Sunday, June 30, 2019

Index for this Blog

I am putting this up as a guide to this site. I will try to keep it updated to the end. I figure I have 1-2 months before the cancer gets me.

Chapter layout

Genesis 1 God’s image, Soul, Days of Proclamation, Quantum Soul,

Genesis 2  Rivers of Eden Strange hydrology of Eden , Creation of Man, Eden and the Flood , Adam, Genetics , Brain size, Brain size 2, religion, Atmospheric model of Desiccated Mediterranean, teaching Adam to speak, Wildlife of Eden, The Anti-evolution Views of Theistic Evolutionists

Genesis 3 Curse1, Curse 2, Curse 3

Genesis 4 Technology of Eden, Cain and Abel Tech pt 1, Tents & Music Tech pt 2, Tubalcain Tech pt 3

Genesis 5 Genealogies

Genesis 6-9 Flood Rainbow, Rivers, Eden and the Flood, Was Noah a Farmer?

Genesis 10 Genealogies

Genesis 11 Babel

Genesis 12

Genesis 13 Pillar of Salt

Genesis 41 Joseph’s Palace

Numbers Bad numbers

Job 41 Leviathan


Does faith exclude observational evidence1

Does faith exclude observational evidence 2

How God controls evolution

Why Historicity is important

The Power of Knowing the Bible is True.

Divine Inspiration

What if My Theology is Wrong?

Sad State of Apologetics

Stupid Atheist Arguments 1

Stupid Atheist arguments 2

Problem of Evil

Hawking and Nature of Mankind

Acidity of Christian Liberalism

Personal Stories

My Story

Turkish Translator experience

Where is God in the Pandemic?

Why historicity is important

Why Historicity is Important.

Glenn R. Morton June 9, 2020

What I want to talk about concerns why historicity in Scripture is important. Unlike almost any other religion, Christianity is a historically based religion. It’s fundamental tenet is that Jesus rose from the grave. If that didn’t happen, then Christianity is utterly false. But that was a historical event, and unfortunately, too many theologians and Christians have yielded to science the ability to judge if something is true or false. Too many theologians and Christians have reserved to themselves only things that can’t be proven–values. It is best expressed by Stephen Jay Gould’s famous nonoverlapping magisteria.

The text of Humani Generis focuses on the magisterium (or teaching authority) of the Church—a word derived not from any concept of majesty or awe but from the different notion of teaching, for magister is Latin for “teacher.” We may, I think, adopt this word and concept to express the central point of this essay and the principled resolution of supposed “conflict” or “warfare” between science and religion. No such conflict should exist because each subject has a legitimate magisterium, or domain of teaching authority—and these magisteria do not overlap (the principle that I would like to designate as NOMA, or “nonoverlapping magisteria”).”

“The net of science covers the empirical universe: what is it made of (fact) and why does it work this way (theory). The net of religion extends over questions of moral meaning and value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry (consider, for starters, the magisterium of art and the meaning of beauty). To cite the arch cliches, we get the age of rocks, and religion retains the rock of ages; we study how the heavens go, and they determine how to go to heaven.” Gould, S. J. (1997).
“Nonoverlapping Magisteria.” Natural History 106 (March): 16–22 and 60-62.

The resurrection of Jesus is not a ‘value’ issue. It is a question of historical truth or falsehood. Science would deny the resurrection and say it was impossible, so going along with the Pope and Gould, relegating to science judgments of historical fact, means Christianity’s most fundamental tenet is deemed false, but most importantly, we Christians stupidly place those who oppose us as judges over this! . Once we are in that position, nothing else in the Bible matters. If the bodily resurrection didn’t happen, then we have nothing. A spiritual resurrection, as some have suggested, means nothing–it leaves no evidence at all, not even for the 12 disciples.

If Christians believe that the bodily resurrection of Jesus actually happened, then it seems absurd to me, for us to think that God couldn’t or wouldn’t do other miracles reported in the Bible, like the resurrection of Lazarus, the water to wine, the floating ax head, the lack of rain brought upon Israel by Elijah. Eventually we have to look at the miracles which were the reason Jesus’ resurrection was necessary. The need for Jesus’ death and bodily resurrection was because of sin. Sin is explained in the Bible in a story deemed false by most Christians. If that story is false, one could ask if there is any reason to believe Christian theology? Logically, H. G. Wells explains what happens to Christianity if the story is false. Wells says.

If all the animals and man have been evolved in this ascendant manner, then there would have been no first parents, no Eden, and no Fall. And if there had been no Fall, the entire historical fabric of Christianity, the story of the first sin and the reason for an atonement, upon which current teaching bases Christian emotion and morality, collapses like a house of cards.” H. G. Wells, The Outline of History, (Garden City: Doubleday, 1961), p. 776-777

For him the issue was evolution. I have offered a way for God to control evolution, so to me, the issue is, "Did we have a primal pair’. Again a historical question, not a value question, and again, by Christians acceding to the non-overlapping magisteria, are ceding to others the ultimate judgment about the truth or falsity of our religion. Science judges that we have had no primal pair back to 200,000 years ago. And unfortunately, Christians don’t want to push Adam further back in time to a time we could have had a primal pair. Christians have grown comfortable with a religion lacking reality.

Furthermore, by succumbing to this idea of non-overlapping magisteria, we make Christian values equivalent to the values of every other religion in the world. I always wonder why one should believe in a religion that we believe starts with falsehoods. If an adherent to a religion doesn’t believe it’s tenets, why should anyone else believe it?

A few years ago, my church asked a rabbi in to explain Judaism to us. I attended and I asked the rabbi, “What was the biggest reason to be a Jew?” I was thinking I would get an answer like, “Because I believe it is metaphysically true!” I would have respected that answer. If she believes her religion, she should believe she is right and I am wrong. But what she answered was that the biggest reason to be a Jew was because her parents were Jewish. I certainly am not a Christian because my parents were Christian. My dad was an atheist and my mother a bible spouting, murderous sociopath. I thought that joining a religion because your parents joined was an insufficient reason to be in any religion. I then asked if all we have in religion is Saturday or Sunday fellowship clubs? The answer was basically we do. It is community that matters. I can find community in the local pool hall!

From my perspective, what matters is if the religion is true or not. If Buddhism is actually true, then my behavior needs to reflect that belief.The Dhammapada says:

" 411 Him I call indeed a Brahmana who has no interests , and when he has understood (the truth), does not say How , how? and who has reached the depth of the Immortal.
412 Him I call indeed a Brahmana who in this world has risen above both ties, good and evil, who is free from grief, from sin, and from impurity.
413 Him I call indeed a Brahmana who is bright like the moon, pure, serene, undisturbed, and in whom all gaiety is extinct.
414 Him I call indeed a Brahmana who has traversed this miry road, the impassable world, difficult to pass, and its vanity, who has gone through, and reached the other shore, is thoughtful, steadfast, free from doubts, free from attachment, and content.
415 Him I call indeed a Brahmana who in this world, having abandoned all desires, travels about without a home, and in whom all concupiscence is extinct.
" The Dhammapada: The Essential Teachings of the Buddha, Transl by Dr. Friedrich Max Muller, (London: Watkins Publishing, 2006), p. 93

So, if they are correct, I am not to have any interests, . not ask ‘how’, i.e. for deeper understanding, free from grief , not to have sin and impurity, have no gaiety , abandoned all desires, having no home and no desire for riches.

While there is some overlap with Christian values, the differences are interesting. I am not to have fun, desires interests or curiosity in Buddhism. One or the other or both of these religions are untrue. Saying that ‘values’ belongs to religion leaves us with a great uncertainty of which values? Whose values? If these values are different but all equally valid, they are also all equally false.
Some forms of Bhuddism require Mo divination whereby one rolls the dice to determine what to eat at a restaurant. That too is a value. Are Christian values better than those? If not, then all we have are various community clubs none of which have metaphysical value.

