Biblical Archeology > Fascinating discoveries in the field of Genetics - including Adam's rib

..

We carry DNA from extinct cousins like Neanderthals.

Science is now revealing their genetic legacy

John Gurche helps people understand what ancient humans looked like by creating lifelike models based on archaeological finds. The work requires a mix of artistic skill and scientific knowledge.

(Sept. 24) (AP Video: Michael Hill)

BY LAURA UNGAR AND MADDIE BURAKOFF

Updated 8:38 AM PDT, September 27, 2023

Neanderthals live on within us.

These ancient human cousins, and others called Denisovans, once lived alongside our early Homo sapiens ancestors. They mingled and had children. So some of who they were never went away — it’s in our genes. And science is starting to reveal just how much that shapes us.

Using the new and rapidly improving ability to piece together fragments of ancient DNA, scientists are finding that traits inherited from our ancient cousins are still with us now, affecting our fertility, our immune systems, even how our bodies handled the COVID-19 virus.

“We’re now carrying the genetic legacies and learning about what that means for our bodies and our health,” said Mary Prendergast, a Rice University archeologist.

In the past few months alone, researchers have linked Neanderthal DNA to a serious hand disease, the shape of people’s noses and various other human traits. They even inserted a gene carried by Neanderthals and Denisovans into mice to investigate its effects on biology, and found it gave them larger heads and an extra rib.

In the Biblical story of Creation, God took a rib from Adam to make Eve. Man has been missing this rib ever since. Isn't that curious?

Much of the human journey remains a mystery. But Dr. Hugo Zeberg of the Karolinska Insitute in Sweden said new technologies, research and collaborations are helping scientists begin to answer the basic but cosmic questions: “Who are we? Where did we come from?”

And the answers point to a profound reality: We have far more in common with our extinct cousins than we ever thought.

NEANDERTHALS WITHIN US

Until recently, the genetic legacy from ancient humans was invisible because scientists were limited to what they could glean from the shape and size of bones. But there has been a steady stream of discoveries from ancient DNA, an area of study pioneered by Nobel Prize winner Svante Paabo who first pieced together a Neanderthal genome.

Advances in finding and interpreting ancient DNA have allowed them to see things like genetic changes over time to better adapt to environments or through random chance.

It’s even possible to figure out how much genetic material people from different regions carry from the ancient relatives our predecessors encountered.

Research shows some African populations have almost no Neanderthal DNA, while those from European or Asian backgrounds have 1% to 2%. Denisovan DNA is barely detectable in most parts of the world but makes up 4% to 6% of the DNA of people in Melanesia, which extends from New Guinea to the Fiji Islands.

That may not sound like much, but it adds up. “Half of the Neanderthal genome is still around, in small pieces scattered around modern humans,” said Zeberg, who collaborates closely with Paabo.

It’s also enough to affect us in very real ways. Scientists don’t yet know the full extent, but they’re learning it can be both helpful and harmful.

For example, Neanderthal DNA has been linked to auto-immune diseases like Graves’ disease and rheumatoid arthritis. When Homo sapiens came out of Africa, they had no immunity to diseases in Europe and Asia, but Neanderthals and Denisovans already living there did.

“By interbreeding with them, we got a quick fix to our immune systems, which was good news 50,000 years ago,” said Chris Stringer, a human evolution researcher at the Natural History Museum in London. “The result today is, for some people, that our immune systems are oversensitive, and sometimes they turn on themselves.”

Similarly, a gene associated with blood clotting believed to be passed down from Neanderthals in Eurasia may have been helpful in the “rough and tumble world of the Pleistocene,” said Rick Potts, director of the human origins program at the Smithsonian Institution. But today it can raise the risk of stroke for older adults. “For every benefit,” he said, “there are costs in evolution.”

In 2020, research by Zeberg and Paabo found that a major genetic risk factor for severe COVID-19 is inherited from Neanderthals. “We compared it to the Neanderthal genome and it was a perfect match,” Zeberg said. “I kind of fell off my chair.”

The next year, they found a set of DNA variants along a single chromosome inherited from Neanderthals had the opposite effect: protecting people from severe COVID.

The list goes on: Research has linked Neanderthal genetic variants to skin and hair color, behavioral traits, skull shape and Type 2 diabetes. One study found that people who report feeling more pain than others are likely to carry a Neanderthal pain receptor. Another found that a third of women in Europe inherited a Neanderthal receptor for the hormone progesterone, which is associated with increased fertility and fewer miscarriages.

Much less is known about our genetic legacy from Denisovans – although some research has linked genes from them to fat metabolism and better adaptation to high altitudes. Maanasa Raghavan, a human genetics expert at the University of Chicago, said a stretch of Denisovan DNA has been found in Tibetans, who continue to live and thrive in low-oxygen environments today.

Scientists have even found evidence of “ghost populations” — groups whose fossils have yet to be discovered — within modern humans’ genetic code.

SO WHY DID WE SURVIVE?

In the past, the tale of modern humans’ survival “was always told as some success story, almost like a hero’s story,” in which Homo sapiens rose above the rest of the natural world and overcame the “insufficiencies” of their cousins, Potts said.

“Well, that simply is just not the correct story.”

