Archive for the ‘Philosophy’ Category

http://www.christianapologeticsalliance.com/2014/05/07/convince-me-theres-a-god-archaeology-11/

Convince Me There’s A God- Archaeological Evidence? 

My Radio Interview on the Fringe Radio Network

My radio interview on the Fringe Radio Network.

On The Trail of the Nephilim!

Posted: April 29, 2013 by Maverick in Archaeology, Philosophy

On The Trail of the Nephilim!

New book by LA Marzulli!

The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone is a large boulder on the side of Hidden Mountain, near Los Lunas, New Mexico that bears an ancient inscription carved into a flat panel in the rock. The stone is also known as the Los Lunas Mystery Stone or Commandment Rock. The inscription is interpreted to be an abridged version of the Decalogue or Ten Commandments in a form of Paleo-Hebrew. The tetragrammaton YHWH, or “Yahweh,” is written four times throughout the inscription. The stone is controversial in that some claim the inscription is Pre-Columbian, and therefore proof of early Semitic contact with the Americas.

The first recorded mention of the stone is in 1933, when professor Frank Hibben, an archaeologist from the University of New Mexico, saw it. Hibben was led to the stone by an unnamed Indian guide who claimed to have found it as a boy in the 1880s. The 1880s date of discovery is important to those who believe that the stone was inscribed by a lost tribe of Israel. However, Florencio Chavez, a former Los Lunas resident, reported being shown the rock by his grandfather, Simon Serna. Serna was born in 1829 and his father had claimed to seen the rock in 1800.

The Paleo-Hebrew script is practically identical to the Phoenician script, which was known at the time, thus not precluding the possibility of fraud. One argument against the stone’s antiquity is its apparent use of modern Hebrew punctuation, though amateur epigrapher Barry Fell argued that the punctuation is consistent with antiquity.[1] Other researchers dismiss the inscription based on the numerous stylistic and grammatical errors that appear in the inscription.

In 1948, William H. McCart an Albuquerque resident took an interest in the rock and sent photographs to Dr. Robert H. Pfeiffer of the Semitic Museum at Harvard University. But in doing so, in order to get a better picture, he purposely scratched out the natural patina over the inscription thus effectively destroying the most valuable information & context on the stone! Dr. Hibben had stated first hand to an archaeologist friend of mine in the 1960’s that he did see not only patina covering the inscription in the 1930’s but also lichen growing on the stone! What a tragedy that this important information was removed by an amature wanting to get photographs.

In 1949, Dr. Pfeiffer made a first known translation of the strange writing. Being an authority on the Old Testament (the Hebrew Scriptures of the Bible) he concluded that the inscription was a copy of the Ten Commandments. He thought that the inscription was written in the Phoenician, the Moabite, and the Greek languages. Indeed, some local native American Indians, as a result of his work, have been referring to this rock as the Phoenician Inscription Rock. Professor Pfeiffer never stated at that time whom he thought carved the message. Many locals have been calling this site the “Ten Commandments Rock” ever since. Further speculation involved the authorship of that rock inscription. Some even considered it to be an inscription from a member of one of the lost tribes of Israel.

However, Robert L. Pfeiffers translation has not remained unchallenged. Notably two translators rejected the idea that the rock inscription had something to do with the Ten Commandments. In 1964, Robert L. LaFollete wrote a translation which resulted in a travelers story carved on the rock using Phoenician as well as some Hebrew, Cyrillic and Etruscan letters. LaFollete translated this story in English as well as in the Navajo language. Dixie L. Perkins published another translation in 1979. This time under the assumption that the writer was of Greek origin and that he was using old-Greek and Phoenician letters. Perkins translation, too, challenges the Ten Commandment version, again resulting in another travelers story. (1) However, Mrs Perkins stated in her foreword to her translation that she only studied Latin and Greek, not however Hebrew. It remains clear that Dr. Pfeiffer’s translation is the correct one and has been verified by other scholars.

The writings on the Los Lunas stone use a combination of Samaritan and Greek letters. Greek? That’s interesting. The Book of Mormon says nothing about Greek. The Greeks didn’t conquer Palestine until more than 200 years after Lehi and Mulek left Jerusalem. But the language of the stone uses good Greek grammar, and makes Samaritan mistakes that would be natural grammatical mistakes for a person of Greek learning, and unthinkable for a Hebrew. But what of the language? The particular combination of characters matches perfectly a Samaritan-Greek dialect that has been discovered in Alexandria. Doesn’t this mean the person who wrote it was most likely not a Hebrew? No, on the contrary. It could be a Phoenician influence.

Other Phoenician and old-Hebrew inscription samples
Another way to narrow down the problem of the age is to compare the Los Lunas inscription with other Phoenician and Paleo-Hebrew inscription samples from the Mediterranean Middle East. In general, if the Los Lunas inscription is old-Hebrew, it is no younger than 600 B.C.E. because after that old-Hebrew came to be gradually replaced by the square-Hebrew alphabet. The old-Hebrew and Phoenician characters used to be almost identical from 1100 B.C.E. to 600 B.C.E. Thereafter, mainly the Phoenicians continued to use this old alphabet, until their Mediterranean colonies were destroyed by the Romans during the Punic wars of the 2nd century B.C.E.  As mentioned in the Epigraphy section, the closest matching Phoenician or paleo-Hebrew writing samples are those from the Eshmunazar Sarcophagus (4th century B.C.E.) or those of the Bar Rakab Inscription and the Nerab Stelae.

What about Mormon Influence?

There is further speculation involving the authorship of the rock inscription. There are some that claim that the stone was carved by someone in the Mormon Battalion as they may have passed through that area. It is claimed that some of the members of the Mormon Battalion participated in the school of the prophets where ancient Semitic languages were studied. The stone could have been just the etchings of a bored solider, which would explain some of the typos and errors in the text. Others have expressed the thought that perhaps some Mormons may have carved this message in an attempt to support their views of an ancient pre-Columbian semitic history in North America. However, a simple research on Mormon Web sites reveals absolutely nothing about this rock inscription. It is not used by their church as a proof for the existence of ancient Nephites in America. For a certainty it is not written in so-called “reformed Egyptian” language.

The overwhelming number of Phoenician and Greek letters and words found in Los Lunas are more of a direct link to Old World (Bronze Age) employ. Again, though there are some dating overlaps seen between Los Lunas and Mormon Brigade, from the 1840’s to the end of the 1850’s, the concentration was on the Great Utah Basin and their early establishment in the area. Finally, I do not see a strong connection in the Mystery Stone and the Mormon community for the simple reason, there is not the faintest hint to any Christian Confession. The Mormon faith, nor any of the array of Christian denominations; especially, of early American age would omit such an opportunity for Christological profession. In addition, no names of individuals mentioned in the Book of Mormon have every been found in ancient inscriptions.

Nevertheless, the Mormons examined the stone in the 1950’s to see if it was theirs. They sent out the Archaeological Society of Brigham Young University from Provo, Utah. The Mormon team critically examined the stone and in 1954 published an article which concluded the inscription was quite recent because of the lack of patina in the letters. Consequently, they dismissed it altogether. I had one person email me who was interested in the Los Lunas Mystery Stone. He stated that he was Mormon & had been so all of his life. He had never heard of the stone within the Mormon community and was intrigued by those claiming that it was of Mormon influence. He personally visited the site & concluded that this indeed had nothing to do with the Mormons- independently verifying the 1950’s expedition!

