EZEKIEL
and YHWH’s
Judgment
for the
Good News
PEOPLE
VOLUME VIII
Man
EZEKIEL and YHWH’s
Judgment for the
Good News People
Volume VIII--Man
by
an unworthy servant
And you shall know the truth,
and the truth will make you free.
(John 8:32)
Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho. The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States. Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.AgeEnd.Com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA.
Contents
Volume VIII--Man
CHAPTER PAGE
- Cover Page 1
- Title Page 2
- Contents 3
- Publisher’s Preface 5
Part X--The Race Question
107 Evolutionary Problems I 6
108 Evolutionary Problems II 21
109 Evolutionary Problems III 30
110 Evolutionary Problems IV 45
111 Evolutionary Problems V 62
112 Creation in the Word 75
113 More Racial Alterations 90
114 Answers in Blood Types I 103
115 Answers in Blood Types II 115
116 Acts 17:26 Concluded 121
117 Answers in the Torah I 126
118 Answers in the Torah II 142
Part Y--More on Race
119 Demographics, the Flood & Noah’s Ark 155
120 Post-Flood Demographics 162
SHEERIT YISRAEL
PO Box 473
Calder, Idaho 83808, USA
Publisher’s Preface
Greetings! The following presentation is volume eight of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.AgeEnd.com web site.
This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world. In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one.
Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material. It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message!
The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1. It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins: left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers).
For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope.
With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers. May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him. Shalom (peace) to you and yours!
an unworthy servant, Hanukkah 2003 CE
Chapter 107--Evolutionary Problems I
Maoz Israel
The Jun 2003 “Maoz Israel Report” (p. 1), as published by the Maoz Israel Messianic Jewish group of Tel Aviv, Israel, said: “There are four elements that define a people: language, religion, culture and cuisine.” Admittedly, these four qualities are important. But there is still one more element missed by Maoz Israel which is of far greater importance in defining a people. It is race, as will be addressed in comments to follow.
Science on Race
In truth, perhaps one of the most important subjects of all time facing so-called humanity (at least, for worldly unconverted people, who do not turn to the Hebrew Scriptures to establish righteousness and right living) is the question of race and racial origins of people at large.
Historically, there were times when some scientists and so-called scholars broached this issue. But no one can argue with the reality that has come into play in the post WWII era when almost no one will even utter the word “race.” The world’s peoples have been so mesmerized and zomibiized on this subject that it is impossible to have any discussion about it whatsoever in any sense.
Generally, when one says the word “race,” in whatever context, the immediate reaction from most modern peoples, and particularly from most modern Americans and Christian Westerners (who are the most zomibiized of all), is absolute hostility and the uttering of words about racists, White supremacists, etc.
Of course, the so-called scientific world is about as locked in confusion and misunderstanding as is true with the rest of so-called humanity. In some respects, the alleged scholars and brains of the land are the worst people of all in addressing the subject of race and certainly in the Scriptural context.
Yet, the Hebrew writings defining righteousness have much material on this theme which no one seems interested in, though it is crucial information that even underlies the entire New Testament and the alleged “great commission” which Christians like to quote and preach about so often (in order to raise more and more money from the dumb sheep in order to finance ever more glorious worldwide missionary campaigns--after all, money is the name of the game).
While it probably is easy to appreciate that secular scientists (who completely reject the Hebrew Scriptures and the idea of A Great CREATOR) would foster and promote this ridiculous environment of ignorance and confusion, one must pause and wonder why Christian and Jewish scholars at the various “Bible colleges” and religious teaching centers would be just as ignorant and confused.
Therefore, it seems that in the real world, everybody is lost on this subject. And generally, people refuse to even address it in any aspect--Scriptural, secular or whatever. It has become the greatest taboo subject, perhaps of all time. What a tragedy this is for people searching for truth (because they must inevitably go out of their way to even approach a discussion on the truth about race).
The March to World Government
Part of the dilemma is that the world is largely under Satanic control right now, and it is marching full time to world government. Anything that can impede on this march to world government has come under enormous Satanic opposition. This influence affects everybody in the general society. It is a rare few people who can avoid this powerful spiritual influence (either directly or indirectly).
Obviously, in order to have a one world state governed by a one world rulership system, the question of race and how people interplay has fantastic implications. Probably, it is this reality which has necessitated the extreme push by Satanic and demonic powers to influence all of so-called humanity in a certain adverse direction on this subject.
In this push, no one has been purposely left out. True, there are a few students of truth who have had brains and strength enough to not buy into the prevailing Satanic teachings. Some of these persons probably are protected by YHWH and influenced greatly by His Spirit of Truth (in the vein of being in the election, as discussed in previous chapters). But there aren’t many persons around in this category.
Subsequent chapters herein will discuss the motion for world government and the establishment of world social “gods” which are promoted to all of the world’s people by all facets of global power and influence. The subject of race fits precisely into this classification (as will be covered in the later chapters).
The Official Position
Consequently, Satanic powers that invented and promoted the stupid theories of evolution and the stupid evolutionary development of man have obviously played a key role in the current scientific thinking on race, now believed by perhaps all of society (other than the few exceptions, cited above, as possibly being protected or promoted by YHWH).
This all of society perspective includes almost all Christian and Jewish scholars and brains at the supposed scientific levels of religious teaching and scholarship. Thus, virtually everybody has bought into the Satanic approach--including local religious pastors, priests, elders, teachers, and so forth.
Hence, the theology of Satanic evolution has designed, established, and defined the modern concepts of race. The reason for this development and motion is manifestly a furtherance of the New World Order which is quickly developing on the global scene, right now!
