Unresolved questions can give confusion.....
Frequently asked questions
Many people can not come to faith in the one true God because they are staying with unresolved questions. This article aims to meet people in this. Of course it is not possible to answer all questions here. There are too many. Finally all people are different. The one is worrying with this and the other with that. But there are however questions that come back again and again. Therefore some frequently asked questions are answered here.
If all humans are descending from Adam, with whom are the sons of Adam and Eve (Cain and Seth) married then? (Assuming that Abel, who was killed, not married).
Impression of Cain and Abel, two sons of Adam and Eve
Answer to Question 1
Of course they knew in that time still no marriage ceremony, as we know that. But in every case "fidelity" is the essential element of the marriage. Also in that time it would have been so, that partners, who had chosen for each other, had to remain loyal to each other. Let us call this fidelity the marriage. Further we read in Genesis 5: 4 that Adam got sons and daughters, though the daughters are not named. So Cain and Seth probably married one of their sisters or nieces. In any case one of the sons of Adam must have married an own sister. From Leviticus 18: 9 we can conclude that the Jews were not allowed to marry their own sister. But that was just many centuries later, at the time of Moses, who passed God's laws to Israel. Why was it allowed at first and later no more? Because the risk of getting children with an aberration becomes more and more greater as the mankind becomes older. When a man and a woman get offspring, their DNA with the genes is copied to their child. The child thus receives double genes for everything. For each property, for example the size of the ears, the child receives a gene from the father and from the mother. When one of both genes is defective then, the good gene makes, that yet it is all right with that property. But if both genes are defective, the child gets an aberration.
When two people, who have a close relationship, get married, their genes will have a great similarity. The probability becomes much greater then that they get a child with 2 defective genes for one property. So the child will have in that case one or more aberrations. To prevent this God had given in Leviticus those marriage laws.
But when Adam and Eve were created they had no yet defective genes. For God had created everything perfectly well. Only after the Fall (into sins) destruction and misery came into the world. But that did not have immediately its full effects on everything. The chance that their children had defective genes was still very small. The genes of Adam and Eve were then copied still only once. But the more they were copied in the later offspring, the more errors finally came in it. Hence some thousands of years later it was no longer justified, that a brother and a sister got married. That is why God forbade it in the book of Leviticus.
But undoubtedly the sons of Adam and Eve simply married their sister or niece!
In Genesis 11: 5 is written that God came down (to the earth) to view the Tower of Babel. But isn't God omniscient? Doesn't He know everything immediately? Doesn't contradict the Bible itself then, if it says that God came down to watch something, as if He could not see it well from a distance?
Impression of the Tower of Babel
Answer to Question 2
God is indeed omniscient! Indeed it was not necessary for Him at all to come down to watch something. But God finds often pleasure in proposing Himself as Someone with human properties. In reality God is infinitely great. We humans can not understand God in everything. Like an ant does not understand everything what a man is and what he does, so we can not understand God to the bottom in everything. No doubt the ants communicate also with each other. For almost all animals do that, whether they are birds, dogs, or cats, etc. (Maybe this is not true for the single-celled animals). Ants can also run over the keyboard of a computer. But of course they have no word or expression for computer. For they understand nothing of that. Similarly we humans can not understand everything of God. In essence the difference between God and us human beings is still much larger than the difference between humans and ants. For God is the Creator of everything, while we humans are unable to make a living ant.
Because God is so infinitely high elevated above us, it is often pleasing to Him to speak about Himself as Someone with human characteristics. In that way we people can still anyway understand what God has to say us. This was even more true for the people who lived in the early centuries. They had still a very primitive way of thinking. Not that they were less intelligent than us, but in those days they had still little formative education. That was coming later gradually. The people invented for example a musical instrument. And then the newly acquired knowledge was passed to others, so that also others could make musical instruments and music. Thus the education came only slowly into being. Because of the primitive way of thinking of the first people God has done even more effort to present Himself in such a way, that they could understand. Even this sentence about effort of God is still adapted to the human abilities of mind. For God never needs tot do effort (I mean: heavy tired making work) for something. He simply does what he wants, even if it concerns gigantic galaxies, in comparison with which the earth is only a tiny dot.
If there is a God of love, why there is so much misery in the world?
Sometimes there is a direct relation between disobedience and stubbornness on the one hand and misery on the other hand. But often not.
Answer to Question 3
This question is often heard. Some people ask this question to demonstrate with that, that thus there is no God. Others would like to believe in God, but struggle with this question. The answer to this question is however, that by the sins a curse has come over this world. And we people suffer under that. Because of His righteousness and justice, God can not simply turn a blind eye to the sins.
