Books of Moses

Fact or Fiction?

 

 

 

Session 3

 

 

Land Animals, Humans and the Evolution of Life

 

 

 

 

Bruce Armstrong

 

 

 

Land Animals, Humans and the Evolution of Life

 

Table of Contents

Introduction

Special Creation

Beasts of the Earth

The First Humans

The Sabbath Celebration

Evolution of Multi-Cellular Life

Increasing Complexity

Prokaryotic to Eukaryotic Cells

Vascular Plants

Males, Females and Seed

Seed Germination

Fruit Production

Symbiotic Plants and Microbes

Insects

Amphibians

Haeckel’s Fraudulent Embryo Drawings

Cambrian Explosion

Vestigial Organs

Junk DNA

Genetic Entropy

Gene Duplication and Reuse

How Complex is An Organism Like A Human?

Apes to Humans?

Animal and Human Complexity

Evolution Did It!

Conclusion

Table 1: Additional DNA Required As Organisms Become More Complex

 

 

Introduction

In the last session, we looked at the creation of plants and flying and aquatic animals in the creation model, and the origin of the first cell in the evolution model.

 

In this session, we will first continue examining the Biblical Creation Week, focusing on Day Six, during which God creates all of the non-flying land animals and the first humans.  Then God gives the humans their jobs.  After that, on Day Seven they all have a day of rest and celebration together.

 

In the evolution/secular belief model, we will look at what is required for an original ‘simple’ prokaryote cell to evolve into complex multicellular organisms like humans.  Potential roadblocks in this route will be pointed out.

 

Special Creation

 

Beasts of the Earth

 

Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth live souls, each after its kind: livestock and creeping things and its beasts of the earth, each after its kind.”  And it was so.

So God made the beasts of the earth after their kinds, livestock after their kinds, and everything that creeps on the earth after their kinds.  And God saw that it was good.    Genesis 1:24 & 25

 

So God explains that He begins the Sixth Day by making all of the non-flying terrestrial animals, including worms, crawling insects, all kinds of wild beasts and even domestic livestock (Figures 1 to 8).  Again, God says these creatures all have souls, and He was pleased with them.

 

 

Figure 1: Compost Earthworm

   (Oligochaeta)  ESB

 
 

 

 

Figure 2: Ant

   (Crawling Insect)

 

 

Figure 3: Green Frog

   (Amphibian)

 

 
 

 

Figure 4: Crocodile

   (Reptile)

 
 

 

Figure 5: Red Kangaroo

   (Marsupial)

 

 

 

Figure 6: Bear and Cub

   (Mammal)

 
 

 

Figure 7: Triceratops

   (Dinosaur -Extinct)

 

 

 

Figure 8: Wooly Mammoth

   (Mammal -Extinct)

 

The First Humans

Next, God creates the first humans:

 

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea, over the flying creatures of the heavens, and over the livestock, and over all the earth and over all the creeping things that creep on the earth.”

So God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.    Genesis 1:26 & 27

 

This passage introduces the last physical creations God (and His Son—see John 1:1-17) made in forming and populating the earth.  It also shows that God had a special commitment to these creatures: these humans are the only ones that He says are made “in Our image”.  He also states that He will create them to “rule over” all the earth and all the other creatures He has made.  Finally, He states that we were created “male and female” (Figure 9).  Though the other animals were also male and female, this is the first time it is specifically mentioned.

.

.
 

Figure 9: Adam and Chavvah’s (Eve’s) family a few years after the Fall. (modified from Bachiacca).  It is likely that Adam and/or Chavvah were darker.

 

In Genesis 2, we are given a more detailed explanation of the process God used in making the first man:

 

And Jehovah God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living soul.

Jehovah God planted a Paradise in Eden to the East, and He put the man whom He had formed there.  And out of the earth Jehovah God had made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food.  The tree of life was in the midst of Paradise and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.    Genesis 2:7 to 9

 

In forming the man, God confirms that the matter He used came from the earth.  But Jehovah God also shows us that merely shaping the man, complete with all of the potential genetics and nanomachines required for life was not enough.  The man was still just a corpse.  It was only when God personally blew the breath (spirit) of life into him that he became a living soul.  There are other scriptures that confirm that God must add that ‘breath of life’ to every one of us before we actually come alive.

 

1 Corinthians 2:11 explains that we must have this Spirit from God in order to know how to be human and to be able to function as a human.  This means that each person is a triune being composed of a body, soul and spirit.  When we die our first death, our spirit returns to God, and our body and soul return to the ground (Heb 4:12, 1 Thes 5:23, Ecc 12:6-7).