Neanderthals and Denisovans had already existed for thousands of years by the time Homo sapiens left Africa. Scientists used to think we won out because we had more complex behavior and superior technology. But recent research shows that Neanderthals talked, cooked with fire, made art objects, had sophisticated tools and hunting behavior, and even wore makeup and jewelry.

Several theories now tie our survival to our ability to travel far and wide.

“We spread all over the world, much more than these other forms did,” Zeberg said.

While Neanderthals were specially adapted to cold climates, Potts said, Homo sapiens were able to disperse to all different kinds of climates after emerging in tropical Africa. “We are so adaptable, culturally adaptable, to so many places in the world,” he said.

Meanwhile, Neanderthals and Denisovans faced harsh conditions in the north, like repeated ice ages and ice sheets that likely trapped them in small areas, said Eleanor Scerri, an archeologist at Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Geoanthropology. They lived in smaller populations with a greater risk of genetic collapse.

Plus, we had nimble, efficient bodies, Prendergast said. It takes a lot more calories to feed stocky Neanderthals than comparatively skinny Homo sapiens, so Neanderthals had more trouble getting by, and moving around, especially when food got scarce.

Janet Young, curator of physical anthropology at the Canadian Museum of History, pointed to another intriguing hypothesis – which anthropologist Pat Shipman shared in one of her books –- that dogs played a big part in our survival. Researchers found the skulls of domesticated dogs in Homo sapiens sites much further back in time than anyone had found before. Scientists believe dogs made hunting easier.

By around 30,000 years ago, all the other kinds of hominins on Earth had died off, leaving Homo sapiens as the last humans standing.

‘INTERACTION AND MIXTURE’

Still, every new scientific revelation points to how much we owe our ancient cousins.

Human evolution was not about “survival of the fittest and extinction,” said John Hawks, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. It’s about “interaction and mixture.”

Researchers expect to learn more as science continues to advance, allowing them to extract information from ever-tinier traces of ancient lives. Even when fossils aren’t available, scientists today can capture DNA from soil and sediment where archaic humans once lived.

And there are less-explored places in the world where they hope to learn more. Zeberg said “biobanks” that collect biological samples will likely be established in more countries.

As they delve deeper into humanity’s genetic legacy, scientists expect to find even more evidence of how much we mixed with our ancient cousins and all they left us.

“Perhaps,” Zeberg said, “we should not see them as so different.”

============================================================================================

The Miracle of Israel - A Scientific Theory

..

HAVE SCIENTISTS PROVEN THAT GOD IS PROTECTING ISRAEL?

written by Phil Schneider

Israel Unwired

April 11, 2019 

Nuclear physicist, Gerald Schroeder, a known researcher in the past for The Weizmann Institute and Hebrew University, simply cannot be accused of unscientific thinking. When observing statistics that don’t seem all too logical, most of Schroeder’s colleagues admit that there was “luck” involved.

Impossible Stats?

The existence of the State of Israel, the fact that there were so few casualties from the Scud missiles shot down on Israel during the Persian Gulf War of 1991, all appear, on the surface, to be a stroke of luck. Schroeder, however, refuses to call it “luck.” Luck is just not a scientifically sound term. For nuclear physicists like Schroeder, the real answer is that God is protecting His people.

Dr. Schroeder makes the point that many miracles happen in what seems like a very natural manner. The Persian Gulf War in 1991 was an odd war. The State of Israel endured a massive bombing of an enormously powerful missile – the Scud missile – on heavily populated areas in Israel – Tel-Aviv and its surroundings. Not one person was killed from these bombings, though there were wounded. One man experienced a heart attack, and it is unclear if this was connected to the bombing.

One does not need to be a brilliant professor in order to reach the conclusions of Dr. Schroeder. But, it is most reassuring when someone of his stature makes it clear that the rational explanations of the occurrences in the modern State of Israel simply don’t hold water. We don’t need to be scared of the repercussions of accepting God’s involvement in this world. If it is logical to assume that there is a hand of God in charge of this world, and illogical to assume otherwise, then let’s accept that the creation and existence of the State of Israel is one big miracle.

The fact that Israel survived at least 4 wars by much larger countries on three sides is another clue to the Hand of God being with them. Arabs and Muslims don't like it, but it has been clear for many years that God is not with them, but with the Jews, as He promised He would be.

There Used to be Nine Species of Human. What Happened to Them?

The disappearance of these other species resembles a mass extinction. But there’s no obvious environmental catastrophe, except for the rise of Homo Sapiens

There is a lot of imagination in anthropology. Take what you want from this, but remember, these theories will continue to evolve for some time.

The spread of modern humans out of Africa has caused a sixth mass extinction, a greater than 40,000-year event extending from the disappearance of Ice Age mammals to the destruction of rainforests by civilisation today.Getty Images

The Conversation

Nine human species walked the Earth 300,000 years ago. Now there is just one. The Neanderthals, Homo Neanderthalensis, were stocky hunters adapted to Europe’s cold steppes. The related Denisovans inhabited Asia, while the more primitive Homo Erectus lived in Indonesia, and Homo Rhodesiensis in central Africa.

Several short, small-brained species survived alongside them: Homo Naledi in South Africa, Homo Luzonensis in the Philippines, Homo Floresiensis (“hobbits”) in Indonesia, and the mysterious Red Deer Cave People in China. Given how quickly we’re discovering new species, more are likely waiting to be found.