This argument is not very convincing to everyone. People consider the sins as not so bad. God's response on that they see as exaggerated. But are the people right who think in this way? Let us look just very honestly at the sins. People see the sins of others often through a magnifying glass and the sins of themselves many times through a diminutive glass. If someone has offended us or has done us an injustice we often do not forget that in whole our lives. We can keep than the other lifelong at a distance. But we ourselves can hurt or unfairly treat another without realize anything of that. And if we already feel something of it we consider it often only as a trifle, which is too unimportant to talk about it. From these differences we see already, that there is something wrong with our sense of justice. If we then extend the line to God, we must recognize that also in relationship to Him we can not judge ourselves purely and right.
Let us consider some other examples:
1. Sometimes children have sorrow when they are reprimanded. But what becomes of them, when they are left to themselves? If they steal from shops or otherwise give trouble, then the parents are also guilty if they do not take appropriate measures.
2. Suppose we have decided to be full of love to our fellow men, and that we meet a drug addict who begs for money. Do we give instantly money then? If we do, the chance is great that the money will also be spent for drugs. The addict can think it unkindly then if we go through. But sometimes we can not do otherwise. For then there is need for much more to help that person really substantially.
3. Or suppose that someone has committed a murder and has been sentenced. Can we liberate that other then without reason, even if we would have the power to that as a judge? No, for the justice must have its course, surely if the killer has not even yet repentance for his crime.
The above standing is a extreme example, but we can fill in here everything. If someone has committed a traffic violation and does not intend to moderate his dangerous way of driving, then such a person must be punished too. Otherwise he continuously brings others into danger.
If we people have already the opinion that we can not simply turn a blind eye to everything, how can we expect from God that He does? His sense of justice is perfect, because He is perfect in everything! There is moreover a substantial difference yet between the above examples and our real situation before God. God is not only our Judge, but we are even also His property, because He has made us. Therefore He has just the more the authority to punish us, when that is righteous in His eyes. In the article on this website about the Lord Jesus is still more information about God's justice in relation to us sinful people.
God is certainly a God of love. But not in our human way, but in His way. It is not a real solution, when God would condone all sin without any reason. For then the people simply continue to sin. They remain lie, steal, kill, etc. That is why God is working on a total plan, a plan that offers a total solution. This means that He is going to make eventually a new and perfect world, a world without misery, pain, sickness and sin.
Who will come there finally? People who at first want to acknowledge and confess their sins and depravation, and subsequently put their trust in the Lord Jesus, Who suffered and died for the sins of the people. But this also means that they give their lives to Christ, and that they want to love and serve Him with their whole being, all their mind, and with all their strength. They are purchased by Christ with His own blood. Christ did not only die for the sins, He also rose from the grave on Easter morning. Therefore also these people will rise from the grave and will be allowed to enter God's glory, when God's time has come for that. And that is the time after the Second Coming. Christ will in God's time return to this earth and make everything new and perfect. Then fully will be proved that God is indeed a God of love.
In the Bible are such strange things, for example the story of Samson with enormous strength.... or the story of the Flood, by which even the mountains came to be under water.... can not we better regard those stories as fairy tales?
Samson causes the temple of Dagon to collapse.
Answer to Question 4
What standard do we apply in fact when we call something a fairy tale or not? What we are used or is known to us? A black man from the interior of Africa has probably never seen snow and ice. Are snow and ice therefore a fairy tale? And an Eskimo from the Arctic regions has probably never seen a Negro. Is a Negro therefore a fairy tale? Of course not. So we can not take our own knowledge and experience as the norm.
To begin with the story of Samson: It was very special, that Samson had such extraordinary power. He grabbed a lion in its jaws and tore it into pieces. Also he took up a town gate and carried that onto a mountain. But why would the Almighty God not be able to give such a power to a human?
People who have made much study of the occultism and the demonry have discovered, that even the devil can give superhuman strength to a man. This still exists! Fortunately it occurs not so much, because God keeps the demons at bay (e.g. to protect His own children, that is: the true believers). But on their own ground (of occultism, witchcraft and satanism, etc.) the demons have generally much more power. Insiders who are delivered by God from this demonic world have confirmed this. Also the true stories on this website confirm it. Well then, if the devil can give this power to people, then God is surely able to do that!
And the story of the Biblical Flood then? Is not that exaggerated? The answer is: No! Even at the top of Mount Everest, the highest mountain of the world, one has found marine fossils!