Christianity must reclaim its stake in history or universalism, which leads to silly consequences and moral equivalency will be the future, all morals are equal and equally worthless. I fear it is already too late. In some sense, the world is already in the great falling away.

Many Christians don’t believe anything in early Genesis is true, but they believe we are still to believe the ‘spiritual lessons’ in it, they should consider this. We don’t talk like this about any other area of knowledge. We don’t wax eloquent about the deep life meaning in the Ptolemaic theory. Nor do we proclaim that phlogiston is deeply meaningful and instructive of how we should live our lives. We proclaim those theories false and worth forgetting. If the early part of Genesis is false, why not just proclaim it as such and then forget the religion?

When interpreting Scripture, we have several steps.

1.the Hebrew word

2.the list of possible English equivalents for that Hebrew word.

3.the choice, from that list, once made, should make sense, and not lead to obvious falsehood. If there is no way to avoid obvious falsehood from the list of possible translational choices, then we should conclude the Bible is false, not conclude that it is true(poetry excepted–to head off the usual and boring ‘trees clap their hands’ question rote critics throw at me).

4.The interpretation of the final English version of the passage.

I don’t think it is good policy for a Christian to read a passage and not try to rework the possible translations list, to see if the passage could say something that made more sense–i.e. Tubalcain and his ‘metal work’. Unfortunately though this is the approach taken by too many Christians. If they can’t find a solution in 30 min, they give up, proclaim the passage false and move on. I find little difference between this and what Xi Ji Ping is wanting to do. He too is picking and choosing what passages of the Bible we should believe.

Beijing no longer wants simply to repress religion but to transform it. I Lian, a. professor at Duke University Divinity School, tells me that the Communist Party wants to ‘create a new version of Christianity shorn of its transcendent visions and values.’

“The centerpiece of this campaign is a major new undertaking to rewrite holy scripture. China’s state-run Xinhua News Agency said late last year that Politburo Standing Committee member Wang Yang had presided over a meeting of so-called scholars and ‘religious people from grassroots level’ to discuss ‘ making accurate and authoritative interpretations of classical doctrines to keep pace with the times.’ ”

“It would take years to create official state translations of the Bible, Quran and other religious texts. Purging passages deemed incompatible with the ‘core socialist values’ while retaining a measure of the original poetry—this would require literary achievement and deep religious knowledge, both of which are lacking in the party’s hand-picked experts. Even entertaining such an idea reveals Beijing’s staggering ‘arrogance of power,’ Mr Lian says, noting that Chinese emperors never attempted such a feat…

“Why does Beijing seek, as Mr. Lian puts it, ‘to drain Christianity of its spirit’? One explanation is generalized hostility to religion.”
Matthew Taylor King, “The Gospel According To Xi” The Wall Street Journal, June 5, 2020, p. A15

Isn’t deciding what passages are ‘deemed incompatible’ with modern science the same as what Xi is doing, at least in style. This has bothered me for a long time about the more liberal branches of Christianity, where instead of putting the Bible at risk of being declared wrong, they drain the power from it by declaring that God didn’t do any of those silly things like, have a garden of Eden, a talking snake, a flood, etc. They say, without evidence, that none of that was meant to be true! Yet, we are still told to believe that God raised 2 men from the dead in the first century, Lazarus after 4 days and Jesus after 3. If God could do that, why on earth do we choose to disbelieve he could do all the other miracles? We chose that by ‘purging’ passages we deem incompatible with modern times. That is always the claim isn’t it–that we must make God more modern. I think it would be more honest to simply say God is not there and forget the religion than to modify it so much that it no longer has any spirit in it.

The poor in China can not afford the hospitals–hospitals are cash only operations. Indeed when I was in China a Conoco couple were saving $10,000 cash up for the wife’s operation. The maid’s boyfriend found out about the cash, came in when they expected everyone to be gone and found the wife home sick. He murdered her and took the cash. I say this because in the situation below, the Christian’s only hope is healing from Jesus. They can’t afford the doctors, and the party doesn’t pay for healthcare for peasants.

Communist Party of China (CPC) officials visited believers- homes in Yugan county of Jiangxi province-where about 10 percent of the population is Christian. They urged residents to replace personal religious displays with posters of President Xi Jinping; more than 600 removed Christian symbols from their living rooms, and 453 hung portraits of the Communist leader, according to SCMP.
"The efforts were part of a government campaign to alleviate poverty in the region, since some CPC members believe families- faith is to blame for their financial woes, according to SCMP. The poster swaps in villagers homes represent the party’s desire to have residents look to their leaders, rather than their Savior, for assistance.”
Many poor households have plunged into poverty because of illness in the family. Some resorted to believing in Jesus to cure their illnesses," the head of the government campaign told SCMP. "But we tried to tell them that getting ill is a physical thing, and that the people who can really help them are the Communist Party and General Secretary Xi.

China Tells Christians to Replace Images of Jesus with Communist President

Propaganda effort in poor province latest sign of Xi Jinping consolidating control.

For scientifically minded Christians, who believe miracles don’t happen, is it then the right thing for the Communist party to do to those Christians–remove religious symbols, replacing them with pictures of Xi? Some may say that the peasants have misplaced faith in God, which is exactly what the party is saying. Do they? Does God not perform miracles? This is an important question because if miracles can happen, even today, why couldn’t the miracle of a talking snake take place? Why do we reject what the Bible says happened in light of the fact that the greatest miracle of all was the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Such a big miracle means all others are small potatoes Why do we think God is impotent to have had a Garden of Eden?

In my mind, the Communist party is doing the same thing as many of us do every day–picking and choosing what miracles we will allow God to do! Getting rid of that limit on God’s power, means that the early stories of Genesis just might well be true, and we like the Communists, don’t believe in the power of God.

The Wildlife of Eden

I said I would show some of the animals that lived in that deep basin.

I do this so that people won’t think that there is no way anything could have lived there. These are reconstructions from fossils, so exact coloration is not to be obtained but that doesn’t mean the animals were here. All of these were found in Messinian sediments. Some of those sediments have been uplifted above sealevel bringing their fossils with them so they could be found. There are some uplifted sediments in Cypus but most of the uplifted sediments are found in Sicily, and Italy.

First at the bottom of the food chain are ostracods, fish and mice. This is a chart of the fish that lived in the basin

Myotragus–a goat. The only way this goat could have made it to this island was to have walked across the dry basin and then by luck, was above sea level when the flood came. Now, they could have retreated up the mountain as the waters rose, numerical modeling says the waters rose in the basin around 7 m per day. This is a model and different assumptions would change that number, but it gives an idea of how herds could retreat up-slope day after day while the basin filled with water. While they only survived on Mallorca they would likely have been widespread during the Messinian Salinity Crisis–I will discuss him later.

Early elephant called Gomphotherium

A hyaena type of animal lived on that basin floor

A big cat called Machairodus and below is size compared to man

Hippos and elephants walked to many of the mountain tops during the dry messinian times in the Mediterranean and survived on what became islands after the flood. Both hippos and elephants became dwarf hippos and dwarf elephants over time. While some say the elephants swam to the islands, this is doubtful to me because the hippos had to walk to the islands. They can't swim at all. Hippos bounce off the bottom of the rivers and if the water is too deep, they will drown if they can't get to shallow water.

"And apparently, hippopotami made their way from the Nile to Cyprus. The migratory traffic might have been more frequent if the wanderers had not had to travel across a desert 2,000 to 3,000 meters below sea level." ~ Kenneth J. Hsu, The Mediterranean was a Desert, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), p. 177.

"For all intents and purposes the hippo does not swim," said Douglas McCauley, an assistant professor in the department of ecology, evolution, and marine biology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. "It almost always maintains some contact with the bottom and walks or bounces off the bottom using these bottom contact points as a source of propulsion." Adrienne LaFrance, "Hippos Can't Swim--So How Do they Move Through Water?" The Atlantic, April 26, 2017, Hippos Can’t Swim—So How Do They Move Through Water?

