Pastor Jeremy M. Thomas
Fredericksburg Bible Church
107 East Austin
Fredericksburg, Texas 78624 830-997-8834 email@example.com
B0817 – May 4, 2008 – Post-Diluvial Migration Alright, this morning we’re still working on getting to the Call of Abraham, that’s our fifth event in this course, these are major historical events, we’re not going into all the details. We just want to see the key event, what God teaches us through the event, what the world has done to that event, how they’ve maligned it, twisted it distorted it in such a way that it maligns God. Well we’re not interested in maligning God, we’re interested in glorifying God. So, we’re moving very slowly, event by event and we’re heading to the very delicate and controversial aspect of the gospel, and that is why is it said that one and only one group of people have the truth and no other people do. What is this offensive Exclusivism in the Bible? I’m sure some of you have the experience of being the only Christian in the family, and if you’ve heard it once you’ve heard it a dozen times, “How can you be so arrogant to think that you have the only way?” We saw this a couple of weeks ago with Oprah with her virtual claim of omniscience, “One of the mistakes people make,” she says, “is thinking there is only one way.” And one of the ladies in the audience challenged her, “What about Jesus?” and Oprah, with great condescension responded, “What about Jesus?” All paths lead to god or what you call god. And incidentally this is not just in the new age secular arena, this is the same claim those of the emergent church are making, yes, this is in the so-called church, there are multiple paths to god. Well, that’s precisely the issue we’re dealing with here in the Call of Abraham. Why did God abandon the world system, the I’m going to work with everyone approach, and choose out from humanity this subset, then forever after work strictly with this subset of people? Why did God do this? You ask the average person on the street and they’ll say it’s very unfair of God to do that, and they’ll say that’s why we can’t stand Christianity, you people say “Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father but by Him,” well what about the Muslims, what about the good person, what about the guy who works hard, takes care of his family. We’ve all heard this. That’s what we’re dealing with. This is why we’re spending a lot of time with Noah, the fountainhead of modern civilization, to see there is a reason why God picked out one person who grew into one nation. It is all going to flow logically. But you have to start where the Scripture starts and we have to go back to origins, in this case we’re dealing with the origin of civilization.
Let’s go to Acts 17:26; keep in mind that this is the passage where the Apostle Paul preaches the gospel to the center of Greek thought, Athens. And it’s an approach to Gentiles, not Jews and there’s a certain style, a certain logic, a certain approach that Paul used with Gentiles, and we know that this is not just for philosophers because the methodology in Acts 17 is the same methodology Paul used in Acts 14 at Lystra. It’s the same methodology he uses in laying out his argument in Rom 1-2. Every once in a while you get some preacher in Acts 17 he tries to say this was a big failure of Paul, he was trying to cater to the intellectuals and nobody responded, etc. Wrong! If that’s so, how do you explain Acts 14, Rom 1 and 2? The logic of Rom 1 and 2 repeats the logic of Acts 17, so if you’re going to throw out Acts 17 as a failure you also have to throw out Rom 1 and 2 and Acts 14, all those passages go together. It’s a Pauline approach to Gentiles.