Noah receives the animals at the ark.
Besides, why are there billions of fossils found in this world? Well considered this is very remarkable. For when an animal or plant dies under normal circumstances, no fossil at all comes into being. The remnant digests and there remains ultimately nothing others than some ground (or some bones if they do not digest). But fossils are understood to mean all residues of plants and animals preserved in rock. And those are only created when the animal or the plant is suddenly overwhelmed by mud or sand. And this just happened in the Flood! The water of the flood first made that various strata were pushed up. Subsequently those earth layers fell down, whether by the weight (if they were heavier than water), or because the water dried up.
If geologists find several earth layers, one above the other, they are already soon inclined to state that the layers have been formed millions of years after each other. But if we think well and honest about it, we find that this is not so logical at all. For if there occur no natural disasters, we do not see a dividing line between the different layers. These lines are only created when the one layer is quickly thrown upon the other, while the layers among themselves (slightly) differ in their composition. And that happened in the Flood! So it is not surprising that fossils have been found, half in the one layer and half in the other. About this has been told already in the article of this website about the dating of fossils and stones. Furthermore we find in many places on earth (even until New Zealand!) different earth layers above each other, which have the same curving, without lines of fracture! This is only possible if the layers just dried up together at a later stage!
Furthermore it is the case, that people find the fossils of immobile and at the bottom living sea animals (think for example of shellfishes) mostly in the lower strata. And the fossils of the terrestrial vertebrates are mostly found in the upper strata. How can this be explained? The evolutionists see this as a confirmation for their opinion, that those marine animals lived tens or hundreds of millions of years before those vertebrate animals. The vertebrates would eventually be evolved out of the marine animals. But by going out from the Flood all is easier to explain. First the water of the Flood was bubbling up and took clay and sand with it. Later those earth layers sank back down. And when the waters finally subsided many watery areas became dry. So all kinds of sea creatures were first buried.
The land animals will initially have fled to the higher areas. But ultimately also those were overflowed. So they found their grave in the upper earth layers or they normally went to dissolution, if they were not quickly enough buried by a layer of earth. The latter has probably happened in the most cases. For there are relatively few fossils of land animals found, in relation to the found fossils of the sea animals.
Those fossils of sea animals, for example starfishes, jellyfishes, brachiopods, clams and sea snails, are dated by evolutionists at 530 million years old, but these animals look nowadays just the same as in that time! But something like this one will not read soon in a scientific journal, for there is mostly a strict censorship. The items must confirm the assumptions of the editors! However some sea animals are extinct, for example the trilobites and the ichthyosaurs. Present-day live specimens of these types one will not find anymore. But that does not mean yet that all kinds of vertebrates have evolved from them!
To return to the original question: Should the Bible be a book with fairy tales? Countless scientific discoveries confirm just the Bible! And moreover: If the Bible contains fairy tales, what image of God is left to us anymore then? In some religions God is only an impersonal force. Thus they speak for example about the yin and yang forces, which are in balance. But if we look at all the miracles that God has performed, both in nature and in special situations, then this proposition is absurd. It is inevitable that there is a God with an infinite intelligence! But this God has revealed Himself also as a loving God Who has given even His own Son into the death to save people. Would this God have saddled mankind then with a book full of fairy tales? Of course not!!! In the Bible God has revealed Himself to the people and when He reveals Himself He does it well! For it is in contrary to His love to give a revelation we can not trust!
In the Bible in Genesis 6: 2 and 4 is spoken about God's sons, who married daughters of men and got children with them. How is that possible? Is not there only one God? And does not God have only one Son, the Lord Jesus?
God's sons in Genesis 6 were probably normal people, but believing.
Answer to Question 5
This question has been interpreted by Christians in different ways. It is no shame however, when Christians do not understand all of the Bible. Finally there is a great cultural difference, if we compare the time of the Bible with the time of now. There are thousands of years between! Nevertheless lots of things are to clarify with the help of a thorough study.
We shall just see the whole Bible-section, so that we can read it in its context (where the King James Version is used again, because that renders the Hebrew parent language mostly very literally):
1. And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2. That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of
men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
Let us put some explanations, given for this subject, under the microscope.
Those sons of God were believers. For the believers are mentioned God's children in the Bible, e.g. in Matt. 5: 9: "Blessed are the peacemakers; for they will be called the children of God." Already in the Old Testament this name is already used, for example in Deuteronomy 32: 19: "And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters." And Deuteronomy 14: 1 says: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God."