The Groundwork
“The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia” (p. 702) lays the groundwork for the present state of ignorance and confusion by offering a small paragraph of a little over one inch which discusses “race” (perhaps one of the most profoundly important themes of all time and it receives almost no space from Columbia).
This encyclopedia is not much different from the others. Virtually all modern encyclopedias and dictionaries have little to say on this issue. Again, race is the taboo subject for people today. In historic times, books of knowledge and learning did broach this theme--but not today.
The Columbia position (p. 702) on race is that race involves biological groupings or subspecies of human beings on the basis of certain physical traits which were transmitted by heredity through genes.
Supposedly, these physical traits are not always exhibited in the totality of a given race (thus, the issues of skin color, nose shapes, eyes, etc can “theoretically” vary within races--but this does not seem correct in the real world, in terms of pure thoroughbreds or complete full bloods who have not been subjected to earlier genetic alterations from some man-made or man-induced action or actions).
Per Columbia, these different physical traits arose from mutations (the popular evolutionary word used to describe differences--ed), selection (also another popular evolutionary word--ed), geographic adaptation (another popular evolutionary idea--ed), and genetic drift (one more evolutionary concept--ed). In other words, we have the different races and kinds of people in the world today because of evolution.
However, the tragedy of this scientific explanation is that it does not represent the Hebrew Scriptures (either the OT or the NT). It is all fiction and make-believe which simply will not hold up to truth and righteousness.
This background on the evolutionary world of so-called scholars and brains takes the student of truth to the next point of assessing how this evolutionary thinking now permeates the entire Christian Church, with few if any exceptions.
Thus, Christian Evolution
It is amazing that so many people, including Christians, believe in, support, teach and advocate evolution (which was just described and as addressed earlier), although many hypocritically claim otherwise.
Now, this statement will shock many readers of this paper. Surely, "good" Christian people would never believe in and support evolution, one might argue. But they do so, as can readily be seen in any discussion on the origin of the human races.
For example, most Christian Churches and peoples interestingly speculate, guess, think, assume and presume that all of so-called humanity (including all of its differences, varieties, kinds and representations all over the globe) do, in fact, descend from a common pair of humans named Adam and Eve and/or as developed by evolutionary processes.
This theology is, of course, the basis of Christian false worship which stresses the brotherhood of man and the need for Christian preachers, teachers and evangelists to go out in the world with their “Gospel” to convert and change all humans/humanoids to their beliefs. Christian writer Sydney Cleveland typifies this in his view that “we are all brothers and sisters in Christ” (Nov-Dec 1997 “Sabbath Sentinel,” p. 10).
However, a student of truth should pause and give this theology some careful thought and consideration before jumping on the band wagon of acceptance. Does it really sound logical and plausible and is it genetically possible that a true, homogenous pair of human beings named Adam and Eve could produce the incredible human variation now visible on planet earth today?
Despite this popular, proud, vain view, it is interesting that in the heart of Black Africa, true, 100%, Black people reproduce true, 100%, Black children, kind after kind.
In some (few) places in Scandinavia or the Baltic states, 100%, pure, White people reproduce 100%, pure, White children, kind after kind. And in some places, in perhaps Mongolia, 100%, pure Mongoloids reproduce 100%, pure, Mongolian children, kind after kind.
A Mormon Evolutionist
This writer once sat near an "educated" Mormon biologist, of sorts, on an extended airplane trip across the Pacific. Although he was theoretically a Christian believer, he had evolutionary ideas and thinking about the source of humans/humanoids across planet earth in our time.
This man believed that Adam and Eve had "evolved" from some earlier form of life (while there may have been previous life forms on an earlier earth, he allowed that the evolved Adam and Eve were themselves unique in some ways when they existed 6,000 years ago).
And then, in conformity with the traditional thinking of Christendom, the Mormon dogmatically asserted that from Adam and Eve, all of the present races, varieties and kinds of humans/humanoids evolved (as found on planet earth today). In other words, Adam and Eve produced the now present White, Black, Brown, Yellow, Red, etc peoples (in skin and hair color) across the globe.
As proof of “evolution,” this person argued that alleged human beings have been and are continuously evolving, as they have never reproduced kind after kind since the time of the first pair. In his warped mind, homogeneous married men and women, as he saw it, did not and do not necessarily reproduce copies of themselves.
In his thinking, all of the fantastic varieties, kinds, races and differences in so-called human beings proved conclusively that evolution was true. After all, they all had evolved, in his eyes, from a common, single pair (based upon mutations and natural selection, as outlined formerly).
A Sardis Woman
In another separate situation, this writer also came into contact with a Sardis, Sacred Name, Sabbathkeeping, believing woman (of sorts) some years ago, who likewise parroted the same common Christian nonsense. This woman also assumed, guessed, thought, believed and presumed (from intellectual pride and vanity) that all humans/humanoids descended (evolved) from Adam and Eve.
This Sardis woman, under discussion, predicated her great intellectual "brilliance" upon the theory that the huge varieties, kinds and breeds of domesticated dogs were all brought about through selective interbreeding from a single, common, original pair which she conceived was created in the beginning by The CREATOR.
In her view that dogs had so evolved into the 100 or so modern breeds, then it stood to reason that supposed human beings had also so evolved from Adam and Eve into the huge assortment of different peoples all over earth today.
Well, in both instances (with the woman and the Mormon), this writer tried (unsuccessfully) to explain that all of these varieties and different kinds of both so-called humans and dogs (in terms of the woman) did not, in fact, descend (evolve) from one, single, homogeneous, common pair.
