By Stanford Murrell
THE ORIGIN of MAN
A Confession of
Faith
“In the beginning it pleased God the Father,
Son and Holy Spirit, for the manifestation of the glory of His eternal power, wisdom,
and goodness, to create or make the world, and all things therein, whether
visible or invisible, in the space of six days, and all very good.” (The Confession of Faith of 1689, Chapter 4, Section 1; study
John 1:2,3; Heb. 1:2; Job 26:13; Rom. 1:20; Col. 1:16; Gen. 1:31).
The
soul did not emanate from the substance of God for two reasons. First, emanation implies that the substance
of God can become disturbed or changed, and this is unworthy of the character of God. God cannot become less than Himself. Second, substance is that in which
attributes inhere. If men were able to
partake of God’s essential substance they would possess the attributes of God,
such as omniscience, infinity, omnipotence, etc. That is not possible. God
will not give His intrinsic glory to anyone.
(Isa. 48:11)
The soul is not a
form of God for that would be Pantheism.
God and man are separate beings and are not to be confounded or blended.
The soul is not the
product of spontaneous generation.
Science knows nothing of spontaneous generation except as a theory. Elaborate experiments and the most
painstaking efforts and observation have ruled out spontaneous generation for
this reason: "Research sponsored in
part by NASA (for the purpose of enabling astronauts to recognize even the most
rudimentary forms of life on other planets) has shown that the simplest type of
protein molecule that could be said to be "living" is composed of a
chain of at least 400 linked amino acids, and each amino acid is a specific
combination of four or five basic chemical elements, and each chemical element
is a unique assemblage of protons, electrons, and neutrons. It is thus inconceivable (to anyone but a
doctrinaire evolutionist) that a living system could ever be formed by chance. (Scientific Creationism, edited by Henry
M. Morris)
What the Soul Is
According to the
Old Testament usage of the word nepes,
the soul is the essence of man in the totality of his being. The breath of God blown into the body of
Adam created "a living nepes" (Gen.
1:20; 2:7; Ex. 1:5). The soul is
something that can hunger and thirst (Psa. 107:5) and can be distressed (Gen.
42:21). It is often used for the
essence of self (Job 16:4; Psa. 124:7).
In the New
Testament, the soul (psyche) is the life principle (Acts 20:10; Rev. 8:9) which
is distinct from the body. John sees
the "souls of those who had been
slain," not "those who had
been slain" (Rev. 6:9 cf. 20:4; Matt. 10:28; Luke 21:19; Jam. 1:21;
5:20).
Rational Objections
to Evolution
¨ ¨ The Great Gaps. Science shows great gaps between different species and that each came
without known antecedents in the lineal decent. One evolutionist, former Professor Joseph Le Conte, University Of
California (c.1920), has confessed: “The evidence of geology today is that
species seem to come into existence suddenly and in full perfection, remain
substantially unchanged during the term of their existence and pass away in
full perfection. Other species take their places apparently by substitution,
not be transmutation.”
¨
¨
The insufficiency of
Time. When evolutionists assign
millions and millions of years for the process of producing man, they do so
without evidence. The Question may be
justified whether the earth has been habitable millions of years. The oldest written records with verifiable
chronology only dates back to the first dynasty in Egypt (c. 2200-2500
BC). There is a great discrepancy
between the theory which says that man's unknown uncommon ancestors lived 30
too 70 million years ago (true modern man arrived 1-3 million years ago), and
the record of civilization. While the concept
is intriguing of infinite time to form the earth and all the life that is on
earth, there is no evidence to support the theory.
¨
¨
The Sterility of Birds. Equally opposed to the theory of evolution
is the idea of the crossing of the species.
Nature herself has closed the door to this possibility (note Gen. 1:24).
¨
¨
The Remains of Men. The earliest remains of man are of high
development, showing that man like the other species came upon the scene in the
maturity of his being. There may be
evidence for devolution or man going from a higher state of existence to a
lower state as per Genesis 1-2, but there no is evidence that any man has going
from a lower state to a higher form of existence. Radiocarbon dating methods have proven to be unreliable for
establishing dates of antiquity, and evening more damaging is that lack of
fossil evidence when population statistics are considered. From all the people that would have lived on
earth in the last million years, even with a slow population growth rate, there
is little evidence of the preservation of ancient man. If evolution is true, why there so little
evidence in the fossil records? In the
past, some extraordinary hoaxes have been offered by evolutionists to fool the
public.
q
q
Neanderthal Man. In 1856 in the Neander Valley, near
Dusseldorf, Germany a creature was found that was believed to be semi-erect and
sub-human. "It is now known that
Neanderthal man was fully erect and in most details was indistinguishable from
modern man, his cranial capacity even exceeding that of modern man." (Evolution?