Wiki says:

"The Cretan dwarf hippopotamus (Hippopotamus creutzburgi) is an extinct species of hippopotamus from the island of Crete. Hippopopotamus colonized Crete probably 800,000 years ago and lived there during the Middle Pleistocene.[3] Bones of H. creutzburgi were found by Dorothea Bate on the Katharo plateau, in eastern Crete, in the 1900s.[4] A similar species, the Cyprus dwarf hippopotamus (Phanourios minor) lived on the island of Cyprus until the Holocene. It was at least 20% smaller than either subspecies of Cretan hippo. Hippopotamus creutzburgi - Wikipedia

Cyprus dwarf hippopotamus
Maltese dwarf hippopotamus
Sicilian dwarf hippopotamus
Hippopotamus creutzburgi - Wikipedia

Wiki is wrong about when they colonized the island because 800,000 years ago, the Mediterranean was a deep sea and hippos couldn't swim. The only time they could have colonized these islands was when the Med was dry and they walked to these mountain tops and escaped drowning by the Zanclean flood. Dwarf hippo, dwarfed by island endemism, compared to the normal size hippo.

Below is the same for the dwarf elephants.

A strange deer with fangs called Micromeryx lived in that basin.

Pikas lived down there in that deep basin.

Believe it or not, this is a bovid.

Animals found in the Messinian basinal sedimens which I couldn't find a picture for are large and small giraffids. There were Mustelidae, which are related to weasels and otters

There were civet or gennet like animals:

They pointed out strong affinities between the Baccinello V3 fossil, Viverra n. sp. “A” from Sahabi, Libya (Howell, 1987) and Viverrinae sp. indet from Lothagam, Kenya (Werdelin, 2003), thus erecting the species Viverra howelli. This species is characterized by a relatively small size and a lower carnassial with a short talonid. ” Raffaele SARDELLA,“Remarks on the Messinian carnivores (Mammalia) of Italy” Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana, 47 (2), 2008, 195-202. Modena, 11 luglio 2008, p. 196

There were more hyanids than the one I showed:

The following hyaenid taxa have been collected from Italian Messinian localities: Plioviverrops faventinus Torre, 1989 (Brisighella; Fig. 2), Plioviverrops orbignyi (=Ictitherium orbignyi) (Gaudry & Lartet, 1856) (Gravitelli), Hyaenictitherium hyaenoides (Zdansky, 1924) (=Ictitherium hipparionum) (Gravitelli), Hyaenictitherium sp. (Verduno), Lycyaena chaeretis (Gaudry, 1861) (=Thalassyctis (Lycyaena) ex gr. chaeretis-macrostoma) (Brisighella), Hyaenidae indet. (coprolites) from Baccinello V3.” Raffaele SARDELLA,“Remarks on the Messinian carnivores (Mammalia) of Italy” Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana, 47 (2), 2008, 195-202. Modena, 11 luglio 2008, p. 197

That basin was full of life with ostracods in the waters, fish, etc. One drawing of it shows a great grassland. It would have to be like that in order for hippos to survive, because they eat grass.

The place I put Eden would have been a lush steppe/desert. One derivation of the word Eden means steppe or desert.

"The name Eden comes from either an Akkadian word meaning 'steppe' or 'desert,' edinu, or a West Semitic word that describes 'luxury,'-'delight,' and abundance, adan." Mangum, D., Custis, M., & Widder, W. (2012). Genesis 1:11 (Ge 2:4:25). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

But it was full of wildlife.

Where is God in the Pandemic?

Where is God in the Pandemic?

Glenn R. Morton May 22, 2020

God is here, even in the virus and even during end stage cancer. I watched the video of Tim Keller and Francis Collins on the above topic. The discussion lacked the personal experience of being sick. I didn’t really see any evidence of God in the Pandemic as they discussed academic issues.

I want to tell yall about my last month. It has had me at times begging God to take me and at times feeling ok. Here is what I sent my doctors trying to figure out what was wrong with me.

April 23 chemo
April 25 went to bed 6pm got up 10am fever nausea, dry heaves
April 26 went to bed 8pm got up 9am 100+fever
April 27 99+ fever
April 28-30 bad fatique

4-28 This chemo has been the worst of the 9 times I have had this Carboplatin (4 back in 2016/2017 and 5 this year). I know I have been spoiled, so I might not get sympathy. I don’t know that I have been as miserable since I was a kid. I have been running a temperature between 99 and 100, high 99.8 I had chemo on April 22. With every round, Sunday was my worst day. This time it was Sunday and Monday. On Sunday the 26th, I took a nap, laid down for two hours and went to bed at 6pm, sleeping until about 9 am. My chest hurt slightly, I think it was my sternum because that is sore now when I reach for something and my joints hurt. I went into dry heaves in the middle of the night (and I haven’t thrown up since college). Sunday the 26th, I couldn’t force much food or water down that day. On the 27th I forced liquid down but not much food, and still went to bed at 8 pm last night. I woke up last night about once an hour. This morning I slight temp of 98.8, but feeling a bit better for now. I had breakfast. I am worn out. I am still not 100% yet. Am I a wimp?

Every round has been a lower level and harder to take. Should we think about skipping the next one and doing the chemo at the end of May so I can build myself up a bit? I always hate to skip but this week has been pretty bad. I don’t think covid will be gone by the end of May for scanning, just my opinion.

to Dr. Joseph 4-28 I think it might be time to get some blood work to see my status. I am still feeling bad and have the stamina of an 80 year old man(ok Im 70, close), Im kinda wondering how long this is going to go on. I called left a message, but that doesn’t seem to work very often.

Here is my history since may 1.

May 1- had cbc everything normal except for fatique Nausea in night, pain in tooth, (weird but just reporting facts).
May 2 david visit
May 3 David calls says he has 101+ fever
May 7 David to ER
May 2-7 I feel ok.
May 8 99+ fever
May 9 100+ fever
May 10 101.5 fever ER visit all blood work normal
May 11 100+ fever
May 12 99+ fever
May 13-17 no fever but extreme fatigue and
Sunday night.
May 18, 100.6 fever at 5pm Pain on the right side of the chest all day–it went away
May 19, woke up with 99.1, high of 99.7 Normal temp at bed time. Nauseous and in my life I have rarely gotten nauseous–Food smells awful.- majority of my life time nausea has been past 3 weeks. Food smells awful.
May 20th woke up without fever 98.6 F walked 30 ft with an o2 sensor on my finger and watched my oxygenation drop from 97 to 83% leaving me panting and having to sit down. Is this normal to drop 02 levels so quickly with such a small walk?

added for this post:
May 20th, went to ER again. Saw same great ER doctor as I did 10 days earlier. This time, they swabbed me again for covid–results negative, but doc said some people never test positive with it yet they obviously have it.

They admitted me to the hospital and rolled me up to the 5th floor. I asked what was on this floor. The nurse said “This is the covid floor”. My gallows humor came to the fore and I asked, "Where is the sign that says: “All ye who enter here, leave all hope behind.” the nurse didn’t appreciate my humor. But as I was wheeled through the door, it was a bit of a dispiriting experience. I wondered if I was going to come out of there. There were, as near as I could tell, 2 other patients on this floor. Our rooms were separated as well.

Debi, my wife, couldn’t come see me, I was alone in the room with the only people I could see were the wonderful nurses and technicians who I came to love, but they were not my wife, my sons, my grandkids. These are the people you want around you when you are in that situation. At least this time I had my phone charger with me so I could communicate with my family, unlike the last time at the ER.

