Author : Harry E. “Buddy” Payne, Jr.
“And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature alter his kind, cattle and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” (Genesis 1:24-27)
If you have visited a zoo and spent some time watching the monkeys, the apes, and especially the chimpanzees, you surely have noticed the many characteristics which these animals have in common with human beings. You probably thought to yourself that they look as if they might be our distant cousins. You may have even thought that somewhere back in time humans, monkeys, and apes had the same ancestors. Of course, you would not be the first to think such thoughts.
Carolus Linnaeus, the great Swedish biologist of the 18th century, who is given credit for establishing the modern system of classifying all living things, classified human beings (homo sapiens) as relatives of monkeys and apes. He did not mean to imply that there was any common ancestor for humans and monkeys because he believed strongly that God had created them separately. However, he did recognize that the characteristics of men and apes are more similar to one another than to those of any other creature.
Not until after the publication of Charles Darwin’s books The Origin of the Species and The Descent of Man in the mid and late19th century did the notion that humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor become widely accepted. Darwin proposed that the species in Linnaeus, system were not fixed creations of God which had remained essentially unchanged since creation. He said that all the species living today came from common ancestors in the past by a process of gradual evolution. This process, according to Darwin, was guided by nature (natural selection), not by God. Thus, in particular, apes and men evolved from a common ancestor many thousands or millions of years ago.
The general theory of evolution, which states that all living things have a common ancestor, has come to be believed so strongly that it is taught in many places as an established fact. You have been taught by your teachers, television or books that men and apes are the result of a long process of evolution which began on earth some 4.5 billion years ago. The following quotes from Thread of Life by Roger Lewin (published by the Smithsonian Institute) are typical.
Primates apparently evolved in the late Cretaceous from creatures resembling today’s tree shrews. The primate line gave rise to two groups: the prosimians, including tarsiers, lemurs, and lorises; and the anthropoids, the monkeys, apes and humans. (page 220)
Humans are not just a part of the rich pattern of evolving life; through possession of our sense of awareness, we know we have evolved and are evolving still. (page 249)
Obviously, the account in Genesis quoted above presents an entirely different picture. Man and the beasts were distinct creations by God. Man was specially made in the image of God and was given power to control all the other creatures. The Bible claims to be the inspired word of God. There is much evidence to convince you that the Bible must have been written under God’s direction, as you will learn later in this series. If the Bible is God’s Word then, of course, its account of the origin of men and apes is the true account and the subject is closed.
However, there is much evidence from God’s world that can also help us answer our questions about men and apes. From the scientific evidence, is it more reasonable to believe men and apes were created separately or that they evolved from a common ancestor? We shall examine some of the evidence together and see that God’s Word and God’s world testify to the same truth.
The only direct evidence from nature with regard to the ancestry of men and apes is the remains of dead men, apes, or intermediates from the ancient past. If scientists could find, identify, and date a sequence of fossil skeletons showing the evolution of men and apes from a primitive ancestor, it would go a long way toward supporting the general theory of evolution. But such a sequence has not been found, nor in fact can it be. Certainly parts of fossil skeletons have been found and great claims have been made, but the fossil record of supposed human and primate evolution is (at the very best) sparse. Interpretations of the fossils that have been found do not agree. There are as many ape to man genealogies as there are experts. In spite of this, the National Academy of Sciences has put out the following statement on human evolution:
Studies in evolutionary biology have led to the conclusion that mankind arose from ancestral primates…The ‘missing links’ that troubled Darwin and his followers are no longer missing. Today, not one but many such connecting links, intermediate between various branches of the primate family tree, have been found as fossils. These linking fossils are intermediate in form and occur in geological deposits of intermediate age. They thus document the time and rate at which primate and human evolution occurred. (Science and Creationism, National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1984)
Every one of the supposed “missing links” in the primate family tree has been seriously questioned and/or discarded from the human family tree. William R. Fix, in his book The Bone Peddlers, examines each of the major finds through 1979 and shows that all of them are beset with problems, disqualified by later finds or exposed as hoaxes. A sequence of fossils forming our ancient family treecannot be found because there is no way to determine whether a given fossil is the ancestor of another fossil as required by the theory of evolution. Richard Lewontin of Harvard University made the following insightful observations:
All the fossils which have been dug up and are claimed to be ancestors, we haven’t the faintest idea whether they are ancestors. Because… all you’ve got is Homo sapiens there, you’ve got that fossil there, you’ve got another fossil there…and it’s up to you to draw the lines. Because there are no lines. I don’t think any one of them is likely to be the direct ancestor of the human species. But how would you know if it’s that one?
The only way you can know that some fossil is the direct ancestor is that it’s so human that it is human. There is a contradiction there. If it is different enough from humans to be interesting, then you don’t know whether it’s an ancestor or not. And if it’s similar enough to be human, then it’s not interesting. (“Agnostic Evolutionists”, by Tom Bethell, Harper’s Magazine, February, 198, page 61)
The scanty fossil evidence with regard to apes and humans is more reasonably interpreted from the creationist viewpoint. All of the fossils proposed as “missing links” in the evolution of apes and men are in reality either apes or men. They do not fit somewhere between. Apes and humans existed in the past, as they do in the present, as separate types with a large but limited variation potential within each type. The similarities (such as the striking similarities in their skeletons) between apes and men, past and present, are better explained as the result of a basic plan used by the Creator to serve as a model for creating many different forms of life. What need was there for the Creator to start all over with a totally new plan for each new creation? Would you have done so?
In addition to the fossil evidence there are a number of essential differences between men and apes which also testify that men and apes were separate creations.
1. Men have a unique ability to use language. Apes can communicate only in limited ways by using noises and gestures. One chimpanzee named Washoe mastered 67 signs from the standard American sign language for the deaf, but there is no comparison between this learning by imitation and rewards and man’s ability to learn an alphabet, spelling and writing. Man can use language to name, discuss, abstract and symbolize. There is absolutely no evidence that man’s ability to use language evolved. The difference between men and apes in the use of language is a difference in kind, not a difference in degree.
2. Man’s unique ability to transmit knowledge from one generation to the next has led to tremendous progress in developing technology and civilization. While there are some animals that seem to have intricate social systems (e.g. ants, bees, baboons) these are all instinctive and remain the same from one generation to the next. In this, too, man is different in kind from all of the animals.
3. Man is a moral, esthetic and religious being; apes and other animals are not. How can a random, impersonal, and nonmoral process like evolution produce human beings with moral principles, personal consciences, a deep appreciation for beauty, and a capacity to worship God? There is no evidence that the apes possess such abilities. Here too men and apes are different in kind, not just in degree.
The evidence from God’s world convinces us that it is more reasonable to believe that men and apes were separate creations. They were designed by the Creator based on similar blueprints, but were made distinctly different with the capacity to vary within limits. This testimony agrees completely with the testimony of God’s Word.
Let us all give praise to God!
