Category: Bible vs Scientism

NEO-DARWINISM CANNOT EXPLAIN MAN’S DISTINCTION FROM ANIMALS

The Biblical text was not intended as a precise scientific document, but it does describe essential facts that Man needs to know, including the two phases of Man’s creation.

The Biblical text was not intended as a precise scientific document, but it does describe essential facts that Man needs to know, including the two phases of Man’s creation.

These phases correspond to the scientific evidence we have.

Phase I:

“And God formed the man of dust from the ground, and he blew into his nostrils the soul of life, and man became a living being”

(Genesis 2:7)

The term “living being” used in Genesis 2:7 is the same term used in Genesis chapter 1 to describe the animals that God created before Man.

The great rabbinic sage Sforno explains that in phase I primitive Man existed as a higher form of animal, but still an animal similar to all the other animals which are lacking the ability of speech and intellectual reasoning.

We might conclude from this that these animal like humans could have existed for hundreds of thousands of years, but they left no evidence of language, writing, civilization, or abstract thought.

Line drawings on a cave wall, with no evidence of language or abstract thought, do not really distinguish primitive Man from animals.

Phase II:

“God planted a Garden in Eden, to the East, and placed there Man whom He had formed.” (Genesis 2:8)

The rabbinic sage Sforno explains that the “Garden” is the location where Man received the “image of God” so that higher Man gained the ability for speech and intellectual reasoning that primitive Man and animals are lacking.

This second phase would have occurred less than 6000 years from the present time, IE in the year 5786 according to the Jewish calendar that counts from the creation of higher Man.

Honest scientists will admit that the oldest writing that exists is less than 6000 years old, which was the period when Man was placed in the “Garden” and received the “image of God”.

No amount of Darwinist imagination can explain Man’s ability for speech, language, writing, and intellectual reasoning. These abilities could only be granted by a supernatural Creator.

God’s Mind is Far Above Man’s Puny Mind

Could all the Neo-Darwinist scientists in the world construct even a one-celled living organism from (non-living) laboratory chemicals? I rather doubt it.


Could anything as enormously complex as a 1 celled organism have evolved from un-directed natural causes?

https://www.britannica.com/science/cell-biology

How could the cell nucleus survive before all the other components evolved?

How could the components outside the nucleus survive before the nucleus evolved?

We should have the humility to admit that God’s mind is far above Man’s puny mind.

In contrast, the pompous and intellectually dishonest New Atheists and Neo-Darwinists refuse to admit that they have no explanation for the origin of the Universe, nor can the Neo-Darwinists explain the origin of life on Earth. 

At best Neo-Darwinist theories can explain minor changes within the same species (such as the size and shape of a finch’s beak) due to un-directed natural causes. These changes do not represent any increase in the complexity of the species.

The many articles and books by Dr. Stephen Meyer teach true science within the limits of Man’s knowledge.

“the probability of producing even a single functional protein (a gene product) of modest length (150 amino acids) by chance alone stands at a “vanishingly small” 1 chance in 10^164 (10 to the 164 power)”

Signature in the Cell

Young Earth Creationism: A Simplistic Interpretation of the Bible

So-called “Young Earth Creationism”, IE a belief that the Universe is less than 6000 years old, represents a simplistic interpretation of the Bible that can be exploited to promote atheistic beliefs. 

“AND there was evening and there was morning, ONE day.” (Genesis 1:5)

“And…”, “one day” – The Bible is telling us that the “one day” was not the “first day”. There are ancient Jewish rabbinic sources (such as Breishees Rabbah) that indicate that long periods of time elapsed that are not detailed in the Bible because they are not pertinent to the message of the Bible.

“God separated the light from the darkness.” (Genesis 1:4)

“(prior to the fourth day) periods of light and darkness alternated due to causes other than the revolving of the planet around its own axis, due to the expression of God’s will.” (Commentary of Rabbi Ovadiah Sforno on Genesis 1:4, 16th Century C.E.)

Sforno is explaining that the “days” mentioned in Genesis are not necessarily the same length as our present days, they represent periods of time of unknown length. Thus we do not know how much time actually elapsed since the beginning of the Universe.

The Jewish Bible in the Book of Genesis is informing us that the Universe was created ex-nihilo in the finite past. However creation ex-nihilo is not a process that can be comprehended by Man nor can its details be described in the Bible.

The Bible was never intended as a science textbook for Man. The Bible is a book of ethics for Man that also contains some basic scientific information, but that information is incidental to the purpose of the Bible.

In contrast to erroneous ancient Greek science, modern science seems to agree with the Bible that the Universe had a beginning. Any finite age to the Universe claimed by the scientists may or may not be correct. Even if the scientists are claiming the Universe is billions of years old, as long as the scientists are claiming the Universe had a beginning in the finite past, they are not necessarily contradicting the Jewish Bible.