In each situation, there was more than one kind of progenitor involved to produce the assortment of dogs and humans/humanoids found on earth today. And while the involved, original progenitors could all reproduce and interbreed, they represented distinctively separate and different creations by The CREATOR.
The cases for a creation of the different species of both dogs and humans/humanoids will be addressed in some detail in comments to shortly follow below.
The Evolutionary View
The alleged evolutionary development of life on planet earth was discussed in some detail in a previous chapter. There is no intent to repeat that presentation at this time.
Suffice to say, modern scientists assert that life started in a bowl of primordial soup (actually, the latest theory is that this bowl of soup was a mud puddle or pond scum--May 31, 2002, “The Week,” p. 14). There once was a theory that life started in the ocean, but the belief now is that the oceans were too salty to start life.
From the mud puddle, bowl of soup, or pond scum (or whatever), the theory is that life evolved into the fantastic representations now visible over earth.
Of course, this view has it that all hominoids descend from a common tree trunk on this theorized evolution of life. Actually, Christianity has almost the same view on humans/humanoids--in that the huge variation seen today descend from an original common pair (thus, from an original trunk on a tree).
Some New Science
A University of California law professor named Phillip Johnson wrote a book in 1991 which seriously questioned the evolutionary theory of life; and yet, did not exactly subscribe to the creation ideas of Christians and Jews. Johnson’s work was in the form of a book on “Darwin on Trial.”
Johnson’s work was summarized in the May/Jun 2002 “Biblical Archaeology Review” (p. 16), in that “life is so complex that some sort of rational designer must be behind it.” Going on, proponents of this new scientific thinking accept an ancient formation of the earth (billions of years ago); and believe that organisms have evolved in some limited forms ever since. But they reject the argument of natural selection (ibid, p. 16).
The April 26, 2002, “The Week” (p. 9) had a whole write up on “Another challenge to evolution” which focuses upon some of the details of the work of Johnson. “The Week” says that Johnson’s position is that life on earth did not evolve by mutations, but from a blueprint drawn up by some intelligent outside force.
Actually, over the last several years, a number of UFO buffs have toyed with the thinking that early man was transferred here from some other place in the universe. Apparently, Johnson’s position is close to this; and even arguably, is not far from creationism, as advocated by Christians and Jews (actually, most modern evolutionary scientists dismiss Johnson’s work as being merely a rehash of creationism).
While it is unclear to this writer how much evolution Johnson would allow, the fact that he spoke of blueprints raises some question about whether his scheme would agree with the Christian theory on the surfacing of a single man and woman who produced the huge variation now visible over earth by evolution or whether he would opt for several different blueprints of different forms of man.
It would be logical, per both Johnson and indeed even from the UFO buffs and their theories, that man was developed on earth from different blueprints or transferred here from another place in the form of several varieties. Thus, it might be that these new attempts to explain life on earth are more contrary to the ideas of the evolutionists than even Christian and Jewish thinking (which agrees with the evolutionists).
Therefore, the presentation to follow in this and succeeding chapters will make more sense to people like Johnson than it will to most Christians who are obsessed with the theory that there was only one original pair of humans, who evolved over the ages to present the huge assortment of people now visible (this Christian view is, of course, almost precisely the same as historic evolution theory).
More on Dogs
In the case of dogs, as mentioned above, it is true that various kinds of domesticated dogs, as well as wolves, coyotes, dingoes, jackals, foxes, etc (in the canine family), can all evidently interbreed and reproduce mongrel, mixed offspring. But this fact does not prove, suggest or imply at all that all of this variety came from a common, single pair, as Christendom often alleges, teaches and asserts.
On this point, it is interesting that in raw, undefiled (by man) nature, there are a host of different kinds and varieties of animals in the canine family which can all theoretically interbreed and bring into existence mongrel offspring. But they don’t naturally cross in nature, though they are fully capable of crossing.
And of this variety, it is enormous since there are some 35 species of wild dogs in the world (including the famous dingoes and highland dogs of Australia), 14 species of foxes, several different kinds of jackals, 19 species of coyotes and a huge assortment of wolves, including 32 species of just gray wolves, 24 in the Americas and 8 in Europe (per “Encyclopedia Americana”).
None of these just cited canine numbers include earlier extinct species or subspecies which also must be considered.
Admittedly, man can do so-called wonders by selectively interbreeding animals in a domesticated environment. But that’s not the way it works in nature. At best, in nature, breeding is done on a random basis and not on the planned, controlled breeding assumed in natural selection. True, man has created a number of different breeds of dogs in this controlled situation. But this is not the reality of nature and wild animals.
Ducks
In this discussion, it would be well to pause for a moment and also take a look at the world of ducks. One encyclopedia (Americana) says that there are at least some 116 different species of wild ducks in the world today, not counting extinct species. And this does not include the subspecies which can also be enormous (there are some 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks alone).
But the interesting thing about all of these ducks is that, in nature, they fly near each other regularly and often inhabit nearby areas. Yet, they never cross or mix, although they seem fully capable and able to reproduce.
In nature, you never find different kinds and created orders of ducks interbreeding and selectively breeding to form new kinds and varieties of ducks. They stick to their own kinds exclusively--just as the different canine varieties never cross.
No Mixing in Nature
Therefore, what one finds in the wilds of nature, and as obviously created in separate creations by The CREATOR, are hundreds of varieties and kinds of wild life which never seem to mix and cross in nature, although they are all of the same families and fully capable of interbreeding and reproducing. Let it be said again, these many different species never appear to mix and cross in nature--naturally.