Response to explanation A:
This explanation is probably one of the best explanations for these Bible verses. There is already written in Genesis 4: 26, immediately after the birth of Enos has been told: "Then began men to call upon the name of the LORD." Probably the descendants of Seth and Enos formed a kind of faith community. Because the book of Genesis has been written probably also by Moses (as the book of Deuteronomy), it is somewhat obvious that Moses also the faithful from the time before the Flood indicated with sons and daughters of God. Probably there was no faith community among the descendants of Cain, the brother of Seth. Plausibly therefore the women and girls from the family of Cain were mentioned simply daughters of men. Similarly the New Testament of the Bible speaks sometimes about "the world" to indicate the unbelieving people. For that reason it is quite well possible that in these Bible verses with daughters of men are meant the unbelieving women and girls from the lineage of Cain, and that the men from the believing lineage of Seth married them.
Those sons of God were inhabitants of another planet or another celestial body, who had visited the earth with their spaceship.
Response to explanation B:
This explanation has been based on fantasy and has very little basis to be acceptable. Throughout the Bible we read nothing about visitors of the earth from elsewhere in the universe.
The mentioned sons of God were angels. For the angels are called children of God in Job 2: 1.
Response to explanation C:
Angels are inhabitants of the heaven without human body. And the angels, fallen from God, are evil spirits which we can not even see. How then can they get human offspring? Moreover there is written in Matthew 22: 30: "For in the resurrection they (= the people after their death) neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." So this statement is wrong on any side.
In the Bible sometimes something gets the add-on "God's" to indicate that it is special impressive. So Mount Bashan is called a hill of God in Psalm 68: 15. (Unfortunately the King James Version has a wrong translation here, because the translators did not understand the verse. The Dutch translation of the "Statenvertaling" is better in this respect). And Psalm 36: 6 speaks about God's mountains (when we translate it literally), while there was only one temple mountain. In Ezekiel 1 is spoken of certain creatures. They are simply mentioned living creatures in the K.J.V. Verse 24 of that chapter reads: "And when they went, I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of great waters, as the voice of the Almighty." So they sometimes called the name of God or the Almighty to indicate that something was very impressive. So in Genesis 6 is spoken about impressive giants.
Response to explanation D:
This seems to be one of the best explanations. Giants have usually giants as offspring. And indeed in Genesis 6: 4 is talked about giants. And these giants misused their powers to do violence and injustice to others. This aroused the wrath of God so much, that He brought the Flood upon the earth. Thus it becomes also clear why the Bible just speaks about these giants as an introduction to the story of the Flood.
In summary: Explanation A and D are probably the best explanations for this piece from the Bible.
May be explanation A is still the best. For it is very obvious that Moses also here (as in Deuteronomy) the believing men denoted by "sons of God". This also explains better why Genesis 6 makes such a clear distinction between God's sons on the one hand and those giants on the other hand. Explanation A is further also very logical. That faith community among the descendants of Seth was probably but small. No wonder that after some time the men of it went to look also at women who did not belong to their own circle.
After a period of time there were giants. But also that is not so strange (even when we accept explanation A). In every nation there are smaller people and bigger people. When the bigger people marry each other, a generation of giants comes into being. So later among the Philistines there were also giants. In any case the giants of Genesis 6 abused their powers, which led to the Flood.
In the Bible is written (in Genesis 2: 7) that God formed the first man from the dust of the earth, but cannot we better understand that figuratively? Are not there found fossils of ape-men, that is: Creatures from the development phase between apes and humans? Does not this confirm the evolutionary theory?
Skulls with a slightly different form prove still nothing! A disease like rickets can already cause a crooked growth.
Answer to Question 6
It is a risky matter to draw all kinds of conclusions, if a skeleton or skull is found, which differs slightly from the average of a human or an ape. For there are among the people countless races (sometimes few in number of people) with a build that is different from that of the most races. Moreover within one race also all kinds of variations are possible. If someone has a metabolic disease, his body will develop otherwise than normally within his population.
Among the monkeys there is even more variety. There are many different types of monkeys, big and small. If there is moreover within such a type a monkey with a different build as a result of a disease or a defective gene, then it will be difficult at all to identify his skeleton, if that skeleton is found afterwards.
Some practical examples:
1. The Homo sapiens neanderthalensis (the Neanderthal)
This so called ape-man was walking bent, and therefore the scientists saw at first in it a precursor of man. Generally it is now understood (even by evolutionists) that they were ordinary people. Their bent posture was due to diseases such as rachitis. Further they could speak well, were artistic formed and were religious.