In the Mormon community, I would love to see someone pursue that; someone like the wonderful scholarship provided by Dr. Brian Stubbs. What Dr. Stubbs has contributed to is the awesome connection between Hebrew consonal roots (and Hebrew plural construction) to languages of both ancient America; especially Indian languages squarely in the Los Lunas matrix. Another scholarly contribution in this area of Hebrew root connections and Ancient Americas is David Deal’s work in Mayan syllabary and words.

There is no evidence that supports the existence of the Nephites in Mormon archaeology. FARMS, a scholarly group associated with BYU, has no scholarship dealing with the site and does not make any evidentiary use of it. The stone is simply not connected to Mormon influence. The connection between the Stone and the Mormon community is circumstantial from both an alphabetical and historical perspectives.

“It can be stated definitely that there is no connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the Book of Mormon. There is no correspondence whatever between archeological sites and cultures as revealed by scientific investigations and as recorded in the Book of Mormon, hence the book cannot be regarded as having any historical value from the standpoint of the aboriginal peoples of the New World.” F.H.H. Roberts, Jr, Smithsonian Institution, 1951

The first step in deciphering the Los Lunas Inscription was to identify the letters.  Native American Indians in the New Mexico area never developed a character-based alphabet. They were mainly carving petroglyphs on rock surfaces. These are quite different and are more like little pictographic drawings than writings. The inscription itself was done in old-Hebrew or Phoenician letters, as can be seen from the following (to the right)  character chart:

Many modern scholars now seem to agree that the rock inscription is indeed an abridged version of the Decalogue or Ten Commandments. Among others, these include: Cline 1982 (2), Deal 1992 (3), Stonebreaker 1982 (4), Underwood 1982 (5), Cyrus Gordon 1995 (6), and Skupin 1989 (7). In 1996, Prof James D. Tabor of the Dept. of Religious Studies, University of North Carolina, Charlotte, interviewed Professor Frank Hibben who is a local historian and retired archaeologist from the University of New Mexico. Hibben is convinced that the inscription is ancient and thus authentic. He also stated in the interview that he first saw the text in 1933. (see Tabor 1996: An Ancient Hebrew Inscription in New Mexico: Fact or Fraud” (8), see also J.Huston McCulloch 1997: “The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone” (9) ).

Dr. Cyrus Gordon, a historian of ancient Near Eastern civilizations, has promoted the idea that such people’s reached the New World for the past several decades. The historical and archaeological evidence is not unimpressive and has been well documented by Barry Fell in his major study entitled “America B.C.” (10)

Is there a Crypto-Jewish Connection?

Given the long history of crypto-Judaism in Spain, it seems logical to consider the question whether there is a connection between the native New Mexicans and those of the 15th-16th century Iberia. In the 1490’s, Spain & Portugal began the forced conversion of Jews which became increasingly violent. Approximately 100,000 Jews converted at the point of the sword. This resulted in about one-third of converts; but insincere converts at that. A significant portion of these so-called converts continued to practice the ancestral Jewish faith illegally & in secret. Another 100,000 refused & were killed, while another 100,000 escaped.  (11) What started as a campaign for religious conformity evolved into the establishment of racial and ethnic discrimination. At the end of the 14th century began the expulsion of the Jews driving them into Germany, Russia and Central, South, & North America.

The timing of Columbus’s expedition, which coincides with the expulsion of the Jews, begs the question whether Columbus himself was a Jew. What we do know is that at least one of these converts can be found among the crew of Columbus first voyage to the New World. His name was Luis de Torres and was specifically recruited because of his knowledge of Hebrew. (12)

While there is ample evidence beginning in the 1580’s of increasing crypto-Jewish immigration into New Spain, there is little evidence of settlement into New Mexico under Luis de Carvajal and the Failed Colony of Gaspar Castano de Sosa in 1579-1591, Juan de Onate in 1595-1607, or by Diego de Vargas in 1692.  Later during periods of persecution by the Mexican Inquisition in 1591, crypto-Jews migrated to frontier areas of northern New Spain to look for safe haven elsewhere.  So the question remains. Were there any Jews living in New Mexico under Spanish rule? Rabbi Floyd S. Fierman, a dedicated investigator of Jewish history in the Southwest US, faced this question in 1960. He turned to France V. Scholes, a leading historian of colonial New Mexico. Fierman reported the Scholes’s view that “there appears, in fact, to be very little positive evidence regarding Jews in 17th century New Mexico and Arizona.” (13)  The only circumstantial evidence for the first Anglo-Jew in New Mexico seems to be a person named Paul Levi, presumably of French background, who lived in Spanish colonial Santa Fe as early as 1773.

There is abundant evidence however for the migration & settlement of German Jews in the 18th century; specifically between 1840-1860.  One estimated places 15,000 Jews in the US in 1840 but only about 16 of them on the census in New Mexico by 1850.  However, the census was probably incomplete & thus would not accurately reflect the correct number. By 1860, a figure of 43 were numbered. The census for Los Lunas was very small showing only 12-16 residents there including one Moses Sachs. A survey by the Union of American Hebrew Congregations in 1877 estimated the total number of Jews in the US at 190,000 and assumed that the great majority came from Germany. (14) What is known currently is that German-Jewish immigrants made up the entire Jewish population of New Mexico in 1850. (15) Jews still only accounted for only two-tenths of one percent in 1860 with New Mexico ranked at the bottom of the population census. Clearly, Jews did not come to New Mexico in large numbers before the Civil War.

The main residence of the Jewish community centered around Santa Fe in 1860 with the census reflecting other areas such as Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Taos, & Los Lunas. One district in Santa Fe even became known as “Little Jerusalem”.  It is clear that the German-Jews in New Mexico did not hide their Jewishness nor seek to forget it although prior to 1860 there is no evidence or sign of public religious expression or that they sought to follow the Mosaic Law.The first clear indication that they had not abandon their belief systems & customs was in 1860. An article written in The American Israelite in 1881 recalled the first “Yom Kippur” held at Santa Fe at the home of Levi Spiegelberg in 1860. One family who migrated to New Mexico from Old Mexico in the late 1890’s and with a clear memory of their Jewish traditions, closed their curtains every Shabbat & still lit candles to Moses as a saint. Eventually with its continued growth,  the first bar mitzvah ceremony in New Mexico took place in Santa Fe in 1876 and the first synagogue was built in Las Vegas, NM in 1886- the Temple Montefiore.

So is the Los Lunas Mystery Stone connected to the crypto-Jews of New Mexico? There is very good evidence that the Mystery Stone was made by  the Crypto-Jews migrating out of Germany from 1840-1860. Hidden Mt. may have reminded them of Mt. Sinai and therefore they depicted the abridged version of the Ten Commandments in Paleo-Hebrew in remembrance of the Mosaic Law.

To obtain a copy of the documentary on DVD, go to www.AARONJUDKINS.com for details.

