

Arthur Keith, an evolutionaryscientist, admitted, �Evolution isunproved and unprovable. We believeit only because the only alternative isspecial creation which is unthink-able.� (B.G. Ranganathan �Origins?�1988, p. 22)

Finally, a quote from scientistD.M.S. Watson, essentially denyingDivine creation, �Evolution itself isaccepted by zoologists, not because ithas been observed to occur or can beproven by logical coherent evidence,but because the only alternative�specialcreation�is clearly incredible.�


no longer a match for the youngchild? This barrier, as we have seen,was the human spirit in the little boy.But what gave the chimpanzee theability to even learn what he did,limited as he was? And you mighthave heard about the famous gorilla,Koko, who apparently can communi-cate to an extent in sign language?How can we explain such intelligence?

We already know that God, aSpirit being, created all matter andenergy out of spirit. We read that ifHe were to take back His spirit, allmatter would cease to exist. NoticeNumbers 16:22, �Then they fell ontheir faces and said, O God, the God ofthe spirits of all flesh�Again, Mosesuses the same expression in Number27:16, �The God of the spirits of allflesh.� Is this a reference to humanbeings only? It says, �all flesh.�

In the account of the flood in thebook of Genesis, the term �all flesh�clearly refers to animals, as well ashumans. For instance, Genesis 7:15says that the animals went into theark, �two by two, of all flesh in which isthe breath of life.� And later in verse21 we are told that �all flesh died thatmoved on the earth: birds and cattleand beasts and every creeping thing thatcreeps on the earth, and every man.�But notice verse 22, �All in whosenostrils was the breath of the spirit oflife, all that was on the dry land, died.�This refers to a spirit residing inliving creatures besides man.

Another interesting passage isfound in Ecclesiastes, where KingSolomon points out that just basedon physical components, there is nodifference between man and animals.We read in Ecclesiastes 3:19-20, �For

what happens to the sons of men alsohappens to animals; one thing befallsthem: as one dies, so dies the other.Surely, they all have one breath; manhas no advantage over animals, for all isvanity. All go to one place: all are fromthe dust, and all return to dust.� Butthen Solomon asks a remarkablequestion in verse 21, showing that,just as man has a spirit in him,animals also have a spirit. Readingfrom the New Revised StandardVersion, �Who knows whether thehuman spirit goes upward and the spiritof animals goes downward to the earth?�

We already saw that Solomonsays in Ecclesiastes 12:7 that thehuman spirit of man does go upwardto God at the time of man�s death.His point here is that we don�t knowwhat happens to the spirit of animalswhen they die. The Bible simply doesnot tell us. But the Bible states thatanimals have a spirit, too. Thisexplains what science cannotexplain�how animals communicateamong themselves. Killer whaleshave been observed getting intoformation to attack a blue whale.Bees, through a complicated dance,�tell� their fellow bees where pollencan be found.

This also explains how Godcommunicates with animals, whetherto bring in motion�in very specialcircumstances�instinctive behavior(such as, how birds know when tostart flying to warmer climates), orwhether to motivate animals to veryspecific individual conduct in a givensituation. In our sophisticatedmaterial world, we sometimes neglectto realize that God, who has createdthis world, also sustains it. He is very


(B.G. Ranganathan �Origins,� p. 22).Attorney Philip Johnson wrote a

book, entitled, �Darwin on Trial.� Init, he states on pages 59 and 56, �Wepaleontologists have said that thehistory of life supports [the story ofgradual adaptive change], all the whilereally knowing that it does not�[The]sudden appearance and statis [lackof change] of species in the fossilrecord is the opposite of what theDarwinian theory would predict.�

British Scientist ChandraWickramasinghe summarized theproblem this way, �The generalscientific world has been bamboozledinto believing that evolution hasbeen proved. Nothing could befurther from the truth� There is noevidence for any of the basic tenetsof Darwinian evolution. I don�tbelieve there ever was any evidencefor it. It was a social force that tookover the world in 1860, and I think ithas been a disaster for science eversince.� Did you get that? It was asocial force, not scientific fact. Peoplechose to believe a lie, and indeed,today they still cling to it. LouisBounoure, a biologist and zoologistfrom France, put it this way: �Evolu-tion is just a fairy tale for grownups.�

EVOLUTION—A FAIRY TALEFOR GROWNUPS?

Some time ago, a program wasshown on television entitled, �TheMysterious Origin of Man.� It washosted by actor Charlton Heston,known from such movies as �TheTen Commandments� and �BenHur.� Mr. Heston stated thefollowing in the program, �Some-times artifacts are found that break

all the rules [of evolutionary timetables]� What happens when wefind a modern human skull in rockstrata far beneath the oldest of man�sancestors?�

To answer this question, theprogram interviewed Dr. RichardThompson and Michael Gremo, co-authors of the book, �ForbiddenArchaeology,� in which they listedliterally hundreds of so-calledunexplainable artifacts. MichaelGremo stated that �we are talkingabout a massive cover-up.� Dr.Thompson elaborated, �What wefind is a knowledge filter. People filterout things which don�t fit, whichdon�t make sense in terms of theirparadigm. In science you find thatevidence that does not fit theaccepted paradigm tends to beeliminated. It�s not taught, it�s notdiscussed.�

Another person who was inter-viewed in the program was Britishauthor Richard Milton, who wrote abook entitled, �Shattering the Mythsof Darwinism.� He stressed what wealready know��So far,� he said, �themissing link is still missing.� Whenasked why he criticized Darwinismwithout offering an alternative, heresponded, �It seems to me that ifDarwinism is wrong, somebody hasgot to point the finger.�

The program also discussed theso-called Java man, which, until1984, was considered to be a linkbetween man and ape. It was pointedout that today it is a scientific factthat the Java man was not a man atall, but rather an extinct ape. Anotherfossil, called Lucy, was claimed to bea link between ape and man. Michael


awareness. He says in Proverbs20:27, �The spirit of a man is thelamp of the Lord, searching all the innerdepths of his heart.� The NewJerusalem Bible renders this verse,�The human spirit is the lamp ofYahweh�searching the deepest self.�

Turning now to the New Testa-ment, we find an interesting state-ment regarding the spirit in man inActs 17:16 and 17, �Now while Paulwaited for them at Athens, his spiritwas provoked within him when hesaw that the city was given over to idols.Therefore he reasoned in the synagoguewith the Jews and with the Gentileworshippers, and in the marketplacedaily with those who happened to bethere.� Some who read passages likethese erroneously conclude thatthose statements refer to God�s HolySpirit. But this is not the case. TheBible distinguishes clearly betweenthe spirit in man and the Holy Spirit.God gives to everyone the spirit ofman, apparantly at the time ofconception, while only those whomGod specifically calls, He grants HisHoly Spirit.

Paul says in Romans 8:14-16, �Foras many as are led by the Spirit of God[the Holy Spirit], these are the sons ofGod. For you did not receive the spiritof bondage again to fear [a referencehere to Satan, the god and spirit ofthis world], but you received the Spiritof adoption [or better, sonship] bywhom we cry out, Abba, Father. TheSpirit [God�s Holy Spirit] Himselfbears witness with our spirit that weare children of God.�

Paul speaks very clearly about twospirits�the spirit of man and theHoly Spirit. Notice in 1 Corinthians

2:11 and 14, �For what man knows thethings of man except the spirit of theman which is in him. Even so no oneknows the things of God except the Spiritof God� But the natural man [a personwho does have the spirit of man, butwho does not have the Holy Spirit ofGod] does not receive the things of theSpirit of God, for they are foolishness tohim; nor can he know them, becausethey are spiritually discerned.�

So we see that it is the spirit inman that explains the vast differ-ences in self-awareness, intellect andintelligence between man andanimals. This fact alone disprovesDarwin�s theory of evolution. Andthough science widely promotes thetheory of evolution, there are a fewscientists who do recognize that manhas a spiritual component withinhim. Listen to this astonishingstatement from brain researcher WolfSinger, as recently quoted in �DerSpiegel.� He states, �In this mostcomplex matter of the universe [thehuman brain] something resides thatrecognizes itself as �I.� This �I� isethereal. The human spirit cannot bemeasured with any balance in the graysubstance��

DO ANIMALS HAVE ASPIRIT?

Are animals just �robots� withoutany spiritual components? Clearly,they don�t have the same spirit asman, but they have some kind ofspirit in them that gives them theinstincts God designed for eachanimal kind. Remember the youngchimpanzee that was able to developto a certain level of intelligence, andthen reached a point where he was


Gremo explained, �I was at aconference of paleontologists wheremany of them were making the casethat she was hardly distinguishablefrom an ape or a monkey.� RichardMilton concurred, �This is merely aninterpretation�an interpretation ofone group. These same bones can be,and they have been, taken byscientists to identify simply anextinct ape�they have nothing todo with us at all.�

In light of those admissions andfindings, Mr. Heston made thefollowing remarks: �So far no missinglinks have been found at all. So whathappens to the evolutionary model ifthe missing link does not exist at all?The model simply collapses.� Thisindictment against the scientificmethod is repeated in a book entitled,�Apes, Man and Morons,� written byevolutionary anthropologist ErnestAlbert Hooton in 1970. He states onp. 107, �Heretical and non-conform-ing fossil men were banished to thelimbo of dark museum cupboards,forgotten or even destroyed.�

Here�s a quote from anotherarticle published in the �P.M.�magazine by Professor Joachim Illis,entitled, �What Do We Know AboutThe Evolution Of Man?� It containseye-opening admissions as to howscience has invented, and keeps inoperation, the fairy tale of evolution.Professor Illis writes, �Missing factsand gaps in the building of thetheory are supplemented withtheoretical missing links�, and inthis way, the magician of biologypresented a completed trunk of life-forms, which arises from the organic

soup�to its proud height, contain-ing as branches all present andextinct animals and plants. Merechance of correct mutations, as wellas the concept of the survival of thefittest, according to Darwinism, werealone responsible for this trunk andits branches, which evolved all bythemselves. Man has a similar fate asthe ape, because he, too, is�theproduct of a material process withoutany purpose and design; he is thehighest coincidental or accidentalassembly of energy and matter, aproduct of chance.

�Darwinists think today asHaeckel did 100 years ago, but in themeantime, one should have learnedthat chance is not even a scientificexplanation. Most biologists do notlive comfortably any more in theshaky building of Darwinism. That isso, as we have never found any bigmutations (that is, changes thatwould show that one species coulddevelop into another species)�andwe have never found any fossils thatcould qualify as a link between thespecies. Those missing links areabsolutely necessary, as they alonecan fasten the branches to the trunkand the tree, and they must thereforehave existed.

