Updated April 21, 2004 (first published January 1996) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

Three recent scientific reports provide proof that the Genesis account or origins is true, but most scientists refuse to admit it.

The first appeared in the December 4, 1995, issue of U.S. News & World Report, in an article entitled “The Genetic Eve Gets a Genetic Adam.”

“Eight years ago, researchers 'found' the mother of all humans, the proverbial Eve. By peeking into the cells of several ethnic groups, they traced the family tree of modern humans back 200,000 years to A SINGLE--albeit theoretic--WOMAN. Now, Eve has an Adam. In two reports in last week's nature, researchers suggest that virtually all modern men--99.9 percent of them, says one scientist--are closely related genetically and share genes with ONE MALE ANCESTOR, dubbed 'Y-chromosome Adam.'

“Each study dates Adam differently. One says he appeared roughly 188,000 years ago. The other estimates he lived up to 49,000 years ago. But both buck the notion that modern humans emerged in disparate spots across continents. 'We are finding that humans have very, very shallow genetic roots which go back very recently to ONE ANCESTOR,' says the University of Arizona's Michael Hammer, author of one of the studies. 'THAT INDICATES THAT THERE WAS AN ORIGIN IN A SPECIFIC LOCATION ON THE GLOBE AND THEN IT SPREAD OUT FROM THERE'“ (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 4, 1995).

The same December Time magazine published a cover story entitled “Evolution's Big Bang.” The cover proclaimed, “New discoveries show that life as we know it began in an amazing biological frenzy that changed the planet almost overnight.” That sounds like a six-day creation to me!

“In a burst of creativity like nothing before or since, nature appears to have sketched out the blueprints for virtually the whole of the animal kingdom. This explosion of biological diversity is described by scientists as biology's Big Bang. ... Since 1987, discoveries of major fossil beds in Greenland, in China, in Siberia, and now in Namibia have shown that THE PERIOD OF BIOLOGICAL INNOVATION OCCURRED AT VIRTUALLY THE SAME INSTANT IN GEOLOGIC TIME ALL AROUND THE WORLD” (J. Madeleine Nash, “When Life Exploded,” Time, Dec. 4, 1995).

When all of the evolutionary mythology is stripped from these reports, such as dating methods which purport that rock sediments are hundreds of millions of years old, it remains that scientists have never established any fact which disproves the Biblical account of a literal six-day creation.

They claim to know how old certain rock layers are, but they don't. They are only guessing. This is evident by the fact that their guesses differ so wildly from one scientist to the next and from one year to the next. This is admitted in the U.S. News & World Report article.

Friends, there is a big difference between 188,000 years and 49,000 years! And both figures are mere guesses. The age of man could just as easily be 6,000 years, as the Bible indicates. No known scientific FACT disputes this. There is a great difference between a theory and a fact. The dating methods used in these studies assume certain things which cannot be proven. They assume, for example, that there was no creation!

In his 1871 article “A Caution against Anti-Christian Science,” Presbyterian preacher Robert Lewis Dabney described the dilemma of modern dating methods:

“The supposed conclusions, which seem adverse to the Scriptures as understood by common Christians, are parts of an unstable, because an incomplete system. And I will venture the assertion, without other faculty or acquirement than the light of common sense, that these conclusions are far short of that perfect, exclusive demonstration which would be necessary to unseat the Bible from its throne of authority. A faithful scrutiny would detect sundry yawning chasms between facts and inferences; sundry places where the proposition which, when introduced first, can be called no more than a 'may-be,' is afterwards tacitly transmuted into a 'must-be.' ...

“Do you suppose that their proofs are of that character which, in a court of justice, would stand the test of adverse counsel at law in every link, and remain so conclusive beyond all doubt as to justify an honest jury in taking a fellow creature's life? The inventors themselves would doubtless recoil with a shock from such a responsibility!

“The assumed antiquity of all the rocks called sedimentary is an essential member of the argument by which geologists endeavor to prove the antiquity of these fossils. But if many of these rocks may have been created, then the pre-Adamite date of fossils falls also. Moreover, when we are confronted with an infinite Creator, honesty must constrain us to admit, that amidst the objects embraced in his vast counsels, there may have been considerations, we know not what, prompting him to create organisms, in numbers, and under conditions, very different from those which we now term natural.”

Since Darbey's day, “modern science” has changed its opinions countless times. The estimated dates of the geological strata and of the appearance of plant and animal life have changed repeatedly and dramatically.

The Time article asks some important questions that no evolutionary scientist can answer:

“What could possibly have powered such a radical advance?”

“Where did this extraordinary bestiary come from, and why did it emerge so quickly?”

“Why has this evolutionary burst, so stunning in speed and scope, never been equaled?”

The simple answer is that the all-powerful God of the Bible created the world for His purposes and glory. Mock that if you will. Vast numbers of men from every sphere of society accept it without hesitation, including large numbers of men with scientific degrees. Evolution is a fairy tale, as unscientific as a Hindu myth.

The Bible's account of creation fits every known and observable scientific fact. The Bible says an all-wise, all-powerful, eternal God created intelligent life out of nothing. Creation testifies of this. Man has never observed intelligent life arising from unintelligent matter. If the Bible is not true, and if God did not create the world as the Bible says, man will never know how it happened because the process has never been repeated. Scientists admit that evolutionary processes are not at work today. The reason is that they never were at work.

The Bible says God created man separate from the animals; man is made in God's image with a consciousness of and ability to communicate with God; the animals are distinctly different type of creatures, made for man's needs and pleasure (Genesis 1-2). This is observable; man is not like the animal kingdom. He is an entirely different type of creature. The Bible says every living thing in creation was made to reproduce after its kind, and only after its kind (Genesis 1:12,21,24,25). That is precisely what we see. No one has ever observed a carrot produce anything other than a carrot, or a bird produce anything other than a bird.

The Bible says the heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament sheweth his handywork (Psalm 19:1). That is precisely what we see. The incredible complexity and intricate interrelatedness of creation points conclusively to an all-wise, all-powerful Creator.

Praise the Lord for faith to believe the Bible and to reject “science falsely so called.”

The third report to which we referred at the beginning of this article is from the field of linguistic science. It appeared in The Story of English by Robert McCrum and Robert MacNeil. Consider:

“Two centuries ago an English judge in India noticed that several words in Sanskrit closely resembled some words in Greek and Latin. For instance, the Sanskrit word for 'Father,' pitar, was quite like the Latin word pater. A SYSTEMATIC STUDY REVEALED THAT MANY MODERN LANGUAGES DESCENDED FROM A COMMON PARENT LANGUAGE, lost to us because nothing was written down. Identifying similar words, linguists have come up with what they call an Indo-European parent language, spoken until 3500 to 2000 B.C.” (Robert MacNeil, condensation of The Story of English).

Again, once we remove the guesses from linguistic science, we have a perfect description of the Genesis account of how the languages were multiplied and spread abroad in the earth. In the beginning there was one common language (Gen. 11:1). Because of man's rebellion at Babel, God multiplied the languages to divide men and to hinder them in their wicked purposes (Gen. 11:2-9). From Babel men spread abroad to various places and established separate nations based on shared language. Everything linguistic science knows for certain fits the biblical account.

Not many years ago scientists were saying that “the roots of the different families of languages indicate separate sources for the original tribes of men.” Now they admit this is wrong.

We can see that the Bible was right all along. The choice is clear. We can build our lives upon the solid rock of biblical truth, or we can build upon the shifting sands of science so- called.