2. The Ramapithecus
Also this was viewed initially as a precursor of man. Later they discovered that it was an extinct type of orangutan (so a monkey).
3. The Eoanthropus
In this case they had not realized that a human skull had been placed next to the jaw of an orang-utan. For forty years this has been wrongly regarded as the missing link between ape and man.
4. The Hesperopithecus
Here there was only a single tooth. Later they discovered that this was of a rare type of pig, which still only occurs in Paraguay.
5. The Pithecanthropus
This is now considered as complete human.
6. The Australopithecus africanus
This looks very much like a monkey and evolutionists no longer consider this as an intermediate type between ape and man.
7. The Sinanthropus
This is now classified as Homo erectus. (See No. 10).
8. Other types of the Australopithecus
Still only one form of the Australopithecus they could explain difficultly, the Australopithecus afarensis. This was walking otherwise than most monkeys, but also not as a human being. Recently they discovered however, that it is just a monkey, which is walking on its knuckles.
9. The Homo habilis
Most anthropologists came to the conclusion that here it concerned a repository of types, which they had given already an other name, such as the Australopithecus. So this category has in fact no right to exist. But previously this category was portrayed as the abundantly clear link between apes and humans.
10. The Homo erectus
Here they mean different types. (So a main category). That is possible of course, if the classification happens orderly. In this we have types that were more robust than the average modern man. The homo erectus was walking upright, as its name indicates already. Further study of the build of the body and the archaeological-cultural discoveries revealed, that the homo erectus was fully human. Several evolutionists have recognized this.
In summary: The missing links between apes and humans are still missing. Time after time they thought, that they had found something like that and then however it turned out to be wrong again, or the findings were so doubtful, that even the evolutionists among themselves disagreed about the question if these findings were valid and had some significance. All in all, relatively very few discoveries of deviating types have been done. If there had been really an evolution of millions of years, they would have found also millions of fossils of transitional forms, given the large number of fossils that has been found in total. But it is far from that. Hence that they made sometimes ado about a single tooth. And then later it turned out to be of a rare species of pig!
But those who believe in the Creation, as described in the book Genesis, will find with joyful amazement how well the archaeological discoveries confirm the Bible! If one goes to conceive all kinds of stories from the Bible, which are told as history, figuratively, then one is located on an inclined plane. For if the one story has been meant to be figurative, why not the other? We have lost our grip then. For how do we still know then, that the Son of God really came to this earth to undergo the punishment for the sins? And if not, then we can not trust anymore in God's love and forgiveness because of the sacrifice of His Son. And the Bible just says (John 3: 16): "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
The previous paragraph needs an explanation, even for two reasons:
1. The expression "an inclined plane" is often misinterpreted. People imagine in such a way, that everyone who is on an inclined plane continues to slide or roll downward. This last is possible, but it does not need to be so necessarily. The fact is that sometimes a man can keep himself upward for a long time on an inclined plane, and sooner or later also can climb upward. That is why the expression "an inclined plane" indicates nothing more and nothing less, than that a certain situation (or a certain faith as in this case) is dangerous, because it can get worse more and more. But not always it goes from bad to worse. The use of this expression is therefore not meant to condemn others, but only to warn them.
2. Of course some stories in the Bible are meant figuratively. Thus we read in 2 Kings 14: 9, that the thistle on the Lebanon says to the cedar tree on the Lebanon: "Give your daughter to my son to wife." And in Ezekiel 17 we read of a great eagle, that takes a branch of a tree on the Lebanon, and plants it elsewhere into the ground, so that a new tree grows from it.
When we read these stories in their context, it is clear that this is not history, but a parable. So these stories should really be understood figuratively. But the Biblical history is very different. If the Bible tells something as history, we may conclude that it also actually happened. And who still doubts however if the Creation has been accomplished in six days, may also consider that God Himself confirms this, namely in the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20.
Exodus 20: 11: "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." If God Himself says this, who are we to contradict this?
There is for someone who believes in the Bible another strong argument to believe NOT in the evolutionary theory. The evolutionary theory is based on natural selection. This also implies that animals eat other animals and thus hold the population of those other animals within certain limits. But in this way the animal world is full of fear and pain. And animals also often die when they are not able for a long time to obtain prey. In short: It is a world full of misery. But in Genesis 1: 31 we read: "And God saw everything that He had made, and behold, it was very good." This testifies of a completely other world without pain and misery! This world corresponds to what Isaiah describes in Isaiah 11: 6 - 9:
6. The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and
the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
7. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
8. And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
9. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.
