Customer Reviews

Who Was Adam?: A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man

5 star:		(24)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

Are humans just advanced apes or have they been specially created in the image of God? Publications by scientists almost never ask the question, whereas publications by theists seldom examine the scientific data that relates to the question.

However, two scientists raised in non-Christian homes, Fuz Rana (Ph.D. in chemistry) and Hugh Ross (Ph.D. in astronomy), have written a new book (Who Was Adam?: A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man) that examines the question of human origins by comparing biblical and evolutionary models.

The second in a series of books designed to produce a comprehensive biblical creation model, Reasons To Believe scholars, Rana and Ross present a biblical creation model that makes 13 specific predictions on the nature and origin of mankind, then go on to examine the evidence published in the latest scientific studies. One example from the biblical creation model is the predicted discrepancy between the origin dates for male and female genetic lines. The Bible claims that there was a genetic bottleneck at the Genesis flood. Whereas all females can trace their ancestry back to Eve (through the three wives of Noah's sons), all males trace their Y-chromosomes through Noah (through his three sons). This predicted discrepancy for molecular dates of mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome data is actually seen in the scientific literature. In addition to the mtDNA and Y-chromosome data, Who Was Adam? examines molecular dates from nuclear genes, numerous varieties of non-coding genetic elements, and human parasites. All these data confirm a recent origin date for Homo sapiens sapiens. Other chapters examine the hominid fossil record as it relates to specific evolutionary models compared to the biblical creation model. Chapter 5 examines the question whether we can detect the image of God in modern humans that differentiates them from hominids in the fossil record. Specific hominid species are examined in detail, including Homo erectus, Homo neandertalensis, and chimpanzees. A chapter devoted to the development of bipedalism shows that the extensive changes required for this form of locomotion appeared in early hominids, with no apparent selective Darwinian driving force. An examination of hominid brain sizes shows no gradual increases within species, but large jumps as new species appeared on the scene. Opponents of the idea that humans are intelligently designed often point to the presence of "junk" (non-coding) DNA in the genomes of both apes and humans. Chapter 14 examines the most recent evidence that shows that non-coding DNA is certainly not junk, but provides vital regulatory functions for coding genes.

One chapter stands out as being somewhat out of place in a book on human origins. Chapter 6, "The best possible time" examines the timing of the appearance on humans in the context of the history of the universe and the history of the earth. Although peripherally-related to the question of intelligent design, it would seem to be more relevant to discussions of cosmology and the anthropic principle.

Although the book seems to be marketed to Christians (from the title), it will probably have more broad appeal within secular circles, since it does present an excellent, up-to-date review of the current scientific literature on human origins. Does a biblical creation model for human origins present a scientifically-respectable alternative to neo-Darwinian evolution? Read the book and make your own decision.

Who are these children who make their way to the nurse's office at school to see me-children whose disruptive behaviors and/or mental illness make it impossible for them to function in a regular classroom and qualify them for my school? And why should I care so deeply about them?

In their book on the origins of man, "Who was Adam?", Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross provide surprising, yet satisfying answers to my questions.

Surprising because of the breadth and wealth of cutting-edge scientific research they cite.

Surprising because the evidence from the fossil record, biochemistry, archeology, human and parasitic genetic studies, geology, and astronomy is at odds with the evolutionary model of human origins that I was taught.

Surprising because they propose a creation model for human origins that is both biblical and able to stand up under scientific scrutiny. (Mitochondrial-DNA research reveals that humanity originated from one woman, called "mitochondrial Eve", and Y-chromosomal studies reveal that humanity came from a single location!)

Their model posits that while humans share many similarities with animals, humans are qualitatively different from animals. Only humans bear the image of God. If their model is correct, then even the most difficult to manage children have inherent dignity and intrinsic worth.

"Who was Adam?" - an exciting exploration of the evidence.

The Creation-Evolution debate, or more specifically the Intelligent Design-Naturalism debate would be far more productive if level-headed presentations and discussions of the evidence, like those presented in "Who was Adam", were more common place. The typical dogmatism from the Young-Earth creationism or naturalism/neo-Darwinism has dominated the debate for far too long.

Why should you read "Who was Adam"? Dr. Fuz Rana and Dr. Hugh Ross have summarized the scientific record, discussing it from the perspective of two opposing world-views, and proposed a testable creation model for the "Origin of Man". Dr. Rana and Dr. Ross have taken an approach that systematically presents their evidences for intelligent design and shows how their model is soundly supported by both the scientific understanding of nature as well as the Holy Bible

"Who was Adam" should be used as a point of discussion where believing and non-believing scientist or layman can debate and discuss the evidences rather than simply follow the path of personal attacks taken by many in the Young-Earth Creationist-Evolution debate.

I believe that anyone who studies "Who was Adam" with an open mind followed by a "testing" of the supporting references will reach the same conclusion as did Rana and Ross; mainly that the scientific record supports the words of the Holy Bible. The next step is up to you.

I am a Christian scholar who for the past year has been trying to figure out whether biology provides evidence for God. I like Ross and Rana because, unlike some critics (see below) they show a real love of science, and speak of those with whom they disagree with respect. Augustine noted that if Christians give bad evidence to defend the Gospel, educated non-believers will assume Christianity lacks evidence. Reviewers who insist that the world must be a few thousand years old fall into this trap, in my opinion. Evidence for an ancient universe is overwhelming; if that destroys your faith, I find that both surprising and sad.

But while I was rooting for Ross and Rana, I did not find their primary argument, against the common descent of man with hominids and chimps, as convincing as their previous book, Origin of Life. (Which was a series of sharp, knock-out blows to materialistic explanations for the origin of first life.) Sometimes they were so honest in explaining the facts, and the evolutionary interpretation, that the opposing argument seemed to win.

