Modern science, especially evolutionary science, presents many questions for the church to answer, although most of those questions are asked in a rhetorical fashion, with the expectation that we cannot answer them. In this, it is expected that our inability to answer those questions would prove science right and Biblical Christianity wrong.
There is an element of dishonesty in this, in that evolution is a theory, rather than science, even though it is presented to the public as science. However, it does not meet the most basic requirements of science; things like it being proven by experimentation and reproducible. To be fair to the evolutionists, it is impossible to prove evolution; but to be fair to the rest of us, they should acknowledge this, referring to evolution as a “theory,” rather than a “science.”
By presenting it as “science” – something already proven, they put the onus of proof on us, while not accepting that for themselves. Evolutionists point to the huge amount of data that has been collected, stating that it all supports their view, while ignoring some of that evidence which is unexplained or unexplainable. Evidence that supports an alternative conclusion is outright ignored and evidence that supports their conclusion is massaged to give it stronger standing.
This is no place stronger than in the fossil chain that supposedly leads from ancient primates to modern man. If we look at the fossils that are used to make up this particular part of the evolutionary chain, it is clear that there is a severe lack of data. In fact, evolutionary scientists regularly bemoan the fact that there is not enough fossil evidence to back up their theory.
Yet in the mid-1970s, a “Catalogue of Fossil Hominids” was published, listing almost 4,000 known fossil “individuals” in the collections of museums or research centers. That was 50 years ago and the search continues, meaning that there are many more today.
Yet in the process of trying to “prove” evolution, scientists have ignored many of those fossils, sticking to a rather small group which are widely known. Sadly, some of those which have been used appear to have been manufactured by those who supposedly discovered them; taking fossils they found and modifying them to create a “new” species of link in evolution. Great license has been taken in formulating humanoids from these fossils, with artists’ conceptions that go far beyond the evidence given by the fossils.
One such example is the fossil skull known as “Piltdown Man.” Most scientific study is done using castings, rather than the actual fossils, in order to preserve the fossils. Yet a well-known archeologist (whose name I won’t mention here) was allowed to briefly examine the actual fossil, before doing the bulk of his work with a casting. In his book, he mentioned that the teeth of the fossil clearly had file markings on them, while those in the casting did not.
Scientific understanding of the fossil collection known as “Neanderthal Man” has changed throughout the years. Originally thought to appear more as an ape, the scientific community has gradually changed their opinion. This was predicated on some serious errors made by the French scientist who originally constructed the skeleton of the first Neanderthal Man in 1908. His errors included:
- The spine being placed in a position that made the man hunchbacked. However, there was evidence in the fossils found to show that the man had both rickets and arthritis.
- The head was placed too far forward, in relation to the spine; making it unbalanced.
- The foot was only slightly arched, rather than a normal human arch. This would have caused him to walk more like an ape than a man.
- He placed the big toe far from the others, creating a gap that made the foot look like it had an opposing thumb, like the feet of monkeys and apes.
- These errors together made the center of gravity too far forward, meaning that the man would probably have fallen over if he tried to walk upright.
It is clear that the scientist who made this first Neanderthal construction had an image in mind of a half-man/half-ape and used the fossils he had available to him to create that image. Take the skeleton that he created, put a muscular body on it, with long, unkept hair and beard, and you have a savage looking man. But then, if you took one of us and had us live out in the woods, without any modern conveniences, and our musculature, hair and beard would probably have us looking rather savage too, after a few years.
Later discoveries showed that he was wrong and 44 years later the scientific community accepted a reconstructed Neanderthal Man, whose skeleton and posture is much more similar to that of modern man. Yet the old image is still being taught, either as the only image or as an “alternate view” of Neanderthal Man.
Genetics and the Neanderthal Man
More recently, studies have been undertaken on the genome or genetics of Neanderthal Man, comparing his genetic makeup to that of homo sapiens (modern man). This has been made possible by actual Neanderthal bones that have been found in more recent times, rather than just fossils, in which the organic material of the bones has been replaced by minerals.