Like Aaron’s Blog? Click to Tweet! http://clicktotweet.com/4dM9t

References:

  1. Dixie L. Perkins, “The Meaning of the New Mexico Mystery Stone”, Sun Publishing Company, Albuquerque 1979
  2. Donald Cline, “The Los Lunas Stone”, Epigraphic Society Occasional Publications 10 (1982 part 10)
  3. David Allen Deal, “Discovery of Ancient America”, Kherem La Yah Press, Irvine CA, first published in 1984. 1999 3rd Edition available from David Deal (davebigdeal@cox.net).
  4. Jay Stonebreaker, “A Decipherment of the Los Lunas Decalogue Inscription”, Epigraphic Society Occasional Publications 18 (1989)
  5. L. Lyle Underwood, “The Los Lunas Inscription”, Epigraphic Society Occasional Publications 10 (1982, part 1)
  6. Cyrus Gordon, “Diffusion of Near East Culture in Antiquity and in Byzantine Times”, Orient 30-31, 1995
  7. Michael Skupin, “The Los Lunas Errata”, Epigraphic Society Occasional Publications 18 (1989)
  8. James D. Tabor, “An Ancient Hebrew Inscription in New Mexico: Fact or Fraud”, United Israel Bulletin Vol. 52, Summer 1997
  9. J.Huston McCulloch “The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone”, 1997, mcculloch.2@osu.edu
  10. Fell, Barry; “Ancient Punctuation and the Los Lunas Text,” Epigraphic Society, Occasional Publications, 13:35, 1985.
  11. Hordes, Stanley, “To the End of the Earth”, 2005, Columbia University Press, New York. pg. 18
  12. Ibid. pg 25
  13. Tobias, Henry, “A History of the Jews in New Mexico”, 1990, University of New Mexico Press, Albuqueque. pg. 7
  14. Ibid. pgs. 27- 28
  15. Ibid. pg. 29

Image

Along with commentary by noted Ph.D. scholar, Dr. Michael Heiser, independent filmmaker Chris White presents an exhaustive point-by-point critique of the Ancient Aliens series while providing a massive list of references from scientific journals and other scholarly sources to back up his definitive refutations.

These 252 footnotes, combined with White’s sound, logical arguments, show that the theories promoted by the History Channel as historical fact on this wildly popular series are actually embarrassingly easy to disprove.

Even those sympathetic to the ideas proposed in the Ancient Aliens series are giving praise to this new documentary. One author from the DailyGrail.com, a very prominent website that typically upholds the viewpoints touted in Ancient Aliens, recently said the following of White’s new film:

“A new 3-hour documentary, Ancient Aliens Debunked, takes the series apart, fact-checking individual’s claims on topics including pyramid construction, the Temple of Baalbek, Incan sites, Easter Island. Pacal’s ‘rocket’, the Nazca lines, and the Egyptian ‘light bulb’.…..[the film] offers clarifications, corrections, and background information that certainly removes much of the superficial gloss from Ancient Aliens.”

Like Aaron’s Blog? Click to Tweet! http://clicktotweet.com/4dM9t

This is part 1 of 3: The Megaliths

Intro, Puma Punku, The Pyramids, Baalbek, Incan sites, Easter Island.

http://t.co/e8tpXsSD

Part 2: Ancient Artifacts

Pacal’s rocket, The Nazca Lines, Tolima “fighter jets”, Egyptian “light bulb”, Ufo’s in ancient art, The crystal skulls

Part 3: Ancient Texts

Ezekiel’s Wheel, Ancient nuclear warfare, Vimana’s, Anunnaki, Nephilim, Misc. and conclusion

http://youtu.be/y2ZgH_6T7aU

By Robert Matthews, Science Correspondent Telegraph U.K.

Filed: 26/12/2004)

It is one of the best-known stories in science: the evolution of mankind from ape-like creatures to modern humans via knuckle-grazing cave-dwellers.

Now it has been blown apart by the first comprehensive study of all the fossils, which has revealed that they are probably all variants of Homo sapiens.

This is the type of dumb illustration often included with these stories & it was this time as well.

The discovery comes as fossil-hunters in Indonesia continue to defend claims to have found yet another new species of human, dubbed “Hobbit Man”. If true, the diminutive creature would join such famous specimens as Lucy, Java Man and the Neanderthals in the complex family tree of mankind.

 The findings have significant implications for the oftenbitter debates between fossil-hunters about thesignificance of their finds. While they no longer bicker over the so-called “Missing Link” – the now-derided idea of a creature linking humans to chimpanzees – experts continue to argue over the relationship between Australopithecines and early humans, and between Neanderthals and modern humans.

 The number of human species claimed by fossil-hunters now stands at around 10, while the total number of human-like species exceeds 50. Such claims have long been based on supposedly significant differences in sizes and shapes of fossil bones.

Now they have all been thrown into doubt by research showing that the differences lie within the range expected for just a single species.

Professor Maciej Henneberg, of the University of Adelaide, a world authority on fossil human anatomy, made the discovery after analysing the skull sizes and estimated body weights for all of the 200 identified specimens of human-like fossils known as hominims.

These span the entire history of humans, from the emergence of so-called Australopithecines with an upright stance more than four million years ago to neolithic modern humans from around 10,000 years ago.

Prof Maciej Henneberg

Prof Henneberg found that the fossils show clear evidence of evolution, with substantial increases in both skull sizes and body-weight. However, he also found that the fossils show no evidence of being anything other than a single species which had grown bigger and smarter over time.

According to Prof Henneberg, the much-vaunted differences in fossil size used to identify “new” species all lie within the normal range expected for one species. Plotted out as a graph, they form the classic bell-shaped curve found using data from modern humans.

Reporting his findings in the current issue of the Journal of Comparative Human Biology, Prof Henneberg concludes:

 “All hominims appear to be a single gradually evolving lineage containing only one species at each point in time.”

 The findings have big implications for the often bitter debates between fossil-hunters about the significance of their finds. Experts have long bickered over the relationship between Australopithecines and early humans, and between Neanderthals and modern humans.

Prof Henneberg has said that the new results suggest such disputes are meaningless, as they ignore the possibility of huge differences within the same species. He said they also raise doubts about the reliability of bones in identifying new human species: “There is no precise way in which we can test whether Julius Caesar and Princess Diana were members of the same species of Homo sapiens”.

According to Prof Henneberg, the study highlights the scant evidence for so many of the claimed new species of human. “Considering that there are only about 200 specimens in total, if these really do represent ten different species, that makes an average of just 20 specimens per species”.

He added that only a single skull had been found for the “Hobbit Man” of Indonesia.

Other authorities hailed Prof Henneberg’s findings as a much-needed reality check. “Clearly there is a need to be more aware of the possibility of variation – but that is not the inclination today,” said Geoffrey Harrison, emeritus professor of biological anthropology at the University of Oxford.

“It has been a problem because the discoverers have usually put so much effort into finding the evidence, so they want it to be important”.

Professor Chris Stringer, a leading expert on human fossils at the Natural History Museum, London, said even Neanderthals were not significantly different in skull or body size from modern humans.

However, he added that they do differ in other details, such as inner ear bones. He said: “The argument they are a different species is, of course, only a hypothesis, but comparisons of skull shape published recently certainly show they are as different from us as monkeys and apes are different from each other”.

According to Prof Henneberg, there are fewer than 30 examples of Neanderthals on which to base any conclusions. What evidence there is, however, is consistent with Neanderthals being from the same species as modern humans.

He added that the never-ending announcements of new species said more about those making the claims than about human evolution. “The problem is there are far more palaeontologists than fossil specimens”.

Like Aaron’s Blog? Click to Tweet! http://clicktotweet.com/4dM9t

GIANT-SKELETONS-CHART

Genesis 6:4 (KJV)
4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which wereof old, men of renown.