The Fossils Say No, Duane
T. Gish)
q
q
Java Man (Pithecanthropus
erectus, "erect ape man"). It was in 1891 that Eugene Dubois, a
Dutch physician made his discover of Pithecanthropus
erectus in Trinil, Java. There was a
single skull cap found. The next year,
still digging in the same area but fifty feet away, Dubois discovered a thigh
bone, along with two molar teeth.
Assuming all the pieces belonged together, Dubois dated the find as a
half million years old, and told the world.
What he did not tell the world until thirty-one years later is that he
had also found two obviously human skulls at the same time and on the same
level as the digs. Just before his
death, Dubois conceded that Java man was rally the remains of a large gibbon.
q
q
Piltdown Man (Eanthropus
dawsoni, "Dawn Man").
Charles Dawson is credited with the discovery of "Dawn Man" in
Piltdown, England in 1912. From a skull
part and a few teeth, the little chap was dated to be from 500 to 750 thousand
years old! In 1950, the bones of
"Dawn Man" were put under the spotlight of truth: fluoride tests were
done and a grand hoax was revealed. The
skull portion unearthed had been stained with iron salts and the teeth had been
deliberately filed down to give it
the appearance of age.
q
q
Peking Man. Unearthed near Peking, China in 1912 by Davidson
Bolack, this find consisted of the fragments of thirty skulls and 147
teeth. Today, Piltdown man is believed
to be the remains of some large monkeys or baboons which were killed and eaten
by those working in an ancient lime-burning quarry.
q
q
Nebraska Man ("Western Ape Man). Harold Cook informed the world that he had made a wonderful discovery
in western Nebraska in 1922. What did
he find? One tooth! ONE tooth!
The world was made to wonder as an imagine artist drew a mouth around
the ape-man that was declared to be six thousand years old. In 1927 the tooth was discovered to have
really belong to an extinct pig.
q
q
East africa ape (zinjathropus). In 1959, National
Geographic Magazine was all to happy to tell the world that Louis S.B. Leakey
have made a marvelous discovery in Olduvia, Tanzania. A skull cap and a few bone fragments were produced and dated to
be 2-4 million years old. Here at last
was a real missing link. Or was
it? Just prior to his death, Leakey
admitted that he felt his find was nothing more than a variety of australopithecus (Southern ape) found in
1924.
¨
¨
The Discrepancies between Kingdoms. Nature today, and the fossil records of the past continue to
testify against evolution by demonstrating that some kingdoms in nature are
vastly superiority to others. This would
not be the case if evolution were true.
Rather, there would be some sort of connection between the kingdoms to
form a unified ecosystem. However,
there cannot be found in the vegetable kingdom anything from which the
characteristic features of animal life could be developed or vice versa. So too there is a vast gulf between the
animal and man, despite the attempts of modern science since 1859 to show how
similar man and animal are. Some
dramatic differences may be noted.
q
q
Man alone is a rational creature. Animals may solve problems based on a biological urge but only
man sits down to think, the way that a philosopher, professor, theologian, or
someone in love does.
q
q
Man alone makes things by reason and free will,
not according to instinct. "The instincts of animals remain the
same from age to age. The bird still
builds her nest and the bee her cell as they did at the Gate of Eden. There has been no progress in their mental
development." (David Clark)
q
q
Only men build machines which are in themselves
productive. Animals may use tool, but no animal makes a
pattern or die press to stamp out other tools for mass production.
q
q
Man alone communicates thoughts based upon words and
reasons. Animals communicate with sounds and
grunts. They communicate emotions and
impulses but nothing that can be asserted to be true or false.
¨
¨
The Law of Entropy. There is a universal law of degeneration
which argues against the evolutionary model.
The law of entropy says that everything goes from order to
disorder. There is a natural breakdown
of all things. Physically, modern men
is believed to be inferior to the ante-diluvian civilization (and mentally we
may not be above the ancient Egyptians either; their inventions rival ours. It
will be interesting to see if modern buildings will stand the test of time like
the pyramids.) Rather than ascend ever
upward, the body of man is wearing down just like all the things he builds and
the universe itself. One day, the sun
will stop shining, the earth will rotate no longer, and the starlights shall
disappear. The universe is winding
down, not up.