By 10,000 years ago, they were all gone. The disappearance of these other species resembles a mass extinction. But there’s no obvious environmental catastrophe – volcanic eruptions, climate change, asteroid impact – driving it. Instead, the extinctions’ timing suggests they were caused by the spread of a new species, evolving 260,000-350,000 years ago in Southern Africa: Homo sapiens.

Unless there was a global flood!

The spread of modern humans out of Africa has caused a sixth mass extinction, a greater than 40,000-year event extending from the disappearance of Ice Age mammals to the destruction of rainforests by civilisation today. 

But were other humans the first casualties?

We are a uniquely dangerous species. We hunted wooly mammoths, ground sloths and moas to extinction. We destroyed plains and forests for farming, modifying over half the planet’s land area. We altered the planet’s climate. But we are most dangerous to other human populations, because we compete for resources and land.

History is full of examples of people warring, displacing and wiping out other groups over territory, from Rome’s destruction of Carthage, to the American conquest of the West and the British colonisation of Australia. There have also been recent genocides and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, Rwanda, Iraq, Darfur and Myanmar. Like language or tool use, a capacity for and tendency to engage in genocide is arguably an intrinsic, instinctive part of human nature. There’s little reason to think that early Homo sapiens were less territorial, less violent, less intolerant – less human.

History is full of examples of people warring, displacing and wiping out other groups over territory

Optimists have painted early hunter-gatherers as peaceful, noble savages, and have argued that our culture, not our nature, creates violence. But field studies, historical accounts, and archaeology all show that war in primitive cultures was intense, pervasive and lethal. Neolithic weapons such as clubs, spears, axes and bows, combined with guerrilla tactics like raids and ambushes, were devastatingly effective. Violence was the leading cause of death among men in these societies, and wars saw higher casualty levels per person than World Wars I and II.

Old bones and artefacts show this violence is ancient. The 9,000-year-old Kennewick Man, from North America, has a spear point embedded in his pelvis. The 10,000-year-old Nataruk site in Kenya documents the brutal massacre of at least 27 men, women, and children.

It’s unlikely that the other human species were much more peaceful. The existence of cooperative violence in male chimps suggests that war predates the evolution of humans. Neanderthal skeletons show patterns of trauma consistent with warfare. But sophisticated weapons likely gave Homo sapiens a military advantage. The arsenal of early Homo sapiens probably included projectile weapons like javelins and spear-throwers, throwing sticks and clubs.

Complex tools and culture would also have helped us efficiently harvest a wider range of animals and plants, feeding larger tribes, and giving our species a strategic advantage in numbers.

The ultimate weapon

But cave paintings, carvings, and musical instruments hint at something far more dangerous: a sophisticated capacity for abstract thought and communication. The ability to cooperate, plan, strategise, manipulate and deceive may have been our ultimate weapon.

The incompleteness of the fossil record makes it hard to test these ideas. But in Europe, the only place with a relatively complete archaeological record, fossils show that within a few thousand years of our arrival , Neanderthals vanished. Traces of Neanderthal DNA in some Eurasian people prove we didn’t just replace them after they went extinct. We met, and we mated.

Elsewhere, DNA tells of other encounters with archaic humans. East Asian, Polynesian and Australian groups have DNA from Denisovans. DNA from another species, possibly Homo erectus, occurs in many Asian people. African genomes show traces of DNA from yet another archaic species. The fact that we interbred with these other species proves that they disappeared only after encountering us.

But why would our ancestors wipe out their relatives, causing a mass extinction – or, perhaps more accurately, a mass genocide?

The answer lies in population growth. Humans reproduce exponentially, like all species. Unchecked, we historically doubled our numbers every 25 years. And once humans became cooperative hunters, we had no predators. Without predation controlling our numbers, and little family planning beyond delayed marriage and infanticide, populations grew to exploit the available resources.

Further growth, or food shortages caused by drought, harsh winters or overharvesting resources would inevitably lead tribes into conflict over food and foraging territory. Warfare became a check on population growth, perhaps the most important one.

Our elimination of other species probably wasn’t a planned, coordinated effort of the sort practised by civilisations, but a war of attrition. The end result, however, was just as final. Raid by raid, ambush by ambush, valley by valley, modern humans would have worn down their enemies and taken their land.

Yet the extinction of Neanderthals, at least, took a long time – thousands of years. This was partly because early Homo sapiens lacked the advantages of later conquering civilisations: large numbers, supported by farming, and epidemic diseases like smallpox, flu, and measles that devastated their opponents. But while Neanderthals lost the war, to hold on so long they must have fought and won many battles against us, suggesting a level of intelligence close to our own.

Today we look up at the stars and wonder if we’re alone in the universe. In fantasy and science fiction, we wonder what it might be like to meet other intelligent species, like us, but not us. It’s profoundly sad to think that we once did, and now, because of it, they’re gone.

Nick Longrich, Senior Lecturer, Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Bath.

‘Take a Selfie with God and I’ll Resign,’ says Duterte

There is a lot to like about Rodrigo Duterte, and a lot to hate. His efforts to clean up the Philippines drug culture is both laudible and horrifying, but I wish he would extend his enthusiasm to cleaning up the rampant child sex abuse that makes the Philippines the world's premier hotspot for child sex tourism and child pornography. 

One good thing about Duterte is that Christians don't have to apologize for him. We do have to pray for him because he has the most pathetic grasp of theology of almost any world leader.