They put me on oxygen, and wired me to all sorts of monitors. I got what I call, ‘the yellow band of shame’ which is a yellow wrist band saying I am a fall risk. (I use two sticks to help me stay stable). Because of the yellow band of shame, they programmed my bed to let them know if I got out of bed. So the first time I got out of bed, the room started yelling loudly “Don’t get out of bed, your care team has been notified”. I wondered if they were going to shoot me for trying to escape. lol

The second time, I called them and told them I needed to go. Because I am a prostate cancer patient, when I have to go to the bathroom, I better get there quickly. After 20 min. of waiting for them to come, I again got out of the bed with the guard bed yelling that I was again attempting an escape. I told the nurse this wasn’t going to work. We came to an agreement that I would be allowed to do my thing without them having to be there. Hospitals are such great places to lose one’s dignity.

As I settled in with an awful sandwich for dinner, I started video calling my 3 sons. Not knowing what was to come, I wanted to reach out to them as a possible last chance communication. One thinks deeply about leaving this world from a place like this, what I call Dante’s 7th circle of Hell. It is deeply disturbing to be cut off from all friends and family.

All night long they came in at various times to change my antibiotics, stab me in the belly with a shot to stop blood clots (not that I had any), come to take my temperature and they would come to take blood for the antibody test. An infectious disease specialist came and looked at me, listened to the chest. All in all, all my tests were normal yet I feel awful. In the end, they never figured out any given cause for my fatigue and lack of breath but, they ruled out covid. After proving to the doctor I could walk around without my O2 dropping like a rock, she agreed to let me go home. At least my fever was gone.

As I was being released, the covid doctor told me that my cancer doctor here in town had nothing more to offer me in the way of life prolonging treatments.My cat scan showed that my tumors had grown in spite of the chemo–which means that chemo is over and done with. I think everyone now views my situation as end of life issues, not covid, and not anything else. All my tests were normal.

So where was God? He was there this morning to cheer me up in a very unusual way. I have an iphone. Apple gave everyone a U2 album on the iphone several years ago. I didn’t want it, wish it were gone and I hate the lyrics, hate the album cover. You need to know this for background. I found God this morning as an active, intervening theistic God, in this pandemic. I sent this to my family this morning.

If one isn’t looking for God’s comfort, one will never see it. I have mentioned to some of you how irritating it is when I get in my car and my phone starts playing that free U2 album with a song that says, ‘you have a face that’s been saved from beauty’. This is background.

Yesterday my covid doctor told me that my cancer doctor here had nothing more to offer me for my cancer. (btw covid antibodies negative). As I contemplated ‘being on my own now’, and looking at the long walk to get the newspaper, I decided to drive to the end of my driveway to get the paper (lazy I know but safer). When I got into the car, instead of that irritating U2 song, the song that came up was Andrew Peterson’s “Darkness Before the Dawn” which never ever comes on when I get in the car—wish it did. This morning it did. And in that small thing was God’s comfort—the lyrics, especially this part

> So I’m waiting for the King
> To come galloping out of the clouds while the angel armies sing
> He’s gonna gather His people in the shadow of His wings
> And I’m gonna raise my voice with the song of the redeemed
> 'Cause all this darkness is a small and passing thing
*> *
> This is the storm, this is the storm
> The storm before the calm
> This is the pain, the pain before the balm
> This is the cold, the cold
> It’s the cold before the warm
> These are the tears, the tears before the song
> This is the dark
> Sometimes all I see is this darkness
> Well, can’t you feel the darkness
> This is the dark before the dawn ------copyright Andrew Peterson

Thank you Andrew Peterson.

This is exactly like the cheer up I got in 2016 when, the week the cancer went to my bones, and God showed me how Quantum mechanics demonstrates the immateriality of the soul. God is very good

God was telling me that everything would be ok in the end as I go through this time when medicine as run out of options.

God doesn’t owe me a thing. He doesn’t owe me a healing anymore than he owes me a Mercedes Benz. God doesn’t even owe me love, but he pours it out in abundance in the simple event of a song from my Iphone that had never automatically played before with exactly the lyrics I needed.

My previous publications for free

If anyone has problems with downloading these leave a comment and I will figure it out.

Occasionally people ask for copies of my old books. While I would love to update them with new support for the ideas contained in them, there isn't much in them which I still don't support.  These books have withstood 20 years plus of the advancement of science.  There are arguments today that are better than the ones in the books, and most of them can be found on this blog, but the old arguments for the positions I took are still valid.  Anyway, my book on the flood, Foundation, Fall and Flood can be found here.

My book on how fossil man fits into everything, Adam, Apes and Anthropology, can be found here.

I also published and sold 6 Pathway Papers. Each covers a topic.  Both the books and the Pathway Papers should be considered only as how I got to my present views.  The views on this blog are being written within months of my death and I have found so much more than is in either the Pathway Papers or in my books.  My final set of views should be considered this blog.

Pathway Paper #1 Genesis 1: A Historical and Scientific Reading
Pathway Paper #2 The Invisible Pink Unicorn: Why Atheism is Intellectually Unsatisfying
Pathway Paper #3 Paley's Stone: The Universe Designed for Man
Pathway Paper #4 The Origin of Language
Pathway Paper #5 Who was Adam?
Pathway Paper #6 The Age of the Earth: A Theogeological Perspective

It irritates me that some sites are selling my books when I put them into open domain around 2010 or so, with explicit requirement that no one sell them for their profit.  Why should they profit when I get nothing.  I get nothing for the above either, and you get the books free, hopefully undermining those sellers. 

Links to my ASA posts:

Homo Floresiensis, also known as the Hobbit

Cognitive abilities of archaic hominids to plan ahead--which is a pre-requisite for religion.

Dating Adam--When did Adam live?

Random Worms-Randomness in the universe---controlled by God.

Coming Energy Crisis. Note I said by 2020. If I am wrong, I am wrong by a year or two.

Professional papers, some available some not

Prieto, Corine, and Morton, Glenn, (2003), "New Insights from a 3D Earth Model: Deep Water Region of Gulf of Mexico," The Leading Edge, 22(2003):4, p. 356-360

Morton, G. R., Conway, Paul. and McHugo, Steve. (2002), "Reversing the Earth Filter: Thin-sand Detection Using Single Sensor Data," Petrol. Expl. Soc. of Great Britain's, PETEX 2002 Meeting Abstracts  given in London, Dec. 10, 2002, CD from Petroleum Exploration Society of Great Britain, London.

Morton, G. R., Dobb, Angela., Conway, Paul. and McHugo, Steve. (2002), "Acquisition of High Frequency Seismic and its Implications for Reservoir Management of the Murchison field, U.K. North Sea--A Case Study," 72nd Ann. Internatl. Mtg., Soc. Exploration Geophysicists Expanded Abstracts. p. 548-551.

Knighton, Terry, Steve Western, Glenn Morton and Robert Fleming (1999), "Development of Alternative Interpretation Models and Discriminating between Them Using a Borehole Gravity Survey and a Walkaway Checkshot Survey,"  Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts with Authors' Biographies, 69th Annual Meeting, Oct 31-Nov 5, 1999, Vol.1, p. 228-231.

Morton, Glenn; Schlirf, Paul; Chang, Mark; and  Kriechbaum, Victor, "The History of Seismic in the Gulf of Mexico," Presented to and published by the American Association of Petroleum Landmen, Jan. 22, 2004, Woodlands, Texas.

Morton, Glenn; Miller, Steve, 2005. "Knowledge Management via the use of Collaboration Tools in the Oil Industry," The Energy Forum, Houston, Texas.

Simons, Gordon, Yao, Yi-Ching, and Morton, Glenn, 2003, "Global Markov Models for Eukaryote Nucleotide Data,"  Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, Volume 130, Issues 1-2, 1 March 2005, Pages 251-275

Simons, Gordon and Morton, Glenn, 2003 "The Gene-Orientation Structure of Eukaryotes," Journal of Theoretical Biology, 222:4:471-475.