�Pitecanthropos and the Nean-derthal man are upon closer exami-nation not apes at all, but realmembers of the species man. Thefamous original bird, Archaeopterix,which was listed as a link betweenreptile and bird, has now beendeclared as a real reptile whichcaught, while running, butterflieswith its feathered forelegs.�


When a person dies, his bodyreturns to dust. But the spirit of manin him has recorded the appearanceof the person, the personality, thepersonal attributes, and God givesthe spirit of that person back into thenewly created physical body. Let�sread Luke 8:49-55, �While He wasstill speaking, someone came from theruler of the synagogue�s house, saying tohim, Your daughter is dead. Do nottrouble the Teacher. But when Jesusheard it, He answered him, saying, Donot be afraid, only believe, and she willbe made well. When He came into thehouse, He permitted no one to go inexcept Peter, James and John, and thefather and the mother of the girl. Nowall wept and mourned for her; but Hesaid, Do not weep; she is not dead, butsleeping. And they ridiculed Him,knowing that she was dead. But He putthem all outside, took her by the handand called, saying, Little girl, arise.Then her spirit returned, and shearose immediately.� Jesus comparesthe death of a person with a dream-less sleep, out of which the personcan awake. Remember when Jesussaid that Lazarus was sleeping. Hewas in fact dead, but Christ knewthat He would wake him up out ofthat sleep or death.

Just as the Bible teaches aresurrection to physical life, so it alsoteaches a resurrection to spirituallife. Those who died after havingbeen counted worthy to enter theKingdom of God at the time of Christ�ssecond coming, will have part in aspiritual resurrection, as the ApostlePaul explains in 1 Corinthians 15:35-38, 42-44, �But someone will say,�How are the dead raised up? And with

what body do they come?� Foolish one,what you sow is not made alive unless itdies. And what you sow, you do not sowthat body that shall be� But Godgives� a body as He pleases� So alsois the [spiritual] resurrection from thedead [to spiritual life]: The body issown in corruption [flesh and blood],it is raised in incorruption�It is sown anatural body, it is raised a spiritualbody.� But as with a resurrection tophysical life, the resurrection tospiritual life will also incorporate thespirit that was in man and thatrecorded the person�s characteristics.

The spirit in man imparts themind and the intellect of man � aspirit that animals don�t have. Notewhat Job�s friend, Zophar, understoodabout this spirit in Job 20:2-3,�Therefore my anxious thoughts makeme answer�The spirit of myunderstanding causes me to answer.�Elihu would later agree with thisassessment. The New JerusalemBible translates Job 32:8, �There is,you see, a spirit residing in humanity,the breath of God conferring intelli-gence.� Let�s also read verse 18,going back to the New King JamesBible, �For I am full of words; thespirit within me compels me.�

One of the writers of the Psalms,Asaph, also understood that it wasthe spirit within him that motivatedhim to think and gave him intelli-gence. He says in Psalm 77:6, �I callto remembrance my song in the night; Imeditate within my heart, and my spiritmakes diligent search.� King Solomon,who wrote the books of Proverbs,likewise confirmed that it is the spiritin man that grants human under-standing and is responsible for self-


IS “THEISTIC EVOLUTION”THE ANSWER?

A famous German TV moderator,Dr. Franz Alt, wrote a book severalyears ago entitled, �Love is Possible.�He pointed out, �We were at no timein our development mouse, ape ortadpole. We were, from the begin-ning, humans. Man did not evolvefrom animals. More and morescientists consider that the belief in aCreator is much less speculative thanthe belief in a big bang or an organicsoup, out of which everythingsupposedly developed. The theory ofaccidental creation reminds me of aprinter who threw all his letters outof the window, hoping to find lateron the street, just by chance,Goethe�s Faust� The theory ofchance is the mentally poorest of allexplanations for the existence of theworld. The atheism of modernmaterialism�do[es] not give us anyanswers to the�question as to whatis the purpose of life.�

These are intriguing words. Canevolution tell us WHY we exist? Ofcourse not! And neither does it evenattempt to do so. In the P.M.magazine, �The Wonder of Evolu-tion,� we are told, �At the beginning,chance reigned�.There is no planfor creation�Man, too, has evolved.He is not a crown of creationdesigned by God, but as all mammals,the latest product of a mollusk�Spirit, morals and even the belief inGod are only, according to Darwin, aproduct of the brain structure.� IFthat were true, then life wouldindeed be hopeless. Then we mightas well live for today, becausetomorrow we are dead and gone.

Yes, the Theory of Evolution lacksanswers to these and many otherquestions. For instance, evolutioncannot explain the enormousdifference in intelligence andintellect between man and all otheranimals. Professor Illis discussed thisdilemma in another article entitled,�Can Apes Still Become Humans?�He wrote, �Not one scientist hasbeen able to explain WHY the apedeveloped into man�. We cannoteven postulate convincingly thatman developed out of the ape�andnot that the ape developed out ofman�These are strange things thatshow us that man�s development is amysterious matter that science doesnot understand�Today it is clearthat evolution cannot be explainedby science�Man is separated fromanimals (including the highestanimals, the apes) through unbridge-able mental gaps�This strangebeing, man, does only existonce�All these characteristicswhich make us unique were acquiredaccidentally�Apes cannot developinto man, unless an unexplainablemiracle occurs.�

The P.M. magazine, �The Wonderof Evolution,� confirms that man�sintelligence cannot be explainedscientifically. They point out on page60, �What is�the unique criterionof man�s brain? Is it constructeddifferently�? �No,� explains GerhardtRoth, Director of Brain Research atthe University of Bremen. �The brainof the whale is even more complexthan ours�� Does man then haveunique, higher developed nervecells? Roth answers again in thenegative. �Under the microscope, you


God, that spirit does not continue tolive consciously, apart from the body.Rather, God �stores� it, so to speak,in heaven, until He unites it at thetime of the resurrection of man witha new spiritual or physical body. Theconcept that man�s soul is immortal isas wrong as the concept that man�sspirit continues to live consciouslyafter death. Rather, the body�orsoul�dies, and the spirit of manreturns to God to await a resurrection.

Note Ecclesiates 9:4-6, �But forhim who is joined to all the living thereis hope� For the living know that theywill die, but the dead knownothing�Also their love, their hatred,and their envy have now perished�And verse 10, �Whatever your handfinds to do, do it with your might, forthere is no work or device or knowledgeor wisdom in the grave where you aregoing.� In other words, there is noconscious activity after a person dies.The spirit does not continue in therealm of consciousness.