Acts 17:24-27 is probably a summary of hundreds of words that Paul preached that day, because the Holy Spirit apparently tends to summarize a lot of these sermons. Notice what he does; in verse 24, he deals with the issue of creation. You always hear “Oh, we don’t want to touch creation, that’s controversial, let’s just get to the gospel. If you’re going to avoid the creation issue, what else are you avoiding? The Creator-creature distinction. And if you’re going to avoid the Creator-creature distinction you’ve already started to compromise your view of God. You can’t teach about the biblical God without talking about what He does; His premier act of creation. That’s why Paul does not avoid the issue in verse 24. Paul knew that people who followed Aristotle and Plato not only did not believe in this kind of a thing, that they could not. If we know Platonic categories and Aristotle’s logic, we know that it was unacceptable to say what he said in verse 24, and Paul knew that, but Paul goes ahead anyway and says it, because you can’t understand the biblical God apart from creation. This is why the great creeds, the Apostle’s Creed, “I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth.” Why does it start that way? Because creation is where the biblical God is defined. So verse 24, creation: “The God who made the world, and all things in it, since He is the Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25Neither is He served by human hands,” so in verse 24-25 he is setting off the God of the Bible from pagan deities. Then he follows a strategy in this sermon that we want to remember, and that is the strategy of envelopment. In other words, either you interpret the world through the eyes of the Bible, or you will permit the world to interpret the Bible according to it’s pagan heart: one or the other! So the way you avoid getting trapped is to encircle the world and explain it from the Biblical point of view. Don’t ever let the world try to explain itself. Don’t ever accept that, always strive to interpret things that happen, things you’re interested in, the flow of life, the flow of history, always seek, ALWAYS to go back to Scripture and anchor your understanding in some area of Scripture that touches that area. That way you neutralize the toxins that are all there, the intellectual poison of the world system. That’s what he does here. Notice verse 26, now he applies the doctrine of creation to that pagan society, and he says “and He made from one every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times, and the boundaries of their habitation.” Notice that he says “He has made from one every nation of mankind,” that is Paul’s analysis of the world as a mission field, that the world has a primary unity, it is a biological unity that goes back to the Noah and Adam, ultimately. So all men, it doesn’t matter what their culture is, it doesn’t matter what their language is, it doesn’t matter what their race is, it doesn’t matter how long they’ve lived in one place or another place, God has made from one all nations of men. It’s axiomatic, and it has to follow. In fact, if that’s not so, then Christ’s death on the cross has a problem, because Christ died as the second Adam, and He died for all the sons and daughters of Adam, and if we have people who are not people who are not sons and daughters of Adam, then Christ didn’t die for them. So from one He made every nation of men to live. Now look at what he says about history, and he includes the Greeks, who were very proud and arrogant about their history. Remember in the New Testament how many times you read about the Greeks and the barbarians, it was their way of saying we are the Greeks and everybody else is a clod. It’s the class idea. So here he destroys the class idea because he says “every nation of mankind” has been made, there’s no superior class. He made every people group “to live on all the face of the earth,” notice all the face of the earth, because we’re going to deal with that strongly today and next week. ALL the face of the earth, not part of the earth, all the earth. What did God tell Noah to do? Go out and do what? He repeated what He told Adam, “Scatter and fill the earth.” So God made every nation of mankind to live on ALL the face of the earth. And “having determined their appointed times, and the boundaries of their habitation.” Notice God determines the groupings, God determines the geographical groupings. Do you want a philosophy of history; have you ever taken a history course that discussed verse 26? Do you realize what we’re reading? Acts 17:26 is the Biblical philosophy of history, that God shapes nations, He shapes them geographically, i.e. their boundaries, and temporally, i.e. their times, the rise and the fall of nations. That is the Biblical view of history. Now, that’s a motivation to study history. Not some pile of dates, while dates have their importance, when so and so did this when so and so fought this war, this and that, after awhile it’s just a pile of marbles. What’s the connection between these things? You keep telling me date, I keep spitting them up on the test, so what? But if there’s a pattern, if the rise and fall of nations is actually going somewhere, serves a purpose then suddenly history is interesting. Why did Columbus do this? Why did the Puritans come to North America? Who was there before them? Were the Indians the only ones? Those are the questions I’m interested in, not who did what on such and such a month and day. That makes sense only if you see the larger framework that you’ve pre-established. What Paul’s saying here in verse 26, there is the large framework that we have to work out of to get to the details. So God determines the appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation. Verse 27 is the purpose of history, it’s showing there is a grand purpose to people migrating, the rise and the fall of civilizations, why does this take place? Why, for example, did God let Spaniards go into Central America and massacre the Aztec and Inca civilizations? God obviously allowed it to happen? Why did God allow Alexander the Great to go in and take over the Persians, extend his empire? Why did God allow Stalin to kill 50 million? Why does He allow these awful things? Why is America here? Why? Why? Why? Verse 27 is a Biblical answer to why. And yet where do you ever hear it in history courses? It couldn’t be clearer. Paul knew this. Look at this, an evangelist, a missionary, and he trained himself in world history so he could move out into various people’s groups that lived where God determined them to live and immediately envelop them with the word of God. He could encircle their whole way of life, their whole thinking, everything with the word of God. And he says, you Greeks, you came from the same mankind as the barbarians, you all came from the same place, your rise that you Greeks are so proud of, your great classic era of Plato and Aristotle, do you know why God allowed the Greeks to do this, he says? Verse 27, “That you should seek God,” that’s why. “That they should seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him,” notice the word “grope,” who gropes? Blind people. This is a left-handed compliment, that they should seek because they’re blind, this is like God herding a group of blind people toward the door, pushing them gently so they don’t bang into a wall, so they can get out of the door, they’re all blind, they don’t know where they’re going. And this is what God says, he’s set the times and the boundaries of people groups, “if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, thought He is not far from each one of us,” and then he goes on. Then he goes through a few verses and he comes down to verse 30, look at what it says in verse 30. “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all everywhere should repent.” In other words, God let the process of history go on until Christ, so from Noah to Christ, among the nations outside of Israel, history was allowed to proceed to keep a minimal God-consciousness alive. The rise and the fall of nations had as its purpose to keep, verse 27, a minimal level of God-consciousness there; that was the purpose of history. God didn’t force anybody to do anything; He was hoping they would come to Him. How? Through what they could remember, what they had learned from Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth who had passed it down, they had information. There’s not anybody out there that didn’t hear. Isaiah says “Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared from the beginning?” Every people group had revelation, everybody had the tradition from Noah. It got distorted, yes, but nations don’t rise in vacuums. So the point is that with the gospel, now God declares everybodyalways, look at the universals in verse 30, every man always should repent, in other words the whole world is screwed up, and the gospel is going into it. Basically God says all you nations are wrong, I don’t care whether you’ve been good boys or not, whether you have great intellects or not, you’re all screwed up, and moreover, I’m telling you you’re going to have to get a new heart because you’re all wrong. That’s the offense of the gospel, that’s why we’re not liked, that’s why the gospel message is, frankly, very offensive in our day, it’s politically incorrect to make these kinds of statements. That’s what we’re dealing with in this area of Genesis, so let’s go back to Genesis.
In Gen 9-10 we want to get into some of the details. At the end of Gen 9, keep in mind Acts 17, we just got through saying God sets the boundaries of the habitations and the times of the nations rise and fall, all this has been determined for a theological purpose… a theological purpose! Now, some of those boundaries are in Gen 9:25, here’s what is called “The Oracle of Noah” and it gives the shape of history to come. It’s in the form of a blessing and a cursing, upon and through his sons. I want to refresh your mind about certain elements in that. Remember Canaan, who was a son of Ham, is mentioned here because who wrote Genesis? Moses. What were the Israelites about to face when Genesis was first written? Canaanites, they were going into the land under Joshua. So obviously they needed some analysis of who God placed in those boundaries at that time in history. “Cursed by Canaan; a servant of servants he shall be to his brothers. 26He said also, Blessed be the LORD, The God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. 27May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant.” We won’t get into Canaan because we’ll have plenty of time to deal with him, what I want you to look at is verse 26-27, the name “Shem” and the name “Japheth.” Shem and Japheth are two of the three sons of Noah. Notice that Shem seems to be the one who will carry the Messianic line. Notice it is Shem who is the one who is associated with the God of redemption, the God of the Noahic Covenant. You’ll also notice the second son in verse 27, Japheth, is to be enlarged. He is to be made large, and in Gen 10:2-5 something happens in verse 5 that’s unlike the latter verses of Shem and Ham. Look at the word coastlands, isn’t that an enlargement, a geographical enlargement. God enlarges Japheth, isn’t that saying something about the pattern of history, and we assume that this history began at this point. Further, back in verse 26, “And let him dwell in the tents of Shem.” In some way, Japheth is dependent upon Shem.