They avoid each other like the plague. They stick to their own created kinds and orders. Assuredly, they do not naturally interbreed. Of course, man has and can pen up a wolf or coyote and make it cross with a dog--just as man can forcibly cross a donkey and a horse. But such crossings are unnatural and occur only because of man’s interference someway in the reproduction processes.
There is a theory among some scientists (particularly evolutionists, but also persons advocating creation science) that varieties in nature in the different families or types capable of interbreeding (like the canine family) do selectively interbreed to produce new varieties in nature. This is called “micro-evolution.”
There is no arguing the capabilities of different species and varieties in family groups to interbreed. But what this writer must question is the theory that in raw, undefiled nature, these different varieties do interbreed. If there is any of this interbreeding naturally in today’s mixed-up world, logically, it must be traceable to man’s upset of nature in some way. Otherwise, even micro-evolution seems out of the question.
More on River/Dabbling Ducks
Take the case of the just cited 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks. It would be easy to account for all of these subspecies on the basis of internal crossings among themselves. However, that theory simply won’t hold water as one can quickly perceive with a little logic.
If there was just one variety of river or dabbling ducks in the beginning, then this one variety would have always produced kind after kind with no variation. Thus today, instead of 36 subspecies, we would only have one breed or specie of river or dabbling ducks.
But let us suppose that there were two, three or more varieties of river or dabbling ducks in the beginning. In this instance, one can more easily speculate that over the ages they did cross in nature to build the present situation with 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks.
However, even this supposition won’t hold water; because in nature, wild life simply reproduces on a random basis and without the controls needed to produce the 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks. Admittedly, man could take three or so breeds or river ducks and reproduce them in a controlled, pen environment to eventually replicate 36 subspecies (or even more than 36 varieties if man so desired).
Tragically, all of these attempts to justify the 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks fall short and won’t measure up to truth. If there were two, three or more major varieties of river or dabbling ducks in the beginning, and if they did randomly cross in nature, over the ages, they all would mongrelize into a melting pot of confusion and particularly as they moved toward uniformity.
Random interbreeding in nature of kinds that can breed and reproduce would only make for a mass of confusion with none of the resulting ducks being in definable and recognizable varieties (as is true today with the definite 36 subspecies). Not only would they be all mixed up, but their chances for survival (in the vein of survival of the fittest) would be greatly reduced or perhaps even eliminated.
The fact that there are 36 recognized and definable subspecies of river or dabbling ducks simply spells out a creation of them in the beginning. They would have never survived in this dimension of 36 variations otherwise.
Yes, Micro Evolution is Out
Now, having made these remarks, if someone can speculate or even prove that a male of one river or dabbling duck variety did cross with a female of another variety and she produced a fertile egg from him and later it hatched to produce a mongrel duckling, this still would not alter the reality of the just made remarks.
This duck would be deformed and not fit into the pattern and habits of the other ducks. Probably, it would not survive and if it did survive and if it later further crossed with its given family of ducks (in the variety of the mother which produced the odd duck in the initial cross), its genes would be absorbed into the variety’s pool of genes fairly soon and would lose all significance.
The essence here is that the 36 varieties or subspecies of river or dabbling ducks will not prove or allow for micro evolution at all. It is impossible! Only a creation of all of the varieties in nature makes sense.
Exceptions?
Thus, evolutionists may speculate and theorize that these different created kinds cross, interbreed and evolve, but there is no evidence of this whatsoever. Additionally, the fact that on rare occasions in heavily populated areas, a partly wild, female coyote crosses with a domesticated dog is seemingly because of the unavailability of a male coyote mate due to man’s upset of nature and goes to prove nothing.
A similar rare condition has reportedly surfaced in nature when a particular deer specie in NE Washington was almost wiped out in recent years because of man’s encroaching “civilization,” coupled with an over-hunting of bucks.
In this case, it appears that an isolated female deer of such a group has on occasion accepted a male of another deer specie when she cannot find a mate of her own kind. The resulting fawn is born defective and sterile. Since it is genetically defective, it would become a ready prey to predators in a true natural environment (which is not what one finds today where man has killed off and altered the species of wildlife).
Another rare situation surfaced in 1998 when ruddy ducks in Britain, migrating to Southern Spain, were found to be so “sexually voracious” that they mated there with European, white-headed ducks and produced hybrid offspring that were no longer true-bred birds (3-1-98 Guardian, quoted in the Oct 18-24, 1999, “Washington Times”).
The ruddy ducks are not native to Europe, but were introduced there 50 years ago from America. Therefore, if there is any problem with these ducks, it cannot legitimately be placed on the doorsteps of The CREATOR or of nature.
This writer doesn’t have the details on this fear and proposals to kill the ruddy ducks before the migration. But if these ducks do cross in nature, the reason surely must be because man did upset their natural order and habitat in moving them to Europe. In the context of (created) nature, it is hard to fathom that such a reality would take place (just like the crossing of the river or dabbling ducks is illogical and unprovable).
One more tragic cross arose in recent years in North Idaho, along the St Joe River. Historically, this area had Cutthroat Trout. Someone got the bright idea to also introduce Rainbow Trout into the area. The Rainbow and Cutthroat crossed and have produced some hybrid fish. But all of this arose because of man’s stupidity and not because these kinds would ever cross in raw, undefiled nature.
Another Issue
“The Week,” of Jun 15, 2001 (p. 18), had a report of some recent examples of the crossing of different animal species (like horses and zebras, lions and tigers, different kinds of owls, and different varieties of fire ants, etc). The article said that this mingling is caused by humans who have taken wild species from their natural habitats and confined and crowded them into non-native habitats in wildlife refuges (as in Africa).