The word the Hebrew uses here is the word “Nephilim” which means “the fallen ones” and HaGibborim which means “the mighty ones.” The Greek Septuagint (LXX), a translation of the Torah into Greek about 270 B.C., renders these as gigantes; meaning “earth-born.” These giants are the result of an unnatural union between some of the fallen angels and human women that resulted in offspring that were not only gigantic in stature but very evil. Their great size and strength likely came from the mixture of demonic “DNA” mixing with human genetics. Does that make them ancient aliens from other planets as some suppose? No. They are not extraterrestrials at all! They are hyper-dimensional in nature. After the Nephilim arrive, we see that wickedness is abound on the earth corrupting mankind. This was one of the primary reasons for the drastic judgment of the flood.

In order to understand Giants, you need to understand that there were “gods” on this earth before the flood of Noah’s day and they will appear on this earth again before the 2nd Advent of Jesus Christ. The names of these gods have survived in myth form in Greek, Roman and Babylonian mythology. The “gods” are those Nephilim, “the fallen ones,” whose offspring were the giants.

They were the men of old, men of renown as the Bible describes them. The Bible clearly uses the “sons of God.” The Hebrew word which is used is “Bene Ha Elohim.” This always refers to “angels” in the Old Testament.[1]They were not the “Daughters of Men” which is the term “benoth adam” in Hebrew and translates as the “daughters of Adam.” It is important to note that “benoth adam” means from Adam; not Cain! Since the designation “sons of God” is consistently used in the Old Testament for angles, it is logical to conclude that the term in Genesis 6:2 also referred to angels. In Job1:6 and Job 2:1 the “sons of God” came to present themselves before the Lord in heaven. Among them is Satan-a further confirmation that the “sons of God” are angels.

Genesis 6:5-9 (KJV)
5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, andNoah walked with God.

This intermarrying with the Fallen Angels is the reason that God wipes out everyone except for Noah and his family in a worldwide flood. Every human genetic line had been corrupted except for Noah’s. It wasn’t because Noah was a perfect man! The Bible doesn’t say that. It says that he was “perfect in his generations.” Noah and his family were not corrupted by the Nephilim and were the only ones to carry on the human gene pool to repopulate the earth after the Deluge. They were “perfect” in their DNA. This corruption of the human genetics with the Fallen Angels is Satan’s attempt to pollute the human gene pool to attempt to thwart the coming birth of the Messiah!  So the Nephilim were the offspring of the cohabitation of fallen angels with human women. What we have in Genesis 6 is part of the Angels that rebelled with Lucifer come down and cohabited with human women; producing a race of demonic giants.

Admittedly, this is pretty wild. Now that the human race is starting, Satan sees an opportunity to do that which he could not do before and that is to be fruitful and multiply. How does he do this? He does so by getting some of the fallen Angels (sons of God) that rebuild with him to cohabit with the daughters of men. This produces a race of demigods; half demonic, half human giants.

Here are the races of giants the Bible describes:

1. Rephaim – from the root rapha = spirits, shades; the walking dead. (Gen. 14:5, Deuteronomy 3:11, Isaiah 26:14) Gen 14 is the account of how powerful Chedorlaomer, King of Elam, was by defeating the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Rephaims, Zuzims, Emims, Horites, Amalekites and the Amorites. These were the nations of the Giants. We also read how Abram defeated Chedorlaomer in battle to rescue Lot when he invaded Sodom & Gomorrah. This was a sign to let all know that God was with Abram!

2. Anakim “Ananaki” – those from who the heavens came (Num. 13:33) They were perhaps the best known of the giants living in the land of Caanan at the time of the Exodus.

3. Emim – the proud deserters; terrors.

4. Zuzim – the evil ones, roaming things (Gen. 14:5)

5. Zamzummims – the evil plotters, (Genesis 19:38; Deut. 2:20-21) They were a people great, and tall, as the Anakims and were overcome by the Ammonites, who called them “Zamzummims.” They belonged to the Rephaim, and inhabited the country afterwards occupied by the Ammonites. It is thought that they might be Ham-zuzims (Zuzims) dwelling in Ham; a place to the south of Ashteroth (Gen_14:5), the ancient Rabbath-ammon.

Giant remains in Ancient History[2]

* Remains of Teutobochus, Rhone in 1613 -30 ft.

* Angoula. 21 ft. (12 cubits in height),

* Lucerne, 1577, Dr. Plater. – 19 ft.

* Giants of Patagonia- 11-15 ft.


[1]CF: Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 & NT: Luke 20:36

[2] Taylor, Joe, Giants Against Evolution, Mt. Blanco Publishing, 2012

Like Aaron’s Blog? Click to Tweet! http://clicktotweet.com/4dM9t

AlienAgenda-Web-page

New book by A.S. Judkins! Now Available!

www.mtblanco.com

New book by Joe Taylor: Giants: Against Evolution
http://www.mtblanco.com

         Click the pic to go to the website


1. The Miracle of Space, Matter, and EnergyImage

When did time begin? In Genesis 1:1 it states, “In the beginning GOD…” This refers to the beginning of time itself. Notice the words of Genesis 1:1: “In the beginning GOD created the heavens.” The original Hebrew word for heaven is SHAMAYIM. It simply means stretched out space! Think: GOD even had to make the empty space in which to put everything. Then what? “GOD created …the earth.” The original word there for earth is ERETS in Hebrew which simply means the dirt or matter from which everything else is made, but it was not yet as we see today. So what was the condition of these raw materials in the beginning? GOD says they were “without form and void.” Think: when you take blocks and build something, then you have “form”.  Before that the matter was without form. It’s like when you begin a construction project. What do you start with? Basic materials like lumber, nails, and paint. But what raw material did GOD start with first? The answer is ATOMS.  What are they? The building blocks of all physical reality, atoms are composed essentially of 3 things: space, matter, and energy.

The physical structure of matter had apparently not yet been organized and the earth was truly empty (void) of the things that were necessary for life. Also we read that “the Spirit of GOD was hovering over the face of the waters.” Beginning with Genesis 1:3 we see GOD developing a logical sequence of creative acts to change the “without form and void” condition of the earth to matter. And then, in the same creative miracle, GOD said: “Let there be light!” Light includes the entire electromagnetic spectrum, not just the narrow band of color we can see. From short wave gamma rays, to long radio waves, electromagnetic radiation includes a vast range of frequencies spanning at least 75 octaves. Visible light occupies only one octave of this range. So what do we now have? Energy. Is this not the 3rd aspect of all physical things? At the instant that matter was energized, basic elements took on specific form. Particles were now in motion and operating in TIME. Think: When physical matter ceases to be, time shall be no more. In a very simple, yet profoundly scientific way, the Genesis account of God’s first creative miracle act logically defines the basis of all physical reality: space, matter, and energy.

But there’s more! Electromagnetic energy is at the heart of all physical matter. Atoms are held together by complex electric and magnetic forces, providing form and structure to the universe. All chemical elements took form when GOD said, “Let there be light!” HE initiated the physical laws that govern all forms of matter. One of the miracles of creation is the amount of energy “locked up” in the atoms. Man has been able to release some of the energy for use in atomic power plants for example, but think of the total amount of energy required to put together all the physical matter in the universe. It seems the miracle of “science” in the book of Genesis that the structure of every atom in the universe doesn’t fly apart. What does the Bible say in addition to Genesis 1:1? “…all things were created by Him [Jesus] and for Him; And HE is before all things, and by Him all things consist.” Colossians 1:16-17.