·
·
The Lack of Visual
Evidence. If evolution is a cosmic
process, it should be everywhere apparent and in actual operation before our
eyes. Why is there no discernable
evolutionary processes going on? Has
everything in the evolutionary model reached such a stage of perfection that no
advance is possible? Evolutionary
science is strangely silence before such questions.
·
·
The Logical Impossibility of the Evolutionary Process.
If intelligent cross breeding
has failed to produce a single new species in ideal laboratory conditions, what
probability is there that blind chance
or natural selection could do so?
Natural selection will not be able to do what intelligent selection
cannot do.
A theory of Recapitulation
The
Embryological Recapitulation Theory argues that the unborn child passes through
the various forms that the race is supposed to have traversed. It is argued that each person in the womb
moves from the protoplasmic cell, through invertebrate life, to fish,
quadrupeds, and finally to man. This theory was once held to be the most
convincing demonstration of the evolutionary claims.
In
response, it is admitted that there is a cursory resemblance between the fetus
of a human and that of some animal forms.
But the resemblances are only superficial for one can see life
similarities in other things such as unusual cloud formation, rain puddles, and
rock formations. King Ahab said that he
saw, "a little cloud out of the sea,
like a man's hand." (1 Kings 18:44)
The following points are worthy of consideration.
·
·
It is only a
pre-suppositional thought that says
that the human embryo in its early stages is an actual representation of a mass of protoplasm that is the same as
the lower form of life, which is little more than a globule of protoplasm.
·
·
It is only a
pre-suppositional thought that say that
the elongation into the form of an infant must necessarily reflect the shape of
a fish.
·
·
It is only a
pre-suppositional thought which
supposes that as the as legs and arms develop, they have the same likeness to a
quadruped.
·
·
It is only a
pre-suppositional thought that sees
the folds in the skin of the neck resembling the gills of a fish. In reality, all these things are
superficial and prove nothing as to the background of the human race. Besides, the real difference in fetal development
lies in that which is not physical but spiritual.
The Recapitulation theory
Does not Matter
Even if somehow the
recapitulation theory of evolution could be proven true, “what has been accomplished in building the long stairway from the
ameba to man if every man must begin for himself at the lowest point, a cell of
protoplasm? If man could begin where the animal development left off, there might
be some purpose discerned in the evolutionary process. But how absurd it is to suppose that it took
the cosmic forces millions and millions of years to do what the human embryo
does in nine months! “ (David Clark)
The Harm of Change
The
truth of the matter is that the whole science of reproduction demonstrates that
cross breeding small hereditary changes do not accumulate to the making of a
species. In addition, both macro and micro-mutations have been proven to be
essentially harmful to a species over a period of time. Macro mutation refers to the sudden change
in a organism such as an arm, eye, or leg suddenly appearing. Micro-mutation refers to small incremental
differences from in a species over a prolonged period.
The Fossils Say No!
Evolutionists
have always suspected that nature has destroyed millions of life forms. If these discarded life forms could be
recovered, they would prove the evolutionary theory to be correct. (Perhaps nature has a sense of humor in that
it destroys the very forms needed by its advocates while preserving the rest.) The truth of the matter is that the fossil
record bears witness against evolution.
In some fossil sites with a continuous deposit being made of nearly two
thousand species, all of them appeared suddenly. No fossil has ever been shown
as having passed away to be superseded by other forms. Though embarrassing to
the evolutionist, some geological sites in the world reverse the order in which
life was supposed to appear on the globe.
Pre-Cambrian strata (alleged to be the earliest of geological history)
and fossils supposedly old lie in
complacent conformity to underlying cretaceous (chalky) strata (of the
Mesozoic era) and fossils supposedly young. Why is this? The answer is simple: there are
no credible signs of the most infinitesimal, let alone intermediate, variations
in the fossil records between one species and another. In the beginning, God created all the
animals and all forms of life within a six literal day period. Therefore, the Creationist (Christian) would
expect to find things together. As far
as the rock formations being mixed up, the Bible explains this better than the
evolutionist. The Biblical answer is that there was a flood that churned up the
earth. (Gen. 6-7) The Genesis model of
reveals the Catastrophism of the Flood and is more consistent with the known
facts than the evolutionary model of Uniformtarianism that teaches that the
earth was formed by layers of rock upon layers.