Hybrid animal offspring tend to birth defects and shorter lives. Many are born sterile, as is the case of the deer, discussed above.
There is another fall-out in the man conceived efforts to cross species. The Sep 9, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 14) noted that the Nanjing Zoo had crossed a lion and a tiger to produce a hybrid cub, born on August 22, 2002. It was not clear whether the zoo used artificial insemination or what to produce the cub. Interestingly, this aberration was rejected by its lion mother and soon died from an infection.
Obviously, such abnormal crosses simply do not occur in nature as designed by The CREATOR. Thus, the theory that different kinds of species naturally cross in nature is pure and simple hogwash. It exists only as a figment in the mind of evolutionary proponents (who will not accept the simplicity that YHWH created the different, natural varieties in families).
With having said that these hundreds of kinds of canines, ducks, etc. never seem to cross in nature (that is nature--undisturbed, undefiled and unaltered by man), it is interesting that all of the domesticated animals and birds we now know of “theoretically” came from man's efforts to domesticate them from earlier wild stock, as evolutionists see it. Later comments will disprove this theory!
Selective Inbreeding
In reality, it is only man who can and does take different kinds of wild animals and birds from nature and in the man-made and man “controlled” environment, force species of different created kinds and orders to reproduce and cause new mongrel kinds which can be continuously and selectively interbred to eventually create a new breed (apparently, it takes about ten generations or so to create a new breed of dogs).
Additionally, within a specific kind, man can and has selectively interbred them on the basis of some particular quality or characteristic--like size or some other factor. Small, miniature animals are produced by this method. But typically, this just doesn’t happen in the wilds (if undisturbed by man). Of course, man follows this interbreeding practice “within” various species and breeds.
But this is all done in the man controlled and man forced environment (where the species lack freedom to move, room about and choose their mates in the natural, random way ordained by The CREATOR). Diet can also affect size somewhat and particularly so among humans/humanoids (within limitations). So man can alter diet and help attain some desired end on size.
Of course, any “free” animals in nature (or even in a domesticated environment) subject to crossing could and would only breed on a random, chance basis and would never ever “selectively” interbreed, as man can force them to do in a controlled situation. But even here, this is certainly not the real world type of stuff. In the wilds (if undisturbed), different species simply do not cross, although they physically can do so.
In most animal species in nature, it appears that a female ready for mating will mate randomly with the first male of her kind to reach her.
Strength
In many instances, females end up being taken by the physically strongest and most powerful males of the kind without any regard to other physical characteristics.
Take the case of wild sheep, horses, etc. The males fight it out and the winner gets the females. In the case of some animals, it appears that the female is the dominating sex, in contrast to the male.
But again, domination or strength seems to be the primary determining quality and not something else--although there may be a few minor exceptions. For example, chickadee males seem to compete in their world for the attention of females (May 24, 2002, “The Week,” p. 14). Possibly, peacocks or other birds may use their feathers, strutting abilities or something else.
Whether a particular male or female has a certain unique coloring or discoloration seems generally quite irrelevant, certainly in the majority of cases. A random occurrence and/or sheer strength usually determine the breeding. Among many species, a pecking order is established--based on strength and power to preserver. Breeding is often predicated on this factor.
Consequently, it is quite manifest from any observation of nature that wild animals do not practice selective breeding practices (so-called natural selection) on the basis of alleged variations or mutations--beyond the obvious strength (dominating) factor just mentioned. In other words, survival of the fittest prevails (as occurring in strength).
Separate Creations
Tragically, it seems that ignorant, prejudiced, proud people have got it in their warped minds that all of the ducks (and perhaps geese and swan, too, since they are in the same family) came from a single, common pair; that all of the domesticated dogs, wild dogs, wolves, jackals, foxes, coyotes, etc came from a single, common pair; and that all of the humans/humanoids all over the globe came from a single, common pair.
These dumb people predicate their ridiculous evolutionary beliefs on the fact that within the various families of the created order, reproduction is possible.
These so-called scientists and thinkers then postulate that from one breed or variety, the many other varieties of a specie (capable of interbreeding) mysteriously “evolved” in nature and/or were domesticated by man over the ages. Even many Christians believe this nonsense.
They insist on wanting to believe that The CREATOR made only one pair of canine. And from this single pair, the hundreds of varieties (capable of interbreeding), now evident, evolved. They make the same assumption about ducks, geese, cats, mice, rats and you name it (including so-called human beings).
Again, man may create new varieties in his controlled pen, but new varieties do not surface in true nature, undefiled by man.
What these foolish evolutionists lose sight of is the fact that a single variety would have always reproduced “kind after kind” in raw, undefiled nature--which is the Scriptural formula. They would have never selectively interbred in nature on some supposed quality (i.e. coloring, spots, etc).
In historic times, as well as today, purebred animals in the wilds of nature reproduce kind after kind. They never create new varieties and kinds (as can happen in the man-controlled environment where man forces different varieties to interbreed, contrary to nature).
In truth, based upon what the Scriptures do say and what is readily apparent in nature, it is sufficient to make one correctly perceive that The MOST HIGH separately created all of the different kinds and varieties of life on this earth, including the hundreds of species of canines and ducks and the original, major races of man.
Domesticated Versus Wild
Before leaving this sub-topic of where domesticated dogs and ducks came from, this writer would like to acknowledge that there is some evidence from the Scriptures that The HIGHEST specifically created certain breeds and kinds of domesticated animals (like some different dogs) in a specific creation, along with various "wild" living creatures (like different wolves) in Genesis 1:21-25.