 

As we are made in the image of God, it should be no surprise to learn that the Bible teaches that God also has a body, soul and spirit (Dan 7:9, Lev 26:11, Gen 6:3).  So He too is a triune being.  This topic is explored in our article Spirit, Soul and Body.

 

We are only conscious, fully functioning beings when all three components are present and active.  It seems probable that our brains are the interface between our body, soul and spirit.  Thus damage to parts of our brain may make it difficult for our spirit to control the corresponding part of our body.  However, there is new research confirming that our spirits have some ability to reallocate functions in our brain, sometimes allowing communication and function to be restored.

 

Ecclesiastes 3:21 shows that animals also have their own spirits, but their spirits are stored in the earth when they die.  So they are also triune beings, but made on a different level to us.1

 

By the way, it is sobering to know that on a mass to mass basis, rats, dolphins and elephants all have brain to body ratios as large as ours.  Our status as their rulers depends on our appointment to this role by God, rather than on some imagined superiority we have of our own.

 

Then Jehovah God took the man and settled him in the Paradise of Pleasure to tend and keep it.  And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree in Paradise you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it, dying you shall die.”    Genesis 2:15 to 17

 

We see that God has taken the unusual step of placing the man in His special Paradise of Pleasure, also known as the Garden of Eden.  And Jehovah God also gave the man his first job: tending and keeping Paradise.  So man did not begin as a barbaric hunter and gatherer, but as a horticulturist working and living in a superb parkland and orchard.

 

He was also given specific instructions to not eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which will become of immense importance next session.

 

But we still only have one man.  Let’s see where the first woman comes from:

 

And Jehovah God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”

Out of the earth Jehovah God had formed every beast of the field and every flying creature of heaven. He brought them to Adam to see what he would call them.  And whatever Adam called each living soul, that was its name.  So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the flying creatures of the heavens, and to every beast of the field.  But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.

And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place.  Then the rib which Jehovah God had taken from the man He built into a woman, and He brought her to the man.

And Adam said: “This time, this one is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one shall be called Woman, because this one was taken out of Man.”    Genesis 2:18 to 23

 

So we have an interesting interlude here.  God gives the man, now named Adam, the job of naming the various kinds of creatures that lived near the Garden.  It is likely that they came to him in male and female pairs for him to name.  As Adam worked through his task, it appears that he eventually realizes that unlike all of these animals, he does not have a female partner.

 

So one can easily imagine the conversation between Adam and God, and God’s offer to make a partner for Adam from his body, which Adam accepts.

 

So we are told that God takes a rib from Adam and builds a woman.  Note that God does not use a toe, so the woman would be under his foot, but uses a rib, as a rib is near Adam’s heart.

But also notice that God did not simply build a clone of Adam.  The DNA in the rib was altered to make a woman.  To achieve this God would remove Adam’s Y chromosome and replace it with a second copy of an X chromosome in every cell.  But God would have given Chavvah modified genes throughout to increase the genetic variations possible in their descendants, who include all extant versions of mankind plus the Cro-Magnons, Neanderthals, etc.  Verse 23 indicates Adam’s delight and satisfaction with the woman God had built for him.

 

One of the surprising things of this way of making the woman is that she was, in a way, born from a man.  The other surprising thing is that she never had a mother.  She had to invent what it was to be a woman, and became the mother model for all women.

 

Another interesting aspect of both Adam and Chavvah (Eve)2 is that neither of them likely had a navel, as neither of them were born from a womb, so they had no need for an umbilical cord and placenta.  This was perhaps a simple and effective way for them to prove to their descendants that they were both made directly by God.

 

But why would God create the woman in such an unusual way, as there is no indication that any other female creature was made in this way?  I believe that it is Jehovah God’s way of showing us how He had made His own Son, Jesus Christ.  Just as the woman came from the man, Jesus (Jeshua in Aramaic) came from His Father.  Just as the woman was not an exact clone of the man, Jeshua was not an exact clone of his Father. -Which is another way of saying that both Chavvah and Jeshua are unique, individual beings.  Just as the woman had no mother, Jeshua also had no mother.  Just as the woman was human like the man, Jeshua was God like His Father.  As the woman owed her existence to the man and Jehovah, so Jeshua owed his existence to His Father Jehovah.  You can read more on this topic in our article Jeshua the Messiah; the Son of God or Part of a Trinity? at www.chcpublications.net.