© Romeo Ranoco / Reuters

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte has promised to resign immediately – if a Christian can show him any proof that God exists. It comes just weeks after he outraged religious groups for calling God “stupid.”

The outspoken leader made the vow on Friday during one of his signature freestyle speeches. Duterte said if anyone can say that they have either “been to heaven, talked to God [or] saw him personally,” he would resign as president “tonight.”

“I just need one witness who will say, ‘Mayor, those fools at the church ordered me to go to heaven and talk to God. God really exists. We have a picture together and I brought a selfie,’” he added, during the opening of a science and technology event in southern Davao city.

I would like to introduce you to Someone called Jesus. Have you heard of Him as other than a curse word? I dare you to find out Who He is.

Duterte then hit out at the Catholic Church by asking why followers are required to donate money to the Church. “If you are really helping people, why do you ask money from them?” he questioned.

This isn’t the first time the 73-year old has criticized Christian groups and their ‘God.’ In June, Duterte called God “stupid” during a discussion about the Biblical story of creation. In response, Christian groups accused him of insulting God and demanded an apology, to which the president replied: “Not in a million years.”

You might get a million years to change your mind! But I don't think it will take that long.

Duterte's tirade against God started, at the beginning, with Adam and Eve. With God allowing them to choose to sin and thereby contaminating every human being born after them, except Jesus, with their sin. Duterte called it stupid, and at first glance, in fact after several glances, it still appears pretty stupid from the view of an extremely limited human mind.

But what was God thinking? He didn't have to allow Satan into the Garden of Eden, did He? He threw him out of Heaven after he sinned against God, but threw him to earth where he could tempt and infect all of mankind. How bright was that?

One of the erroneous assumptions we make as human is to think that this life that we are living is all there is, or is the whole purpose of our existence. But, contrary to some weak theological theories, God did not create us and put us on the earth for the purpose of just enjoying our lives and avoiding suffering. We may have those opportunities, but most of us struggle through life suffering in a myriad of ways.

What was God's purpose in creating us and putting us on a planet with demonic spirits, with evil personified? God created us to love and enjoy Him forever. But love is a funny thing. You may 'fall' in love with someone but that almost invariably fades over time. True love, the love that God showers upon us and the love He hopes to get from us is deeper than that. It includes a decision to love, a choice. 

Our lifetime on earth is an infinitely small fragment of forever, but a vital one. For it is here that God determines those who shall go on to enjoy Him forever, and those who will not. Those who will go on to be in God's presence are those who choose to love God. They are those who choose good over evil - not what they think is good, man cannot make his own definition of good or evil. One evil that God consistently hates is man's desire to be his own god. To ignore what God says and to ignore the phenomenal sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ. 

But choosing good over evil requires that there be evil to choose! If there was only good and no evil, man would have no choice but to 'love' God. Such love would ultimately fail as it did in Heaven where there was no evil and therefore no real choice to make. Satan's love for God faded and he decided to put himself on the throne. Many of us are still doing that today - Duterte is one of them.

So earth is a testing ground, a boot camp almost, where those committed to God are taught and tested to determine if their commitment, or faith, is real and will last through Eternity.

God shows Himself to believers in many ways. He has proved Himself to me many, many times. He will not prove Himself to unbelievers, generally speaking, because we have to come to Him in faith. If God could be seen by unbelievers, there would be no need for faith, and without faith there can be no lasting, pure love, and no hope for an Eternity with God.

Duterte has just celebrated his second year in office but critics cite his verbal war with Christians as one of the many reasons he has “become isolated domestically and internationally,” and may not see the end of his six-year term.

“Duterte’s tirade against God and the Bible reveals again that he is a psychological freak, a psychopath, an abnormal mind who should have not been elected as president of our civilized and Christian nation,”  Catholic Bishop, Arturo Bastes

Unfortunately, the Bishop doesn't seem to understand that it is God who places Kings, Queens, Prime Ministers and presidents. His purposes are not always what Christians might want or hope for. Sometimes it is to clean up messes that religious people have created or have allowed to exist.

9.7mn-yo Ape Teeth Puzzle Scientists, Challenge Timeline of Human Species

Questionable Science

I love it when scientists discover that what they believe is completely wrong. Too much science, especially in the field of archaeology and paleontology, is not science at all but guess work and the consequence of highly over-active imaginations. And many scientists think Christians are stupid.

Dig site near Eppelsheim, Germany © Naturhistorisches Museum Mainz

Ancient ape teeth dating back more than 9 million years and discovered in Germany last year are raising questions about the timeline of human evolution.

The two teeth, discovered in sediment of the Proto-Rhine River, are of an ape species whose remains have never before been observed in Europe.

Understood to belong to one ape, the two teeth are similar in structure to 3 million year old fragments belonging to an ape skeleton previously uncovered in Africa.

However, the German river bed remains, an upper right molar and left canine, predate the African example by more than 6 million years, according to a study published by the National History Museum Mainz.

The age disparity is puzzling since it raises questions over whether apes really originated in Africa.

While study author Herbert Lutz refused to be drawn on what it means for evolutionary theory, he said the findings indicate that there are still blind spots in the study of fossils.

“We want to hold back on speculation,” Lutz told Research Gate. “What these findings definitely show us is that the holes in our knowledge and in the fossil record are much bigger than previously thought.”