These studies have found that “Neanderthals fall within the variation of present-day humans for many regions of the genome.” In other words, Neanderthals are similar enough to humans, that there is a distinct possibility that they are merely a branch of humanity, such as any other ethnicity is.
When we look at the wide variety of humanity who live on the earth today, it is clear that the genetic code that God gave us includes variations in size, sex, skin color, musculature, skull thickness, hair color and type, eye color and a host of things which are not so obvious. Some of the more distinctive characteristics of Neanderthal can be found in the world today, within populations who live in colder climates. Specifically, the bony ridge found above the eyes is similar to that found in some people groups living in the Arctic Circle.
This is, of course, not to say that those people are Neanderthals or that they are any less people than any of the rest of us. Rather, it is to say that Neanderthal is more like us, than different from us. Since the average cranial capacity of a Neanderthal was 200 cubic centimeters larger than ours, there’s a good chance that anyone who looks like a Neanderthal is highly intelligent, regardless of how they look.
Where Does this Fit in the Bible?
We can’t find the word Neanderthal in the Bible, because that word didn’t exist before the 1900s, when the first Neanderthals were discovered. However, there are still ways that we can fit him into the Biblical accounting. Since we don’t actually know what happened, these are theories, none of which can be fully proven or disproven.
First, we know that there was a difference between man before the flood and after the flood. Before the flood of Noah’s time, humans lived an average of over 900 years, according to what is recorded in the Bible. Noah himself lived 950 years. That meant that he could have known Abraham (nine generations later), who was 58 years of age when he died.
And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” – Genesis 6:3
Before we go any further, it is necessary that we realize that the way that God works is through natural means. The word “supernatural” shows us God’s influence on those natural means, because it refers to natural things working in non-natural ways. When God changes how things work, such as when He caused Balaam’s donkey to talk (Numbers 22:28), the donkey didn’t stop being a natural donkey, God just caused it to operate in a non-natural or supernatural way.
Practically speaking, there are two possible ways that God could have changed the natural order of things to limit man’s days to 120 years. Both have been proposed as possibilities by creation scientists.
The first of these is for God to change the environment that mankind was living in, so as to affect our bodies, shortening our lives. There are a couple of things we know of, which support this theory. First, there is the “firmament” that was above our atmosphere. Apparently, that firmament contained a lot of moisture, which fell upon the earth in the form of rain, being a part of the cause of the flood that happened in Noah’s time. That moisture would have cut the amount of ultraviolet light (UV) reaching the surface of the Earth. Ultraviolet light is destructive, causing aging of the skin, wrinkles, skin cancer and possibly other negative health-related issues.
The second of these is for God to modify mankind’s genetics, our “genome.” Since He created our genome in the first place, this would have been quite easy for Him to accomplish. All that would have been required is a minor change to the genome anyway, modifying human genetics to shorten our lifespan.
This second explanation, coupled with the Biblical account of the flood, can give us a possible hint as to what happened to the Neanderthals. If we assume that none of them were included in the direct family of Noah, then it stands to reason, based on the Bible, that they would have died out in the flood. Hence, we see Neanderthal fossils in the fossil record, but don’t see any recognizable Neanderthals in the world today.
Another Possibility
There’s another way that Neanderthals can fit into the Biblical account. That’s through Cain. After Cain killed his brother in Genesis, chapter 4, God drove him away from his home, saying, “A fugitive and a vagabond you shall be on the earth” (Genesis 4:12). When Cain complained about this, saying to God, “it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me” (Genesis 4:14). In response to this, God put a mark on Cain, keeping those people from killing him.
And the Lord said to him (Cain), “Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him. – Genesis 4:15
We have no idea what this mark was, as the Bible doesn’t tell us. But one possibility is that it could have been the distinctive bony ridged brow that the Neanderthals had. If that were the case, and this is only one possible theory, then the Neanderthals could be the descendants of Cain. Following the flood, we have no record of Cain’s descendants existing here upon the Earth.