 

2.  The Miracle of WaterImage

In Genesis1:2, we read of GOD’s Spirit moving (or hovering) over the face of the water. On the beginning of the second day water covered the whole planet. GOD moved some of it to the space separated form the surface of the planet by what He called a firmament in Genesis 1:6-8. He then called the firmament “heaven” in the plural to apparently indicate there was more than one “heaven”.  It’s interesting to notice that the Hebrew word for waters is “MAYIM”. The first instance of the word “mayim” is in a compounded form with the word “SHAM”, meaning “there” or “in it”. It is thus found as the word “SHAMAYIM” and is translated as “heavens” in Genesis 1:1. It appears there is something about the expanse of “heavens” which inherently includes water.

Scientist are learning that there is water out in the emptiness of interstellar space.[1] The Bible says in Psalm 148:4-6, Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens.
 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.
 He hath also stablished them forever and ever: he hath made a decree which shall not pass”.

Water is one of the most primary of the physical phenomena, yet it defies normal chemical theory. It is so unique it could not have originated by chance. With its many qualities for the support of life, it could only be the result of an incredibly complex design. The result of a strong chemical union of two gases (oxygen & hydrogen), water just happens to stay in liquid form at a narrow range of temperatures that are conducive for living creatures. When combined with carbon and certain other elements, water composes nearly all molecules of living creatures. Virtually a liquid mineral, it is a misfit to other compounds, expanding when it freezes, enabling it to float. Water is absolutely essential in liquid form for all the key systems of life. Even the oxygen you breathe requires water to dissolve it and carry it to every cell in your body. Without water, there is no life! Space probes have searched other planets for liquid water to see if life forms could be present. But Earth, the place where GOD specifically created all physical life forms, is the only planet where the miracle of liquid water is found, and in abundance! In John 6:63 GOD says, “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” GOD’s Spirit gives Life!  Remember the connection of the Bible’s reference to water in Genesis 1:2? It’s also the first place in the Bible where God’s Spirit is mentioned. As water is essential for physical life, so GOD’s Spirit is essential for our spiritual life.

3. The Miracle of Design in Nature

Image

Let’s think of an aspirin pill for a moment; you will immediately recall the mark in the middle of it. This mark is designed in order to help those who intake half a dose. Every product that we see around us is of a certain design even though not as simple as the aspirin pill. Everything from vehicles we use to go to work, to TV remotes.

“Design”, briefly, means a harmonious assembling of various parts into an orderly form towards a common goal. Going by this definition, one would have no difficulty in guessing that a car is a design. This is because there is a certain goal, which is to transport people and cargo. In realization of this goal various parts such as the engine, tires and body are planned and assembled in the plant.

However, what about a living creature? Can a bird and mechanics of its flying be a design as well? Before giving an answer, let us repeat the evaluation we did for the example of a car. The goal at hand, in this case, is to fly. For this purpose, hollowed bones, strong muscles that move these bones are utilized together with feathers capable of suspending in the air. Wings are formed aerodynamically, and metabolism is in tune with the bird’s need for high levels of energy. It is obvious that the bird is product of a certain design.

If one explores other creatures besides a bird, similar facts are attained. There are examples of a certain meticulous design in every creature and living system. It is called the “Golden Mean Ratio”.  It is GOD’s signature on HIS creation. If one continues further on this quest, one would discover that humans are also a part of this certain design. Your eyes that read these lines are making vision possible with such focus that the best camera on earth simply cannot.

Hence one arrives at this important conclusion; all creatures in Nature, including mankind, are of a Design. This, in turn, shows the existence of a Creator Who designs all creatures at will, sustains the entire nature and holds absolute power and wisdom.

However, this truth is rejected by the theory of evolution that was formed in the middle of 19th century. The theory set forth in Charles Darwin’s book “On The Origin of Species” asserts that all creatures evolved within a chain of coincidences and essentially mutated from one another.

According to the fundamental assertion of this theory all living things go through minute and coincidental changes. If these coincidental changes help the creature then it gains advantage over the others, which in turn is carried onto following generations.

This scenario has been passed around as if it is a very scientific and convincing one for 150 years. When scrutinized under a bigger microscope and when compared against the examples of the Design in creatures Darwin’s theory paints a very different picture i.e. Darwinism’s explanation of creation is nothing more than a self-conflicting vicious circle.

Let us first focus on the “coincidental changes”. Darwin could not provide a comprehensive definition to this concept due to lack of genealogical knowledge in his time. The evolutionists who followed him put forth the concept of “mutation” on this subject. Mutation is arbitrary disconnections, dislocation or shifts of genes in living things. Most important point is that there is not one single mutation in history that is shown to improve the condition of genetic information of a creature. Nearly all the known cases of mutations disable or harm these creatures and the rest are neutral in effect. Therefore, to think that a creature can improve through mutation is same as shooting at a crowd of people and hope that the injuries will result in healthier and improved individuals. This would clearly be nonsense.

As importantly, on contrary to all the scientific data, even if one assumes that a certain mutation could actually improve a being’s condition, Darwinism still cannot be delivered from inevitable collapse. The reason for this is a concept called “irreducible complexity”.  The implication of this concept is that majority of systems and organs in living things function as a result of various independent parts working together, elimination or disabling of even one of which would be enough to disable the entire system or organ.

For example, an ear perceives sounds only through a chain reaction of a series of smaller organs. Take out or deform one of these, e.g. one of the bones of the middle ear, and there would be no hearing whatsoever. In order for an ear to perceive a variety of components such as auditory meatus, malleous, incus and stapes bones, tympanic membrane, cochlea and fluid, sensory cells, vibration sensor extensions of these cells, net of nerves that connect to brain and hearing center in the brain have to work together without exception. The system could not have developed in segments because none of the segments could possibly function alone at all. Hence the concept of irreducible complexity demolishes the theory of evolution from its foundations. What is really interesting is the fact that Darwin also worried about these very prospects. He wrote in On The Origin of Species:

“If the impossibility of formation of a complex organ through a series of small changes was ever to be proven my theory would have certainly collapsed. However I could not find such an organ…” (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, page 189.)

Darwin could not or might not have wanted to find such an organ at the premature levels of 19th century science. However the science of 20th century did study the nature down to minute details and proved that majority of living structures embody irreducible complexity. Therefore, Darwin’s theory has most “certainly collapsed” just as he feared. As we examine the living beings we will not only see an immense error Darwinism makes but also witness the greatness of wisdom that these systems were created with. These mechanisms will be found anywhere from the wings of a bird to inside a bat’s skull. Hence we will see the indisputable evidences of GOD’s creation without error. Likewise, the power and faculty of God to create without error is expressed in the Bible:

Job 12:7-10:
7 But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee:
8 Or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee: and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee.
9 Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the LORD hath wrought this?
10 In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.

Genesis 1:24-28
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

1 Thessalonians 5:21
21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

Ecclesiastes 7:29
29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they [men] have sought out many schemes.

Romans 1:20-25
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Luke 12:24-28 
24 Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?
25 And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit?
26 If ye then be not able to do that thing which is least, why take ye thought for the rest?
27 Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
28 If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith?

4. The Miracle of the Heavens  Image

The initial shock of stellar majesty inspires a new appreciation for the work awesome. Truly, that amazing sight is overpowering to our human emotions and intellect. But is there more to it than that?