Not bigger than I previously thought! 

How the ape came to be in the Germany region near Eppelsheim is a “mystery,” Lutz said.

Maybe he was looking for a good beer, or a great glass of white wine? Schnitzel?

He added that if the ape is found to be related to the species observed in Africa 3 million years ago, then “[it] would mean that a group of primates was in Europe before they were in Africa.”

‘The Darwinian View is False’: Ph.D. Biologist Dismantles Evolution in New Book

By Garrett Haley

An accomplished molecular biologist with more than two decades of research experience has come out with a new book in which he describes crippling weaknesses in the theory of evolution and argues instead that life must have been invented by God.

Dr. Douglas Axe is a credentialed scientist who earned a Ph.D. from California Institute of Technology and held a number of research positions at the University of Cambridge. The author of numerous scientific papers, Axe currently serves as director of Biologic Institute—a non-profit organization committed to researching biology and the origin of life.



Axe says he first became interested in evolution while working on his Ph.D. in California, so at Cambridge he extensively studied DNA and proteins.

“[My strategy was] to look at the constraints on gene sequences and protein sequences and see if the constraints were loose enough that evolution could work or if they were too tight so that evolution couldn’t work,” Axe said in a recent interview with the Discovery Institute.

While conducting his research at Cambridge, Axe began to doubt the validity of Darwin’s ideas.

“I was consistently starting to find that [the constraints on gene and protein sequences] were too tight—that the target that had to be hit for something to work as an enzyme was too small for accidental changes, accidental mutations,” he said.

Axe decided that Darwin’s natural selection observations were valid and scientifically sound. However, based on his research, he concluded that evolutionary processes are unable to create new species and life forms.

“That’s where Darwin went wrong,” Axe stated. “He assumed that inventions could [take place] a little bit at a time.”

Charles Darwin

“It’s easy to fall for the idea that on a scale of eons and on a scale of billions and trillions of organisms, things can happen that are very, very counterintuitive,” he explained. “Well, it turns out, if you do the math, billions of years is not nearly long enough and trillions and trillions of organisms is not nearly enough for the sort of magic to happen that would have to happen for inventions to happen by accident. It’s just not enough.”

To further explain his findings, Axe, who now describes himself as “a Darwin-doubter,” has written a book that describes the pitfalls of evolutionary thinking. The book, “Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life is Designed,” was published this summer.

He hopes the book will dismantle the idea that doubting evolution equals ignorance.

“The orthodox position in the academies is that Darwinism is true and everyone who denies it is putting their head in the sand,” he said in an interview with “The Mountain Times.” “It’s not easy to dislodge that, but my plan is to get a huge number of people who are very bright and very capable of articulating their point of view, who get this.”

Contrary to what many think, Axe says, science clearly points to a Creator.

“The technical science shows that design is true, that design is the true understanding of life, and that the accidental view—the Darwinian view—is false,” Axe stated in a Discovery Institute presentation. “Our intuitions say the same thing, and I think it’s remarkable that the two agree so well.”

How Old is the Earth, Really? Why Judaism Rejects Creationism

By Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz

“Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God.” Psalms 90:2 (The Israel Bible™)


(Shutterstock)

After successfully debating Bill Nye, a celebrity scientist, Ken Ham built a $92 million theme park in Kentucky with a full-size replica of Noah’s Ark as a centerpiece to promote his belief in Biblical Creationism. People are flocking to the park, and its Biblical message of creation seems to be gaining popularity. This belief has not caught on in Judaism, but the reasons may surprise you.

A Pew poll in February showed that 34 percent of Americans choose creationism over evolution, and another 25 percent believe in evolution guided by a supreme being (intelligent design). The poll went into detail, showing that 57 percent of Evangelical Christians believe in creationism, with another 25 percent believing in natural processes guided by a supreme being, leaving only 11 percent who believe in evolution.

On the other hand, the Pew poll showed that 58 percent of Jews believed the world came about through natural processes, another 18 percent believed these processes were guided by a supreme being, and only 16 percent believed the world has always existed in its present form.


Noah’s Ark replica built by Ken Ham. (Twitter @ArkEcounter)

It may seem paradoxical that the People of the Book, who received the Torah directly from God, would reject a belief based on a literal reading of the Bible. But although many see creationism as a choice of belief and Bible over science and data, Jews have worked hard to live successfully in both worlds.

In its purest form, creationism understands the world as coming into existence, fully formed, in six calendar days of 24 hours each, with man created separately as the pinnacle of God’s work. It precludes evolutionary theory and theories about the origin of the universe, leading to a conflict on estimates of when the earth and the universe were created.

Scientists generally agree the earth was formed 4.5 billion years ago. Most scientists claim the Big Bang that brought the universe into existence occurred approximately 14 billion years ago. Young Earth creationists believe both events occurred simultaneously between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago.

As director of the Biblical Museum of Natural History, Rabbi Natan Slifkin embodies the ideal of a Biblical scientist. He doesn’t see any contradictions between the worlds of Bible and science. Judaism, he explains, has always been able to accommodate science and theology. He quoted the Rambam, a preeminent medieval Sephardic Jewish philosopher.

“As Rambam said, accept the truth from wherever it comes,” he told Breaking Israel News.