Now without getting into details, let’s skip forward many, many centuries. When the gospel moved out into the world, what people group did it move out from? Shem, Ham or Japheth. If Shem represents the Semitic peoples, the Jews and the Arabs, the Middle East area, where did the gospel come from? It came from Shem. Where did the gospel go, primarily? Asia, Europe, Africa or India? Where were the great missionary travels of Paul? Europe? Where did the Japhetics settle? Europe. And it’s striking that when we open our Bibles there’s two languages in the Scriptures? The first one is Hebrew (actually there’s another one, Aramaic, but forgetting that for a moment, just the two major languages). The Old Testament is written in Hebrew. That’s a Semitic language. The New Testament is written in Greek. That’s a Japhetic language. So in these verses of the Bible you have this thing, this shape of history that’s being built.
We want to move into this background of what Noah’s sons went into, and we have to cover some of this background because if we don’t, we wind up letting the world interpret this background in such a way that it discredits the Scripture. Let’s look at this chart again. This chart summarizes Gen 9-11, the time between Noah and Abraham you have this process of decreasing longevity. We have on that chart people like Shem living a long time, and then we have Nahor, he’s born here, he dies here, but Shem outlives him. If you take this time period between these later men when they were dying, and finally when Shem dies off in Abraham’s time, you take this zone of history, it is a strange, unrivaled time in human history, it had never occurred before, it will never occur again, a very strange thing. For three centuries grandfathers outlived their grandsons. For three centuries the human race as it was diverting and multiplying had these giants who became known as gods, and this is why we believe that Shem, Ham, Japheth and their sons reappear in mythology all over the world. The later generations, the third, fourth generation, count down that chart about five generations and you get down to the people that are born later, and still are unable to outlive their great-great-great-grandfathers. And they look back at these people, and they must have assigned supernatural proportions to them, it’s not far-out to see that. I have a quote by Dr Pilkey, and I don’t have the knowledge to confirm every idea that he has, but several of his observations are very incisive, and he says, “The high longevities of Noah’s immediate family combined with the gentile Pentecost of human government to make that family the most astounding aristocracy the world has known. Nothing in human experience can compare with it short of the Christian Apocalypse . . . During this period, all but one of twenty-five dynasties of the Sumerian King list and the first twelve dynasties of Egypt ran their course. Shem outlived most of them.” Just think of that, that is unheard of from the modern historian’s point of view, absolutely impossible, this is fairy story, this is mythology. But you see, its mythology because we insist on taking processes we observe now and extrapolating them backwards. Isn’t that what evolution does? It takes present processes of human reproduction, human longevity, etc…and it speculates they were the same yesterday as today, making the present the key to the past. This is an illegitimate method of reasoning. Biblically we can’t agree with it, and here’s why? What do you do with this? How do you dare take processes going on in our own day, historical processes that we can go out and measure, and arrogantly presuppose that it must have always been this way, therefore what the Bible says here didn’t happen, just mythology. So you’ve got to use the word of God to interpret the data. The data can’t be interpreted just in terms of present processes. And when you think of this Scripturally, like Pilkey’s doing, you find an astonishing thing. During this period, this is stunning, “all but one of the twenty-five dynasties of the Sumerian King list and the first twelve dynasties of Egypt ran their course” before Shem died. He was around to see the rise and fall of twenty-five Sumerian dynasties? He outlived twelve dynasties of Egypt? Amazing!
Now let’s turn to Gen 10 and look at one of the sons of Ham in that list. Gen 10:6, here are the sons of Ham, Noah’s youngest son. “And the sons of Ham were Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan.” Let’s think, Ham is the son of Noah, so he is living like Shem is, long time; he has a son, Cush and Mizraim, now Mizraim is strange because that word ends in “im,” a plural, so it probably isn’t a person, it’s a nation. Anybody know what that nation is? It’s Egypt. So whoever this son is, he is the first Egyptian, a white son. So Mizraim would be the first dynasty of Egypt, he began it, and Ham is still living, because Ham is his grandfather. Ham is also the father of Cush. Cush is the founder of Ethiopia, obviously black. So now here we have a marvelous thing, we have a white son, Mizraim and a black son, Cush. Where are these genes coming from? It goes back to the wives of the sons, it goes back to the fact that you had a lot of diversity in the genes then, and they were combining in all kinds of different ways, and you have these origins. It is also true that Cush and Mizraim both lived a long time. Where do you suppose they were born? Mesopotamia or Egypt? It’s a matter of speculation, but presumably they were born in Mesopotamia. That means that Egyptians became Egyptians not in Egypt; Egyptians became Egyptians in Mesopotamia. And then after they had their Egyptian identity they moved into these areas. And Cush, who was the founder of the Ethiopian black in the middle of Mesopotamia, from which he went into Africa. So this is a very, very startling and radical rearrangement. I’m making this point because I want to get you to realize that we’ve been asleep at how we’ve been trained and educated in history. We haven’t begun to probe the depths of Scripture of how history really happened. Maybe we won’t know until the Second Coming of Christ all that went on in history. But we’ve got a lot of screwed up analysis, and we’re very arrogant in how we think we understand history, oh, this happened this way and this… not so fast.