The actual age of the Universe is NOT important for understanding the Bible. What is important is that we believe that the Universe had a beginning in the finite past, such belief is not contradicting the Bible.

Religious people should not allow creation of a false contradiction between modern astronomical evidence and the Bible that enables any forms of atheism.

Present Humans are Qualitatively Different than Neanderthals

Neanderthals and other ancient creatures possessed a hominoid body form but had no known speech, language, writing, technology, philosophy, religion, or civilization. Neanderthals should not be compared to or classified as a predecessor species of present day humans.

The friendly smiles drawn on the illustrations of Neanderthals that we see today are the pure imagination of modern humans. If we were to observe a Neanderthal creature today, we might conclude it is a vicious animal with instincts but lacking any rational intellect.

Neanderthals and other such creatures resemble animals more than they resemble present day humans.

A “qualitatively new species” refers not simply to new DNA or new physical traits, rather it refers to present day Man’s immaterial quality of being “created in the image of God” that allow Man to recognize the existence of God and speak, write, study science, create technologies and civilizations.

No amount of fake Darwinist “science” can explain the qualitative differences between ancient hominoid animals and present day humans.

Why would Darwinian “survival of the fittest” principles require a gorilla or chimpanzee to develop a rational intellect capable of abstract thought and develop the ability for speech?

A gorilla’s “survival of the fittest” in the jungle requires strong arms to pull bananas off a tree and fight off lions, a gorilla has no need for a rational intellect capable of abstract thought or the ability for speech.

Why would a gorilla require an intellect capable of creating an advanced civilization?

 

Imagining that Apes had Uniquely Human Characteristics Is Scientism

Present day humans possess “uniquely human characteristics” that were never possessed by any animals nor by ancient humans (prior to about 6000 years ago).

Examples of “uniquely human characteristics” are having a rational intellect, the ability for speech, language, and writing, the ability to understand good vs. evil, the ability to study science and create technology, and having a body designed to walk upright on two legs on a continual basis.

Human limbs and joints are not designed for humans to “knuckle walk” on all four limbs, as apes do.

On the Smithsonian Museum website it claims that the ancient creature known as “Lucy” (Australopithecus afarensis) had “a body that stood on two legs and regularly walked upright”. That site also claims that Lucy had “apelike face proportions”.

However evidence indicates that “Lucy” had wrist joints designed for knuckle walking as apes also have.

When I personally challenged a professional paleontologist in a major museum that Lucy was an ape, not a human, the paleontologist agreed to compare Lucy’s jaw with an ape jaw. The two jaws were indistinguishable from each other.

Imagining that ancient ape like creatures had human characteristics, such as walking upright, is “scientism”, not true science.

“Scientism” seems to have an agenda to devolve Man into a lower animal.

This interesting video demonstrates that “Lucy” had the morphology of a knuckle walker who walks on all four limbs, not the morphology of a bipedal human.

Lucy the Knuckle Walker

Present Humans Only Appeared Recently

The Bible is correct – humans in their present form only appeared on Earth very recently.

The Bible is NOT intended as a detailed scientific history of the ancient Universe, it is primarily concerned with the history of Mankind as we know it now.

The Bible is not interested in telling the history of any primates (Neanderthals, Cro-Magnon, etc.) that may have existed before humans in their present form were created.

Imagining that ancient ape like creatures or ancient primates had characteristics of present day humans, such as language, writing, and abstract thought, is “scientism”, IE not true science.

How can Neo-Darwinism explain the profound metaphysical differences between Man and the animal kingdom, such as Man’s rational intellect capable of abstract thought, Man’s ability for speech, Man’s recognition of good vs. evil?

Why would Darwinian “survival of the fittest” principles require a gorilla or chimpanzee to develop a rational intellect capable of abstract thought and develop the ability for speech?

A gorilla’s “survival of the fittest” in the jungle requires strong arms to pull bananas off a tree and fight off lions, a gorilla has no need for a rational intellect capable of abstract thought or the ability for speech.

Why would a gorilla require an intellect capable of creating an advanced civilization?

The Bible does not state the age of the Universe, but it does indicate that humans in their present form (IE “created in the image of God” as per the Book of Genesis) have only existed for about 5800 years.

Man being created “in the image of God” means having Man has the ability to speak, develop languages, write, create civilizations, create technology, have intellectual apprehension, and know good vs evil. None of these capabilities have ever existed in animals or primitive “humans”, and no amount of “Darwinism” can explain their appearance in present day humans.

If mankind in its present form has allegedly existed for hundreds of thousands of years, why has writing, civilization, and technology only existed for about 5400 years?

“Sumer” was an area near the Persian Gulf mentioned in Genesis 10:10 as the “Land of Shinar”. Most secular history books or websites will agree that the first examples of human writing occurred about 3400 B.C.