Jesus Christ also made it clearthat dead people do not continue tolive on. Rather, the dead will have tobe brought back to life through aresurrection from the dead. InMatthew 22:31-32, He asked theSadducees, since they did not believein the resurrection, �But concerningthe resurrection of the dead, have younot read what was spoken to you byGod, saying, I am the God of Abraham,the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?God is not the God of the dead, but ofthe living.� If the dead persons ofAbraham, Isaac and Jacob hadsomehow continued to live con-sciously after their death, including aconscious existence of their spirit

that had returned to God, thenChrist�s words to the Sadduceeswould have been without sense.

WHY DOES MAN HAVEA SPIRIT?

WHY does God give each humanbeing a spirit? The spirit in manrecords all the human characteristicsof the person, as well as his or heroutward appearance. At the time ofthe resurrection, the spirit of thedead person is combined with a newbody of the dead person. This means,all the experiences and memoriesand ideas of the former life are backin the resurrected individual, and theresurrected person will also look thesame way he or she did in theirformer life.

The Bible teaches that there is aresurrection of people back tophysical life, and also a resurrection tospiritual life. In the book of Ezekiel, aphysical resurrection of the entirehouse of Israel is described. Theprophet sees in a vision a valley withdry bones. Let�s read, this time in theNew American Bible, what happens,beginning in Ezekiel 37:7, �I proph-esied as I had been told; and even as Iwas prophesying I heard a noise; it wasa rattling as the bones came together,bone joining bone. I saw the sinews andthe flesh come upon them, and the skincover them, but there was no spirit inthem. Then He said to me, �Prophesy tothe spirit, prophesy, son of man, and sayto the spirit, ��Thus says the Lord God,From the four winds come, o spirit, andbreathe into these slain that they maycome to life.�� I prophesied as He toldme, and the spirit came into them; theycame alive and stood upright, a vast army.�


cannot distinguish man�s brain cellsfrom those of an ape.��

Though the brain material ofhumans and animals are not distin-guishable, one cannot deny differ-ences in the way the brains function.An astonishing scientific article inthe German biological encyclopediaentitled �Brehm�s Tierleben,�explains it thus, �The questionwhether animals are intelligent ismostly answered by lay persons inthe affirmative�Oftentimes, actionsby animals appear to beintelligent�Those mechanicalactions which are not understood bythe animals are called instinct. Itshould be clear, however, that this isjust a designation and not anexplanation of this totally unex-plained phenomenon. Instinct hasbeen one of the most mysterious andstrangest secrets of nature�Onlyman lives in an environment inwhich intelligence, considerationand accountability is demanded�the animals know none of it.� Thesescientific comments should promptus to wonder WHY do thosedifferences exist? If man is only thehighest developed animal, why doeshe KNOW what the animals doNOT know?

At this point, religion tries tointervene and explain the unexplain-able in a spiritual way. The notionthat evolution has taken place iswidely accepted. But it is �spiritual-ized.� That is, supposedly Goddirected the process of evolution andHe intervened at certain stages,under certain circumstances, sort of�helping it along.� It is believed thatman evolved from apes, but that

along the way, God gave the evolvingcreature, man, certain mental andspiritual abilities, thereby separatinghim from the animals. But thistheological attempt to teach the conceptof a theistic evolution overlooks the mostimportant problem. First, as we haveseen, evolution is not scientificallyproven, a fact that is admitted bysome leading scientists. Second, theconcept of a theistic evolution issimply irresponsible and actuallydamaging, as it rejects the clearteachings of the Bible withouthaving any reason to do so, as wewill see shortly. And we will alsodiscover that the fossil record, forexample, does not contradict thebiblical teachings in any way.

Those who have analyzed the issueof a theistic evolution, admit that itclearly contradicts the teachings of theBible. The article in �Brehm�sTierleben� points out, �The ancientidea, which had been mainly taughtby Christianity, postulated that manwas the crown of creation, a uniquebeing, and that his soul, his intelli-gence and his language constituted aunsurpassable partition wall betweenhim and the animals. But with thefundamental teachings of Darwin,this partition had to begin to shake.�

The P.M. magazine, �The Wonderof Evolution,� concurs, �For manycenturies, man considered himself asthe crown of creation. It wasaccepted what was written in theBible, �And God said, Let us makeman, an image equal to us, to ruleover the fish of the sea and over thebirds of the air.� Then CharlesDarwin appeared� His teaching isuniversally known and has deeply


in Judah.�� Even King Cyrus realizedthat God had influenced his spirit tomake this proclamation.

But the work of rebuilding thedestroyed temple progressed veryslowly. There was a lack of leadershipto motivate the people to accomplishthe task at hand. Let�s read how Godintervened, in Haggai 1:4, �So theLord stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel�,governor of Judah, and the spirit ofJoshua�and the spirit of all theremnant of the people; and they cameand worked on the house of the Lord ofhosts, their God.�

The Bible strongly indicates thatGod gives the human spirit at thetime of conception, and then takes itback at the time of death. We read inZechariah 12:1, �Thus says the Lordwho stretches out the heavens, lays thefoundation of the earth, and forms thespirit of man within him.�Ecclesiastes 12:7 says, �Then the dustwill return to the earth as it was, andthe spirit will return to God who gaveit.� When the spirit in man leaves aperson, that person is dead. James2:26 says, �For as the body withoutthe spirit is dead, so faith withoutworks is dead also.�

Jesus Christ Himself, at the timeof His death, cried out to the Fatherto receive His spirit. What exactlydid He say? Let�s read in Luke 23:46,�And when Jesus had cried out with aloud voice, He said, �Father, into Yourhands I commit My Spirit.� Having saidthis, He breathed His last.� When Hedied, His human spirit returned toGod, as we read in Ecclesiastes.Hebrews 12:22-23 also confirms thatthe spirit of man returns to God inheaven when the person dies. �But

you have come to�the city of the livingGod, the heavenly Jerusalem [when wepray, we appear before God inheaven], to an innumerable companyof angels,�to God the Judge of all, tothe spirits of just men made perfect��

In the book of Job, Elihu, underGod�s inspiration, tells us, �If He[God] should set His heart on it, if Heshould gather to Himself His Spirit andHis breath [since God gives bothbreath and spirit, they both belong toHim and are His. But the spirit beingtalked about here is the spirit inman, not the Holy Spirit, which isaltogether different], all flesh wouldperish together, and man would returnto dust� (Job 34:14 and 15).

When God decided to destroyman in the flood, He made thisstatement in Genesis 6:3, �And theLord said, �My Spirit shall not strive [orabide] with [or in] Man forever, for heis indeed flesh; yet his days shall be onehundred and twenty years.�� WhatGod is saying here is that He woulddestroy man through a flood within120 years from then. This spiritabiding in man cannot be a referenceto God�s Holy Spirit, as man was tobe wiped out because of his own evildoings. We know, on the other hand,that God gives His Holy Spirit onlyto those who obey Him, as we readin Acts 5:32. So, the spirit referred toin Genesis 6:3 is a reference to thespirit of man, which is temporary.Isaiah 57:16 tells us, �For I will notcontend forever, Nor will I always beangry; for the spirit [of man] would failbefore Me, and the souls which I havemade.�

Understand though, that when aman dies and his spirit returns to


affected and shaken the Christianfaith�His expedition [with the shipBeagle] changes the theologian[Darwin. Note that Charles Darwinwas originally a theologian]. Hebegins to doubt the Biblical story ofcreation��

THE PROOF OF CREATIONWhile scientists tell us the

beginning of the universe began witha �big bang,� the Bible tells ussomething altogether different. Godsays in Genesis 1:1, �In the beginning,God created the heavens and theearth.� The word �heavens� is plural,referring to the entire universe. InIsaiah 45:11-13, God says, �Thus saysthe Lord, the holy One of Israel, andHis Maker:� I have made the earth,and created man on it. I�My hands�stretched out the heavens, and all theirhost [the stars, planets, etc.] I havecommanded.�

The New Testament confirmsthese claims in Hebrews 11:3, �Byfaith we understand that the worldswere framed by the word of God, sothat the things which are seen were notmade of things which are visible.�Hebrews 1:10 tells us, �You, Lord, inthe beginning laid the foundation of theearth, and the heavens are the work ofyour hands.� Again, we are told thatit was God who brought intoexistence everything there is.Revelation 4:11 states, �You areworthy, O Lord, to receive glory andhonor and power; for You created allthings, and by Your will they exist andwere created.�

You might wonder whether the Bibleallows for creation through evolution.The answer is clearly �NO.� We just

read how in the beginning Godcreated the heavens and the earth�the entire universe�out of thingsthat are not material, things thatcannot be seen. In other words, Goddid not create the universe out of anucleus of energy or matter, whichthen exploded. We also read thatGod created the earth and theuniverse at the same time. However,man was not created at that time, aswe will explain shortly. Nothing issaid, though, how long ago thishappened. The creation of the earthand the universe could have beenmillions or billions of years ago. TheBible also indicates that the creationdid not gradually evolve over time.

Note God�s purpose for Hiscreation in Isaiah 45:18, �For thussays the Lord who created the heavens,who is God, who formed the earth andmade it, who has established it, who didnot create it in vain, who formed it to beinhabited.� The Hebrew word for �invain� is �tohu,� which means �empty�or �in a state of waste.� When Godcreated the earth, it was not createdin a state of being empty or waste.Rather, we read in the book of Job,that the angels were delighted whenthey saw the beauty of the earth, asGod had created it. Job 38:4-7, �Wherewere you when I laid the foundations ofthe earth� when the morning starssang together, and all the sons of Godshouted for joy?� The angels would nothave shouted for joy if the earth hadbeen an empty, wasted, uninhabitableplanet, which had to wait millions ofyears for physical life to evolve. No,the earth was created in a beautifulcondition, capable, at the time of itscreation, of supporting life.


say that memory is recorded in thehuman spirit, whether or not it isalso recorded in the �gray matter� ofthe brain. This human spirit alsoadds to man a spiritual and moralfaculty not possessed by animals.�

Most people know nothing aboutthe existence of the spirit in man�even many religious people�laypersons and theologians alike. Whenthey read passages in the Bibledescribing the spirit in man, theyassume the Bible is talking about thesoul. But the soul is not a non-physical component of the humanbeing. The soul, according to theBible, is totally physical. The Bibledoes not teach the concept of animmortal soul. Rather, we read inEzekiel 18:4, �The soul who sins shalldie.� The word �soul� in the Biblerefers to the living body of both manand animals. In Revelation 16:3, weread that every living soul�bothmen and beasts�died in the sea.The soul does NOT distinguish manfrom animals. Rather, the spirit inman is THE distinguishing factorbetween man and animals. It explainsman�s superiority over the animalsand totally disproves the concept ofevolution. In Romans 8:16, and in 1Corinthians 2:11, more fully dis-cussed below, it is expressly statedthat there is a spirit in each man,which spirit is different from God�sHoly Spirit.

