Ancient man invented many accounts of the creation of the world, yet it is still a mystery to many. It would take volumes to describe the myriad of such beliefs.
The Biblical account of creation appeared about 3,500 years ago when men were still idol worshippers. It revealed that there is ONE G-D who created everything and to whom alone every man is responsible. At that time many had believed that the sun was a G‑d, fire was a G‑d, thunder, wind, and other natural forces were G‑ds. They could not accept the Biblical explanation of an invisible G‑d, demanding righteousness and morality, and requiring man to refrain from evil.
Most people still don’t accept the Biblical idea of creation. Some declare it to be a naïve view from man’s uncivilized past, unworthy of serious discussion. Modern cosmogonists have introduced a “really” scientific theory of world creation and the origin of man—the “Big Bang” Hypothesis and the Theory of Organic Evolution: and in comparison with such science, the Biblical account becomes, in the eyes of many, fairy-tale stuff, even if they know little of the scientific view other than from over-simplified accounts.
Such people seem to believe that the scientific theory contained in the “ancient” Bible, compared to that taught in a modern university, stands in the same relation as an ox-cart to a jet freighter.
Let’s take a brief look at the modern scientific theory of creation, and then we will be able to analyze the opinion that modern cosmology far outstrips that of the ancient Biblical scientist. The “Big Bang” and Evolution are two theories that go hand in hand and appeal to many people as the answer to the puzzle of world-creation.
Approximately 15 billion years ago matter was created with a "big bang". It exploded out of nothing and there was nothing there before it. Then the universe began to expand rapidly. As the heat spread out slight variations occurred. Hot spots converted into particles and antiparticles. Slightly cooler ones become voids in space. The particles became attracted to each other by gravity and strong nuclear forces to make them combine. Three seconds after the big bang only exotic particles and energy existed; 3 minutes after the big bang protons and neutrons appeared, 300,000 years later there were clouds of hydrogen and helium atoms, 1,000,000,000 years after the bang there were stars and protogalaxies.
The bodies comprising the universe, star systems, and our own solar system appeared from the protogalaxies, which further condensed into individual hot stars and planetary systems. One such part became our sun and the planets and satellites surrounding the sun. Our earth was one of these planets, and with the others orbiting the sun, comprises what we now call the “Solar System” (“Sol” being the name given to our particular hot star). There are many such systems in the universe and each is thought to have been a nebular mass that divided and developed in the same way. Many nebulae are thought to be going through the process even now. It is thought to have taken millions of years for each state of the nebula to turn into the next. 15,000,000,000 years (earth time) after the big bang we're at present day.
Some scientists carry this theory of evolution even further. They maintain that organic matter on this earth, plants, animals, and man, is also the result of evolution, combined with natural selection (of the survivable). In some mysterious way, life first appeared in the waters through a chance combination of proteins, then upon the dry land. Tiny water creatures were the first to be animated. They evolved slowly into larger creatures; into mollusks, fish, and amphibious creatures. From the latter came life on the dry land, evolving into reptiles, insects, birds, cattle, beasts, and so forth, finally leading to a special type which developed into monkeys and apes in one branch and homo sapiens, man, in another.
The modernist upholding these theories is so vainglorious of his scientific achievements that his attitude toward the Bible is negative, ignoring or nullifying it completely. He considers Biblical science too ridiculous even to mention in the same breath with the former.
When the Biblical record of 6,000 years since Adam, and of Adam himself, is mentioned to the modernist, he merely smiles condescendingly. He refuses even to engage with it, as a heavyweight-boxing champion would smile and refuse debate a statement that he could be knocked out by a baby.
The general opinion resulting from such an attitude toward the Bible by “educated” people is disastrous for the Bible. The belief is taking root, even with those who admire the Bible, that so far as science is concerned, particularly cosmogony, the Bible is unworthy of consideration, and severely out of date. Even certain ministers of the church who respect the Bible in one aspect or another, have published works declaring the Bible fallible, particularly with respect to science. The first demonstration they use to justify their opinion is the Biblical account of the creation, which they brand as primitive baby talk.