So it is possible too! What now is still exception will be in God's future the only reality!
So this is a total other world, a world full of goodness, grace and blessing! Thus it was originally after the Creation and thus it will become again in the future of God, when God is going to restore everything! The evolution with all its cruelty does not fit in that!! And in God's world there is always room enough for His creatures. The problem of overcrowding does not exist at Him. Look at the sky of the stars. The room is still almost total empty! And then we may think that space is so large, that the Earth is therein but a small dot. From the nearest star we would not even be able to see the Earth without a strong telescope.
Or is this space not so empty? It is quite possible that there are still worlds between the stars, which we can not even perceive with our limited senses. Indeed the astronomers perceive with a radio telescope already much more than with an ordinary telescope, which is based on for us humans visible light! This light has a limited wavelength. If the wavelength is too high or too low for us, we see already nothing yet. Often we can still feel something then. Many types of radiation are dangerous to humans!
It is just a good thing that God hides extraterrestrial life for us, insofar it is there. For this sinful world full of crime, hatred and war has more than enough of itself. But when Christ comes back and makes all things right again, worlds would may be opened for us! (For then we get a totally other body, that is imperishable and thus also has totally other senses!). But also then there is no lack of space. After all God is endless and unlimited, both in love and in greatness! But where God's goodness fills all, there is no room anymore for people and animals, which want to kill each other. And this is also true for the time during and shortly after the Creation, when there were still no sin and misery on earth.
How is it possible that the world population has such variation in skin colour? Can blacks and whites both descend from only two people, Adam and Eve?
Different skin colours
Answer to Question 7
The difference in skin colour seems to be more than it is. For it is only determined by the capability, which is recorded in the genes, to produce the substance melanin. Melanin is an organic pigment in the skin. People with a light skin colour have little melanin in their skin. And people with a dark skin colour have just much of this substance. Furthermore also the environment is very important. We all know that our skin gets darker when we are much in the sunlight. By the radiation of the sun extra melanin is produced. In this way the body tries to protect itself, for the melanin makes that we are less vulnerable to the UV radiation from the sun. Too much ultraviolet can lead to burning of the skin, skin cancer and destroying of the vitamin folic acid. By folic acid deficiency, for example, children can be born with spina bifida and other abnormalities. But much melanin is however unfavorable in areas with little strong sunlight. For then the formation of vitamin D3 is too much impeded. And that is among other things important for the formation of the bones. A lack of vitamin D3 may result in rickets, by which the bones grow crooked.
So for someone who lives near to the equator, it is advantageous to have a dark skin. And for someone who lives much more in the north or just in the south, a light skin colour is best. Besides there are 2 types of melanin: eumelanin (deep dark brown) and phaeomelanin (more reddish). It is also true that the possibility to produce melanin has been recorded in at least 4 genes in each person. In the human reproduction only half of it has been passed to the fruit. So the fruit gets (assuming that there are indeed only 4 genes involved in it) 2 melanin genes from the father and 2 of the mother. If one of both parents is white and the other dark, the offspring will be half-dark. For he or she receives 2 "dark genes" from the one parent and 2 "light genes" from the other parent.
But what happens when 2 half-breeds marry each other? Then their offspring can have (assuming 4 genes for the skin colour) 5 colours: Dark, mostly dark, half dark, mostly light and light! So it can happen for example that one child is brown, his brother or sister white and another brother or sister half brown. This is caused by the fact that the child gets 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 "dark genes" from both parents together. Perhaps this explanation is a bit difficult for some readers. But one thing becomes very clear: When brothers and sisters among each other can get a completely different colour, then it is also nothing special anymore to believe, that both blacks and whites descend from only 2 people, Adam and Eve.
How did the colours of the various population groups grow farther from each other? Genes can mutate, that is: change. Many mutations are caused by so called copying errors. Then the properties of the genes are not correctly passed to a next generation. But also all kinds of external factors cause mutations in the genes. Genes seem to be able to be changed much easier than many scientists think. American researchers examined 30 men with a mild form of prostate cancer. The men had to follow for 3 months another lifestyle with plenty of vegetables, fruit, wholemeal products, legumes, soy products and moreover more movement by for example walking regularly. After three months the researchers saw changes in activity in about 500 genes. Harmful genes were turned off and protective genes were turned on. It is therefore obvious (to return to our situation), that the genes also change under the influence of much sunlight. This gives a good explanation for the fact that the inhabitants of Africa are mostly darker than the people of Europe and North America.