Here’s a map I wanted to show you last week of human migration. As they went out from the Middle East, isn’t it striking to notice that the most primitive forms, Neanderthal’s are found in East Africa, China, Indonesia, at these far away places from the center of civilization? If you draw arrows out from Mesopotamia, where the Bible would say that civilization separated from, it’s in the farthest circles where you would have the greatest environmental stresses on the human frame. Remember these people lived centuries; they lived in an adverse environment. So, an alternative interpretation, instead of saying that these were apes evolving into man and they started out in the outer rim and moved toward the Middle East in a convergence to start civilization, the Bible says it’s exactly reverse, they started in the Middle East and went out, and deteriorated anatomically and physiologically due to the stresses they experienced as they went out.
Now, we’ve mentioned some of the high intelligence and the high technology of Noah’s sons, and some of the anthropologists most famous and well known observations, claiming that you have primitive men. “In the evolutionary view millions of years were required for man’s IQ to evolve high enough to support the cultural skills necessary for civilization. To support this belief, evidences are cited such as primitive man’s lack of inventiveness, the simplicity of his artifacts, the extreme conservativism of his customs, and his smaller skull size.” “The Canadian physiologist, Dr. Arthur Custance, years ago refuted each of these evidences as IQ indicators. The majority of intelligent people have never invented anything.” How many people do you know who invented something used worldwide? Simplicity of design is often the best indicator of inventive genius. The guy who can figure out how to do it simplest is a genius. “Conservative customs in an extremely stressful environment is the safest way of survival.” There are certain things they teach you in military survival school that you’d better learn, because when you’re down and wounded some place, and you’re wading around in a swamp, and you’re hungry, you don’t experiment, that’s not the place to experiment. What you do is you apply the principles you learned in your training, and you stick with it because those principles are proven and you don’t have much margin for error. You experiment when you can make an error, but when you don’t have any room for error and you’re just hanging on by your teeth, you don’t experiment. So if people were conservative it might have been just the stress of the times, they didn’t dare experiment, not that they were too stupid to experiment; they were smart not to experiment. And finally Custance’s grand and grandiose counter illustration of a small skull, he points out that Anatole France’s cranial capacity was only 1100cc, which is about that of the primitive man. Anatole France obviously wasn’t primitive. Then he says that we have examples today of old stone age cultures. One of them would be the Eskimo. In a lot of Eskimo areas, if those civilizations would die out today and you were an archeologist digging fifty or a hundred years from now and you dug into their utensils, you would swear you are dealing with an old stone age group. Does that mean they were stupid? That they haven’t evolved? So it’s a very interesting point that he makes, he cites this reference, who noticed that in Australia when they took children of the aboriginal tribes out of the tribes and put them in a western school, and they sat right next to kids from western culture, they did fine, didn’t know they were supposed to be primitives. And that’s why his statement is so powerful. “The mental distance between a living so-called ‘primitive’ and a ‘civilized’ person is regarded as equivalent to thousands of years, but experience proves that this distance, where it exists, is equivalent to no more than a few days, for man is everywhere and always man.” An amazing statement, but he gets rid of some of this garbage we pick up, in all the history stuff we read, just garbage, it’s that we have bought into an entire worldview. While we were tying to learn, we thought we were trying to learn facts, instead we were being sold an entire worldview foreign to Scripture, and we wonder why we have a hard time believing the Scripture.