Some years ago the Church of England issued the following statement concerning the fallibility of Genesis. We read in The New York Times:
“CHURCH OF ENGLAND REPORT UPHOLDS EVOLUTIONARY IDEA OF THE CREATION.”
“Doctrinal Commission Terms Narrative in Genesis ‘Mythological in Origin’.”
“London, Jan. 13—The modernists’ idea of the Creation was upheld emphatically tonight in a 242 page report on ‘Doctrine in the Church of England’, issued after more than fourteen years of study by a commission under the chairmanship of the Archbishop of York.
“‘No objection to a theory of evolution can be drawn from the two Creation narratives in Genesis 1 and 2’, said the report, ‘since it is generally agreed among educated Christians that these are mythological in origin and that their value for us is symbolic rather than historical’.”
Thus most educated Christians are to accept the view that the two Biblical Creation narratives in Genesis are mythological and have only allegorical value. We shall show in this volume that there are not two Creation narratives in Genesis but one, and that the narrative is as far from being allegorical as man is from being a five-legged fish!
As we have noted, neither the learned modernist nor those who accept his theory blindly are correct in their judgment of the Bible. They cannot always be blamed for this since they may never have seen the real Bible; the book they cite is NOT an accurately translated Bible!
As noted above, the Pentateuch was so written that besides giving a subject in its basic form so that a school child might understand it, it contains the most profound knowledge connected with each subject. The Biblical account of the creation, involving more profound scientific knowledge than any other subject, is completely unintelligible in the common translation; it makes hard reading even in the original Hebrew, as if the author had something beyond surface explanation in mind. The Bible contains both a simple account and a really profound treatment of creation. Not only are there scientific theories relating to and connected with the Creator Himself, but also a hypothesis of the details of the system of creation.
The Bible did not leave it to the scientist to be the only discoverer of a hypothesis of creation. It introduced one itself, but because the latter is not so important to the average person, it did not disclose it fully on the face of the text. Most is contained in the shorthand system and the genius of the language, to be understood only by the deeper students of the subject. Once one understands the Biblical hypothesis, the text becomes as clear as day, and one marvels at the text for it is indeed a two-fold story: one for the average person and one for the comprehending scientist. With this understanding the account becomes clear.
Jewish scholars had the Mosaic hypothesis of creation from time immemorial. They clearly recorded that knowledge in their post-Biblical literature. Many explained it to their non-Jewish friends as far back as the Middle Ages; it became known to some scientists in many other ways, one being a description of the hypothesis translated into Arabic and Latin about 800 years ago.
For centuries the scientists of the world looked on it as a peculiar theory; they paid little attention, thinking it to be a peculiarly Jewish way of thinking. Centuries passed, and though learned Jews shared the hypothesis with their non-Jewish friends they got the answer “not today!” Finally the world’s scientists accepted the Biblical hypothesis of creation though they never mentioned its Biblical origin. Today the hypothesis is common among scientists and, as we will show, is clearly and elaborately incorporated in the Biblical account of the creation. The peculiar thing is that the world praises it highly, but instead of calling it by a Biblical name, they call it the “Big Bang” and “Nebular Theory”!
This modern scientific theory of world-creation is essentially the Biblical explanation. The injustice done to the Bible is two-fold. The Biblical creation theory was appropriated by modern science, and on the strength of it cosmogony students declare themselves superior, and brand the Bible as primitive and unscientific.
This injustice done to the Bible has its comical side as well. The modernist has adopted half the Biblical hypothesis, omitting the remainder. The Biblical account of the creation will show that only the Biblical hypothesis is both correct and complete. Scientists are not its originators because the Bible gave it correctly 3,500 years ago. Even today the modernists have not got it all.
Likewise the theory of Organic Evolution concerning the origin of man is in error. This is a theory that the Bible does not share. The Biblical record declaring man to have been created about 6,000 years ago as a highly intelligent creature from the start is not to be scoffed at on the modernists’ mere say-so; the Mosaic account of the creation of man is more convincing than that of the modernist. We shall see that the Mosaic 6,000 years of man’s history are self-evidently supported.