To avoid a misunderstanding: The above standing is no evidence for the evolutionary theory. For in the theory of evolution certain organisms and animals become more and more complex. With the above standing this is not the case, but it concerns only shifts within the situation that already exists. The heavenly Creator has created within the DNA- and genes-system also possibilities by which the organism can get recovery or additional protection against threats from within and without.
Did dinosaurs really exist? And if so, when?
Dinosaurs were quite different among themselves, not only in size but also in appearance.
Answer to Question 8
Dinosaurs certainly existed. This is no point of disagreement for the scholars. Many fossils of these animals have been found, so there is plenty of evidence.
The opinions are however divided about the question when they lived. According to the evolutionary theory they were already extinct 65 million years ago, while humans came only 100,000 years ago into being. But is that true? There are many things that indicate, that the dinosaurs still lived some thousands of years ago, together with the people and the other animals! This also corresponds with the biblical testimony. For God created the larger animals and the people on the same day! What things confirm this further?
1. Many fossils of dinosaurs have been found. Fossils by itself indicate already exceptional circumstances. If an animal dies in the open field or in a cave, no fossil at all comes into being, because the remains of the animal simply perish. A fossil of an animal comes only into existence when the animal is suddenly enclosed by mud, or in every case earth that has been dissolved in water. And that is exactly what happened in the biblical Flood. During the Flood the water came from the sky (rain water) as well as from the ground (spring water). This water mingled with the earth and flooded the animals and the plants. At the end of the Flood the water subsided. The soil around the buried animals dried off and petrified after a period of time. This had a preserving effect and thus the fossils were created.
The fossils of the dinosaurs are often found in groups. Sometimes it is a complete family. For example: One or 2 parents, 2 smaller ones, 2 more smaller ones and a 'baby'. Under normal circumstances such a family does not die simultaneously. It only happens if the family members are suddenly buried together. And that happened in the Flood. Even evolutionists mentioned here the possibility of a flood! But what else could it be? There was also no indication of a disease or an attack by another animal.
2. The dinosaur fossils are far too fresh for being able to be more than 65 million years old. In these fossils they have found soft tissue such as blood vessels, and even blood cells and hemoglobin (the substance that gives the red colour to the blood, and is used for the transport of oxygen and carbon dioxide in the blood). Dr. Mary Schweitzer, one of the researchers who were involved in the investigation, had however difficulties to get published the research results in scientific journals. To her was simply told that it was impossible. But she herself even noticed, that the examined skeleton had a distinct cadaver smell. And even an evolutionistic scientist could not deny that. Further also a dinosaur fossil has been found with still 2 eggs in the body. Apparently the animal has been overwhelmed suddenly, even before the eggs could be laid.
3. Researchers who adhered to the evolutionary theory discovered in the fossilized dinosaur-dung the remains of at least 5 species of grass! They said themselves: "What we found was a complete surprise." Why a surprise? Because according to their evolutionary scheme the grasses only appeared on earth after the dinosaurs were extinct already 10 million years. So their schedule was set upside down!
4. In the Bible perhaps a dinosaur is already described, namely in Job 40: 15-19. There God speaks to Job:
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God: He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
The last words ('He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.') are maybe difficult to understand. But the Dutch 'Statenvertaling' gives as translation: 'Die hem gemaakt heeft, heeft hem zijn zwaard aangehecht.' That is in English: 'He Who made him, has attached his sword to him.'
In another translation they have translated the Hebrew word, which has been translated here (in the King James Version) as 'behemoth', as 'hippopotamus'. But in verse 17 is written: "He moveth (or: moves) his tail like a cedar." And a hippopotamus has only an insignificant little tail! Some dinosaurs however had a colossal tail as big as a tree! So probably here is spoken about a dinosaur. And that lived simultaneously with Job, for otherwise is was useless to point out that animal to Job.
5. Throughout the world stories have been recorded about dragons and such monsters. The descriptions have remarkable similarities and occur from Great Britain (on the flag of Wales is also a dragon!) across whole Europe to India and China. Also on pottery, embroidery and sculptures, etc. are images of dragons. From where did they get the imaginations? Apparently the first authors of those stories and images have still lived together with the dinosaurs, that were dragons for them. Dinosaurs is actually a collective name. There have been many kinds, like the Apatosaurus, the Tyrannosaurus, the Brontosaurus, the Dryptosaurus, etc. On average the dinosaurs were not so great, about as big as a sheep. But there were also huge species. The Seismosaurus for example had a length of 45 meters! The scholars do not entirely agree with each other, what animal was the largest. If one finds an incomplete skeleton, the overall size is sometimes difficult to calculate. But probably the Amphicoelias fragillimus was the greatest. The length of this animal has been estimated at 58 meters. No wonder that these animals appealed to the imagination, and that so many stories and pictures arose about it! Many images also correspond to the fossils, which are found much later.