How God Controls Evolution

How God Controls Evolution

Glenn R. Morton May 14, 2020

On Biologos, a person was concerned with what the point of God was in the face of evolution. He had become convinced evolution was real, but while reading Francis Collin's book, in spite of Collins constantly saying God was the creator, Collins never connected God with something which influenced the course of evolution. He later admired that he felt that such a God was useless. My guess is it is this 'separate magisteria' idea first proposed by atheist Stephen Jay Gould, and accepted by Collins which causes the discomfort.

""In my view, there is no conflict in being a rigorous scientist and a person who believes in a God who takes a personal interest in each one of us. Science's domain is to explore nature. God's domain is in the spiritual world, a realm not possible to explore with the tools and language of science. It must be examined with the heart, the mind, and the soul-and the mind must find a way to embrace both realms."" Francis Collins, The Language of God, (New York: Free Press, 2006), p.6

This isolates God from anything we modern people think of as real. God is a ghost of whom we can have no evidence. This whole blog is dedicated to opposing that view and showing the God is in charge of both scientific data and theological data. Collin's view makes God a harmless being who can't engage in Nature at all. I don't believe our God is that powerless.

The Intelligent Design movement thinks only in terms of either godless randomness or a designer being the two options.

" Given the existence of a designer ready and willing to do the work, why should we suppose that random mutations and natural selection are responsible for such marvels of engineering as the eye and the wing?" ~ Phillip E. Johnson, "Evoution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism" First Things, October 1990, p. 18

I say, 'why not both design and randomness'? Design by use of randomness. That is what this page will discuss.

Indeed, many young-earthers feel the same way about evolution because of the randomness, feeling that God can't control the randomness.

"Sproul also warns that "if chance exists in any size, shape or form, God cannot exist. The two are mutually exclusive. If chance existed, it would destroy God's sovereignty. If God is not sovereign, he is not God. If he is not God, he simply is not. If chance is, God is not. If God is, chance is not." Hank Hanegraaff, The Face that Demonstrates the Farce of Evolution, (Nashville: Word Publishing co., 1998), p. 61

I am opposed to this view as well. Our God is greater than randomness. Randomness which is subject to rules, or limitations is quite controllable. Christians have taken the wrong approach to randomness. Below is how randomness is God can control random evolution.

We all know that some DNA mutations, maybe lots of them, result in the death of the individual. This means that there are ‘areas of nonviablity’ in what is called the phase space of DNA. The phase space is a massively multidimentional space where the number of axes is the number of base pairs. Each axis has 4 possible locations, for A,G, C, T. This space represented all possibilities for for a DNA molecule f that length. It is just a Euclidian space with several billion dimensions. Below is what such a space looks like for a 3 base pair long DNA.

Now, I also read Collin’s book and thought that in that book, God was a useless add on–he served no purpose except as word filler and I agree, Collins provides no mechanism by which God can control evolution and the random mutations that take place. But there is a way to view it where God controls the path.

Consider the Hilbert space above and lets draw walls around those nonviable mutations . I think we would end up with something like a cave system shown below, where one can randomly walk in any direction except into the walls. Given enough time, a randomly walk would fill the entire cave system.

A random walk by a dot starting anywhere in the cave will eventually be at every point in the cave. (look it up) Now consider a cloud of DNA patterns which represent a species. As the members randomly mutate they will fill the spaces which are viable sequences of DNA.When they go down different passage ways, they create two different species and it happens randomly but under God's control of the DNA phase space. In this way God controls the randomness and ensures that we would evolve.

Here are three times steps of what I think happens. Let's say life starts at the bottom of this system and let the random walk begin.

At the time above life has filled a different gallery in the cave system and the original life has gone extinct. The original cavern where life began is empty.

Let's move to one more step in time.

Now we have several galleries filled with different species. I think the reader gets the idea of how I believe God controlled evolution, indeed, made it totally deterministic via random mutations, otherwise known as a random walk. This view makes God a real player in evolution and not a useless mantra we give lip service to every four pages in our book.

In the above way, God can control what happens in random evolution and ensure that eventually we would evolve. It is design, but not of the kind the ID movement prefers. .

The Sad State of Apologetics

The Sad State of Apologetics

Glenn R. Morton May 13, 2020

When I was an arrogant young 19 year old, as opposed to being an arrogant 70 year old now, I became a Christian and was surrounded by YECS. At the time, I knew no geology, barely knew physics, and I read a creationist book. I was thinking, these are Christians. They will be among the most honest people on earth. I didn’t think they would make up data (what a mistake). I didn’t think they would twist data (what a mistake). I didn’t think they would ignore data (what a mistake). Believing that what I was being told was absolute truth, and that there was no data that they would refuse to tell me, I began 17 years as a YEC.

But I was working for an oil company and was forced daily to see contradictions between what Christians were telling me and what I personally saw. In 1979-81, I was an arrogant 29 year old in charge of hiring and training geophysicists for ARCO. I had 60 people working for me and a private secretary and flew business class to colleges all over the US recruiting. And I went to CHC, the college associated with Institute of Creation Research. I met Henry Morris, Duane Gish, Steve Austin, Gerald Aardsma and others. Morris was a vapor canopy advocate and Jody Dillow had done a mathematical model of it showing that the world would be cool. I went over the math, found an error, and told Henry Morris of that error. Henry wasn’t interested. He didn’t care to hear anything that went against his view. I was learning how little YECs cared for observational data, or for being correct.

In the Genesis Flood, Henry cites a delta which formed in a matter of a few days. When I went to look up the reference what Henry didn’t tell his readers, who are obviously thinking about the Mississippi River Delta forming in a matter of days, is that Jopling’s delta is 20 feet long and 1.5 foot thick! This is egregious behavior for a Christian!

I wrote articles in the CRSQ trying to explain the problems I saw. My articles were not received well and indeed; creationists didn’t want to know the problems. In 1985 Emmett Williams became the editor of the CRSQ and I was told directly it was with the purpose to stop me from publishing in CRSQ. I must say I was disillusioned by my fellow Christians, whom I had started out believing would be truthful in all things( what a mistake).

In 1986 my last real gasp as a YEC gave a paper at the Inter. Conf. On Creationism in Pittsburgh. It was entitled, Challenges to a Young-earth. I showed geological problem after problem; and I showed pictures. I really wanted help on the issues I presented from my fellow YECS. That was not to be.

Before I went to Pittsburgh, Robert Schadewald had read a couple of my CRSQ articles, called me, and wanted to have breakfast with me and Kurt Wise. As I recall, Kurt wasn’t at breakfast but Bob introduced me to Kurt later in the day. Schadewald was an atheist, who spent his life ridiculing and ripping people from our faith. While he and I became friends, and I reviewed his posthumously published book, we never saw eye-to-eye. He always knew I was a Christian and would shake his head about it.

After I gave my talk, John Morris came up on stage to challenge what I had just said. He claimed to have “had experience” in the oil industry. I asked him what oil company he had worked for. I am going to let an account of this published in the Skeptical Inquirer in late 86 or early 87. It was written by Robert Schadewald. Of this event, Schadewald wrote:

" John Morris went to the microphone and identified himself as a petroleum geologist. He questioned Morton’s claim that pollen grains are found in salt formations, and accused Morton of sounding like an anticreationist, raising more problems than his critics could respond to in the time available.Morris said that the ICR staff is working on these problems all the time. He told Morton to quit raising problems and start solving them.
"Morton chopped him off at the ankles. Two questions, said Morton:
‘What oil company did you work for?’ Well, uh, actually Morris never worked for an oil company, but he once taught petroleum engineering at the University of Oklahoma. Second, How old is the Earth?’ 'If the earth is more than 10,000 years old then Scripture has no meaning.’ Morton then said that he had hired several graduates of Christian Heritage College, and that all of them suffered severe crises of faith. The were utterly unprepared to face the geologic facts every petroleum geologist deals with on a daily basis. Morton neglected to add that ICR is much better known for ignoring or denying problems than dealing with them. "

It is truly sad when an atheist can say this of a Christian organization. At the ICC in 1986, I was presenting the problems because I wasn’t smart enough to solve them, so John telling me to solve them, well, I was not capable, and John was not capable of correctly describing his academic and work background. I knew that John was not a petroleum geologist. We both went to Oklahoma U. and he was a year or two behind me. My roommate was friends with John at the time. If anything, he is a petroleum engineer, and those guys don’t take geology courses. They are concerned with drilling wells. I checked his Thesis and Dissertation out of the library and point it out here to document what is said above:

John’s Masters Thesis was entitled "Tidal Power State of the Art -1977

His Ph.D. was entitled, “Development and properties of a self-bursting Pellet as Agglomerated from Coal Fines by Use of an Organic Binder,” 1980

His Ph.D. dissertation includes only one legitimate geological reference "S. A. Friedman, “Investigation of the Coal reserves in the Ozarks Section of Oklahoma and their Potential Uses,” Oklahoma Geologic Survey, Special Publication 74-2, 1977.