The evidence for this creation distinction between domesticated animals, as opposed to wild animals, will be presented in a later section of this study. Suffice to say, and regardless of what YHWH created in domestic animals, man has interbred them over the years with each other and wild stock (illegally) in the man controlled environment.
Therefore, as there were separate creations of different breeds, kinds and varieties in domesticated and wild animals, man later crossed these creations to bring into existence new mongrel kinds also capable of further interbreeding and crossing, as has been done over the years by man to produce the enormous variations and (man-made) breeds of dogs, ducks, horses, cattle, etc now present today.
Man-made Crosses Are Not Natural
But such man-made crosses do not happen and will not survive in nature--only in the domesticated environment by selective and controlled interbreeding. Such man-made crosses of canines, ducks or whatever are just not capable of adapting and surviving on their own in nature (that is nature undisturbed and unaltered by man).
This is an important point. Man has created a number of varieties of certain domesticated animals and birds (like dogs, ducks, etc). But in general, these man-made “kinds” could never survive on their own in nature. What man-made breed of dogs, cats or ducks could survive in the wilderness of raw, undefiled nature? Most or perhaps none of them would make it.
Horses may “possibly” be an exception here since some of them have apparently transitioned from man created mongrel stock into wild Mustangs, as happened in early America. But in general, the man-made domestic varieties could not survive in raw nature if they were thrust into it and had to survive based upon their own genetic qualities. Most could not find food or they would quickly become prey to predators.
Maybe, these man-made breeds can make it with man’s help and in man’s controlled environment (where man feeds and takes care of them), but they just won’t hack it in the wilds (which are undisturbed and unaltered by man) where their survival depends upon the creative genius of The CREATOR, Who made the various natural kinds and varieties uniquely capable of survival on the basis of their own genetic merits.
Thus, by selective inbreeding of certain mongrel stock, it is possible over time to create new breeds of domesticated stock, as man does (which will generally reproduce kind after kind, but with few throw backs to original stock qualities).
However, all of this is artificial and man-made. It is totally foreign in the natural order where it simply does not happen. In nature, species do not interbreed selectively, as Charles Darwin argued.
Man Can and Does Illegally Cross Kinds
However, in addition to dogs, ducks and the few other species noted, man has domesticated a number of different animals and birds from nature and has inbred them to form various and sundry new "man-made" breeds. But in all cases, there has been no evolution in these instances.
All man has done is to take two differently created species (domesticated or wild), which are capable of reproduction, and then force or make them cross in an artificially imposed environment. This is selective interbreeding and is not found in nature where breeding is done randomly and not selectively.
And in terms of this man-made inbreeding, it should be pointed out that all such efforts are categorically illegal and sinful by YHWH's Word. Yes, according to the Torah (Lev 19:19 and Deut 22:9-11--which make genetic engineering totally illegal, to be later discussed), it is wrong to take two different created kinds of animals, birds, seeds or whatever, and to cross or mix them, although such reproductions are fully possible.
In Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:9-11, the issue has to be focusing upon species which physically can cross and reproduce and not on two kinds that cannot cross, although this later situation would also be covered when men try to make such reproductions--as for example, in a chicken with a turkey.
Clearly, the issue in YHWH’s law involves man's rebellious efforts to cross kinds that can physically cross, as in the canine family or other groupings. The fact that YHWH stated that law suggests that its primary focus has to be on species which could sexually cross and reproduce offspring.
If the different kinds could not cross (like a chicken with a fox or a chicken with a rat), there would seemingly be no point in having this law.
An Ancient Legend
Incidentally, there is a Jewish legend that in Genesis 6:12, all flesh became dissolute (“The Book of Legends,” p. 26). Per R. Azariah, in the name of R. Judah ben Simon--all flesh became dissolute--a dog mated with a wolf and a rooster with a peacock. R. Luliani bar Tibrin said in the name of R. Isaac--Even the earth acted like a harlot--when planted with wheat, it brought forth tares.
This mention of wheat and tares in this ancient parable could have some particular application over the centuries because of YESHUA’s parable about the wheat and tares (as will be described and commented upon in some detail in a later chapter).
Chapter 108--Evolutionary Problems II
The Major Races
With this backdrop, from the prior chapter, it is prudent to make mention here of the fact that from an anthropological point of view, there seems to be at least three primary or major races of man on this globe. These three are: White (Caucasoid), Black (Negroid) and Red (Mongoloid, which possibly can appear as Yellow after an infusion of White genes--if there is no true Yellow race).
The previously mentioned “Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch with the Fragments of the Jerusalem Targum from the Chaldee” (p. 10) says for Genesis 1 that in the creation of man, “the Lord Elohim took dust from the place of the sanctuary, and from the four winds of the world, and mixed from all the waters of the world, and created him white, red, and black.”
In “The Yellow Peril” (p. 399), first published in 1911, before man’s attitudes were to be contaminated with the new post WWII theories of racial integration and amalgamation, writer G. G. Rupert suggested that there were five major divisions of man--Caucasian (White), Mongolian (Yellow), Malay (Brown), African (Black) and North American Indian (Red).
While a dark bronze or red color is associated with the American Indians, mention must be directed to the historic Southern Irish with their blazing red hair and sometimes red complexions and freckles.
Could the red Irish be another separate race to be added to Rupert’s list or are they just a part of the White race? Comments to follow will offer some possibilities on this phenomenon on the basis of miscegenation.
Four Races?
But more realistically, the ancient Egyptians recognized four major races (White, Black, Red and Yellow)--which are probably more logical (per Charles A. Weisman, in “The Origin of Race & Civilization”).