According to Moses in the Biblical account of creation, man started life as a highly intelligent being, as befitting one created by G‑d Himself. As such, he immediately began to reveal his great intelligence in his thoughts as well as in his deeds: thus great innovations appeared almost immediately.
Man was able to name all animals according to their nature and use for him (Gen. 2:19). He could build an ark to withstand the storm of a terrible flood (Gen. 6:15). (Engineers and modern shipbuilders admit today that the dimensions of the ark given in the Bible are exactly those necessary to give it full buoyancy and stability; modern ships are built according to the same dimensional principles as those of the ark.) In his earliest days man discovered the harp and the organ (Gen. 4:21). He became the instructor of every caster of iron and brass (Gen. 4:22). He discovered the art of brick making and of building a high tower by using mortar (Gen. 11:3).
He quickly discovered all things necessary for him, most being in use to this day: wine, bread, brandy, beer, glass, pottery, paper, textile goods, silk, mirrors, tanned leather, wheels, and hundreds of other useful objects and arts. He soon learned to domesticate beasts of burden for work in the field; beasts for dairy products and wool, for meat, and for tallow.
The logic is obvious! Man was able to do such things in his earliest days because he was intelligent from the very start, and since Moses mentions most of the above named articles, man certainly had them.
He soon advanced so far in civilization that he laid the foundations of great arts and sciences for generations to come. Painting, sculpture, music, mathematics, astronomy, the highest religious doctrines, the art of writing, the art of embalming the dead, the idea of coining money, and many other important arts and sciences were first invented thousands of years ago, and our modern civilization is still making use of them.
All this justifies the Mosaic record that man came into existence not as a savage and a caveman, but as a highly intelligent being. There were also savage people in ancient times. Their existence does not refute the truth of man’s high intellect in the days of his first appearance. There are savages to be found today even among so-called civilized populations; This is not due to a lack of inherent intelligence, but rather to lack of opportunity, education, proper leaders, and the like.
The Biblical account of man, his coming as a creature in the likeness of his Creator, intelligent and capable under proper conditions of reaching the highest levels of true civilization, is verified by a thousand undeniable facts.
The Biblical record of man is so fully convincing as to be the true record. The Biblical record is that man appeared here on earth about fifty-seven centuries ago; the best inventions of the ancients are now known to date back about the same length of time, which suggests that man and civilization came together almost at the same time.
No important human achievement of any sort is known to be older than about fifty-six centuries; this corresponds exactly with the Biblical time of man’s appearance here on earth: hence the demonstration that man was intelligent from the start. Clearly he was no savage cave man fifty-six hundred years ago. The pyramids in Egypt with their embalmed mummies are about five thousand years old, and those who were responsible for them were no cave men; we will soon note the significance of this.
Now let us see what “convincing” proof the classical evolutionist has to offer. He asserts that man is here longer than about fifty-seven centuries and that he started life as a savage and caveman. According to his idea and belief, man has been on earth tens of thousands of years, and his intelligence developed gradually. In the beginning he was a poor caveman: not much more than a bestial savage. Since there is no evidence that prior to six thousand years ago man showed any intelligence at all, we must conclude if we are to believe the evolutionists, that after remaining a real savage for tens of thousands of years, man suddenly became civilized almost overnight. There are many such “jumps” in the fossil record which evolutionists are unable to explain, and which force them to resort to hand waving.
Prior to the last six thousand years, there is nothing to prove that man, as we know him, existed; if he did exist, he left nothing to prove his intelligence to us. At best, he must have been a step or two from complete savagery, yet he suddenly began to make the most important discoveries. It seems that one particular night (at about the time Biblical Adam was created) Mr. Caveman went to sleep in his cave and when he woke up in the morning, he began to invent things, and even started to embalm his dead scientifically, and to build wonderful pyramids for them.