“The Sumerian civilization first developed writing around 3400 B.C., when they began making markings on clay tablets in a script known as cuneiform. ”

https://www.history.com/news/what-is-the-oldest-known-piece-of-literature

Interpreting Genesis

There are many methods of interpreting Genesis, however the Bible was not given to Man as a science textbook.

Dennis Prager has published a set of brilliant Biblical commentaries he calls “The Rational Bible”. These books offer some excellent insights into the relationship between Torah and science. Dennis explains that:

“The notion that the Genesis Creation story must agree with science is itself untenable. . .we have no idea what science will say about cosmology in a hundred years. . .The purpose of Genesis Chapter 1 is not to teach science. It is to teach about God, man, and nature. . .”1

There are many authentic Torah sources that describe the Biblical creation event as “beriyah yesh miayin”, i.e. creation ex-nihilo, meaning creation from absolutely nothing. By definition, such a creation process is scientifically unintelligible to Man. Science is able to a limited extent to recognize a sequence of events in the Creation process, and also to comprehend the created Universe after the creation process was completed by God. But the mechanism of the creation process itself cannot be scientifically intelligible to Man.

The first few chapters of the Bible are intending to convey certain facts, such as the knowledge that God created the Universe, and that a sequence of events occurred, but the Bible is not attempting to explain the mechanism(s) God employed to achieve the Creation. In a number of places in the Talmud, the Talmud explains that “the Torah speaks the language of man.” This can be understood to mean that some Biblical language cannot be interpreted literally, or else some Biblical language is concealing secrets that are beyond the comprehension of Man. A Creation process is being described in Genesis, but we should not assume that Genesis is a science textbook. The purpose of the Bible is to convey God’s commandments, ethics, and wisdom to man, but the Bible is not intended to convey scientific knowledge to Man.

We also should consider that scientific theories have been constantly subjected to revision over time. It is simply unnecessary that we attempt to achieve a detailed correlation between current scientific theories of the origins of the Universe, and the events described in Genesis.

The fundamental events of the Creation are being described in non-scientific language in Genesis, but they do not conflict with the basic scientific evidence that has been discovered. The first animals created in Genesis were simple marine invertebrate in modern language, and afterwards there was a steady increase in complexity of the created animals until finally Man appeared. The fossil record also indicates such a progression occurred starting with the simplest creatures until finally Man arrived. Man represents the pinnacle of the Creation, and is the most complex of the beings created on Earth. What is important is that we recognize the special role granted to Man in the Creation.

1 The Rational Bible on Genesis, by Dennis Prager

Atheist Creationism

While atheists and “progressives” may mock religious believers as some kind of irrational fools, it is actually the “progressive” Left that is becoming increasingly irrational and detached from reality.

Atheists are forced to conjecture how this Universe came into existence, and how the physical properties and constants of this Universe and planet Earth were fine-tuned to an enormous precision, thus allowing for complex life on Earth.

Atheists are forced to claim that undirected, natural causes somehow resulted in the existence of the Universe and in the existence of complex life on Earth. Atheists may tend to zealously wield the term “creationism” against religious believers in a God who created the Universe. However, in truth the atheists themselves are teaching their own, different form of “creationism”, even if they refuse to honestly admit that.

There are three statements below.

One statement is unscientific and incompatible with science.

One statement is compatible with science.

One statement does not contradict science and is the best explanation for various scientific observations.

1. Atheist Creationism = Our Universe had a beginning. BEFORE our Universe existed, either

a) an infinite series of unobservable Universes created themselves, or

b) our Universe created itself!

2. Big Bang Cosmology = The Universe had a beginning. The cause of the creation event cannot be proven by science.

3. Biblical Creationism = The Universe had a beginning. God, an immaterial, intelligent Being created the Universe ex-nihilo through a process beyond the ability of science to comprehend.

No. 3 above, Biblical creationism (at any time in the finite past), is actually the statement most consistent with the scientific evidence. Statement No. 2 is compatible with modern science. Statement No. 1 is incompatible with modern science.

Intelligent Design vs. Neo-Darwinism

Darwinist and Neo-Darwinist theory postulate that random, unguided, undirected, natural processes caused the proliferation of complex life forms on Earth. Although the Darwinist concept of Natural Selection (a component of Evolution theory) by itself is not a random process, Natural Selection can only operate on existing biological features and species. Variations in the biological features and species can only occur due to random genetic mutations.

It seems clear that the objective of Darwinism seems to be to openly deny the requirement of a Creator to explain life, so how can Darwinism not be considered a type of atheist belief system?

In Chapter 19 of the scholarly book “Darwin’s Doubt”, Dr. Stephen Meyer explains how ID opponents have invoked “demarcation arguments” and methodological naturalism against ID. Dr. Meyer then explains how materialistic evolution theories fail the same demarcation standards that are being used to deny the validity of ID.