There is one more thing here, which is worthy of note, even though it is questionable at best whether it has anything to do with our subject. That is, by keeping Cain alive and putting a mark upon him, rather than taking vengeance upon Cain for killing his brother, God gave him the opportunity to repent and turn back to God. This is important in that it shows that God’s will and desire was always that people turn from their sin and return to Him; before the birth of Jesus and even before Moses received the law.
What About Living in Caves?
The question of “cavemen” isn’t much of a question at all. Throughout human history, there have been times when various people have resorted to living in caves, either temporarily, because they had no other shelter available to them or as a protection from attack. The cave drawings and tools found in caves give no evidence as to when those people lived there, how long people lived in those caves, or whether they just stopped briefly, just that they were there.
If we look at the artwork found in various caves, it is not all that different from Native American art, depicting animals and the hunt. Yet the cave art found in European caves is understood to come from a much earlier era. Why is this so? Is it merely because Europe was more “civilized” than North America in the time when they first started discovering these caves? Is the age attributed to those pieces of art more of a reflection of the scientist’s prejudice than anything based on any provable evidence?
We find several times in the Bible, where people inhabited caves, even if only temporarily. The first of these is when Lot escaped from the city of Sodom, taking his wife and two daughters with him. The wife looked back and turned into a pillar of salt (Genesis 19:26). Lot and his daughters then went to live in a cave in the mountains. From the biblical account, it appears that they lived there for quite some time.
Then Lot went up out of Zoar and dwelt in the mountains, and his two daughters were with him: for he was afraid to dwell in Zoar. And he and his two daughters dwelt in a cave. – Genesis 19:30 (and following)
But Lot and his daughters aren’t the only ones we find in the Bible who spent some time in caves. While caves seem to have been mostly used for burying people in, David apparently lived in a cave for some time, when he was escaping from King Saul, who wanted to kill him.
David therefore departed from there and escaped to the cave of Adullam. So when his brothers and all his father’s house heard it, they went down there to him. – 1 Samuel 22:1
There are other Biblical accounts of people staying in caves; both from the people of God and of others. With that being the case, it is likely that others who are not mentioned in the Bible lived in caves as well. It is not uncommon for people to retreat underground in times of danger, even today.
Did Neanderthals Have a Soul?
Since the Bible doesn’t actually mention Neanderthals, we can’t know for sure whether they had a soul or not. If we accept that they are merely a branch, race or ethnicity of humans, then they clearly did. If they are humans who died out in the flood, then they did too. All humans have souls, are decedents of Adam and Eve and are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26).
When we use that term “image of God,” we must keep in mind that God doesn’t have a physical body. “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). Therefore, getting hung up on physical appearance can be misleading. Even getting hung up on genetic evidence can be misleading. The differences between the genome of homo sapiens and Neanderthals may be totally insignificant, when it comes to being in God’s image. What matters is what’s in the mind and heart. Genetics can’t show us that.
If, in fact, the theory I proposed is current, and Neanderthals were the descendants of Cain (and I’m not sure that theory is true), then the fact that God offered Cain an opportunity to repent and turn back to him would carry on down through his descendants, with all of them having the same opportunity to turn to God and have a relationship with Him, as did the other descendants of Adam and Eve.
Nevertheless, our understanding of Neanderthal Man’s spirituality and spiritual beliefs really depends upon our own. If we accept the premise that they are humans, then they have the same opportunity to come into salvation as we do ourselves. On the other hand, if they are some sort of half-ape/half-man, as the evolutionists believe, then they do not have a spirit or any spirituality.
Considering the cranial capacity of the Neanderthal fossils which have been found, it is clear that they were smart enough to wonder about the same sorts of spiritual questions that we do, namely about who God is, what He is like, what is the purpose of life and what happens to us after death. How he answered those questions depends a lot on just who these people were, whether they were humans and whether they accepted the revelation of who God is. Those questions are some we can’t answer, unless we understand Neanderthal to be human