Why didn’t the caveman posses any brains until the time of Biblical Adam? During thirty- to fifty-thousand years, or even longer if it pleases the modernists, man remained as uncivilized as an animal. He did not know enough to build a hut for himself. He lived in caves like the wild beasts of the forests. He did not leave a single proof of his awakening intelligence, now seven to ten thousand years old according to these modernists. Why did he become intelligent so suddenly, just fifty-seven centuries ago? The modernist offers fifty thousand years of fiction.
This decisively refutes the modernist’s theory of man’s evolutionary, gradual, continuous development. Such truly wonderful pyramids and embalmed dead fifty to fifty-five hundred years old, but not one single little tombstone sixty-five hundred or even six thousand years old! Palatial graves of mighty kings fifty and fifty-five centuries old, but not one grave of some tribal chief older than sixty centuries! The highest human intelligence since the Biblical time, but not a trace of Eskimo civilization of one thousands years previous!
The modernist’s fifty thousand years has not a single civilization to offer us; the period is an immense blank. In contrast, the Bible’s six thousand years records the Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Hittite, Minoan, Pelagic, Hellenic, Hellenistic, Roman, and Persian civilizations as well as others; a remarkable procession of cultures. The procession is understandable if man was created intelligent; but if evolution is true, the long sterility is unaccountable when it is followed by such luxuriant fertility.
The modernist has nothing to convince us that his theory of man’s slow evolution contains any truth. This theory is imaginative: supposition but no facts. If anything, this theory of evolution is bankrupt. The modernist cannot prove that prior to the Biblical record there was a man of any intelligence, and he cannot deny that early Biblical man showed the highest intelligence.
But there is one more point in favor of the Biblical record, as against the ideas of the modern Bible-critic. The former is trustworthy because it is history; the latter is not trustworthy because it is speculation: history versus speculation. The Bible records facts, while the modernist is theorizing.
Moses gives the record of the world’s age as being (by now) close to six thousand years, and the man Adam as the progenitor of all mankind and G‑d’s own creation. The Biblical record shows that Moses was the fourth man removed from Shem and the sixth from Adam in receiving the oral tradition of world-creation; his words ought to carry much weight from a purely historical standpoint. Jacob was, according to the Bible, seventy years old when Shem the son of Noah, died. Shem was one of the eight survivors of the flood, and the patriarch of the entire tribe of Hebrews, known by his name until this very date as “Semites”. Jacob naturally knew his patriarch Shem, spoke to him, and learned the previous record back to Adam from him. He handed the record to his son Levi, who passed it on to his grandson Amram, the father of Moses. Thus Moses was the fourth man from Shem to receive the record.
Shem was one hundred years old when Methuselah died, and the latter was over six hundred years old when Adam died, so Moses was the sixth man in receiving the tradition from Adam. The line was: Adam, Methuselah, Shem, Jacob, Levi, Amram, and Moses.
The nations Moses mentions, and whose origin from Adam he gives, actually existed in his time. They lived around him. It is hardly credible that he would write a history of his own time subject to denial, which would allow his contemporaries to call him a liar on the face of his writings. What would he gain by it? What profit would the prophet have from his lies? What benefit would he derive by recording the Pathrusim and the Casluhim in his book, carefully adding that out of them came the Philistim, and remembering many other small nations of his time? (Gen. 10)
Moses gives the origin of 70 national groups back to Adam, and since his generation must have known them to be so, he surely gave the facts correctly, and they must be understood to be historically true. If history has any value at all, and if the reputation of a historian means anything, then Moses, the moralist, sage, and prophet, a man above any suspicion of lying for profit or other motives, has surely given us true historical facts. In his description of the origin of nations of his time back to Adam he could not have used anything contrary to the facts known to be true by his contemporaries from their own direct knowledge. It was current history; it was only recently that the patriarchs Ham and Japeth had died; and they transmitted the facts to their generations, as Shem did to his. Moses therefore, had no opportunity to misrepresent the truth. He is certainly as trustworthy, as a historian, as any other historian. He, more carefully than anyone else, would be scrupulous in describing the history of his own times because he had several opponents who refused to recognize him as the leader of Israel. The first untruth that they discovered in his historical record would surely have been used to discredit his leadership and greatness.