The most ancient cultures on earth were captivated by the stars. To them the magnificent annual precession of the stars had historic and prophetic significance as well as usefulness in scheduling their agricultural seasons. Today most of us have essentially zero knowledge of what those ancient people know of the stars. Think: though corrupted cultures form Nimrod and Babel have wrongfully worshipped the stars, associated them with mythical legends, and developed systems of pagan astrology, we must ask a basic question. What was the Creator’s purpose for decorating the night sky with the stars?

Genesis 1:14-16 
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Days and years clearly reveal GOD’s intent that stars would help us measure time. Indeed, the precision and regularity of stellar observations from the beginning have provided man with annual “skymarks” in time. Like the microscopic world, the starry heaven shows us GOD’s special order and design. The creation is not random, chaotic, and unpredictable, but by GOD’s plan and purpose for mankind. The Hebrew word for seasons is something “fixed” or “appointed”. GOD says in Psalms that He ordained them.

Psalm 8:3  3 “When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;”

Did you know that in GOD’s creative miracle of the Heavens that He named all the stars?

Psalm 147:4-5
4 He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.
5 Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.

Four thousand years ago, GOD ask Job many questions including some about specific stars and well known star groups.

Job 38:31-33 
31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33 Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

Before Job, men recounted the originally meaning of the constellations. In Orion, the coming Prince of Light holds a great club in his right hand and the token of his victory in his left- the head of the “roaring lion” that is Satan. The sign shows Orion’s left foot is raised to crush the head of the enemy.

If there is any doubt about the identity of Orion’s meaning, all we need to do is examine the ancient names of the notable stars in the constellation. The brightest (in the right shoulder of Orion) is named Betelgeuz, which means “the coming of the Branch”. Next is Rigel, seen in the foot poised over the head of the enemy. It is the seventh brightest star in the sky. Rigel means “the foot that crushes.” In the left shoulder of Orion is Bellatrix, which means “quickly coming” or “swiftly destroying”. One of the three stars in Orion’s belt is named Al Nitak, “the wounded one,” and the star in his right leg is called Saiph, meaning “bruised” (the very word used in the Book of Genesis 3:15. Should it surprise us to learn that Orion is the most brilliant of all the constellations?

Psalm 19:1-6 
1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
3 There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
4 Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
6 His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

If the “glory of God” was intended to be declared by the stellar heavens in Psalms, it is likely that their story line, in the 12 signs called the Mazzaroth by God himself in Job 38, signifies the eternal plan of Jesus the Messiah, who alone is “the brightness of His glory.”

Hebrews 1:3 
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

The Hebrews, the Aztecs, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Assyrians, and the Chinese all have the same 12 constellations with the same essential meanings. To look at the stars, there is no reason to group them as they are in the zodiac… except if it was divinely designed to tell a story!

www.aaronjudkins.com


[1] National Geographic, (May, 1974), p. 625

Creationism vs. Evolution

Creationism

Creationism is the presuppositional belief in the literal Biblical Judeo-Christian interpretation in the creation of the universe and of all living things rather than evolution.

The Genesis Creation is a description of the creation of the world, as written in the first two chapters of the Book of Genesis in the Bible. The Biblical account is in stark contrast to evolution and to several other ancient Mesopotamian creation myths, while differing in its monotheistic outlook.

Chapter one describes the creation of the world by Elohim (God), by means of His spoken Word in six days and the designation of the seventh day as Sabbath, a holy (set apart) day of rest. Man and woman are created to be God’s regents over his creation. Chapter two tells of YHWH (God) creating the first man, whom he forms from clay (or dust) and into whom he “breathes” the “breath of life”.

The creation week consists of eight divine commands executed over six days, followed by a seventh day of rest.

First day: God (Elohim) creates light (“Let there be light!”)[Gen 1:3]—the first divine command. The light is divided from the darkness, and “day” and “night” are named.

Second day: God creates a firmament (“Let a firmament be…!”)[Gen 1:6–7]—the second command—to divide the waters above from the waters below. The firmament is named “skies”.

Third day: God commands the waters below to be gathered together in one place, and dry land to appear (the third command).[Gen 1:9–10] “earth” and “sea” are named. God commands the earth to bring forth grass, plants, and fruit-bearing trees (the fourth command).

Fourth day: God creates lights in the firmament (the fifth command)[Gen 1:14–15] to separate light from darkness and to mark days, seasons and years. Two great lights are made (most likely the Sun and Moon, but not named), and the stars.

Fifth day: God commands the sea to “teem with living creatures”, and birds to fly across the heavens (sixth command)[Gen 1:20–21] He creates birds and sea creatures, and commands them to be fruitful and multiply.

Sixth day: God commands the land to bring forth living creatures (seventh command);[Gen 1:24–25] He makes wild beasts, livestock and reptiles. He then creates humanity in His “image” and “likeness” (eighth command).[Gen 1:26–28] They are told to “be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it.” The totality of creation is described by God as “very good.”

Seventh day: God, having completed the heavens and the earth, rests from His work, and blesses and sanctifies the seventh day.

The Evolutionary Concept

Evolutionists base their scenarios on natural effects and chance. One of the concepts they most shelter behind while doing so is that of “considerable time.” For instance, the German scientist Ernst Haeckel, who supported Darwin, claimed that a living cell could originate from simple mud. With the realization in the twentieth century of how complex the living cell actually is, the silliness of that claim became apparent, but evolutionists continued to mask the truth with the “considerable time” concept.

By doing this, they are trying to free themselves from the problem by plunging it into a quandary instead of answering the question of how life could have come about by chance. By giving the impression that the passage of a long period of time could be useful from the point of view of the emergence of life and increase in variety, they present time as something that is always beneficial.

Modern scientists have demonstrated many times that it is impossible for that claim to actually happen. They have carried out controlled experiments in the most advanced laboratories, reproducing the conditions at the time when life first emerged, but these have all been in vain.

It is perfectly clear that even if all the conditions evolutionists insist on are realized, and even if millions of years are allowed to pass, such an experiment will be doomed to failure. Evolutionists try to conceal this fact, however, with deceptive explanations such as “all things are possible with time.” The invalidity of this claim, which is based on introducing an element of bluff into science, is also obvious. This invalidity can be quite clearly seen when this antiquated theory is critically analyzed.

The evolutionist historical perspective studies the history of mankind by dividing it up into several periods, just as it does with the supposed course of human evolution itself. Such fictitious concepts as the Stone Age, Bronze Age and Iron Age are an important part of the evolutionist chronology. Since this imaginary picture is presented in schools and in television and newspaper stories, most people accept this imaginary picture without question and imagine that human beings once lived in an era when only primitive stone tools were used and technology was unknown.

Yet when archaeological findings and scientific facts are examined, a very different picture emerges. The traces and remains that have come down to the present—the tools, needles, flute fragments, personal adornments and decorations—show that in cultural and social terms, humans have always lived civilized lives in all periods of history.

Thousands of years ago, people lived in houses, engaged in agriculture, exchanged goods, produced textiles, ate, visited relatives, took an interest in music, made paintings, treated the sick, performed their acts of worship and, in short, lived normal lives just as they do today. People who heeded the prophets sent by God came to have faith in Him, while others worshipped idols. Believers with faith in God abided by the moral values commanded by Him, while others engaged in superstitious practices and deviant rites. At all times in history, just as today, there have been people who believed in the existence of God, as well as pagans and atheists.

