Featured in:
What makes us human?
Editorial
by Tas Walker
© iStockphoto/EricHood
Evolutionists say that man is a “part of nature” and “has emerged
as a result of a continuous process.”1
So, where do they draw the line between humans and animals?
The Bible says that man is distinct from the animals, created supernaturally by
God: “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground,
and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.”
(Genesis 2:7)
What makes us human? How we answer affects us profoundly: the way we view ourselves,
how we treat others, and the laws of our land.
If we emerged through a continuous process then what qualifies to be human? The
Spanish Parliament wrestled with this in June 2008 when their environmental committee
approved rights to life and freedom … for great apes—rights
previously restricted to people.2
In April 2008 a conference of scientists, philosophers and academics discussed this
question for two days in Los Angeles.3
Does our humanness come from our capacity to communicate, our artistic skills, our
poetry or our tool making? Is it in our ability to laugh and cry?
These evolutionary ideas about superior skills, superior abilities and the struggle
to survive have led the world into global conflict (p. 15). And when Charles Darwin
observed the limited abilities of the indigenous people of South America, he found
it hard to believe they were fellow humans (p. 42).
Our humanity does not depend on our abilities but on our heritage. We are human
from the moment we are conceived.
A humanity decided on ability is a shaky foundation indeed. When do babies,
who cannot speak or fend for themselves, qualify? What about those who are handicapped,
by an accident, say, or with Down’s syndrome? Do they miss out?
With the rise of evolutionary philosophy in the West, the sanctity of human life
has been unravelling. In 2001, the Netherlands was the first country to legalize
“euthanasia”—the medical killing of the terminally ill. In 2008,
Dutch doctors presided over more than 3,200 deaths including 550 deaths “without
request”.4 Now, there
are calls to allow physicians to euthanize “defective” or “unwanted”
newborns.5
Creation affirms we are human because we are descended from Adam and Eve, whom God
made in His own image. Our humanity does not depend on our abilities but on our
heritage. We are human from the moment we are conceived. So human life must be cherished,
and children raised to know the Creator (p. 52).
Some dismiss the story of Adam and Eve as myth. But the scientific evidence supports
the biblical account, not the idea that we are related to apes (p. 46).
Respect for human life comes from the Christian view of man’s origin. People
are valuable because we bear God’s image, as God stressed to Noah after the
Flood: “Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a
reckoning; … For in the image of God He made man.”
(Genesis 9:5–6).
Noah’s Flood is not a myth, either. Geologist Dr Steve Austin has uncovered
massive physical evidence revealing the magnitude of that cataclysm (p. 28). Even
dinosaur fossils contain evidence that the global Flood was recent (p. 18).
So, enjoy this issue of Creation magazine. Marvel at the stunning evidence
for creation, including the pulsating design of plants (p. 36), the aeronautical
ability of dragonflies (p. 51) and the picturesque plumage of parrots (p. 12). May
it strengthen your trust in the Bible. And may your confidence grow in what it means
for you to bear God’s image.
A reader’s commentChandrasekaran M., Australia, 1 February 2010
Your statement “Our humanity does not depend on our abilities but on our heritage. We are human from the moment we are conceived” is really true. I might add to it “ … in spite of all the mutations (copy errors) along the way” which you already imply in the article.
From the moment a human baby is conceived, its DNA is different from its mother’s or father’s DNA. It is very sad when the people justify abortion saying it’s not a human being.
I know you would agree to this that even though we are human we have potentials to behave like animals and some to exercise this potentials which the Bible call it the old man or the flesh or the fallen adamic nature.
Because of this Darwinists might then say we are no different from animals. This would be another example of “bait and switch”. |
Related articles
References and notes
- Humanist Manifesto I, 1933. Return
to text.
- Roberts, M., Spanish parliament to extend rights to apes,
Reuters, 25 June 2008; <reuters.com/article/idUSL256586320080625>, 11 December
2009; see also Going ape about human rights.
Return to text.
- What makes us human conference, <whatmakesushuman.info/program.html
(11 December 2009). Return to text.
- Craine, P., Former Dutch health minister admits error of legalizing
euthanasia, Life Site News, 2 December 2009; <lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/dec/09120207.html>.
Return to text.
- Ideas promoted by evolutionary “ethicist” Peter
Singer. See ‘Bioethicists’
and Obama agree: infanticide should be legal. Return to text.
| Creation.com reaches millions of people each year–many of these aren’t believers in our Creator and Savior Jesus Christ. How will we reach them without your support? Please consider a small gift today.  | | |
|
