Arguing the Origin of Man

***A couple weeks ago I successfully completed my first one week summer module at PBC. It was Survey of Physical Science. For this class, I had to complete a 7 pg paper on the creation/evolution issue. It was due the third day of class- how neat!? I was successful and received an A on the paper. I decided to post it below. This is Summer Semmester 2011.***

When it comes to the evolution and creation issue, one topic of great discussion is the origin of man. A one-time professor at the University of Illinois, A.E. Wilder, states- “From earliest times man has been interested in the question of his origin and this interest is still showing no signs of flagging” (Smith 31). “The question of origins becomes most critical of all as it deals with the problem of the origin of man,” claims Henry Morris, president of the Institution for Creation Research (171). Russian biologist and evolution supporter, Mikhail Nesturkh, states “The problem of the origin of the human race is one that has been awaiting a solution for thousands of years” (5). The two models, creation and evolution, both give ideas for this widely debated topic. W.W. Otey, author of many books on the subjects of Creation and Evolution, points out that all ideas of evolution and creation point back to this fundamental question- “How did life first appear on the earth?” (Otey 50). So, how exactly did life first appear? How did man come into being?
Most private institutions and Christian organized organizations argue that the creation model is most accurate in its ideas of the origin of life and man. The creation model is most predominantly based on scripture. The basic rundown of creation is in Genesis 1 where it states “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (KJV). God’s record of man’s creation is given in Genesis 2 as illustrated by John Whitcomb, creationist orator and author (Mankind). The Bible is thought to be inerrant and infallible. II Timothy 3:16 states, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (KJV). John 17:17 shows that the scriptures are truth- “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (KJV). Further proof of the truth of this inspired by God work is found in Titus 1:2- “…God, that cannot lie…” (KJV). Creationists, therefore, have no problem with using the Bible to back up their ideas; however, the Bible is not the only source of proof for the creationists. The creation model simply holds to the idea that God created life by supernatural processes.
The creation model holds to the fact that life and man were created by a miracle (Otey 40). Genesis 1 repeatedly says “and God said” giving the idea that God spoke life into existence (KJV). Genesis 2 says, “And God made man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul” (KJV). Mankind was created “specially” (Smith 31). Henry Morris states, “The entire world was designed for man and he was appointed by God to exercise dominion over it, as God’s steward” (Morris 211). Genesis 1:28 states, “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” (KJV). Unlike evolution, creationist hold that “human life is far more than animal activity” (Otey 42). W.W. Otey shows that as a creationist man is the greatest of all living beings (Otey 19). Man was not a “mere machine” as Morris claims but man was given free will and a mind (212). Whitcomb says that man was the “crown of God’s creation” (Mankind). He shows in his lecture that Adam was perfect when created but “bad news for us” we have come far downhill (Mankind). Smith shows that creationism believes that God created earth, he created it in seven days, he formed all beings into kinds, he gave the kinds the ability to reproduce itself, and woman was made from man’s side (Smith 35-42). To put it simply, “Creationist affirm that the first man was created as he now is, and transmitted all these attributes to his posterity down to the living” (Otey 53).
In order to state a theory or idea or model is true, there has to be proof. Creationists, as mentioned above, mostly use scripture. Proof of inspiration and truthfulness usually will come first followed by the actual creation accounts. Genesis 1 is most widely thought of as the basic creation run-down. It gives that man was made in God’s image, man was to dominate the world, and man (as well as other beings) were vegetarians (Mankind). Genesis 2 is given as the how, when, where, and test of mankind (Mankind). How were humans created? When were humans created? Where were humans created? What test did humans go through and did they pass? Although widely used and familiar, scripture is not the only proof given by creationist. One other idea used greatly by creationist is the fact that evolution is so hard to prove. Otey illustrates this greatly by showing how difficult to imagine life coming from a single celled organism (Otey 57). He discusses the difficulties behind the idea of the organism knowing the need and creating the power in itself to obtain a head, eyes, feet, legs, and two different sex organs (Otey 57). Thirdly, the fossil record is the biggest material ideal used to support creation, although sometimes used to supposedly prove evolution. Duane Gish, vice president for the Institute for Creation Research, shows that the fossil record does not prove evolution (Man). He shows that most fossils appear abruptly in full form like creationist would expect (Man). Although the Bible is widely used in proving creation, other ideas are used as well.