“I believe we can certainly invoke demarcation arguments against any materialistic explanations for the origins of the Universe and for the origin and development of life on Earth. Assuming the Earth is billions of years old, we cannot observe, measure, or really know exactly what conditions existed during much of those earlier epochs of Earth history. As a result, methodological naturalism must itself rely on numerous inferences and speculations in order to argue for a purely materialistic origin and development of life. Invoking methodological naturalism to explain the origin and development of life requires a much greater inference and leap of faith than ID.”1

The great rabbinic sage and philosopher Maimonides explained a related idea that the state of the Universe during its creation phases did not resemble its state when it was completed. This concept can help validate modern Intelligent Design theory, as Neo-Darwinism erroneously assumes that the same Natural Order we observe now always existed:

“No inference can be drawn in any respect from the nature of a thing after it has been generated, has attained its final state, and achieved stability in its most perfect state, to the state of that thing while it moved toward being generated. . .a being’s state of perfection and completion furnishes no indication of the state of that being preceding its perfection.”2

The treatise “Drush Or HaChaim”, by the 19th Century rabbinic sage Tiferet Israel, cites Genesis Rabbah 3:8 (also Ramban, Ibn Ezra, Recanati) to show that the world had been created and destroyed a number of times, each time in a greater state of perfection, and that the fossil record confirms this. Tiferet Israel was aware of Darwinist theories in his time, but he did NOT support Darwinian evolution. He makes no mention of any Darwinian type evolution processes.

Tiferet Israel also cites the renowned scientist Dr. Georges Cuvier, who taught “catastrophic theory” while firmly opposing evolution. Dr. Cuvier believed that species appeared and disappeared in the fossil record without significant changes to each species while it lived, but overall there was a continual increase in complexity.

It is intellectually dishonest to morph certain Medieval rabbis, who are considered “rationalists”, into some type of modern rationalist Neo-Darwinists. It is evident that the concept of “intelligent design” is not only compatible with Torah concepts, but in fact the study of design in the Universe may have been mandated by some Torah sources.

For anyone interested in the fascinating subject of intelligent design and the influence of various Biblical concepts on Western philosophy and science, I highly recommend the very scholarly book “Return of the God Hypothesis” by Dr. Stephen Meyer.

Although the author is a non-Jew, the book’s thesis seems quite compatible with a Torah based understanding that the Universe and life on Earth could only be the intentional products of a Superintelligence, and not the products of random natural processes such as Neo-Darwinists might claim. Dr. Meyer’s book actually cites Biblical and rabbinic sources in a number of places.

1 Dr. Stephen Meyer http://www.darwinsdoubt.com/

2 Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, 12th century CE.

Biblical Principles: Rational and Scientific

In many ways, Biblical principles are more rational than modern atheist “scientism” and modern nihilist social movements such as “transgender”.

A Biblical believer is not required to believe claims that conflict with rationality, such as somehow the Universe could have created itself, or that a person can “transform” themselves to a different gender than the one they were born with, or that a marriage can be constituted by two men or two women.

This is not to say that Man can solve all his own problems purely by “rationalism”, but rationality is a necessary component for civilization to maintain itself.

Although the Jewish Bible is intended as an ethical guidebook for Man, and not as a science textbook, the basic sequence of events that were explained in Genesis using simple language so that all could understand, are perfectly compatible with advanced modern science.

“The waters shall team with swarms of living creatures (sheretzim). . .”1

The basic sequence of events described at the beginning of the Biblical book of Genesis are actually quite consistent with modern scientific evidence:

1. The Universe did not exist forever and had a beginning in the finite past.

2. According to Maimonides (12th century CE) we cannot know exactly when the Universe was created because time itself was created. As mentioned earlier, this idea is also expressed in a modern astrophysics textbook.

3. The initial Universe, described as unformed matter in Genesis 1:2 was an extremely tiny point of formless matter.2

4. All the matter in the Universe was initially created (Genesis 1:1) and the components of the Universe were gradually separated.3

5. The verse in Genesis 1:20 explains that the first animals that appeared on Earth were various types of swarming marine invertebrate. This is consistent with the scientific evidence of the “Cambrian explosion” where many phyla of animals suddenly appeared on Earth without a gradual evolution from more simple animals. This evidence actually confirms the Biblical account and actually disproves Darwinist evolution.

6. The Biblical account is describing how God caused a gradual increase in complexity of the lifeforms. This was a gradual, metaphysical upward increase in biological complexity over time that was NOT due to Darwinism.

7. The Biblical account describes how Man (as we know him) is the most complex creature and was created last and very recently4. Thus recorded human history is much shorter than the age of the Universe.

1 Genesis 1:20

2 Nachmanides (13th century CE) commentary on the Bible.

3 Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed II:30

4 Genesis 1:26