 

But now, back to God’s Creation:

 

So God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.  Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; rule over the fish of the sea, and over the flying creatures of the heaven, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”    Genesis 1:27 & 28

 

So we see that God blessed the man and woman, told them to fill the earth, and also told them both that He had placed them in authority over all the creatures on earth.  We were intended to subdue the earth, which indicates that we had permission to remove plants that were in our way, dig for minerals and modify the landscape to suit our needs.  But it seems certain that our rule over the animals was to be beneficial for all animals as far as possible.  They were not to be subdued like the earth.  Jehovah God had just created them all and was very pleased with them.  We were to rule them—lead them—under God’s direction and according to His Instructions, for God is King of kings and Lord of lords (1 Tim 6:15, Rev 17:14).  This is made clear when God describes our food, and indeed that of all animals:

 

And God said, “See, I have given to you every plant that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; it shall be for food for you.

“Also, to every beast of the earth, to every flying creature of the heavens, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green plant for food.”  And it was so.    Genesis 1:29 & 30

 

So it was that the first humans were vegans.  Their food was entirely plant material.  The only exception to this would be babies who were breast-fed until they became old enough to flourish on a vegetable diet.  It was not necessary for any animals to die to provide food or clothing for humans.

 

Not only the humans, but all of the animals were also vegan.  It looks like the main difference between the humans and the animals was that only the humans had been given the fruit of the trees to eat.  So we have the original system in place which does not require the death of any human or animal.

 

Jehovah God also instituted marriage then, and married Adam and Chavvah:

 

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.  And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not ashamed.    Genesis 2:24

 

There are many things embedded in these two verses: One is that it would be normal for a newly married husband and wife to move out and set up their own home.  Another is that through sexual intercourse they would become one flesh, indicating that their sexual union altered and enhanced their relationship to each other, and that oneness would be shown in their children, who would each be a unique combination of their DNA.  Finally, the last verse shows their innocence and purity at that time.  They did not know what shame was.

Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good.  And there was evening and there was morning: The Sixth day.

Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished.    Genesis 1:31 & 2:1

 

So we see God’s declaration that His creation was very good, that He had devoted one day to creating all the land animals and the first man and woman, that it was the last of the six days He used to create everything, and it was now finished.

 

 

The Sabbath Celebration

To both celebrate His Creation, and to remind everyone how long it took and that He had done it, Jehovah instituted the seven day week in which the last day was one of rest and rejoicing:

 

And by the seventh day God had completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.  Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because He rested from all His work in it, which He had created and made.    Genesis 2:2 & 3

 

God gave His seven day week to Adam and Chavvah, and thus to their descendants, many of whom adopted His seven day week and observed God’s seventh-day Sabbath.  Seven days is not a precise subdivision of either the solar year or the lunar month, so this is the only logical explanation for the wide-spread ‘custom’ of seven day weeks throughout the world.  The seven day week has been used for millennia by the Jewish, Christian, Babylonian, Persian, Chinese and Islamic calendars.

What we have not discussed until now is why would God decide to create all of us?  The Bible makes it clear that Jehovah God is complete in Himself and has no needs that we can fulfill for Him.  This leaves one other option: Jehovah loves being alive, and wants to share His joy in life with us.  His motivations are generosity and love.

 

Evolutionists insist that the above creation account cannot be correct, and propose an alternative method and timeline for the origin of these creatures and ourselves.  So, let us see how the Atheistic Evolution of complex life scenario explains our existence:

 

 

Evolution of Multi-Cellular Life

Let’s ignore the fact that the last session showed that evolutionists cannot even explain how the first living cell arose, and allow them to actually have their first living cell.  Now the question becomes this: How can organisms of increasing complexity evolve from this relatively basic original cell?

 

Increasing Complexity

Neo-Darwinism claims that complexity arises by random mutations to the DNA codes, which are then filtered by natural selection to remove the damaging mutations and allow the positive changes to be passed on.

 

Everyone agrees that a new feature, organ or organism can only happen if we have large amounts of new, complex and precisely coded DNA arise to specify what the new feature is, control how the new feature is manufactured and have new ‘software’ arise so the new feature can be used.

Neo-Darwinism also teaches that natural selection has no predictive power, which means that it has no goal that it is selecting for.  Therefore, complex and highly sophisticated new tissues and functions must arise from random DNA ‘noise’ via a long series of tiny improvements, each of which must make that organism more fit than its siblings for the changes to be selected and passed on to its descendants.

 

And when we look at organisms in the world, there are indeed some organisms that are relatively ‘simple’, such as single-cell prokaryote bacteria and others that are extremely complex multi-cellular organisms like humans.  And not only that, some of the most basic cellular functions of all these organisms are based on quite similar DNA codes.  Evolutionists claim these two features prove descent from a common ancestor: their First Cell and then evolution from it.