Of course, throughout history, there have always been those living under simpler, more primitive conditions as well as societies living civilized lives. But this by no means constitutes evidence for the so-called evolution of history, because while one part of the world is launching shuttles into space, people in other lands are still unacquainted with electricity. Yet this does not mean that those who build spacecraft are mentally or physically more advanced—and have progressed further down the supposed evolutionary road and become more culturally evolved—nor that the others are closer to the fictional ape-men. These merely indicate differences in cultures and civilizations.

 www.aaronjudkins.com

 

Creation vs. Evolution

The field of science has sought to answer specific questions regarding our universe, our world, and the origins of life. The discipline of science then is to answer the unknown by formulating questions, then ideas, then developing a hypothesis to assess those ideas. Then theories are developed and tested with models to determine outcomes. A theory therefore, must be tested against observations and experiments to examine its validity. The National Academy of Sciences stated in 1998, “It is the nature of science to test and retest explanations against the natural world.”

The way to test the theory of evolution is through investigating its claims using scientific methodology. In general, science is self-correcting under proper scientific scrutiny. This is how hypothesis and theories are formed and tested. Only after repeatable, observable and measured tests are conducted and verified with predictable outcomes, can a theory then become a law.

What science should say is ‘evolution is not proven fact, so it should not be promoted dogmatically.’ Therefore, it should be critically examined just as with any other theory. The problem with using the word ‘theory’ in this case is that scientists use it to mean a well-substantiated explanation of data. Only theories that have endured repeated testing can then be regarded as generally true. This includes well-known theories such as Newton’s Theory of Gravity or Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.

Since some scientists espouse evolution with the greatest of devotion, most people imagine that this theory is scientifically valid without any knowledge of any critical arguments that do not support it. Evolutionary theory however, is somehow excluded from the scientific method. From the day it was first proposed right up to the present, it has been defended by promoting its strengths only. It should not be the role of academia to portray only the strengths of any theory as a proven fact. No doubt, it is most contradictory to strongly defend a theory while its weaknesses are never explored. Yet that is exactly what is taking place. Evolution is being presented as scientifically valid without scrutinizing its weaknesses. Yet again, this defeats the purpose of sound academic science.

There are four basic questions that science seeks to answer regarding life’s origins.

  1. Who am I?
  2. Where did I come from?
  3. What is my purpose here?
  4. Where am I going?

These are purely philosophical questions that science seeks to answer. After all, science is about finding answers to our questions. Analyzing and evaluating all sides of evolution and life origins is essential in understanding theses questions. It is only then that one can begin to contemplate the meaning of life and the wonder of it all.

Science is limited to the present. We can’t directly observe past events, we can only study their results which still exist in the present. So how is science tested? There are at two ways to research. The first is by laboratory data and the second is field data. This can be done by observing, testing, repeating and predicting outcomes with empirical data. Past, non-repeatable events can only be tested by theory and circumstantial evidence. This results in only educated guesses at best that cannot be proven empirically. Then results and outcomes are published. Nevertheless, we need to be aware of three potential problems with evidence.

First, evidence may be incomplete. Ever read a good murder mystery? Just before the end you think you know “who done it.” At the last minute the author reveals a crucial bit of evidence you didn’t know before. You are annoyed to find that the culprit was the butler, not the chauffeur. Why did you reach a wrong conclusion? Because you were basing your ideas on incomplete evidence.

A prime example of incomplete evidence occurred in the U.S. in the 1920s. Noted anthropologist Henry Fairfield Osborn declared that a single fossilized molar tooth found in Nebraska in 1922 came from an extinct ancestor of man called Hesperopithecus. He presented an elaborate scenario showing how Mr. and Mrs. Hesperopithecus looked, what they ate, where they lived, what kind of animals lived nearby, and so on. The 1922 Illustrated London News even printed a double-page picture of them in their native habitat.

Because of Osborn’s reputation, many accepted this scenario as fact. Defense attorney Clarence Darrow even alluded to it in an attempt to berate prosecutor William Jennings Bryan at the famous “Scopes Trial”. The 1925 Scopes Trial in Dayton, Tennessee, has been deemed the most important trial in American history. In this case, teacher John Scopes was tried for violating a Tennessee law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in public schools. Perhaps you saw Hollywood’s inaccurate version of the trial in the motion picture “Inherit the Wind”.

A few years after the trial ended with Scopes being convicted, another fossil tooth was found, identical to the one Osborn had used as his basis for Hesperopithecus. This one was still in the jaw to which it belonged. The jaw belonged to an extinct pig! Why were the “experts” so wrong in their elaborate story? Because they started with incomplete evidence. We should ask ourselves, how much evidence exists about the beginning of everything? We have no way to know. Then how much evidence is still missing? We have no way to know that either. As a result, we should exercise healthy skepticism.

Secondly, evidence may be deliberately withheld. Students are told that life on earth began in a mixture of chemicals known as the “primordial soup” which came together into amino acids, which then assembled themselves into proteins, which then assembled themselves into cells. But the chemicals in this mythical soup cannot combine properly in the presence of free oxygen. Therefore, the students are told that the early atmosphere did not contain free oxygen – which it escaped from inside the earth much later. Geologists know better. It is well known in professional geologic circles that traces of free oxygen — iron oxide, uranium oxide, and so on — have been found in even the bottom layers of Precambrian sediment, all the way down to basement rock. But if you check the textbooks, this evidence is nowhere to be found. Why not? It’s deliberately withheld because it doesn’t fit the theory of evolution!

Thirdly, evidence may be falsified. You’ve probably heard that a human baby goes through all the stages of evolution as it develops in the womb before birth. This is known as “recapitulation” in evolutionist literature. It is more than a scientific deception; it was a scientific forgery. This started in the early 1860s. Ernst Haeckel, a young doctor on the faculty of Jena University in Germany, seized on the growing popularity of evolution.

Haeckel published drawings that he said illustrated his laboratory experiments, in which he had dissected embryos of different kinds of creatures at various stages of development. The drawings apparently showed the embryos demonstrating the stages of evolutionary development. Others tried to duplicate Haeckel’s experiments, but obtained completely different results.

Creation and evolution, between them, exhaust the possible explanations for the origin of living things. Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence.

Fossils show that living beings emerged fully developed and in a perfect state on the Earth. That means that “the origin of species,” contrary to Darwin’s supposition is not evolution, but creation.

Evolution argues that inanimate, unconscious matter created life. It insists that millions of different living species (e.g., birds, fish, giraffes, tigers, insects, trees, flowers, whales, and human beings) originated as a result of the interactions between matter such as pouring rain, lightning flashes, and so on, out of inanimate matter.

Anyone who does not look at the origin of living beings with a materialist prejudice will see this evident truth: All living beings are works of a Creator, Who is All-Powerful, All-Wise, and All-Knowing. This Creator is God, Who created the whole universe from non-existence, designed it in the most perfect form, and fashioned all living beings.

