Life is not hard if you live through god.
As one deals with the origin of humanity, it is vital not to limit the study simply to the beginning of man upon the earth, rather consideration should also be given to the purpose of man’s origin. Within the framework of purpose, the origin of man gives us a clear er and more complete description of his nature and mode of entrance upon the earth. (The ethical implications of Adam and Eve’s placement in the Garden and the ensuing Fall, with all its moral overtones, will not be dealt with in this section. Rather, it is dealt with under the doctrine of Hamartiology.)
Two prominent and distinct views emerge in relation to the purpose of man’s origin. Either there was a supernatur al force(s), or there was si mply a natural cause(s) to man’s origination. Purpose denotes a force and an animat ing system. Within the theist ic teaching, the force is
God, and the animating system varies (various modes will be dealt with later). Atheists, who assign the origin of man to natural causes, argue that the force centers in the evolution of life from an initial cell to higher forms of life through survival of the fittest, and the life animating system of natural selection.
, according to atheists, provides the necessary pr inciples to explain th e origin of man upon the earth. The theory of evolution holds, not necessarily that man somehow descended from any kind of ape or monkey, but rather that probably he and they have arrived from a common ancestry. Man descended generally from the lower primates through natural processe s, controlled entirely by inherent forces (a closed system). However, several objections can be ra ised against the theory of evolution. (1) This theory of evolution, though often presented as an established fact, is up to the present time only an unverified hypothesis. Under the discipline of science, a theory must possess at least three essential properties to establish it as fact: data, observation and repeatability. Since evolution cannot demonstrate data linking evolution of one kind to another, or prove through data examination (such as fossils) a transition, then the evolutionary scheme remains a hypothesis. It should be noted that those who hold to the involvement of a supernatural force(s) in man’s origin, also have only established a hypothesis, when examined in light of the prerequisites of science.
(2) Science has utterly failed to discover any miss ing links between man and the supposed animals from which he originated. Despite the ex tensive excavation occurring around the world, there has at present been no conclusive data to link man’s origin to the lower primates. (3) Furthermore, evolutionists argue that evolutionary trends occur through the processes of mutation. But this view fails to account for the increased complexity of man. Mutations are generally an inferi or derivation, whereas man represents the apex of all living things. Man’s ability to understand, comprehend and remember issues of morality, art, music, self- consciousness, and philosophy raises him above the primates
. In addition, man can speak, interact with other men, enjoy and clearly create. All this distinguishes man from the lower primates. (4) Scientists have utterly failed to demonstrate or identify the origin of life (organic) from inorganic substances. Where did life begin?
From a burning meteor? Perhaps from a pool of ooze? From hydrogen?
These observations are not intended to represent an exha ustive list of objections. Rather, the purpose is to reveal several major problems that must be answered, or the evolutionist has failed to adequately substantiate his hypothesis.
. In contrast to natural explanations for man’s origin, the theistic position assigns (in part or in total) the presence of man upon the earth to external factors (an