Although these proofs listed above may be accurate and may strongly point towards the creation model, a student must understand that neither model of origins can be completely proven (Morris 4). Morris states, “It is impossible to prove scientifically any particular concept of origins to be true” (Morris 4). This is simply because no one was there to witness and it is not going on today (Morris 4). Otey also holds to this idea. He says neither creation nor evolution “can be proved by actual demonstration” (Otey 40). The main problem, if any, with the creation model is that it rest purely on belief. A person has to have faith that the creation model did really occur. The evidences and proofs listed above can help, but faith is the fundamental idea behind the creation idea. Creationist may have the Bible, errors in evolution, and the fossil record as support for their idea, but unless someone could observe creation now there is not complete scientific proof. Creation must, therefore, be accepted on faith. Another problem is the accusation that the creation model is mainly religious. Stephen Meyer, PhD from Cambridge University, mentions in the video Icons of Evolution states, “[creation versus evolution] is not a war of science versus religion, but science versus science” (Icons). The video goes on to show that evolution is also associated with religion (Icons). In the end, creation has one major problem- it takes faith to believe in this model.
The second model is that of evolution. Icons of Evolution is a great source to use in showing the rampant idea of evolution. Put forth by Focus on the Family, Icons of Evolution shows that evolution is widely taught and ruled that no one can speak against it (Icons). It is the predominant idea being held in the world today, despite its problems. Evolution is held to by atheist, scientist, and many others that believe creation to be a too extraordinary event to believe. For some reason, chance is easier to believe than God. Evolution is mainly supported by supposed proofs of genetic variation, mutation, and survival of the fittest. The idea that life comes from non-living is very predominate in the culture of today.
The basic idea of evolution is that man came to be what it is through changes over time according to Dr. Randall Bretz, producer of John Whitcomb’s video lecture on the origin of mankind (Mankind). W.W. Otey agrees by showing that evolution is believed to occur through natural law (Otey 40). It is stated that “life came from some source and by some process” (Otey 40). The source, though, by the evolutionist is assumed to be a blob. Otey shows that from this blob, a tiny single cell organism, that 636,000 different forms of life had to be formed (Otey 51). He says, “[evolutionist assume] natural law quickened dead matter into life” (Otey 50). Smith also shows that evolutionist hold to man coming from lower life (Smith 31). Smith goes on to say that evolution believes all rose from a simple cell originally, there is a continual change occurring, there is a struggle for existence among creatures, and there is a need for millions of years for evolution to take effect (Smith 33-35). The main idea given by Nesturkh, evolutionist, in the formation of main is in four parts supplied by Darwin- mutation, struggle for existence, natural and sexual selection, and environmental influencers (Nesturkh 105). Nesturkh also shows the idea that man comes directly from apes (Nesturkh 6). Evolution, therefore, believes that life came from a blob which in turn produced monkeys which later produced men.
Not only does creation require proof, but so does evolution. Evolution presents many ideas to “prove” the ideas it presents. There are the simple ideas of mutations, adaptation, and survival of the fittest. One idea is similarity. Smith states, “Darwin postulates that similarties in living organisms predict common ancestry” (Smith 52). He gives the concept of the octopus’ eye is similar in structure to the human eye (Smith 53). He goes on to show similarities of other animals to each other- mice and bear (Smith 53). Smith shows the main idea of similarity of apes and man (52). Whitcomb shows the idea that speech is one supposed similarity between monkeys and man because some monkeys can supposedly pick up sign language (Mankind). Gish points out that both man and ape have opposable thumbs, poor smell, a brain, and keen eyesight and hearing (Man). Nesturkh also points out that gill slits and embryology is a proof of evolution (Nesturkh 22). Icons of Evolution gives many “proofs” of evolution- finches, four-winged fruit fly, bacteria, and the tree of life (Icons). One widely disputed idea in dealing specifically with the origin of man is fossil finds of supposed sub-humans. Gish shows the results of findings- the Rhamapithecus, Australopithecus, Homo Erectus, Homo Sapien, Piltdown Man, and Nebraska Man (Man). Morris also shows the Rhamapithecus as a fossil found in 1932 located in India (Morris 172). It was a tooth and a jaw (Morris 172). The Australopithecus is also mentioned by Morris (Morris 173). It is said it was found in Africa and deemed the “southern ape” (Morris 173). Homo erectus, according to Morris, is the Java Man, the Peking Man, Heidelberg Man, and the Meganthropus (Morris 174). Lastly, Morris mentions the Neanderthal Man which is the “most famous” (Morris 175). In the end, evolution uses mutations, adaptation, survival of the fittest, similarity, embryology, finches, four-winged fruit fly, bacteria, the tree of life, and fossils of subhuman creatures to prove its model of the origin of life and man.