Two more major evidences of the high intelligence, one of which is pretty astonishing. The debate has always been when Christopher Columbus and the early explorers, where they got their maps from. Back in the 1950’s and early 60’s, a guy by the name of Charles Hapgood did some work in which he researched thousands of ancient maps and his findings were ground shaking to say the least.i What do we always hear about how people of the Middle Ages viewed the earth. We’re told they believed the earth was flat and if you sailed your boat far enough you’d fall off the edge, one of the little fairy tales we learn in history course. The problem is, they never tell you that an Egyptian by the name of Eratosthenes measured the earth’s circumference with a very simple experiment. He took the angle of the sun’s shadow at two places on the Nile on a north-south axis, and he figured out the circumference of the earth was ~25,000 miles, and he did it in the 3 century BC. Is the 3rdrd century BC a little bit before the Middle Ages? So the world was known to be round, nobody worried about falling off the edge, that’s some mythology we get. But these guys had good maps. Not only did these guys have good maps, they had maps of Antarctica. Just to show you, the map at the top of this diagram is a modern day map of Antarctica, and Hapgood made an interesting observation, that when he studied these maps, he found out that the bottom one, which was made in 1532 from earlier maps, had some peculiar features.
Notice these lines, those are mountains, they mapped mountains. But they’re under ice. On the modern map this is the Ross Ice Shelf, it goes out that much. On the ancient map there’s no ice in it at all, it’s all water. The modern map has rivers completely closed off with ice; this ancient map traces the rivers inland a hundred miles. Who did that map? How did they know that those rivers were there? We know now because we’ve taken sonar soundings below the ice so we discovered those rivers. But where did this map come from? Who mapped Antarctica before it froze, that’s the question? It was frozen in 1532 so this map obviously doesn’t picture 1532. It goes way, way, way back in history to previous maps. The arguments are very detailed but Hapgood does an amazing piece of work, he’s talked to cartographers, mathematicians, all kinds of people about these, nobody wants to make a commitment of course, obviously it’s a little shattering to find out that when man was supposed to be shaking sticks in the air this advanced mapping was going on? This just doesn’t fit the timetable. So what was going on here? Well, what was going on was a tremendous mapping expedition. There’s a lot of evidence for this. Hapgood concludes, “The evidence presented by the ancient maps appears to suggest that in remote times, before the rise of any of the known cultures,” by that he means Egyptian, Sumerian, “…astronomy, nautical science, mapmaking and possibly ship-building,” were “perhaps more advanced,” notice this, “than any state of culture before the 18th century of the Christian Era.… Mapping on such a scale … suggests both economic motivations and economic resources. Organized government is indicated. The mapping of a continent like Antarctica implies much organization, many exploring expeditions, many stages in the compilation of local observations and local maps into a general map, all under a central direction.” Who oversaw such a project? Who were the magnificent people reining in this period of history? Noah, Shem, Ham, Japheth and their immediate progeny. They lived for centuries; they had plenty of time to do this. Remember that the ice age, if we reconstruct it along Biblical lines like Oard did, if you map this out the ice age peaked about 500 years and melted back in the following 200 years, and it was during this melt down when the ice on Antarctica began to build up. So that would indicate these maps were done in the first 500 years after the Flood, which would mean they were probably done before Abraham.
Now why do I show this? Because I want to highlight the tremendous power of the Call of Abraham. This is high technology. We don’t want to ever think that Abraham was some sort of a caveman running around with everybody else in loin cloths. On the contrary, these people, to make a map like that one of the things you have to solve, not only do you have to measure latitude which is pretty easy because of the suns angle, the one thing that’s a problem and no one has yet explained how they did it, is how they measured longitude? The way we measure longitude is by clocks, very precise clocks, but otherwise if you don’t have a precise clock, there’s not any way I’ve ever read that you can measure longitude. So the key in early navigation, remember when Columbus and these guys were crossing the Atlantic ocean they had a longitude problem, not a latitude problem, they could find their latitude, the question was how could they find their longitude, their distance east and west, how do you do that? That’s a hard question; it involves a lot of trigonometry. It’s not a trivial solution. Yet these guys solved it. The question is, “How did they solve it?” Nobody knows how they solved it. Did they have clocks? They had something because they solved it.