In the book of Isaiah we are toldthat each human being has a spiritwithin him. �Thus says God the Lord,Who created the heavens and stretchedthem out, Who spread forth the earthand that which comes from it, Who givesbreath to the people on it, and spirit to

those who walk on it.� (Isaiah 42:5).We also learn that God some-

times influences man�s spirit for Hispurpose. We could say that Godinspires or motivates a person by�stirring up� the spirit in that person.Note 1 Chronicles 5:25-26, �Andthey [Israel] were unfaithful to theGod of their fathers, and played theharlot after the gods of the peoples of theland, whom God had destroyed beforethem. So the God of Israel stirred upthe spirit of Pul, king of Assyria�Hecarried the Reubenites, the Gadites, andthe half-tribe of Manasseh into captivity.�

Another example is found in 2Chronicles 21:16-17, �Moreover theLord stirred up against Jehoram thespirit of the Philistines and theArabians�And they came into Judahand invaded it, and carried away all thepossessions that were found in the king�shouse, and also his sons and his wives.�

Later, when God saw to it thatHis word and promise would befulfilled to rebuild the destroyed cityof Jerusalem and the temple, Heinspired King Cyrus of Persia to issuea decree, permitting the Jews whowere captured in Babylon, to returnto Jerusalem. Both 2 Chronicles36:22 and Ezra 1:1 record whatexactly happened. �Now in the firstyear of Cyrus king of Persia, that theword of the Lord by the mouth ofJeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lordstirred up the spirit of Cyrus king ofPersia, so that he made a proclamationthroughout all his kingdom, and also putit in writing, saying, �Thus says Cyrusking of Persia: All the kingdoms of theearth the Lord God of heaven has givenme. And He has commanded me tobuild Him a house at Jerusalem which is


THE EARTH BECAME VOIDAND EMPTY

With this in mind, let�s readGenesis 1:2, �The earth was withoutform [Hebrew �tohu�], and void, anddarkness was on the face of the deep.�A more correct translation would be,�The earth became void and withoutform.� Some translations, like theCompanion Bible and The NewInternational Version, have madenotations to this effect.

We saw that Isaiah 45:18 tells usthat God did not create the earth invain, or �tohu.� The Hebrew wordfor �in vain� in Isaiah 45:18, �tohu,�is the same word used in Genesis 1:2,and rendered there, �without form.�So we read in Isaiah that God didnot create the earth �void� and�empty,� but we also read in Genesis1:2 that the earth was �void� and�empty.� Since the Bible does notcontradict itself, the only explana-tion is that the earth, which hadNOT been created �void�, subse-quently BECAME �void.�

The reason why some translateGenesis 1:2 as, �The earth WASvoid and empty,� rather than, �Theearth BECAME void and empty,� isbased on the fact that the Hebrewword, translated �was� or �became,�can indeed mean both, based on thecontext. The word in Hebrew is�haya.� It is up to the translator todecide whether to use �was� or�became,� and unless the translatorunderstands what transpired here,based on what the Bible sayselsewhere, the resulting translationis going to be misleading.

Let�s look at some examples thatshow that the Hebrew word �haya�

can mean �became.� As a matter offact, in the following passages, theword �haya� can ONLY mean�became,� and NOT �was.� Genesis2:7 says, �And the Lord God formedman of the dust of the ground, andbreathed into his nostrils the breath oflife, and man BECAME [haya] aliving being.� Let�s also read Genesis19:26, �But Lot�s wife looked backbehind him, and she BECAME [haya]a pillar of salt.� Another interestingpassage is found in Deuteronomy27:9, �Then Moses and the priests, theLevites, spoke to all Israel, saying, �Thisday you have BECOME [haya] thepeople of the Lord your God.�� Finally,2 Samuel 7:24: �For You have madeYour people Israel Your very own peopleforever, and You, Lord, have BECOME[haya] their God.�

Many theologians and scientistshave correctly postulated that thestate of emptiness, described inGenesis 1:2, occurred long after thestate described in Genesis 1:1, whenGod created the earth. For instance,Joseph Free, Ph.D., Professor ofarchaeology and history, published abook in 1950, entitled, �Archaeologyand Bible History.� He writes onpages 19 and 20, �The date of thecreation of the universe is an entirelydifferent question from the date ofthe creation of man. The universemay have been created shortly beforethe creation of man...or long before,depending on whether or not a longperiod of time is involved in the firsttwo verses of Genesis. [T]he originalcreation of the universe and theearth is described in Genesis 1:1, �Inthe beginning God created theheaven and the earth.� Then a period


this. I know what this thing is; I�veidentified it. Now give me the wordfor that out of the archives ofmemory. And that was temporarilyblocked. So then he said, give me thename for a similar thing�and thatwas blocked too. In his frustration,he snapped with the finger. There�sgot to be something directing brainfunctions.�

THE SPIRIT IN MANWhether coincidence or not, at

the same time that Dr. Penfieldconducted his research from ascientific view, a Christian authorwas evaluating the same issue from aBiblical perspective. He, too, couldsee that the human mind is funda-mentally different from the animalbrain, and he wondered whether theBible explains the reason for thedifference. This author was HerbertW. Armstrong, and he published hisfindings in a book entitled, �TheIncredible Human Potential.� This iswhat he wrote on pages 74 and 75,�Animals are equipped with brainand instinct. But they do not havepower to understand and choosemoral and spiritual values or todevelop perfect spiritual character.Animals have brain, but no intel-lect�instinct, but no ability todevelop holy and Godly character.And that pictures the transcendentalDIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANI-MAL BRAIN AND HUMANMIND. But what causes that vastdifference? There is virtually nodifference in shape and constructionbetween animal brain and humanbrain. The brains of elephants,whales and dolphins are larger than

human brain, and the chimp�s brainis slightly smaller.