 

But it only ‘proves’ this if it is the ONLY explanation you will consider.  Special Creation is also consistent with these observations, but the explanation is different. To optimise each living organism, it should only have the DNA it requires.  So a simple single-cell organism only needs a small portion of the instructions that a large mammal needs. And as they are all made by the same intelligent designer, it is to be expected that he would reuse DNA code when different organisms required the same function.  It would not be intelligent to continually reinvent the wheel.

 

Do we see the process of random evolution happening in human activities?  Computer code is a close corollary to DNA code.  Does anyone generate vast amounts of random code and then select the ‘best’ one to create new functions?  No.  They first decide what new function they require.  Then they carefully propose several models that should implement their preconceived function.  Next, they select the best model and begin to write the actual code required to do what they need.  Finally, they rigorously test (select) the new code to find and remove any accidental errors (random mutations) in the code so it will be functional.  They then review how well that optimised code performs its intended role, try to refine their models to further improve it and write new code again if needed.  Restated, random code and random errors are both information technology disasters that they actively work to eliminate.  DNA code is different in that  random changes to it can actually cripple or kill the organism, making it worse than buggy software that can be deleted and leave the computer intact.

 

We often hear that our technology is evolving.  For example, wheeled land transport has evolved from a human pushing a wheelbarrow to a self-driving Tesla electric car.  Like evolutionists claim, the engineers have achieved this transformation in thousands of tiny steps.  But unlike evolution, each step was not one selection from thousands of random changes.  Each step came from an engineer’s mind, who thought of a possible solution to one of the problems they were having, and then worked towards that solution, consciously and deliberately selecting the best alternatives to reach their intended goal.  Without their ideas and their goal, no progress would have ever been made.

 

Atheistic evolution has no ideas and no goals; all it has is filtering of random mutations (errors).  Does it seem probable that blind flailing can produce the complex nanomachinery, far more sophisticated than a Tesla car, required by living organisms?  Instead, are random errors not far more likely to break the machinery it already has?

 

As we saw last session, Doug Axe’s research has demonstrated that random mutations are incapable of producing coherent new DNA code which can produce a functional new enzyme, so it is impossible for natural selection to select something that does not already exist.  The best that natural selection can do is eliminate the more damaging mutations or perhapson rare occasionsfine-tune an existing organism so it can survive better in an altered environment.  Research has shown that natural selection is not even capable of removing most of the non-lethal but damaging random mutations.

 

Michael Behe’s Edge of Evolution demonstrates this with real-world examples.  Humanity’s millennia-long battle with malaria is sometimes called an arms-race. But now that we know the biochemical details of how we and malaria ‘evolve’ resistance to each other, the clearer it becomes that it is really a battle of desperate self-sacrificial sabotage.  Our main internal defence against malaria is sickle cell trait, caused by a change in one amino acid in our haemoglobin.  The defect causes the haemoglobin to gum together when a malarial parasite attacks it.  Then our liver destroys the parasite when it destroys the infected blood cell.  But when a person gets the trait from both parents, they develop sickle cell anaemia, which gives them a very unhealthy and short life.  The defence has a horrendous cost.

 

Likewise, malaria can eventually resist our anti-malarial drugs by breaking functions in its own cells which allow it to elude the drug.  But like us, it is at a cost which makes the malaria less fit in an environment without the drug’s presence.  Behe also looks at HIV and E Coli, and shows that these situations are about the same.  He shows that it takes a long time for random changes to provide even a single ‘beneficial’ amino acid in this war.  And where two amino acid changes are required, it takes much, much longer.  His maths indicate that just a three amino acid beneficial change to a protein is unlikely to ever occur, even when there is strong selection pressure, and he has not been able to find even one example where it has actually happened.  Said another way: there is no known instance where a brilliant new multi-amino acid functional enzyme has evolved which would give an organism a massive advantage.

 

For more complex life to evolve, we need more complex instructions in their DNA to code for that complexity.  How hard is that to account for?  Let’s look at the size of some of the Evolutionary Jumps required for complex life:

 

Prokaryotic to Eukaryotic Cells

Massive changes are required for this next step in evolution.  The smallest genome of a free-living eukaryote, Ostreococcus tauri (a unicellular green algae) is 12.6 million base pairs.  This is over fifteen times more information than was in the Mycoplasma pneumoniae prokaryote’s DNA (816,000 base pairs, as we saw in the last session).  Where did all of this brand new, precisely coded DNA come from (Figure 10)?  And also note that the eukaryote cells are always more complex and generally much larger than the prokaryotic cells.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZtcMBTQaS4  (4.5 min)