His Masters Thesis also includes only one legitimate geological reference. D.J.P. Swift and A. K. Lyall, “Origin of the Bay of Fundy,” Marine Geology, 1968, 6, pp 331-343. A three page article on geology! Having hired about 130 geoscientists, I know this isn’t a geological thesis.

All other references are to engineering and mathematical texts. He isn’t a Ph. D. in Geology as he claimed on the Radio Show Science, Scripture and Salvation, on July 10, 1994. Why do people exaggerate their education? I don’t know. Why do Christians go light on the truth? Again, I don’t know.

When I left YEC in disgust in the in 1987, the biggest part of my disgust concerned the utter lack of interest in geologic data. I could put data in front of them, show them pictures, explain what the pictures meant, and the data was still ignored, treated as if it didn’t exist.

Sadly in my interactions with old earth Christians, I have often had the same experience. Data seems not to matter to us Christians, of any stripe and this grieves me greatly. Old earth creationists have ignored or lightly researched anthropological data which says archaics have capabilities they don’t want them to have. We all make mistakes, but when everyone makes the same mistake, what is one to think? Maybe it is that no one wants to look deeply at those issues

The fact that pain in childbirth goes WAY back to 2.4 myr, doesn’t seem concern anyone who says Eve was a Neolithic woman whom God cursed with what she already had. Same for sweat with Adam.

I had a year long debate with Fazale Rana, about art and music being much older than their arbitrary cutoff of 60,000 years. Rana was stuck on the claim that Neanderthals and H. erectus were mere spiritless animals. The data didn’t matter to their belief at the time that Adam was less than 60 kyr old. Now, after about 18 years, they finally have Adam at 150,000 years of age. They still claim N’s and H. e.'s are spiritless animals. They should have been able to know the age of Adam 30 years ago.And still there is much ignored evidence that Adam is even older than that. Same with my friend Dick Fischer. It seems that our job as apologists is to not dig too deeply into the science and present to the unsuspecting public something that can be easily disproven? That was the problem with YECs. They presented theories that could easily be disproven.

I suspect that part of this is to not run off readers, or to go along with the crowd.

Dennis Venema and Scott McKnight wrote Adam and the Genome, in which they argue against the existence of a real Adam and Eve.  They assume Adam and Eve must be H. sapiens. When we claim as Venema did in his book,  that there was no population bottleneck in the past 200 kyr, so no Adam and Eve, without even trying to look for an alternative, one must wonder what is more important–eliminating Adam and Eve or searching for other options which can make the Scripture true. The statistics he uses only apply IF Adam was a H. sapiens. If Adam was an earlier species of hominid, then Venema’s arguments fall apart. Venema’s view is based on the Out of Africa theory, which has now fallen inside of Anthropology itself. A form of multiregionalism has won the day. We have too much DNA from Neanderthals, Denisovians, and the Ghost species of West Africa.

"Until recently, the story of our origins was thought to be settled: Homo sapiens evolved in eastern Africa about 150,000 years ago, became capable of modern behaviour some 60,000 years ago and then swept out of Africa to colonise the world, completely replacing any archaic humans they encountered. But new fossils, tools and analyses of ancient and modern genomes are tearing apart that neat tale. The Jebel Irhoud skull has turned out to be a key to a new, slowly emerging paradigm. With the dust yet fully to settle, the question now is how many, if any, of our old assumptions still hold. “Should we be thinking of a completely different model?” asks Foley. “Abandoning out-of-Africa?” Strap in, it’s going to be quite a ride." Graham Lawton, "Becoming Human", New Scientist, April 3, 2019, p. 34

"If the AMH genome contains any degree of dual ancestry (that is, archaic and modern) the single origin model must be rejected. Although most of the AMH genome might descend from a single African population, if further studies confirm a non-negligible contribution of archaic genetic material to the AMH genome, it would imply that the evolutionary lineage leading to AMH did not evolve reproductive isolation from other archaic hominin subpopulations and, therefore, cannot be considered a distinct biological species." Daniel Garrigan and Michael Hammer, "Reconstructing Human Origins in the Genomic Era," Nature Genetics, 7(2006), p. 677

Well, we do have a non-negligible genetic heritage from archaic species. Eurasians have 3-4% Neanderthal genes; Papuans have about the same amount of Denisovian DNA and west Africans have 2-19% of their genes from a ghost archaic species we are still looking for.

"Similar patterns were seen in the genomes of Mende people in Sierra Leone, Esan people in Nigeria and those in western areas of Gambia. The four populations are estimated to derive between 2 and 19 per cent of their ancestry from an archaic group of genes.
" This mystery hominin is most likely to have diverged from the ancestors of Neanderthals, Denisovans and modern humans before that lineage split into these groups, according to the researchers. They estimate this divergence took place at some point between 1 million and 360,000 years ago, and interbreeding between the archaic population and the ancestors of the modern populations occurred at some point in the past 124,000 years." New Scientist, Feb 12, 2020,

If Out-of-Africa isn't dead, it has been put on a respirator.

When I left YEC in 1986, I spent loads of time looking at the data from the point of view of ‘where am I wrong?’ not ‘How is my theory correct?’ I had been egregiously wrong about YEC for 17 years or more. Thus, for the rest of my life, when I got an idea about something, the first thing I did was find out what was wrong with it. That allowed me to learn the data, but also, ensure I had solid answers for what anyone would throw at my theory. I fear, Christians don’t use that approach, but use the confirmation bias approach-- take the data if it supports the view, and ignore it if it doesn’t. The artwork I have shown from the archaic species is new information to most on this list. It shouldn’t have been.People like Ross, Rana, and others should have been at the forefront of displaying it, but doing so, undermines their claim of non-personhood for Neanderthals and thus, such data can’t be shown, ever! But pointing it out leads to unpopularity .

I can guarantee one and all, if I had my preferences, I would never have suggested the concordism approach I have–with Med flood and an extremely old Adam. I know John Walton, the OT scholar thinks I am nuts–but he wouldn’t listen long enough to see what I have to offer. He isn’t the only one. Many people just don’t respond to me. I offer my view because I firmly believe the data conforms to the theory. It makes Scripture be true rather than mythological or just plain false. Life would have been much easier for me, if I had gone along to get along with a Neolithic Adam and a Mesopotamian flood. I might even have been popular and influential.

To me the troublesome concern is, “Is ignoring evidence or lightly researching an area the way Christians should work?” and, “Is this the excellence God expects from us?” We seem not to care about Col 3:24: “Whatever you do, work at it with your whole being, for the Lord and not for men,”

On this side of the vale, we cannot prove what God did. All we can do is create theories that match the observational data. While God may tell me I am utterly wrong in a few months, I can at least stand and say I applied the best work ethic and research I could do even as I was dying. If I am wrong, it is not for lack of trying and it is not because I ignored data so as to save a popular view. I do believe we will stand before God for his judgment. I want and hope to hear, Well done…and I have done my research to the best of my ability, be it right or wrong. At least I am not telling everyone something I know to be false nor am I telling everyone something that doesn’t match the facts of geology, anthropology and physics. This should be the goal of every Christian in science.