The other thing that we want to show is the “Worldwide Key Words of Semitic Origin.” We’ll talk a little more about this next week, but one of the other strange things was found by another researcher by the name of Cohane. Cohane discovered that back of the languages across the earth there appear to be Semitic roots. For example, he took studies where they took the language of the Aztecs, and some of the Central American and South American civilizations, and they found a 20% correlation with Semitic language. Why do the Indians in South America and Central America have so many Hebraic words? Why do they build pyramids? Why did the first settlers build pyramids? The Spaniards conquered these people because these people had this thing in their memory that the men who built those pyramids were white people, and one day those white people that built the pyramids would come back. When Cortez and the Spanish conquerors came onto the land they were accepted very naively by the Indians because the Indians thought these were white guys and they were the ones coming back, they were the same guys that built the pyramids of generations before their fathers. And they were deceived, of course, and the Spanish slaughtered them; but that tragedy was born out of this strange history.
There’s one other little amazing fact of history. One of the great show cases of evolution is how do you explain things like the kangaroo in Australia, after all, there are marsupials that are different from the placental animals and they all seem to be concentrated in Australia. So obviously, say the evolutionists, that’s proof of evolution; they must have evolved in place. Well, there’s an alternate explanation, and that is that they were man introduced, that as man spread out from Mesopotamia he took animals with him, and an interesting characteristic of marsupials is they do great on journeys. Notice, Woodmorappe who’s done a lot of work on this: “many if not most living things have had a more widespread distribution than they do today …. As humans were forced to leave their habitations around Babel, they undoubtedly took animals with them for husbandry, game, and a reminder of their former area of living…. Introductions into barren continents had a much greater effect on biogeography than the later introductions of living things into already-populated continents.” Do you see why?
New York has a pigeon problem. Do you know how pigeons came to the US? On a boat called the Jonas headed for France in 1605. One boat? Now pigeons are coast to coast. It was brought by people. What would you do if you got off the ark? Would you take some animals along? Because there weren’t any animals out there, all the animals had to be introduced, either by wild migration or by deliberate human introduction. So peculiar biogeographic distributions of animals can be explained if we take the Genesis text literally.
One concluding remark, Job 40; if you have time you ought to go to that passage and read that because the critics of the Bible have a big fun game with that chapter, they say ha-ha, Job is talking about a mythological animal. And the reason they think it’s a mythological animal is because they say it just can’t be, leviathan as some kind of dinosaur, we obviously know they don’t co-exist with man, blah, blah, blah. It’s interesting that there are cave paintings with all kinds of animals, clearly identifiable, dogs, cats, giraffes and alongside of them these creatures that clearly look like dinosaurs.
What do we have someone painting real animals and mixing in mythological one’s alongside the real? If you study Chinese mythology you’re aware of the dragon motif. If you think of the description of a Chinese dragon, it sounds very much like a dinosaur. And then in 1977 off of New Zealand some Japanese fisherman caught this.
This obviously had been floating around some time in the water, and it wasn’t two hundred and fifty million years old, and you don’t have to be a biologist to know enough about the birds and the bees that where there’s one, there’s got to be two. So what are these things? Do we really control our zoology? Do we really know all forms, or are there forms yet out there that have never been seen by man? Or if they are seen, like this one, it’s totally misinterpreted to mean, “Well, it’s some unknown thing.” Well, the unknown thing bears a striking resemblance to a dinosaur. The point is that we know very little about many of these areas and we have, unfortunately, even as Christians, we absorb this stuff that we’re given out, just take it passively, never think about it, never try to correlate the Scriptures. And that’s what we want to learn the discipline of doing, of questioning what we are getting from the world system. Next week we’ll move into an analysis of Gen 10-11.
i Charles H. Hapgood, Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings.
Back To The Top