Per this view, the Red connects to the Mongolians and not to the Irish, who are theoretically a part of the White race. Yellow could be a Yellow-Brown presentation and particularly so in the hot areas of the earth where yellow can become brown from the sun.
The belief of four major races probably has merit for reasons that will be outlined shortly in this study. And if the four major races are correct, it must be noted that the way they came about will still allow for the correctness of the ancient Jewish Targums which suggested three originally created races in Genesis 1, of White, Red and Black.
In other words, the original creation was of the three basic races, as provided for in the Targums. But in later acts, the fourth (the Yellow race, which is usually connected to a group of small boned people across the globe) came about through acts of sin and rebellion toward YHWH’s laws (in the form of miscegenation).
Nevertheless, from a historical perspective, it is these few major races and these major races only which have existed in Adam’s time, although it must be acknowledged that the prior world in pre-Adamic history (between Gen 1:1 and 1:2, elsewhere discussed herein) evidently had one or more classes of hominids/hominoids of some type, whose bones and presence has been discovered by archaeologists and anthropologists in modern digs across the planet (like those in Africa of the famous Leakey family).
The fact that the pre-Adamic earth had some sort of a hominoid population is plainly suggested in Genesis 1:28 in The ELOHIM’s command to Adam to be fruitful, multiply and replenish the earth.
In the Jul-Aug 2002 “End Time News” (p. 3), writer Colin Deal points out that this phrase is also used in Genesis 9:1 in the commandment to Noah and his sons. As Deal asks, doesn’t these words suggest a prior population on earth?
Evolution is Impossible
Thus, evolution has not produced the huge variety and assortment of humans, dogs, cats and ducks from a single pair each of homogeneous progenitors.
No! The truth is that there were certainly, as a minimum, two and more likely three or more separately created kinds of ancestors (fully capable of reproduction) of people, dogs, cats and ducks in order to cause the variety we behold today.
Of course, with three or more different classes of basic stock of seemingly any animal class capable of reproduction, it is possible to sexually cross them in a “man-made” controlled environment and generate entire new breeds and kinds.
Although man has this capability, it must be again pointed out that such acts constitute sin and are illegal by YHWH’s Word--as established in previous comments.
But for a variety of new breeds and kinds, it takes "more" than one common, homogeneous pair of progenitors.
The continuous random inbreeding of one specific, truly homogeneous breed, kind or specie cannot possibly generate "new" breeds, kinds and species. All they will do is reproduce kind after kind (which is the Scriptural formula for the entire creation--Gen 1).
Categorically, it takes two or more kinds to produce "new" breeds through sexual reproduction and inbreeding. But even here, such interbreeding does not occur in nature where breeding is accomplished on a random basis (generally, with no criteria beyond strength).
New Breeds Through Miscegenation?
Beyond the pure reproductions of Blacks from Blacks, Whites from Whites, Reds from Reds, etc, it is worth noting that when males and females of the three to five human stock races mix, the resulting offspring is a mongrel or mulatto which in no way reflects the 100% characteristics of either parent. Such reproductions do not replicate the original or full blood kind after kind (as was true with the creation in Genesis 1).
How can kind after kind reproduce when both progenitors are mongrels or of different racial stock? At best, they will only reproduce mongrel kind after kind and not true full blood kind after kind. A mongrel or mixed breed of whatever sort is not a true kind or breed in the strict sense.
Please note what happens when two dogs of different breeds are crossed. It’s hard to be sure of what the pups will look like. If two mongrel dogs cross, it’s even more difficult to predict the appearance of their certain mongrel offspring--which can all be different, reflecting any number of characteristics from their various ancestors.
And since both Black and Mongoloid genes predominate over White genes in so-called human beings, any such mixtures mean that the children will basically be Black or Asian, but with only small possibilities of having many European characteristics. More Black genes mean more Black characteristics. In particular, color (and color of hair) does predominate.
Also, of course, as the same mongrel children continue to breed and cross back with Whites, and as the white genes begin to displace in number and quantity the colored genes, then the succeeding generations will begin to appear to be more and more "white" over time.
Admittedly, as interbreeding continues, it appears that most kinds of life forms, in at least the human/humanoid and domesticated animal kingdoms, have the propensity to breed toward a measure of uniformity (which will be assessed in the succeeding chapters).
Once a proper breed is produced with some uniformity, the males and females will begin to produce a limited measure of kind after kind in their offspring.
Understanding the Variety
The great variety that one can behold among people is easily explainable in the context of miscegenation (in the world today and in terms of skin color and color of hair).
White is reflected on an opaque object that reflects all wavelengths while black is produced when all wavelengths are absorbed (“Concise Columbia Encyclopedia,” p. 183).
In short, the color white is made up of all colors while black is the complete absence of color. By combining white and black in a certain ratio and certain method, it seems possible to create any desired color. In this sense, one might build the case that it is technically incorrect to call truly 100% Black people-- “Coloreds.”
On the basis of this truth, some students of the Scriptures and men have theorized that The MOST HIGH only created the White and Black races and that all other productions have surfaced because of the various mixes. While this explanation seems plausible, this writer leans in the direction of the ancient belief in four main types.
This strange reality of nature, of course, accounts for the great variety of colors of human beings and particularly in skin and in hair. In previous comments herein, mention was made to the situation with the red coloring of the skin and hair of so many of the Southern Irish, to be later discussed.
It’s not hard to perceive at all that a certain mix of Caucasians and Mongolians, Negroes or Yellows (to be later described) would produce the red complexions of the Irish. With this background, there is no reason to speculate on any red complexioned Irish race at all. Manifestly, miscegenation can account for these people.