“According to the rationalist approach, it is preferable to explain creation in scientific terms, because it is always preferable to see God working within nature and a system of law. “

Conflicts do arise between Torah and science. The Hebrew calendar, presently standing at 5776, is, in theory, based on the creation of the world. Rabbi Slifkin again quoted the Rambam’s Guide to the Perplexed, in which the rabbinical scholar wrote, “The account of creation is not all to be taken literally.”

The Rambam went on to explain that the Six Days represent a conceptual rather than historical account of creation. Rabbi Slifkin cited Rabbi Dovid Tzvi Hoffman (1843-1921), a member of Agudath Israel’s Council of Torah Sages, who suggested that the Six Days of Creation were lengthy eras rather than 24-hour periods.

Evolution, the impetus for Ken Ham’s massive Biblical theme park, simply does not seem to be such a big deal for Jewish Biblical scholars.


Rabbi Natan Slifkin, General Director of the Biblical Museum of Natural History, in Beit Shemesh, on March 4, 2015. (Hadas Parush/Flash90)

“God can work through meteorology, through medicine, through history, and through developmental biology. This is why it makes no difference if the neo-Darwinian explanation of the mechanism for evolution is true or not,” Rabbi Slifkin explained. “All these descriptions were interpreted literally by the Sages of old, and yet almost all recent Torah scholars interpret them non-literally.”

Torah Judaism also differs from Bible-based Christian creationism on the point of the nature of man. Creationism holds that man is distinct from animals, owing to the separate description of his being “formed”. It is partly for this reason that creationists reject evolutionary theory.

Then Hashem God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Genesis 2:7

Genesis describes man’s creation twice, and Rabbi Slifkin emphasized the version in the first chapter of Genesis.

And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. Genesis 1:27

Professor Natan Aviezer
Bar Ilan University

“Classical Judaism has long maintained that man is not qualitatively different from animals in his physical aspects,” the rabbi noted. “Man’s unique identity is in his spiritual soul, not in his physical body and most certainly not in his physical origin.”

Professor Natan Aviezer of Bar Ilan University, a physicist and religious Jew, deals with this issue in his book Modern Science and Ancient Faith. He quotes Charles Darwin’s parting words in his manifesto on evolution, On the Origin of Species.

“There is a grandeur in this view of life, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one, and from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” Charles Darwin

Aviezer also cites Samson Raphael Hirsch, an influential German rabbi and contemporary of Darwin, bringing a Rabbinic concept of Olam Ke’Minhago Noheg (the universe goes its accustomed way). God did not simply create the world and step back. Aviezer explains that God works within nature.

“This important principle explains how God interacts with His world,” wrote Professor Aviezer in his book. “It follows from this principle that no scientific discovery can cast doubt on the existence of God.”

Has Science Discovered God?

Einstein didn’t believe it was possible.

Stephen Hawking said it might be the 

greatest scientific discovery of all time.

What discovery has baffled the greatest scientific minds of the past century, and why has it caused them to rethink the origin of our universe? New, more powerful, telescopes have revealed mysteries about our universe that have raised new questions about the origin of life.

Has science discovered God?

But wait a minute! Hasn’t science proven we don’t need God to explain the universe? Lightning, earthquakes and even babies used to be explained as acts of God. But now we know better. What is it about this discovery that is so fundamentally different, and why has it stunned the scientific world?

This discovery and what molecular biologists have learned about the sophisticated coding within DNA have many scientists now admitting that the universe appears to be part of a grand design.

One cosmologist put it this way: “Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the teleological or design argument.”

Surprisingly, many scientists who are talking about God have no religious belief whatsoever.

So, what are these stunning discoveries that have scientists suddenly speaking of God? Three revolutionary discoveries from the fields of astronomy and molecular biology stand out:

1. The universe had a beginning

2. The universe is just right for life

3. DNA coding reveals intelligence

The statements leading scientists have made about these discoveries may shock you. Let’s take a look.

One-Time Beginning

Since the dawn of civilization man has gazed in awe at the stars, wondering what they are and how they got there. Although on a clear night the unaided human eye can see about 6,000 stars, Hubble and other powerful telescopes indicate there are trillions of them clustered in over 100 billion galaxies. Our sun is like one grain of sand amidst the world’s beaches.


Pictures from the Hubble telescope

However, prior to the 20th century, the majority of scientists believed our own Milky Way galaxy was the entire universe, and that only about 100 million stars existed.

Most scientists believed that our universe never had a beginning. They believed mass, space and energy had always existed.

But in the early 20th century, astronomer Edwin Hubble discovered the universe is expanding. Rewinding the process mathematically, he calculated that everything in the universe, including matter, energy, space and even time itself, actually had a beginning.

Shockwaves rang loudly throughout the scientific community. Many scientists, including Einstein, reacted negatively. In what Einstein later called “the biggest blunder of my life,” he fudged the equations to avoid the implication of a beginning.

Perhaps the most vocal adversary of a beginning to the universe was British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle, who sarcastically nicknamed the creation event a “big bang.” He stubbornly held to his steady state theory that the universe has always existed. So did Einstein and other scientists until the evidence for a beginning became overwhelming. The “elephant in the room” implication of a beginning is that something or Someone beyond scientific investigation must have started it all.

Finally, in 1992, COBE satellite experiments proved that the universe really did have a one-time beginning in an incredible flash of light and energy. Although some scientists called it the moment of creation, most preferred referring to it as the “big bang.”