The Genealogies of Genesis

The Genealogies of Genesis
Glenn R. Morton May 9, 2020

For the moment, lets assume that Ussher’s values are correct for the sake of argument. No matter where we put Adam, be it 12,000 years ago or 200,000 years ago, or as I do, 5.3 myr ago, there are lots and lots of gaps. The genealogies have (assuming I did my math correctly, and given the bad night last night that is not a certitude), I calculate the average generation time from Adam to Abram is 97.8 years. There are 20 people And Abram lived around 2000 BC (rounding for easy math). So Swamidass has Adam at 10,000 BC (12000 years ago), requiring a 400 years per generation value to get to Abram’s time.

This would mean we miss 3 out of 4 of the people in the genealogy.

If we believe Adam was 200,000 years ago, well, the gaps are monstrously large, and as with my view, the names could not have been handed down by oral tradition over a period of 200 kyr. They have to be there via divine inspiration. Again, if I did my math correctly we would have 1 in 101 of the names that should be there.

If we don’t believe the numbers at the birth for these patriarchs and presume that the times were more in line with modern humans, well, then we have 1 name for every 8000 or so people in the list. Once we have this much gap time in the genealogies, what is the difference or big deal about adding more people to the gap. The only function I see in the genealogies is that I think they are true but very incomplete. And this incompleteness must extend to any view that is not the view of Ussher. And we know Ussher’s chronology is wrong. As I said, both words used for begat or father of, are also used in an ancestor-descendant relationship as well.

I view the genealogies this way. When my great great grandfather gave birth to my philandering great grandfather, he at the same time he became the ancestor of all who would flow from my great grandfather, including my beloved grandfather, his sisters, his half brother(a mob boss/killer/pimp), a third half brother from a different woman(and his 14 grandkids) and one line hidden by adoption records–at least 4 different families and then my father, me, my 3 sons and my 8 grandchildren. That is what these words mean according to the way they are used.

Yalad is used in this passage:

And Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth, 16 And the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgasite, 17 And the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite, 18 And the Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite

If begat here ‘yalad’ means ‘Im your real daddy’, then imagine the wife’s surprise when hundreds of people from 9 tribes pop out of her womb! No one gives birth to tribes unless they are viewing it as I said above–ancestor/descendant relationship. But every ‘ite’ I bolded is a tribe of people, not a son.

Matthew 1 tells us all we need to know about how Jewish people thought about the word ben.

the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham

There are big gaps in that genealogy there–true but very incomplete.

If Matthew 1:1 was in hebrew it would have been:

toledoth Jeshua Meshia, ben David, ben Abraham"

Christian Anti-evolutionism in Light of DNA Evidence

Christian Anti-evolutionism in Light of DNA Evidence
Glenn R. Morton May 5, 2020

As I survey the world of views on Adam and who he was, one thing struck me while I was sick in bed last week–Christians seem to require that Adam not be evolved, that is, that he, like us, is an anatomically modern human. And the vast majority of views say Adam must have lived when the YECs say Adam must have lived–within the past 10 kyrs. Others who believe Adam was 200,000 years ago, still believe he had to be an anatomically modern human. In other words, it seems that a key modern Christian doctrine is that Adam must be physically like us. We seem to be saying that God could not put his image in anything that doesn’t look like us. I reject that view.

What evidence do I have for this claim? First, every YEC says Adam lived within the past 10,000 years, so I don’t need to discuss any of them. Their Adam is almost always considered to be an H. sapiens . Archaic species if granted human status are degenerates from Adam.

With the old earthers, Let’s start with Hugh Ross, who believes the universe evolved, but not biology. Poor Hugh has constantly but grudgingly been moving Adam backward in time.

"While bipedal, tool-using, large brained hominids roamed the earth at least as long ago as one million years, evidence for religious relics and altars dates back only 8,000 to 24,000 years . Thus the secular anthropological date for the first spirit creatures is in complete agreement with the biblical date ." Hugh Ross, The Fingerprint of God, (Orange: Promise Publishing, 1991), p. 159-160.

By 1995, Ross had moved the oldest possible Adamic date back to 60,000 years ago.

" However, the dates for these finds are well within the biblically acceptable range for the appearance of Adam and Eve __ somewhere between 10,000 and 60,000 years ago according to Bible scholars who have carefully analyzed the genealogies. Since the oldest art and fabrics date between 25,000 and 30,000 years ago, no contradiction exists between anthropology and Scripture on this issue ." Hugh Ross, “Art and Fabric Shed New Light on Human History,” Facts & Faith, 9:3 (1995)p. 2

Then in 2005 Rana and Ross say 100kyr old Adam might work out:

" Gaps in the genealogies and the ambiguity of key words in the original Hebrew text render the best attempts at a biblical date for Adam and Eve as estimates only. If few gaps exist, the date calculates to around 10,000 years ago. If many gaps occur, the date falls closer to 100,000 years ago. " Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross, Who Was Adam?, (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2005), p.45

Today they say:

When did Adam and Eve live? … The consistency of these three independent lines of evidence instills some confidence that Adam and Eve lived somewhere between 50,000 and 150,000 years ago . This date fits within the Biblical framework and strongly argues for a recent origin of humanity.

But all throughout this time, they have vehemently denied that Neanderthals interbred with humanity, that Neanderthals were anything other than primates. and have insisted that Adam and Eve are anatomically modern humans–no evolution for us. From Feb 19, 2020:

"RTB’s human origins model regards Neanderthals (and other hominins) as creatures made by God, without any evolutionary connection to modern humans. "

As we will see, RTB is hopelessly incapable of dealing with the recent DNA data. We non-Africans have Neanderthal DNA inside each of our cells.

Ok, what about people like Dick Fischer in The Origins Solution? Again, no evolution for spiritual mankind. Adam is a full-fledged H. sapiens!

" Genesis 4:22. One of Cain’s descendants, Tubal-Cain, was ‘an instructor of every worker in brass and iron.’

"This is the proverbial smoking gun! Adam belongs after the old Stone Ages, at the end of the Neolithic, at the threshold of a period called the Chalcolithic when traditional stone tools were augmented by crude copper implements. Adam’s descendants saw the dawning of the Bronze Age ." ~ Dick Fischer, The Origins Solution, (Lima, Ohio: Fairway Press, 1996), p. 239

As I explain here, brass and iron is a euphemism for corruption. and in the post after that, an even better explanation for the corruption analogy is presented by Phil McCurdy. But regardless, Dick posits Adam as one of us. People alive at the end of the Neolithic were, H. sapiens , that is, modern humans. Again, Christians of the old earth variety require that Adam be physically like us, and living when YECs say he did!

My friend Jay Johnson told me last year that the population which got the image of God, language and morality, lived 65-75,000 years ago–again, these were modern humans because he cited the globularity of their brains and connected it to language. Erectine brains when viewed from above, look like a distorted hour-glass. They are not globular.

Interestingly, Swamidass also places Adam as a very recent person on earth, say around 12,000 years ago. It seems that he and Venema, while disagreeing on the nature of Adam, agree that he was an H. sapiens.

Dennis Venema, a person of esteem here on Biologos said:

" In Adam and the Genome I consistently discuss humans as a species arising ~200,000 years ago. So, by your calculations, Zhao (2000) supports my case - human variation in this all region of the genome cannot be reasonably explained by a bottleneck to 2 individuals within human history, as I argue in AatG. Am I missing something here? I want to be sure I’m reading you correctly." Adam, Eve and Population Genetics: A Reply to Dr. Richard Buggs (Part 1)

He and Scot McKnight wrote the book mentioned above. Venema uses the minimum effective population size of modern humans as a hammer to pound the historical Adam and Eve out of the Bible. No bottle neck of 2 people has happened in human history. But those statistics only apply to the last 200,000 years of anatomically modern man. What if Adam wasn’t an anatomically modern human, and we Christians fully accept our evolutionary heritage rather than acting as if God can only put the his image into a vessel that looks like us?