In short: Just the found fossils of dinosaurs affirm again the reliability of the Bible!
During the flood all the dinosaurs did not die. Some survived in the Ark of Noah. After the Flood the animals could multiply again. Why then are they extinct yet? This question is not so difficult to answer. Nowadays there are also animals that are threatened with extinction, like the tiger, the elephant and the rhinoceros. Will they still live after 100 years, if the world still exists then as it is now? The mankind has often played a major role in the extinction of certain animals. Animals are killed because they provide meat to eat and to sell. Elephants are slaughtered, because the ivory of their tusks is enormous popular. Large animals are brought to an end because they are a threat to agriculture and settlements. Animals are often driven away from their natural habitat, when humans cut forests. And elsewhere the banished animals can often find difficult or not the necessary food, or the environment is otherwise not suitable to survive. Animals also die from environmental disasters and poison-discharges. It is for humans more difficult to maintain the so called bio-diversity than to destroy.
With the technology of today it is not still difficult to kill the largest animals. But also in former times they could it, for example with the use of trapfalls. Large pits were covered with relatively thin branches and possibly a thin layer of soil. And a beast of thousands of kilos broke through it guaranteed. They could also use fire against the animals, and poison from plants, which they mixed with their food.
But in any case the dinosaurs and other extinct animals, like the mammoths, really lived and much less long ago than the evolutionists think. And the Bible is affirmed again by the found fossils of all these animals!
There are people whose conscience has not developed, for example because of a brain disorder. What to say then about a sense of sin?
Answer to Question 9
This is an interesting question. In order to answer this question properly, we need to realize in which a person exists. A human has a material part (the body) and an immaterial part (the soul). Some people even state that there are three parts: Body, soul and spirit, because the Bible also mentions this 3. But the Bible is often somewhat poetic: Many things are repeated and mentioned with slightly different words. We also know this in English. For example we say: "I do that with heart and soul." But with "heart" and "soul" we actually mean the same. We also say for example: "through the fire and flames". Here it is even clearer that we essentially say the same thing twice, just to reinforce our words. In the Biblical languages people had a much stronger habit of saying things in double words, to make a greater impression on the listener or reader.
However we can also say: The soul is especially bound to the earthly life. Sadness for a loved one is then typically a characteristic of the soul. At the word "spirit" we can think of our spiritual fellowship with God.
Whatever the case: The brain belongs to our body. Many people think that everything only takes place in our brains. If these people are right, then it may be that there is indeed no sense of sin possible in case of a serious brain disorder. But: Does everything really take place within our brain? The answer is: No! With near-death experiences (discussed elsewhere on this website) there is no longer any brain activity at all. And then people just have very clear and bright experiences! When people have dreamed, they have mostly soon forgotten their dream. But people who have had a near-death experience never forget their experience anymore.
During a near-death experience, the immaterial part of man leaves the body
It just proves to be not true, that everything only takes place in our brains. And so it is with a sense of sin. Sin awareness does not go beyond our brains, but for a big part it takes place in our immaterial part, so in our spirit! And that is why everyone can have a sense of sin, even people with severe brain disorders!
Even animals have some sense of guilt, although their brain is much simpler than in humans. An evangelist had a dog. And the dog bit and broke the cell phone of his boss. Then the animal crawled from fear behind the bank. For he knew he had done something wrong!
Of course the sense of guilt of an animal is only superficial. But every person, also someone with a severe brain disorder, has the ability to have a deep sense of sin, and thus to go to God for forgiveness. Actually there are different types of brain abnormalities. Some have such a deviation because they have received too little oxygen during pregnancy or childbirth. In others there is something wrong with the chromosomes, due to another cause. But if you notice what these people understand about the spiritual things, then you are suddenly stunned! It happened once, that a somewhat older child, who had never been able to speak one single word, at a story about the Lord Jesus suddenly spoke: "Jesus!" Apparently the Holy Spirit broke through the barrier of his intellectual limitation!
Furthermore it is of course true that people with a brain disorder understand less of themselves and the world around them. If they do from pure ignorance things that are not good, they will have no sense of sin about those things. And then God will forgive them. With other wrong things they just will have a sense of sin.