Korach provides a good example of those who would have seized such an opportunity to discredit Moses, had it existed.1
If Moses is to be considered an unreliable historian, every other ancient historian’s work should also be thought untrustworthy, meriting discarding. No other ancient historian has Moses’ moral credentials: father of the highest code of morals, the Ten Commandments; prophet and historian; father of monotheism. If he is doubted whom shall we trust? His writings were read, re-read, and taught by him to a most stubborn, critical and discriminating people (“stiff-necked and proud”), so what opportunity would he have had to introduce unknown historical speculation to such an audience?
There is the man, with the highest possible reputation for being holy, honest, and trustworthy; there is the situation, which would not allow him to record anything disputable. There is also the total lack of motive for him to lie. His record of all the nations shows in detail how all started from Adam. The first “Who’s Who Among the Nations” has all the earmarks of true history, and nothing but hard facts to the contrary should be accepted to discredit it. But such facts do not exist; or if they do, have not yet been brought forward by anyone.
The critics who maintain that the Mosaic record of Genesis was written 700 years after the time of Moses are totally wrong, and were discredited by scientific research. As long ago as May 25, 1937 we read in The New York Times and other papers of that date:
"Bible Stories Proved. 'Those early chapters of the Bible are authentic literature of successive eras of remote times and not Israelitic literature written 700 years after the death of Moses,' Dr. William Albright, Biblical authority of Johns Hopkins University declared last night.
“'New archaeological discoveries,' Dr. Albright said, 'have firmly re-established this theory, over which Bible students have argued for centuries.
“'The most valuable proof we have gathered in long years of research are the Nuzi Tablets. They prove the patriarchal stories of Genesis were not written during the period of the divided monarchy (700 years after the death of Moses). Rather they show conclusively the stories in Genesis were transmitted substantially from far more remote ages. In fact, the Genesis stories appear to be a shorthand version of the national saga of the Hebrews.'”
That is exactly what was maintained by the Hebrew sages thousands of years before Dr. Albright.
What historical facts (not vague suppositions) can the modernist offer to offset the biblical record of the man Adam, and that he was the progenitor of all known mankind? Can he point out one single nation or one single tribe, proving satisfactorily that it existed before Adam’s time?
Can the modernist point out a building, a ruin, a cemetery, a small graveyard, a single tombstone, anything at all to prove by actual facts, not fancies, that somewhere, someone lived before Adam’s time?
The Modernist does not believe in the Mosaic record of man. He rejects it, declares it worthless and mocks it (though he has accepted the Big Bang/Nebular theory), but as for actual proofs to deny it—he has none, say what he will.
Neither should we take seriously anecdotes about the earth’s crusts. There is the well known story of a horse skeleton found on the Mississippi river bank, buried under a crust known to scientists to be fifty thousand years old. This was accepted as a proved fact: that fifty thousand years ago there were horses in this country. Digging deeper in the same place and reaching a crust supposed to be a quarter of a million years old, an Indian canoe about a hundred years old was found—and there was not doubt at all about its age!
At any rate, prehistoric geological data have little to do with the Bible’s record of the age of man upon the earth. This record concerns not the earth itself, but the time of man upon it, and this no scientist is able to offset, except by fantastic supposition.
You may give the scientist credit and respect for his opinions; but when he tries to disprove the Biblical record of the creation of man and of the world, his arguments are not backed by a single fact; he can only offer untrustworthy suppositions. Since science is changing year-to-year and century-to-century through new discoveries, the scientist cannot be absolute concerning world creation, for what he says now he himself might refute tomorrow by discovering new “facts”. He does his best theorizing, speculating, offering various suppositions, often being forced to refute them, whereas Moses recorded the actual history of his time.
Meanwhile the modernist harms civilization instead of advancing it; though he might take pride in being more “scientific’ in historical matters than earlier man, pride goeth before a fall.