Astronomer Robert Jastrow tries to help us imagine how it all began. “The picture suggests the explosion of a cosmic hydrogen bomb. The instant in which the cosmic bomb exploded marked the birth of the Universe.”


Everything from Nothing

Science is unable to tell us what or who caused the universe to begin. But some believe it clearly points to a Creator. “British theorist, Edward Milne, wrote a mathematical treatise on relativity which concluded by saying,

‘As to the first cause of the Universe, in the context of expansion, 

that is left for the reader to insert, but our picture is incomplete without Him.’” 

Another British scientist, Edmund Whittaker attributed the beginning of our universe to 

“Divine will constituting Nature from nothingness.” 

Many scientists were struck by the parallel of a one-time creation event from nothing with the biblical creation account in Genesis 1:1. Prior to this discovery, many scientists regarded the biblical account of creation from nothing as unscientific.

Although he called himself an agnostic, Jastrow was compelled by the evidence to admit,

“Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to

 a biblical view of the origin of the world.” 

Another agnostic, George Smoot, the Nobel Prize winning scientist in charge of the COBE experiment, also admits to the parallel.

“There is no doubt that a parallel exists between the big bang as an event 

and the Christian notion of creation from nothing.”

Scientists who used to scoff at the Bible as a book of fairy tales, are now admitting that the biblical concept of creation from nothing has been right all along.



Cosmologists, who specialize in the study of the universe and its origins, soon realized that a chance cosmic explosion could never bring about life any more than a nuclear bomb would—unless it was precisely engineered to do so. And that meant a designer must have planned it. They began using words like, “Super-intellect,” “Creator,” and even “Supreme Being” to describe this designer. Let’s look at why.


Finely-Tuned for Life

Physicists calculated that for life to exist, gravity and the other forces of nature needed to be just right or our universe couldn’t exist. Had the expansion rate been slightly weaker, gravity would have pulled all matter back into a “big crunch.”

We’re not talking about merely a one or two percent reduction in the universe’s expansion rate. Stephen Hawking writes, 

“If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller 

by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, 

the universe would have re-collapsed before it ever reached its present size.” 

On the flip side, if the expansion rate had been a mere fraction greater than it was, galaxies, stars and planets could never have formed, and we wouldn’t be here.

And for life to exist, the conditions in our solar system and planet also need to be just right. For example, we all realize that without an atmosphere of oxygen, none of us would be able to breathe. And without oxygen, water couldn’t exist. Without water there would be no rainfall for our crops. Other elements such as hydrogen, nitrogen, sodium, carbon, calcium, and phosphorus are also essential for life.



But that alone is not all that is needed for life to exist. The size, temperature, relative proximity, and chemical makeup of our planet, sun, and moon also need to be just right. And there are dozens of other conditions that needed to be exquisitely fine-tuned or we wouldn’t be here to think about it.

Scientists who believe in God may have expected such fine-tuning, but atheists and agnostics were unable to explain the remarkable “coincidences.” Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, an agnostic, writes, 

“The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been 

very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life.”

Accident or Miracle?

But couldn’t this fine-tuning be attributed to chance? After all, odds-makers know that even long shots can eventually win at the racetrack. And, against heavy odds, lotteries are eventually won by someone. So, what are the odds against human life existing by chance from a random explosion in cosmic history?

For human life to be possible from a big bang defies the laws of probability. One astronomer calculates the odds at less than 1 chance in a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion. It would be far easier for a blind-folded person—in one try— to discover one specially marked grain of sand out of all the beaches of the world.

Another example of how unlikely it would be for a random big bang to produce life is one person winning over a thousand consecutive mega-million dollar lotteries after purchasing only a single ticket for each.

What would be your reaction to such news? Impossible—unless it was fixed by someone behind the scenes, which is what everyone would think. And that is what many scientists are concluding—Someone behind the scenes designed and created the universe.

This new understanding of how miraculous human life is in our universe led the agnostic astronomer George Greenstein to ask,

“Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon

the scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being?”

However, as an agnostic, Greenstein maintains his faith in science, rather than a Creator, to ultimately explain our origins.

Jastrow explains why some scientists are reluctant to accept a transcendent Creator,

There is a kind of religion in science; it is the religion of a person who believes there is order and harmony in the Universe…This religious faith of the scientist is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized.

It is understandable why scientists like Greenstein and Hawking seek other explanations rather than attribute our finely-tuned universe to a Creator. Hawking speculates that other unseen (and unprovable) universes may exist, increasing the odds that one of them (ours) is perfectly fine-tuned for life. However, since his proposal is speculative, and outside of verification, it can hardly be called “scientific.” Although he is also an agnostic, British astrophysicist Paul Davies dismisses Hawking’s idea as too speculative. He writes,

“Such a belief must rest on faith rather than observation.” 

Although Hawking continues leading the charge to explore purely scientific explanations for our origins, other scientists, including many agnostics, have acknowledged what appears to be overwhelming evidence for a Creator. Hoyle wrote,

“A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect 

has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, 

and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.”

Although Einstein wasn’t religious, and didn’t believe in a personal God, he called the genius behind the universe 

“an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic 

thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.”

Atheist Christopher Hitchens, who spent much of his life writing and debating against God, was most perplexed by the fact that life couldn’t exist if things were different by just “one degree or one hair.” 