Questions Raised by the
theory of Evolution
The
theory of evolution raises a number of religious questions that are not easily
dismissed by conscientious Christians. (proposed by David Clark)
·
·
“Is there a beginning as recorded in Genesis 1:1, or
is there only an eternal becoming?”
·
·
“Is God infinite and eternal, according to the
Scriptures, or only a finite and developing deity, a figment of the minds of
men who are themselves only the product of time plus space plus chance?”
·
·
“Does God reign supreme over His universe, or does
He even exist?”
·
·
“Is God subject to a higher power or a community of
powers?”
·
·
“Was man, in his entirety, created in the image of
God, or has his body and soul developed from the beast?”
·
·
“Did man fall from the image of God, or did he arise
from animalism and savagery?”
·
·
“Is sin contrary to God’s will, or is sin merely the
lack of full spiritual development?”
·
·
“Are the doctrines of Judaism and Christianity a
divine revelation, or only the outgrowth of innate human tendencies?”
·
·
“Did man begin to worship God with fetishes and grew
to monotheism, or did man begin worship with monotheism and fell into fetishism
and animism?”
·
·
“Did the Bible produce civilization, or did
civilization produce the Bible?”
·
·
“Are the Scriptures inerrant and infallible, a
revelation from God, or are the Scriptures merely the record of progressive
religious experience?”
·
·
“Is salvation a supernatural intervention
into the affairs of sinful men, or just the outgrowth of inherent natural
forces seeking to feel sorrow?”
·
·
“Does prophecy maintains its predictive element, and
miracles their supernatural power or. are do these things that have a natural explanation?”
THE ORIGIN of the SOUL
How Does the Soul Come into Existence?
While people are very careless with their
souls, the Bible teaches us its immortal value. Jesus said, "For what
shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his
soul? Or what shall a man give in
exchange for his soul?" (Mark
8:36,37) Because the soul is of utmost
importance, it is good to consider the basics such as the origin of the
soul. Concerning this issue, various
positions have been advocated.
·
·
Man being a
single entity, consisting of soul and body, must be one; so that he may not be
both older and younger than himself--"that in him which is bodily being first, and the other coming after" (Eastern
Church father, Gregory of Nyssa, c. AD 331-c. 396 )
·
·
The fact of
hereditary traits in a person’s mental and moral make up.
·
·
The sinful
nature passed on from Adam to his posterity.
Special note: Apart from Traducianism, it is hard to maintain
the justice of God in the punishment of inherited sin. It is difficult for Creationism's position
(i.e., that each soul is created individually) to explain how each soul is created
sinful. Traducianism best accounts for
the universality of sin.
v
v Special note. Among the angels, some fell (Rev. 12:4) and
some did not (Psa. 148:2) because there was no racial connection and no
transmission of sinful nature from one to another in the act of procreation.
Arguments From Scripture for
Traducianism
One of the strongest arguments from Scripture for Traducianism is the
fact that as all animals were derived from the first parents, so all men are
derived from Adam (Gen. 1:27). Only once is the spark of life said to be
breathed into man, and he became a living soul (Gen. 2:7, cf. 2:22; 1 Cor.
11:8; Gen. 4:1; 5:3; 46:26; cf. Acts 17:21-26; Heb. 7:10). After God created man, He is said to have
ceased from His creative work (Gen. 2:2) though His sustaining work continues
for it is "in Him we live, and move,
and have our being." (Acts 17:28)
Then there is the matter of
heredity whereby the sin nature is passed on and even judged in the third and
fourth generation (Ex. 20:5; 34:7; Num. 14:18; Deut. 5:9). Jonathan Edwards understood this principle
and prayed for his children and his children's children to the end of
time. He believed that the
superintending of all things were under the hands of Divine Providence.
John 1:13
"Which were born, not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." This verse contrasts spiritual birth with
natural birth, implying that natural birth is traducian.
John 3:6
"That which is born of the
flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." In this citation the word “flesh” is
understood to mean the whole man is unregenerate.
Romans 1:3.
"Concerning his Son who was
born of the seed of David according to the flesh."
Romans 5:12
"By one man sin entered into
the world and death by sin and so death passed upon all men for that all sinned."
1 Corinthians 15:22 "As in Adam al die."
Ephesians 2:3 "By nature the
children of wrath even as others."
Hebrews
7:10 "For he [Levi] was yet in the loins of his father when Melchizedek
met him."
Isaiah 57:16
“The souls that I have made.”
Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was, and the spirit to God
who gave it.”
Hebrews 12:9
“Furthermore we have had fathers
of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much
rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?”
Zechariah
12:1 “The Lord who formeth the spirit of man within him.”
Critics of Creationism
In
addition to the Scriptures, Individuality is often urged as an argument for
Creationism. It is argued that there
are dramatic distinction between the parents and the child that cannot be
explained by mere reproduction. Those who oppose Creationism note that the
dramatic distinctions between parent and children exist for a logical reason:
every child has two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents etc.
This mixed heritage provides a
sufficient cause for the great variety of personalities and individuality
between parents and children.
Concerning
the passages of Scripture speaking of God as creator, they may be regarded as
expressing God's mediate agency in the origin of the soul. God is also said to be the Creator of the
body (cp. Psa. 139:13,14; Jer. 1:5).
Also,
in opposition to Creationism, there is the matter of man being better than the
animals. If man produces the body
through procreation and God creates the soul, then man is not better than the
animals for they produce body and spirit after their own image.
Finally,
God is not the direct author of moral evil which Creationism would have to
advocate.
Summary Evaluation
Concerning Creationism and
Traducianism, it can be noted that each view faces a difficulty. Creationism must explain the sinful nature
of each created soul while Traducianism must explain how an indivisible spiritual
substance transmits itself.
THE NATURE of MAN
Dichotomy: a Division
between Soul and Body
According to Genesis 2:7 man is composed of two
substances, and only two, body and soul. Genesis 2:7 declares that, “The Lord God formed man out of the dust of
the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a
living soul.” The body is material
substance; the soul is spiritual substance.
Substance may be defined as that which has being, properties, and
potency (power); substance is that in which attributes inhere.
The attributes or properties of
matter are: bulk, weight, hardness, form, etc. The attributes of spirit are:
thought, volition (choice), affections, and conscience. These substances, body and spirit, are
different because their properties or attributes are different and
opposite. The properties of matter do
not belong to spirit, and the attributes of spirit do not belong to matter and
yet these two substances do unite to constitute man. There is the body, which is matter; there is the soul, which is
spirit. There are no other substances
to man. Of the two, the soul is the
more important for it is the soul that gives life to the body. When the soul is withdrawn, the body is dead
for the soul is the seat of the personality.
Consciousness of these things can lead to a favorable view of the
dichotomy: individuals know themselves to be body and soul.
Scriptural Evidence of Dichotomy
In
the creation record mention is made of man's body and soul, but nothing more. Elsewhere, the Scriptures frequently mention
body and soul together, but nothing more.
1
Kings 17:21 "Let the child’s soul come to him again."
Ecclesiastes
12:7 "The dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit unto
God who gave it."
James
2:26 "The body apart from the spirit is dead."
Matthew
10:28 "Able to destroy both body and soul in hell.”
1
Corinthians 5:3 “For I being absent in body but present in spirit.”
The relation of the soul and
body to each other is mysterious and almost incomprehensible. How the body acts on the mind, and how the
mind acts on the body, cannot be fully comprehended though the experience is
known each day. The mind compels the
body to act and it acts. The body conveys
impressions of the external world to the mind and the mind receives the
same. Emotions of the mind affect the
body so that their is blushing, or confusion.
Diseases of the body, especially of the brain, affect and disorder the
mind. Back and forth the interaction of body and mind moves to produce a great
mystery.
Trichotomy (from tricha,
'in three parts' and temno, "to cut" = composed of three
parts) is the view that man is composed of three substances: body, soul, and spirit. The Eastern Orthodox Church has generally held to
Trichotomy. Their belief is best
articulated by the Greek Orthodox priest John of Damascus (c. 675-749) who
speaks of the soul as the sensuous life-principle which takes up the
spirit--the spirit being an emanation from God. The Western church, on the other hand, has generally held to
dichotomy. An appeal for Trichotomy is
made from the Scriptures.
1
Thessalonians 5:23 "And the very God of peace sanctify you
wholly; and I pray God your spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless
unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Hebrews
4:12 "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any
two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and
of the joints and marrow, and a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the
heart."
Arguments against the
Trichotomous theory
Those who advocate the Trichotomous Theory are not
united as to what constitutes the substance of soul and spirit independently.
Therefore, the following arguments are used against the Trichotomous Theory.
The Scriptures
use the terms soul (psyche) and
spirit (pneuma) interchangeably.