The Biblical account of the creation declares that G‑d Himself created man. It further declares that every man is sent individually to the earth by G‑d, and that we have all received instructions through Adam as to what we may and what we may not do in life (very important instructions too, as will be seen later). The accurate Bible gives the true conception of sin: that it is not an offense against G‑d, but against the sinner himself. Man’s duty to G‑d is not to serve Him or to praise Him, but to accept His good advice for man’s own happiness. According to the Mosaic theory, G‑d does not demand anything for Himself of man; He wishes to do things for man, to reward him, and to make him happy. Man is only required to co-operate in the divine intentions and plans for his own good.
Man is thus elevated to the state of G‑d’s protégé, and is under His continual guardianship. G‑d sends him to earth. He is soon to return to Him, and while on earth he is “in the image of G‑d”. Man is both important and responsible. Knowing this he can treat his fellow men as would a loving brother, rather than a cold tyrant. Such men are the best material for the building of civilization: they understand the need and the blessing of civilized life, and are ready and eager to build and promote it.
In helping to make men eager for civilized life, the Mosaic theory forwards civilization itself. It is beneficial for the world at large and for the individual.
To the scientist who preaches evolution, man is just another animal. He is responsible to no one. He is not an honorable individual, but one of his kind, like any base creature.
The scientist tells man that he dates back through his species to ancestors of the monkey tribe, a million years ago. This story goes back a million years to the first life in the waters, a billion years to the time when the whole earth was a ball of gas, still another billion years to the nebula. If there was or is a G‑d behind the nebula, it is certainly not of great concern for current man. A wink and a nod by the modernist further suggests that the existence of G‑d behind the nebula is not so certain and of little importance, for the whole solar system is only one of a billion such systems and the whole earth is like a grain of sand in the solar system. What importance, such people suggest, can man have to G‑d under those circumstances, if there is a G‑d somewhere?
The entire universe is nebular stuff. Man is an animal far removed from the nebula, and still farther removed from the Will of G‑d, if there is such a thing, so Mr. Man is free and clear of any obligation, and can act as he pleases. If this is not preached directly it is signaled readily enough from the general nature of the modernist’s theory. Civilization then becomes a means for taking as much pleasure as one can from life by whatever means. No G‑d; no responsibility; no reward or punishment. Why be honest, merciful and long-suffering when one can get all one’s needs through dishonesty and brutality. Might gets you somewhere, and a truly civilized moral code leads you to the poorhouse, so get all the sweet benefits of civilization without incurring any of its responsibilities, and whistle at every moral philosophy. Such is Nietzsche’s world. We know the terrible price the world paid for this philosophy as used by one European power. The death and destruction caused by this nation, which discarded the Bible, left a “mark of Cain” on the soul of mankind, which may never be erased.
It is a short step from atheism to violence and murder; the evolution that began so many millions of years ago by dividing the nebula, ends by splitting the earth into pieces. It reverses its work with man, and though it is thought to have developed man in parallel with the monkey, and transformed the cave man into a highly civilized being, the consequences of such violence and murder return him to the cave man and even the monkey’s precursor. As a modern philosopher put it: “Increased knowledge has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards”.
If revolutions and wars leading to general destruction continue, and if the pillars of our civilization are shaken and crushed, it is not the work of those following the Biblical philosophy, but of those ignoring it: those who believe in evolution and that man is responsible to no one. Full credit goes to that “modernism” which declares the Bible to be dead and ready for burial.
To leave one’s convictions to someone’s invented theory because so many others do, does not remove any errors; as an old English philosopher expressed it: “Probability does not make any alteration either in the truth or falsity of things.” And we add: Scrutiny and critique through reason do alter things, particularly the things merely supposed to be true or false.
Thinking superficially and accepting claims at face value, most believe that modern science excels Biblical science; a closer look shows this to be false. The Bible far surpasses the modern scientist when it comes to cosmogony as well as to the creation of man. Increasingly, those who have initially denigrated what the Bible has been telling us for thousands of years now “discover” and credit it to the latest science.
Before turning to the accurate translation of the Bible, we need to understand the Biblical idea of G‑d. Such an understanding will greatly assist the reader’s insight into the account of creation. It will also show that the modernist has much to learn from the Bible to make his cosmology fully and truly scientific.