Davies acknowledges,

There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all. 

It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe….

 The impression of design is overwhelming. 

DNA: The Language of Life

Astronomy is not the only area where science has seen evidence for design. Molecular biologists have discovered intricately complex design in the microscopic world of DNA. In the past century, scientists learned that a tiny molecule called DNA is the “brains” behind each cell in our bodies as well as every other living thing. Yet the more they discover about DNA, the more amazed they are at the brilliance behind it.



Scientists who believe the material world is all that exists (materialists), like Richard Dawkins, argue DNA evolved by natural selection without a Creator. Yet even most ardent evolutionists admit that the origin of DNA’s intricate complexity is unexplainable.

DNA’s intricate complexity caused its co-discoverer, Francis Crick, to believe that it could never have originated on earth naturally. Crick, an evolutionist who believed life is too complex to have originated on earth, and must have come from outer space, wrote,

An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to almost be a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.

The coding behind DNA reveals such intelligence that it staggers the imagination. A mere pinhead of DNA contains information equivalent to a stack of paperback books that would encircle the earth 5,000 times. And DNA operates like a language with its own extremely complex software code. Microsoft founder Bill Gates says that the software of DNA is 

“far, far more complex than any software we have ever developed.”

Dawkins and other materialists believe that all this complexity originated through natural selection. Yet, as Crick remarked, natural selection could never have produced the first molecule. Many scientists believe that the coding within the DNA molecule points to an intelligence far exceeding what could have occurred by natural causes.

In the early 21st century, leading atheist Antony Flew’s atheism came to an abrupt end when he studied the intelligence behind DNA. Flew explains what changed his opinion.

What I think the DNA material has done is to show that intelligence must have been 

involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements together. 

The enormous complexity by which the results were achieved look to me 

like the work of intelligence…. It now seems to me that the finding 

of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials

 for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.

Although Flew was not a Christian, he admitted that the “software” behind DNA is far too complex to have originated without a “designer.” The discovery of the incredible intelligence behind DNA has, in this former leading atheist’s words, “provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”



Fingerprints of a Creator

Are scientists now convinced that a Creator has left his “fingerprints” on the universe?

Although many scientists are still bent on squeezing God out of the universe, most recognize the religious implications of these new discoveries. In his book, The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking, who doesn’t believe in a personal God, attempts to explain why the universe doesn’t need God. Yet when faced with the evidence, even Hawking, has also admitted, 

“There must be religious overtones. 

But I think most scientists prefer to shy away from the religious side of it.”

As an agnostic, Jastrow had no Christian agenda behind his conclusions. However, he freely acknowledges the compelling case for a Creator. Jastrow writes of the shock and despair experienced by scientists who thought they had squeezed God out of their world.

For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, 

the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance;

 he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, 

he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries. 

A Personal Creator?

If there is a superintelligent Creator, the question arises, what is he like? Is he just some Force like in Star Wars, or is he a personal Being like us? Since we are personal and relational beings, wouldn’t the one who created us also be personal and relational?

Many scientists like Arthur L. Schawlow, Professor of Physics at Stanford University, winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, believe that these new discoveries provide compelling evidence for a personal God. He writes, 

“It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, 

one must ask why and not just how. The only possible answers are religious…. 

I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.” 

If God is personal and since he has given us the ability to communicate, 

wouldn’t we expect him to communicate with us and let us know why we are here?

What kind of God Who created humans with the ability to communicate with each other at a very high level, would not have the ability to communicate with them Himself? 

As we have seen, science is unable to answer questions about God and the purpose for life. However, since the Bible was right about creation from nothing, might it also be trustworthy regarding God, life and purpose?

Two thousand years ago a man set foot on our planet who claimed to have the answer to life. Although his time on earth was brief, his impact changed the world, and is still felt today. His name is Jesus Christ.

The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ tell us that he continually demonstrated creative power over nature’s laws. They tell us he was wise, humble and compassionate. He healed the lame, deaf and blind. He stopped raging storms instantly, created food for the hungry on the spot, turned water into wine at a wedding, and even raised the dead. And they claimed after his brutal execution, he rose from the dead.

They also tell us that Jesus Christ is the one who flung the stars into space, fine-tuned our universe and created DNA. Could he be the one of whom Einstein unknowingly referred to as the “superintelligence” behind the universe? Could Jesus Christ be the one of whom Hoyle unknowingly referred to as having

“monkeyed with physics, chemistry and biology?”

Has the mystery of who was behind the big bang and the intelligence of DNA been revealed in the following account from the New Testament?

Now Christ is the visible expression of the invisible God. 

He existed before creation began, for it was through him that everything was made, 

whether spiritual or material, seen or unseen. Through him, and for him, 

also, were created power and dominion, ownership and authority. 

In fact, every single thing was created through, and for him….

Life from nothing began through him, and life from the dead began through him, 

and he is, therefore, justly called the Lord of all. 

Jesus spoke with authority about God’s love for us and the reason he created us. He said he has a plan for our lives, and that plan centers on a relationship with himself. But for that relationship to be possible, Jesus had to die on the cross for our sins. And it was necessary for him to rise from the dead so that we too could have life after death.

If Jesus was the Creator, he certainly would have the power over life and death. And those closest to him claim they saw him alive after he died and was buried for three days.