These proofs, however, do not eliminate doubt in this model. There are many problems. Some of the problems come from these proofs. One problem with the proofs is that of similarity. Smith brings up the question and fact that “resemblance or similarity” does not always “require genetic relationship” (qtd Smith 52). One other problem, in general, is the fossil record- both fossil and living forms of the same animal exist (Otey 77). Also, the idea of missing links creates a problem (Otey 94). If evolution is true, it would be expected that changes of species to larger animals could be seen in fossils. This idea is not proven. There are no links. Otey points out that there is not one missing link, but many missing links (Otey 94). There is problem within the fossilized sub-humans. One is that the Piltdown man was a hoax. Smith really shows the history of the Piltdown man conspiracy (Smith 131-133). Piltdown was found fifty years ago by two British geologists (Smith 131). There were actually two finds- one was of a skull, jawbone, and tooth; the other was just a skull and jawbone (Smith 131). Later, x-ray photos showed the results of filing on the tooth and treatment of the skull to give an old appearance (Smith 132). Smith goes on to say in the end that not all finds of sub-humans are hoaxes (Smith 133). They are still errors. Gish shows the errors in his research (Man). Rhamapithecus was discovered to be strictly ape, Australopithecus was discovered to be strictly ape, Homo erectus was discovered to be strictly human, Homo sapien was discovered to be strictly human, and Nebraska man was discovered to be a pig (Man). Neanderthal Man is actually a human with arthritis or rickets according to Morris (Morris 175). The biggest problem with evolution is that they are still looking for substantial proof (Smith 88). Like stated before though- evolution must also be accepted through faith like creation (Morris 16).
In conclusion, it is important to remember that these two models are only truly accepted by faith. Neither model can be completely proven scientifically. There are good evidences, but no real substantial proof. Creationist are satisfied while evolutionist are still looking. Man, according to Morris, needs to have “a sense of his own identity and personal goals” (Morris 2). This is why it is so important that a person does research and discover which idea matches with what they believe. Did life come from God? Did life come from a blob? Each person needs to decide. Otey shows that these two theories are two different to combine (Otey 168). A person will need to choose. Icons of Evolution would argue that teenagers in high school even need to decide for themselves so they should be able to study both ideas (Icons). So, where did life come from- God or a blob. It is time to decide which model of the two is the most believable for each individual.




Works Cited
Icons of Evolution. Dir. Jim Fitzgerald and Bryan Boorujy. Focus on the Family, 2002. DVD.
KJV Scofield Sudy Bible. New York: Oxford University Press, 1945. Print.
Morris, Henry. Scientific Creationism. El Cajon: Master Books, 1974. Print.
Nesturkh, Mikhail. The Origin of Man. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1967. Print.
The Origin of Mankind. Dir. Randall Bretz. Perf. John Whitcomb. Sound Words. DVD.
The Origin of Man. Dir. Dan Huntsinger. Prod. Pat Matrisciana. Perf. Duane Gish. Institute for Creation Research. DVD.
Otey, W. W. The Origin and Destiny of Man. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1938. Print.
Smith, A.E. Wilder. Man’s Origin, Man’s Destiny. Wheaton: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1968. Print.





Outline
I. Introduction—The Study of Man’s Origin
II. The Creation Model
A. The Model
B. The Ideas
C. The Proof
D. The Problems
III. The Evolutionary Model
A. The Model
B. The Ideas
C. The Proof
D. The Problems
IV. Conclusion—What now?