�What then can account for thevast difference? Science cannotadequately answer. Some scientists,in the field of research, concludethat, of necessity, there has to besome non-physical component inhuman brain that does not exist inanimal brain. But most scientists willnot admit the possibility of theexistence of the nonphysical. Whatother explanation is there? Actually,outside of the very slight degree ofphysical superiority of human brain,science has no explanation, due tounwillingness to concede even thepossibility of the spiritual��

Mr. Armstrong then explainsthat, according to the Bible, eachhuman being has a non-physicalcomponent in his brain, called �thespirit in man.� On page 81 of hisbook, he points out, �[T]his spirit isnot the man�only something in theman� This spirit cannot see, hear,or think. The man sees, hears andthinks through his physical brain andthe five senses of seeing, hearing,tasting, smelling and feeling. Thespirit in man imparts the power ofphysical intellect to the physicalbrain, thus forming human mind.

�This spirit acts, among otherthings, as a computer, adding to thebrain the psychic and intellectualpower. Knowledge received in thebrain through the eye, ear and thesenses is immediately �programmed�into the spirit computer. This�computer� gives the brain instantrecall of whatever portion of millionsof bits of knowledge may be neededin the reasoning process. That is to


of time followed during which �theearth was without form and void.� �This period of time may have been ofany length, and could include thegeological ages observable in the earth�ssurface�After this cataclysmic period,the putting of the world in order isdescribed in Genesis 1: 2b, 3 ff�

�In the nineteenth centuryGeorge H. Pumber in his book,�Earth�s Earliest Ages,� popularizedthis view that there may have been along period or gap in Genesis 1:1, 2,and it is sometimes charged that thewhole idea is due merely to his book.The possibility of a gap or a longperiod of time in Genesis 1:1, 2, has,however, been held by many competenttheologians, including Hengstenberg(1802-1869), a German Lutheranscholar who became Professor ofTheology at the University of Berlinin 1828, Franz Delitzsch (1813-1890), Professor at Erlangen inGermany and an outstanding OldTestament scholar, and others suchas Boehme, Oetinger, F. von Meyer,Stier, Keerl, and Kurtz.�

On page 21, Professor Free discussesan interesting potential parallelscripture in the book of Jeremiah. Hewrites: �In warning Israel of God�sjudgment on backsliding, the prophetJeremiah presented his vision of theearth as being �without form and void.�(Jeremiah 4: 23), using the sameHebrew words as those applied to theearth in Genesis 1:2. [Jeremiah 4: 23reads, �I beheld the earth, and indeedit was without form and void, andthe heavens had no light.�] Jeremiahwas apparently led to think back tothe desolation of the earth before thecreation of man and compare it with

the cataclysmic state which wouldresult if God�s judgment should fallon unrepentant Israel. This use ofthe very same words could point to acataclysmic period in Genesis 1:2��

We will later address what causedthis cataclysmic period, and why theearth, after it had been createdbeautifully, BECAME a wasteland.But before the earth became empty,animals already lived on the earth.Man, though, did not exist. Hiscreation is described in Genesis 1:26,after God had made the earthhabitable again, and after He hadcreated the animals which live, forthe most part, still today. An interestingpassage describing the re-creation orthe renewal of the surface of theearth can be found in Psalms 104:30,�You send forth Your Spirit, they arecreated; and You RENEW the FACEof the earth.�

MAN CREATED IN GOD’SIMAGE

Neither animals nor man haveevolved, according to the Bible. Onthe contrary, we read that Godcreated animals �according to theirkind��but insofar as man isconcerned, God created man inGod�s own image, according to God�slikeness�in other words, accordingto the God kind. (Genesis 1:26 and 27)

Animals were not created in sucha way that they could develop fromone kind or from one species intoanother kind or species. The Bibledoes not allow for big mutations, thatis, for changes from one species intoanother species, or perhaps moreaccurately, from one kind intoanother kind. We are using here the


physical attributes in the brains. Thebrains themselves do not differenough to explain the differences inmental capacities and intelligencebetween them. If we adopt thetheory of Darwinism, teaching thateverything evolved by coincidence,this barrier should not exist. Al-though science acknowledges theexistence of this barrier, they areunable to explain what it is, becauseit cannot be explained in physicalterms. Rather, as we will see, it issomething non-physical, somethingthat cannot be tested in tubes orwith physical instruments.

Now, some scientists do concedethat the human brain must have anon-physical component. Dr. WilderPenfield, a famous neurosurgeon, isremembered for his surgical treat-ment of epileptic patients. Hispatients remained conscious duringtheir surgery and were thus able toreport what they were experiencingwhen part of their brains werestimulated with a mild electricalcurrent. Dr. Penfield wrote a bookabout his research entitled, �Mysteryof the Mind.� It was publishedshortly before his death in 1967. Inthis book he wrote, �Throughout myown scientific career, I, like otherscientists, have struggled to provethat the brain accounts for themind.� But after many experiments,he stated: �To me, it seems more andmore reasonable that the mind maybe a distinct and different essence[from the brain]�Here is the meetingof mind and brain. It is not to beaccounted for by any neuronalmechanisms that I can discover�Since every man must adopt for

himself, without the help of science,his way of life and his personalreligion, I have long held my ownprivate beliefs. What a thrill it is,then, to discover, that the scientist,too, can legitimately believe in theexistence of�spirit.�

What led Dr. Penfield to realizethat the human mind must have, inaddition to the physical brain,something non-physical, which hecalled �spirit�? Several years ago,Professor Robert Augrus explainedDr. Penfield�s research and findings.Dr. Penfield operated on hundreds ofepileptics to lessen or eliminateepileptic seizures without adverselyaffecting other brain functions. Duringthe experiments, Dr. Penfield wouldput an electrode on the speech area,making the person temporarilyunable to understand words or speakwithout the patient realizing this, asthe brain has no sensitivity.