George Murphy gets confused when he addresses this issue. He uses the statistics above, which are applicable only to anatomically modern people and then discusses briefly other hominids being human. He cites a problem I had worried about for about 20 years before finding a solution–the Major Histocompatibility Complex.

" The theological proposal to be made here does not depend on the number of hominids to be considered the first humans or on when they came into being. But it does seem unlikely that the present human race can be traced to a single male-female pair. As one example of the difficulty this idea faces, development of the present diversity of alleles of human histocompatibility genes from such a pair would require between five and ten million years. Unless we want to consider ’ Adam and Eve ’ the biological ancestors of all hominids, and perhaps even pongids, we must rule this out . "George L Murphy, Roads to Paradise and Perdition: Christ, Evolution, and Original Sin, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, June 2006, p. 114

While I do want to declare Adam and Eve the parents of the hominids, I wouldn’t go so far as the pongids, nor do I think we need to. Like George, I worried about the Major histocompatibility complex and its implications for not allowing a population bottleneck of two people. At the time I wrote my book, Adam, Apes and Anthropology, the widespread view among many atheists I knew at the time was that of Ayala:

" The human immune system DRB1 genes are extremely polymorphic, with gene lineages that coalesce into an ancestor who lived around 60 million years ago, a time before the divergence of the apes from the Old World monkeys ." Francis J. Ayala, “The Myth of Eve: Molecular Biology and Human Origins,” Science, 270(1995):1930-1936, p. 1932

Now obviously that won’t do. George gave up on the problem too early. The answer was out there shortly after I wrote my book and long before George wrote the above article. I, however didn’t find out about it until about a year and a half ago. Ayala’s calculation was based upon single nucleotide mutation driving the entire MHC polymorphism, which would indeed take 60 myr. But in 1998 it was discovered that both cross-over and recombination occurs in the MHC regions:

" Some new alleles are the result of point mutations, but many arise from the combination of sequences from different alleles either by genetic recombination or by gene conversion, a process in which one sequence is replaced, in part, by another from a different gene (Fig. 5.19). " Janeway CA Jr, Travers P, Walport M, et a, Immunobiology: The Immune System in Health and Disease. 5th edition.

" Sequences can be transferred from one gene to a similar but different gene by a process known as gene conversion. For this to happen, the two genes must become apposed during meiosis. This can occur as a consequence of the misalignment of the two paired homologous chromosomes when there are many copies of similar genes arrayed in tandem - somewhat like buttoning in the wrong buttonhole. During the process of crossing-over and DNA recombination, a DNA sequence from one chromosome is sometimes copied to the other, replacing the original sequence. In this way several nucleotide changes can be inserted all at once into a gene and can cause several simultaneous amino acid changes between the new gene sequence and the original gene. Because of the similarity of the MHC genes to each other and their close linkage, gene conversion has occurred many times in the evolution of MHC alleles ." Janeway CA Jr, Travers P, Walport M, et a, Immunobiology: The Immune System in Health and Disease. 5th edition.

Once one throws gene conversion and recombination into the mechanisms of how to form MHC diversity, one can no longer use the rate of point mutation to date the age of the MHC alleles. In both processes, multiple nucleotides are traded at each gene conversion and crossing over/recombination. This clearly means that the rate of creation of alleles is much faster than point mutations and the age of the complex is much younger than 60 myr, and maybe undatable…

Once this MHC issue is gone we have no real obstacle to a single pair except our own bias. Most people don’t know that there is no definition of modernity which includes all modern humans and excludes all archaic species:

" The main problem with modernity, we think, is reflected in the fact that there is no worldwide definition of moderns that simultaneously includes all modern humans and excludes all archaics. If modern humans share a recent unique origin, definition of this group should be possible. However, it may not be possible if the multiregional model is correct." ~ Milford Wolpoff and Rachel Caspari, “The Modernity Mess,” Journal of Human Evolution, (1996), 30:167-171, p. 169

Indeed, a form of multiregionalism is now in vogue, where Neanderthals, Denisovians and a ghost archaic in Africa interbred with moderns. Were the offspring moderns? Given that some of their descendants are alive today would strongly suggest that. By comparison to other animals we can illustrate the problem:

" We feel that this quest for the beginnings of modernity is doomed to failure; we are seeking something that doesn’t exist. It is time, as P.V. Tobias recently said, to stop talking about ‘anatomically modern humans’ for the same reasons that we don’t talk about 'anatomically modern elephants '. And we propose, it is time to stop publishing papers about the evolution of ‘anatomically modern humans’ unless they include a definition of them. " ~ Milford Wolpoff and Rachel Caspari, “The Modernity Mess,” Journal of Human Evolution, (1996), 30:167-171, p. 170

Very OLD Genes

Moving Adam and Eve back in time, like I do, to 5.3 myr ago, we can have a historical Adam, and an evolutionary humanity. And we can explain the significant number of extremely old genes in humanity (old= old time to most recent common ancestor, like genes greater than 4 myr old). Garrigan and show the age of various genes.

One can see the haploid mtDNA and y-chromosome measurements are only for a very recent time scale and tell us nothing about when humanity arose. The average age of an autosomal gene is about a million years! Anatomically modern humans were not alive then, but we still have genes from those non-anatomically modern humans. The X chromosome and the other autosomal chromosomes show a great genetic time depth for humanity–a time depth Christians seem unwilling to grant.

Garrigan and Hammer suggest that if we modern humans interbred with archaic species, then that would mean we were never an isolated reproductive species.

" If the AMH genome contains any degree of dual ancestry (that is, archaic and modern) the single origin model must be rejected. Although most of the AMH genome might descend from a single African population, if further studies confirm a non-negligible contribution of archaic genetic material to the AMH genome , it would imply that the evolutionary lineage leading to AMH did not evolve reproductive isolation from other archaic hominin subpopulations and, therefore, cannot be considered a distinct biological species. " Daniel Garrigan and Michael Hammer, “Reconstructing Human Origins in the Genomic Era,” Nature Genetics, 7(2006), p. 677

Well, we have non-negligible input from at least 3 archaic populations, Neanderthals, Denisovians and a ghost population from Africa. And there is evidence that the Denisovans interbred with an even older archic from 1.8 myr ago. Asians and Europeans have 1.7 and 1.8 percent Neanderthal DNA respectively. Africans have .5% Neanderthal DNA. Melanesians, Australian aborigines, and polynesians have between 2 and 6% Denisovian DNA. (Wiki) . This year genetic evidence for an unknown archaic having interbred with some West African tribes. Anthropologists don’t know who this archaic is. But the genomes of the Mende of Sierra Leone, the Esan of Nigeria and the Yoruba of Nigeria, have from 2-19 percent of their genomes from this unknown archaic hominid.(see

While Wiki doesn't yet have this archaic-human interaction in West Africa yet (it is too new), this chart shows that we are not and never have been an isolated breeding species.  It shows two further archaic/human interbreeding events with the Khoisan  (see

picture from

Because the main place where Denisovian dna introgressed into humanity was in Papua New Guinea and Australia, Cooper and Stringer wonder if the Denisovians crossed the Wallace line and that would mean building steerable ships.

The data challenges our views of the capacities of the archaic populations, the data challenges our view of when Adam and Eve lived, and the data totally messes up the nice picture we Christians have of a recent Adam living less than 200,000 years ago. Christians have long ignored this data pointing to our ancient roots, denying God the ability to put his image into whatever he wishes to–as Jesus indicated on Palm Sunday that God could make rocks stand up and cheer. The form of anatomically modern humans is not what makes us special–it is the image of God.

Until Christians are willing to actually deal with the genetic data showing that our origins are from millions of years ago, we will be like the YECs, ignoring data to maintain our preferred theological view of a recent Adam.