Here is a brief, partial overview of what scientists were accomplishing in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. All of them were creationists:

  1. Louis Agassiz (1807–1873): glacial geology, ichthyology
  2. Charles Babbage (1792–1871): actuarial tables, calculating machine, foundations of computer science
  3. Francis Bacon (1561–1626): scientific method of research
  4. Robert Boyle (1627–1691): chemistry, gas dynamics
  5. Sir David Brewster (1781–1868): optical mineralogy, kaleidoscope
  6. Georges Cuvier (1769–1832): comparative anatomy, vertebrate paleontology
  7. Sir Humphry Davy (1778–1829): thermokinetics
  8. Jean Henri Fabre (1823–1915): entomology of living insects
  9. Michael Faraday (1791–1867): electric generator, electro–magnetics, field theory
  10. Sir John A. Fleming (1849–1945): electronics, thermic valve
  11. Joseph Henry (1797–1878): electric motor, galvanometer
  12. Sir William Herschel (1738–1822): galactic astronomy, double stars
  13. James Joule (1818–1889): reversible thermodynamics
  14. Lord William Kelvin (1824–1907): absolute temperature scale, energetics, thermodynamics, transatlantic cable
  15. Johannes Kepler (1571–1630): celestial mechanics, ephemeris tables, physical astronomy
  16. Carolus Linnaeus (1707–1778): classification system, systematic biology
  17. Joseph Lister (1827–1912): antiseptic surgery
  18. Matthew Maury (1806–1873): hydrography, oceanography
  19. James C. Maxwell (1831–1879): electrical dynamics, statistical thermodynamics
  20. Gregor Mendel (1822–1884): genetics
  21. Samuel F. B. Morse (1791–1872): telegraph
  22. Isaac Newton (1642–1727): calculus, dynamics, law of gravity, reflecting telescopes
  23. Blaise Pascal (1623–1662): hydrostatics, barometer
  24. Louise Pasteur (1822–1895): bacteriology, biogenesis law, pasteurization, vaccination, and immunization
  25. Sir William Ramsey (1852–1916): inert gases, isotropic chemistry
  26. John Ray (1627–1705): natural history, classification of plants and animals
  27. John Rayleigh (1842–1919): dimensional analysis, model analysis
  28. Bernhard Riemann (1826–1866): non–Euclidean geometry
  29. Sir James Simpson (1811–1870): chloroform, gynecology
  30. Sir George Stokes (1819–1903): fluid mechanics
  31. Rudolph Virchow (1821–1902): pathology

Eighteenth and nineteenth century contributions to science by evolutionists:

  1. Emmanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772) was a do–nothing expert. In his 1734 book, Principia, he theorized that a rapidly rotating nebula formed itself into our solar system of sun and planets. He claimed that he obtained the idea from spirits during a séance. It is significant that the nebular hypothesis theory originated from such a source.
  2. Comte de Buffon (1707–1788) was a dissolute philosopher who, unable to improve on the work of Linnaeus, spent his time criticizing him. He theorized that species originated from one another and that a chunk was torn out of the sun, which became our planet. As with the other philosophers, he presented no evidence in support of his theories.
  3. Jean–Baptist Lamarck (1744–1829) made a name for himself by theorizing. He accomplished little else of significance. He laid the foundation of modern evolutionary theory with his concept of “inheritance of acquired characteristics,” which was later given the name Lamarckism. In 1809 he published a book, Philosophie Zoologique, in which he declared that the giraffe got its long neck by stretching it up to reach the higher branches and birds that lived in water grew webbed feet. According to that, if you pull hard on your feet, you will gradually increase their length; and, if you decide in your mind to do so, you can grow hair on your bald head, and your offspring will never be bald. This is science? Lamarck’s other erroneous contribution to evolution was the theory of uniformitarianism. This is the conjecture that all earlier ages on Earth were exactly as they are today, calm and peaceful with no worldwide flood or other great catastrophes.
  4. Robert Chambers (1802–1883) was a spiritualist who regularly communicated with spirits. As a result of his contacts, he wrote the first popular evolution book in all of Britain. Called Vestiges of Creation (1844), it was printed 15 years before Charles Darwin’s book, The Origin of Species.
  5. Charles Lyell (1797–1875). Like Charles Darwin, Lyell inherited great wealth and was able to spend his time theorizing. Lyell published his Principles of Geology in 1830–1833 and it became the basis for the modern theory of sedimentary strata—even though twentieth–century discoveries in radiocarbon dating, missing strata, and overthrusts (older strata on top of more recent strata) have nullified the theory. In order to prove his theory, Lyell was quite willing to misstate the facts. He learned that Niagara Falls had eroded a seven–mile [11 km] channel from Queenston, Ontario, and that it was eroding at about three feet [1 m] a year. So Lyell conveniently changed that to one foot [.3 m] a year, which meant that the falls had been flowing for 35,000 years! But Lyell had not told the truth. Three feet of erosion a year, at its present rate of flow, would only take us back 7,000 to 9,000 years. It would be expected that, just after the flood, the flow would, for a time, have greatly increased the erosion rate. Lyell was a close friend of Darwin, and urged him to write his book, The Origin of Species.
  6. Alfred Russell Wallace (1823–1913) is considered to be the man who developed the theory which Darwin published. Wallace was deeply involved in spiritism at the time he formulated the theory in his Ternate Paper. Darwin, with the help of two friends, Charles Lyell and Joseph Hooker, pirated and published the paper under his own name. Darwin, a wealthy man, thus obtained the royalties which belonged to Wallace, a poverty–ridden theorist. In 1980, Arnold C. Brackman, in his book A Delicate Arrangement, established that Darwin plagiarized Wallace’s material. It was arranged that a paper by Darwin would be read to the Royal Society in London while Wallace’s was held back until later. Priorities for the ideas thus having been taken care of, Darwin set to work to prepare his book. In 1875, Wallace came out openly for spiritism and Marxism, another stepchild of Darwinism. It is of interest to note that after engaging in spiritism, certain men in history have been seized with a deep hatred of God. They have then been guided to devise evil teachings that have destroyed large numbers of people, while others have engaged in warfare which has annihilated millions. In connection with this, we think of such known spiritists as Sigmund Freud and Adolf Hitler. Wallace’s theory that species have changed in the past, one species descended from another in a manner that we cannot prove today, is exactly what modern evolution teaches. Yet there is no more evidence supporting the theory today than Wallace had in 1858, when he devised the theory. In February 1858, while in a delirious fever on the island of Ternate in the Molaccas, Wallace conceived the idea “survival of the fittest” as being the method by which species change. But the concept proves nothing. The fittest; which one is that? It is the one that survives the longest. Which one survives longest? The fittest. This is circular reasoning. The phrase says nothing about the evolutionary process, much less proving it. In the first edition of his book, Darwin regarded “natural selection” and “survival of the fittest” as different concepts. By the sixth edition of his The Origin of Species, he thought they meant the same thing, but that “survival of the fittest” was the more accurate. In a still later book (Descent of Man, 1871), Darwin ultimately abandoned “natural selection” as a hopeless mechanism and returned to Lamarckism. Even Darwin recognized the theory was falling to pieces. The supporting evidence just was not there.
  7. Charles Darwin (1809–1882) was born into wealth and able to have a life of ease. He took two years of medical school at Edinburgh University, and then dropped out. It was the only scientific training he ever received. Because he spent the time in bars with his friends, he barely passed his courses. Darwin had no particular purpose in life, and his father planned to get him into a nicely paid job as an Anglican minister. Darwin did not object. But, instead, an influential relative got him a position as the unpaid “naturalist” on a ship planning to sail around the world, the Beagle. The voyage lasted from December 1831 to October 1836.

 www.aaronjudkins.com