Professor Augrus pointed out thatDr. Penfield would show the patienta picture card and the patient couldcorrectly identify the picture. Whenthe electrode was applied to thebrain, the patient could not speak,he could only snap his finger. Whenthe electrode was removed, thepatient said, �Butterfly. I could notget out the word butterfly. So then Itried to say the word, moth, but Icould not get that either.� ProfessorAugros summarized this experimentas follows: �This demonstrates verywell the difference between speechand thought. Speech and thoughtare not the same thing. Thought isdirecting speech, telling the brain,which is really like a fantasticcomputer, come up with the word for


word �species� loosely, but we shouldrealize that the Bible talks about�kind,� not �species.� The Biblicaldefinition of �kind� might includeseveral species, the way somescientists identify �species.� This isimportant to remember, as no oneseems to know what a species is. TheEncyclopedia Britannica pointed outin its 1967 edition that scientistsoften cannot agree as to what aspecies is. For instance, the Biblecalls the �owl� a �kind,� (Leviticus11:16), but scientists would call anowl an entire �order,� not just a�species.�

The point here is that evolutionrequires changes and transformationsfrom one species or kind intoanother species or kind, but all ourpast and present experiences showthat those mutations or changes didnot, and do not occur. And remem-ber, NO fossils have been found toprove that any such changes occurredin the past. A bird brings forth birds.As a matter of fact, an eagle does notbring forth a pigeon. A bird does notproduce anything else but birds, itdoes not produce a fish or a mam-mal. And no fish evolves or changesinto a bird, and no reptile into a fish.Rather, all animals reproduceaccording to their kind. No scientistis able to have a horse produce a dog,or a shark or a crocodile.

Darwin�s big mistake was toassume that, since little mutations oradaptations within a species dooccur, big mutations or changes fromone species into another must haveoccurred as well. This, of course, wasa wrong assumption. On the otherhand, it is true that animals within

their own species can change oradapt to their environment. Darwinsaw on the Galapagos Islands thatcertain birds had, within theirspecies, brought forth minor changes.And so it is today. Of course, we canbreed different species of dogs orcats�but they will always remaindogs or cats. Within the species ofcats, one can cross-breed. But onecannot breed a dog with a cat.Likewise, the birds, which Darwinobserved on the Galapagos Islands,did not develop into other birds, andmost certainly not into mammals.

We learn from the Bible that manis NOT the highest species withinthe animal world. Man did notoriginate from animals, rather, manwas created directly by God, and inthe image of God Himself. BeforeGod created Eve, He asked Adamwhether he could find a help matefrom the animals, but he could not.So God created Eve from Adam, andAdam could later say, �This is bonefrom my bone, and flesh from myflesh,� as Eve was made from man,not from any animal. According tothe Bible, man is a being who standshigh above the animal world,destined and charged to rule over allthe animals. Man�s origins are fromGod, not from an organic soup andsubsequent evolution.

What about the theistic version ofthe theory of evolution? As LouisAgassiz, Professor of Zoology, said,�The resources of the Deity cannotbe so meager, that in order to createa human being endowed with reason,He must change a monkey into aman.� (Methods of Study in NaturalHistory, 1863, p. iv).


Darwin�s concepts have broughtmuch misery upon this earth. It is nosecret that Adolph Hitler acceptedDarwin�s teaching of evolution andthe survival of the fittest, and hebelieved that he was entitled toeliminate, what he deemed to be,substandard races. As the P.M.magazine, �The Wonder of Evolu-tion,� reports, Darwin�s teaching alsohad a very bad effect on Darwinhimself. His wife could see �how hisresearch alienated him from reli-gion� When the scientist begins tothink about the consequences of hisfindings [which were, in fact, onlytheoretical ideas without anyscientific proof or evidence], he isstruck with migraine and depression.No doctor can explain his condi-tion� his sufferings begin to becomechronic. He can only work fourhours a day�� Darwin was originallya theologian, believing in theinspiration of the Bible. But heleaned on his own human reasoning,rejecting God�s word, which led todevastating consequences in his ownlife, and in the lives of many, manyothers.

THE BARRIER BETWEENTHE MIND OF MAN ANDANIMALS

Let�s return to an important issuethat we briefly touched on before �the remarkable differences betweenman and animal. We saw that theycannot be explained scientifically.But one cannot deny that they exist.

The German biological encyclo-pedia �Brehm�s Tierleben� discussesthe unsurpassable partition wallbetween man and animals. One

article deals with an experiment to�show how the mental aspects ofdevelopment in men and monkeysbegin to differ dramatically, althoughthey seemed to be identical in theearliest years.� The article says,�Professor Kellog, psychologist at theIndiana University, raised his ten-month old son together with achimpanzee of the same age underthe exactly identical conditions. Thechimpanzee understood the meaningof certain words much earlier thanhis son Donald did, althoughsometimes, it was the opposite. Afterten months the chimpanzee toppedDonald clearly in regard to memory,thinking and understanding; heunderstood much quicker and morereliably the connections of eventssurrounding them; his intelligencewas extraordinary and was able tomotivate him to action which wentbeyond what the little Donald wasable to do� But once they reachedthe age of 1½ years, a remarkablechange occurred within the develop-ment of these two little children[sic]. In a brief period of time, Donaldbecame much smarter than thechimpanzee. He understood whatwas happening around him mucheasier, and began to think and to acton his own and in new ways. Nothingcould be noticed insofar with regardto the chimpanzee. He had reachedwithin 10 months the pinnacle of hisability to learn and absorb. Hisintelligence could not be increasedor perfected any more.�

Yes, there is a barrier thatseparates the mind of man from theanimals. Just what is this barrier? Weknow it has nothing to do with the