A Personal Note on My Dual Human-Origins Thesis

Revised October 2, 2020

I am taking this opportunity to explain to you why I believe that my thesis of creation should be seriously considered. As you know, there is much debate today about what should be taught in the public schools on human origins. This debate gets people who have never thoroughly studied the issues giving their opinion on the subject. Some Christians are teaching that you cannot believe the Bible and also accept theistic evolution. This encourages young people, who are continuously being told that humans evolved, to believe that the Bible is untrustworthy. But we know that the Bible is trustworthy and that faith comes by hearing the Word of God and that this leads a seeker to salvation. On the other hand, other Christians say that God accommodated His inspiration of the Bible to the erroneous current views of that day. They can accept evolution, but now they may have an inferior view of the inspiration of the Scriptures. Models that assert that the story of Adam and Eve is not to be taken literally do not do justice to the creation account in Genesis 2,

 where it relates the creation and the temptation and sin of Adam and Eve. The young earth view, which teaches that Adam and Eve were the first humans and that they were created about six thousand years ago, contradicts the mass of evidence that science has accumulated that revealing that modern humans have lived upon the earth much longer than this. Others believe that you can interpret science to produce evidence for a model that places the time of the appearance of man at about forty thousand years ago. Then they believe that you can stretch the genealogies to place the creation of Adam and Eve this far into the past. But such a scenario is quite impossible because it is unreasonable to interpret the genealogies in this manner and it places the creation of Adam and Eve before the inception of agriculture. About fifteen years ago, I realized that no theory that adequately harmonizes the Bible and science has been popularized in book form or on the internet. Since I felt a different approach was needed, I searched diligently and prayed for it. One night as I was studying the genealogies of the Bible, I was rewarded with mathematical evidence for a model that would truly harmonize the Bible and science.

My personal study of the human genome had brought me to realize the importance of a fact I read in Matt Ridley's Genome: The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters (New York: HarperCollins, 1999), p. 448--life spans of humans are determined by over seven thousand genes. It was this realization that was very helpful in my discovering our origins. Since so many genes determine our life spans, we can view each gene as having a potential for a certain life span. We also can conclude that the genes from the male will influence the life span of the couple's child toward his life span and that the genes from the female will influence the life span of the couple's child toward her life span. Since the laws of probability will cause the total influence of all of these contributing genes to be the average life span of the child's parents' life two spans, we can conclude that the child will have the average of the life spans of his parents. An analogy to this would be the tossing of a coin. It has been shown that if you toss it a lot of times, you will come up with heads about fifty percent of the time and tails about fifty percent of the time.

From this, I concluded that when the descendants of Adam and Eve married pre-Adamites, the children of these marriages would have lifespans that would be the average of their parents lifespans. I proceeded to apply this assumption to an analysis of the lifespans of the patriarchs given in the genealogies of the Bible. My results were extremely rewarding. The life spans that I was calculating were in line with just what you would have expected from the history of the early Hebrews. I now had mathematical evidence that the descendants of Adam and Eve married into an existing human race. This being the case, it became evident that the human race is much older than six thousand years and that, yes, Adam and Eve could have been created about six thousand years ago just as the Bible indicates. My results also gave me evidence that a child's life span will be the average of his parents, since if this were not true, my application of this formula would not have yielded consistent results when this theory was applied to the actual life spans of the patriarchs.

It then became necessary to study the Old and New Testaments in the Hebrew and Greek to discover how we had missed this teaching. It took a few years to properly understand a number of passages, but I discovered that this is just what the Bible teaches. Unfortunately, this interpretation of the Bible has evaded us, and the result has weakened our Christian apologetic.

In regard to the biblical teaching, Genesis 1 is speaking of the creation of the pre-Adamites through God's process of evolution; Genesis 2 is the account of the creation of Adam and Eve and the Garden animals directly from the hand of God. The subject of Genesis 6:1-3 are the descendants of Adam and Eve. This passage makes reference to the decrease in the lifespans of the descendants of Adam and Eve  married. These descendants of Adam and Eve married into an existing human race.

To be more specific, I discovered that Genesis 2:4 refers back to the creation story of Genesis 1 rather than to the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis 2. We must conclude this from the syntax of the Hebrew as explained in the appendix of my book. Furthermore, I discovered that the word "generations" in this verse should be translated here "descendants." It should read, "These are the generations [descendants] of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day the LORD God made the earth and the heavens" (KJV). These pre-Adamites must have descended from the heavens and the earth because they are called "descendants of the heavens and the earth." Recently, I have found further strong evidence that the Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 cannot be referring to the same creation account. My study of the Hebrew syntax, specifically the way the Hebrews used their major conjunction, revealed that the Hebrew of Moses' day would have realized as he read through the book of Genesis that the narrative moves on to a new creation of man in chapter 2, a creation separate from God's creation as recorded in Genesis 1.

Genesis 5:1-2 defines "the man" as the descendants of Adam and Eve. Genesis 6:1-2 explains that "sons of God (better translated "the sons of the gods") married the daughters of the people who were created as told in Genesis 2: "And it came to pass when men [Heb., the man] began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God [better tr., the sons of the gods] saw the daughters of [the] men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose" (Gen. 1-2, KJV). God was displeased with these marriages with the pre-Adamites because they were "sons of the gods," that is, idol worshipers. The result of these intermarriages were the the men of name, the great leaders who lived before Noah's flood. 

It is important to understand how the book of Genesis is divided and to grasp the place that Genesis 5:1-6:8 holds in the Genesis narrative. This section is the only section of Genesis that is called a book Calling it a book indicated that it is complete. Genesis 6:3 tells us that the intermarriages between these two races would eventually result in an average life span of 120 years: "And their days shall be an hundred and twenty years.'" (KJV) It was a series of these intermarriages that brought the average life span of the descendants of Adam and Eve before the flood down from over 900 years to 120 years and the average life span of the pre-Adamites up form 60 years to 120 years. The patriarchs did not intermarry as much with the pre-Adamites as did many of the descendants of Adam; therefore, Shem lived to be 600 years. Due to their sin, particularly, their violence, God destroyed these people who had a life span of 120 years in Noah's flood. Noah and his family was saved through the flood. Due to Noah's marriage to a woman who had a lifespan that was much less than his (277 years); this is why Noah's son Shem lived to be only 600 years. As the descendants of Noah continued to intermarry into the pre-Adanuc race, the lifespans of their descendants continued to drop.

A study of the verses in the Bible that seem to contradict this dual origin thesis shows that they actually do not contradict it. This view of the Bible's teaching on the subject of origins will now yield a very good harmony between the Bible and science. My 2020 edition of New Evidence for Two Human Origins: Discoveries That Reconcile the Bible and Science, dealing extensively with the subject, should be ready for purchase in a few weeks form AuthorHouse; Amazon may still be selling the 2007 edition. But the Amazon electronic version is always the latest version available.