Consequently, it has only been man's illegal and sinful acts in defiance of Genesis 1, Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:9-11 (as mentioned in the preceding chapter) which has brought into existence the huge assortment of domesticated dogs and ducks and the billions of mongrel peoples all over the globe.
Incidentally, there are a couple of other relevant texts which need mention now, though they will be addressed in some detail in a later chapter. Here, it should be noted that the Word prescribes that certainly in terms of Adam and perhaps all of the different major human races, man has been allocated specific areas of planet earth to live in (Deut 32:8; Acts 17:26-27).
Thus, Black Africans were evidently given much of Africa; Mongoloids were given Northeast Asia; Whites were given Europe; and the small Yellow-Brown peoples (who are correctly Hamites) were allocated the hot areas of earth from Europe and North Africa to SE Asia and the Pacific Islands.
Despite The CREATOR’s wisdom and thinking in apparently allocating specific land areas to the different major races, man chooses to move people around (or allow them to move) all over the globe to completely upset the creation. Man follows this same stupid practice in terms of the other created life forms as well.
Yes, Man Upsets Nature
Consequently, African killer bees were brought into South America for some ridiculous reason. And now, they are spreading (unchecked) all over both North and South America. Gypsy moths were brought into North America in 1869 to make silk. No silk was ever produced. But the moths became entrenched over much of the continent to completely wipe out many American trees.
Many years ago, some traveling circus or carnival brought some wild hogs from Europe to America to show off. While wild pigs were once common in parts of Europe and Asia, they were not historically present in the Americas. Some of the pigs got loose in NC and now they are running wild all over the Southern mountains. Though some people hunt them, they have caused an absolute crisis in nature.
The Japanese beetle came into North America somehow because of man’s stupidity and irresponsible actions. Now, they are all over the US eating up vegetable gardens in an unbelievable fashion.
Mediterranean fruit flies were brought into North America for some ostensible reason. Now, they are a constant threat to destroy whole orchards (which means that man is constantly spraying poisons to try to control them).
A late report from the Jul 9, 2002, “Spokesman-Review” (p. A1, A5) on “‘Frankenfish’ on the march” said that a monster snakehead fish from China was on the loose in ponds in Eastern Maryland. This monster fish eats anything and everything and cleans a pond or water way clear of all other fish and most other aquatic life forms.
The snakehead fish can live outside water for three days and can actually walk on its extended fins to move from water source to water source. It is unclear how many of these fish are loose and where they came from in Maryland--though speculation has it that a bankrupt, closing pet store may have dumped one or more of them into a local pond.
The Asian swamp eel, zebra mussel, fire ants, Asian painted turtles, Russian wheat aphids, redgum lerp psyllids and thousands of other varieties of life forms have been shifted to North America to completely upset nature.
Yet, man continues shifting things around; and then never understands why nature gets completely upset.
More Insanity
Asian chestnuts were brought to the US in 1900 for some crazy reason. They wouldn’t grow here. But they bought with them a dangerous chestnut blight or fungus which got started and virtually wiped out the entire US chestnut population. In recent years, some Southern pine beetles were brought into the Pacific NW to create enormous ecological problems.
And More Insanity
The Feb 15, 2002, edition of “The Week” (p. 18) had a news report on “Aliens are invading forests.” The gist of this story was that modern globalization is decimating America’s forests (per a report from the “New York Times”). What is happening is that global trade and commercialism is bringing a host of unwanted imports to the US.
For example, the foreign imports have included a fungus that is killing millions of dogwood trees, a canker that affects butternut trees, and a foot disease that is destroying cedars in the Pacific Northwest.
Forest ecologist Craig G. Lorimer of the University of Wisconsin notes: “To have so many diseases cause so many problems over such a short period of time is unprecedented.”
Lorimer adds that ”You get the impression that clear-cutting is the most devastating thing that’s ever happened to North American forests, and it’s not.” Every year, some 13,000 plant diseases are intercepted by inspectors at the nation’s ports and airports. But thousands more get through and are not detected.
An Intensification of the Problem
The May 27, 2002, “Time” magazine (p. 54-55) had a lengthy story by Jackson Dykman on “Meet the Beetles” which told about the Asian long-horned beetles which were brought into New York in 1996 in wooden packing crates from China and Hong Kong. By 1998, they were in Chicago and are now spreading out to other American towns and areas.
Dykman says that the beetles are big and hungry and are going after American hardwood trees (i.e. maple, poplar, birch, elm, ash, horse chestnut, and willow) like “tree-eating machines.” Already they have destroyed thousands of American trees. If they get loose in the rest of the United States, damages could run as high as $650 billion.
Entomologist E. Richard Hoebeke of Cornell University says that “it’s the greatest threat to U.S. forestry since the gypsy moth.”
To respond to the threat, US authorities since 1998 have been using powerful insecticides and acoustic sensors. The sensors detect the sound of the larvae chewing on the trees. Discovered trees must be cut down and burned.
Along with the Asian long-horned beetles, the Sep 9, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 66-67) assessed the problem in an article on “A long, slow autumn,” by Jessica Ruvinsky.
Ruvinsky noted a whole host of pests and diseases which have been introduced into the US from abroad, primarily in the last ten years (like the citrus long-horned beetle, pine shoot beetle, emerald ash borer, hemlock woolly adelgid, white pine blister rust, beech bark disease, and in 2000, a new unidentified fungus which is spelling out something called the “sudden oak death”).
Obviously, the problem is exploding all over the world as these various bugs and diseases are moved around from place to place to completely upset the delicate balance of nature.