Some really bad arguments sneak in here, too. Isn't it nice (they say) that earth has more land in the northern hemisphere than the south, since life is easier in upper latitudes? (But is life really so intolerable in Tahiti or Sydney?) People in Genesis lived longer, because they don't live near cancer-causing igneous rocks! (Then why do Japanese, in their volcanic islands, have among the world's longest lifespans? And why do Hawaiians live longest among Americans?) "The geographical distribution of these first hominids was also quite extensive (Chad, Kenya, and Ethiopia." (Why should it surprise us if ape-men traveled a few hundred miles in a million years?) Rana and Ross offer an interesting discussion of anatomical changes needed for the first creatures to walk on two legs. But then they make the bare assertion that bipedalism appeared suddenly -- without a word about whether the first two-leggers met all the criteria they laid out. (Probably no one knows, since they point out that most hominid finds consist of only a few bones.)

Many sections of the book are great. R&R give a good description of various hominids. What they say about early human migrations is fascinating; I have notices similarities between peoples in some of the areas they trace. The chapter on "junk DNA" is highly informative. (But for how much of the "junk" has a use been found? It would be helpful to put the research they discuss in clearer context.) The origin of man does appears somewhat mysterious, as they argue. I am not sure mutations and selection have the powers ascribed to them, to create new orgins, assemble living systems, and induce specified complexity.

For me, the question is not, "Was God involved?" The evidence for miracles (modern and ancient) is strong. The Gospels have withstood the most determined attempts to explain them away. (As I show in my new book, Why the Jesus Seminar can't find Jesus, and Grandma Marshall Could.)

But while R & R do show interesting differences between men and munks, in the end their argument against common descent fails to focus on the big picture. Modern man follows Neanderthal, who looked a lot more like us than a koala or a kettlefish. That overall ascending pattern of hominids, with increasing cranial capacity and shared anatomy, is hard to gainsay. God, presumably, could have made man right after the first camel -- was He trying to fool us? After a talk by Rana, I heard a Christian biologist challenge Dr. Rana at precisely this point -- "Show us a fossil radically out of order in the evolutionary order, and you'll have a case." I didn't hear an answer. So while their arguments on cosmology and first origins seem strong, this one, I think, needs work.

I am not sure Rana and Ross prove their case. They do, however, give an excellent education on paleontology, human biology, DNA, and the enigmatic origin of man. Some arguments seem fairly convincing. Just as importantly, they model a fairness, honesty and charity that are refreshing and rare on this topic, that one would wish for from all apologists.

This book should be a must read for all students who take course
being taught evolution! This book is, I believe, what those
who want to learn the truth about evolution are looking for.
This is a well written and in-depth look at the fossil record
and its implications. Missing are the assumptions and leaps of
logic that the public is constantly fed about the fossil record.
This book points out the failings of evolutionary theory and
shows how the fossil record is consistent with the biblical
record - though not the 6 24-hour day (young earth) theory that
most Christians are force fed in churches. If the fossil record
evidence isn't convincing enough, the authors also relate
evidence from archeology, geology, biochemistry and other
sciences. This book is different from many other Christian
books - rather than avoid and dismiss scientific discoveries,
it embraces them. Scientific references from credible sources
are numerous and are used throughout the book! After reading
this book I am more convinced that Christian beliefs are safe
and sound and are strengthened with each new scientific
discovery.

In *Who was Adam* Dr. Fuz Rana has produced a well written, complete and comprehensive overview of science's current state in its attempt to come to grips with the origins of homo sapiens sapiens. The book is well organized, illustrated, and a since of joy emanates from the material. Obviously Dr. Rana loves his work. The book is ground breaking in one particular. It offers an alternative testable scientific model to explain the rise of humanity. Anyone confused about what is and what is not science will be well rewarded by reading this book. Oh and by the way he will also help you brush up on your Shakespeare.

This book addresses some of the toughest questions a skeptic might have about how the authors' biblically sound model of human origins holds up under the latest scientific evidences. It covers a broad survey of research into hominid fossils, their dating, and the controversy. The authors address human population genetics with regards to their biblical model and how the data infers a singular source close to East Africa. The differing certitude of various molecular clock analyses is brought up in the process.

Their model posits that we were made in the image of God and the pinnacle of God's creation. The authors show that contrary to our first impressions, the small differences in the DNA of humans and chimps should not argue against their model. They point out the large differences in human/chimp gene expression in the brain and the fact that whole genome analysis has so far failed to align and therefore count a large percentage of the DNA. They point out that the Hebrew account of the Genesis creation account uses different senses of the word "create." One being something created brand new and the other being created from something already existing. They posit this is talking about generic building blocks. They also explain how mutations to noncoding regions that appear at identical locations relative to specific genes along homologous chromosomes of chimps and humans fits into their model.

Through the substantial research and data they present, you get a feel for the level of confidence in our current understanding of the archaeological and genetic data. I hope that what people see in this book is a fair attempt to explain the data using a rational biblical model and hope they will give significant weight to where the preponderance of archaelogical discoveries and genetic research is leading. I hope we can avoid the trap of giving a lot of weight to interpretations of uncorroborated archaeological finds, where the interpretation hangs on singular instances of an artifact and its age. Its much more sound to make judgements when you have many instances pointing to the same thing. The big bang of art and culture is certainly one of the most pronounced positive examples of this. In the same vein, they maintain that its premature at this time to give significant weight to the relatively small amount of seemingly old genes in our genome.

This is a great book to have in your library. It has almost 700 references to journal articles, books, and other research.

One weakness of the book is its coverage of speech and language generally in hominids. Although the larynx, hyoid bone, and hypoglossal canal in neanderthals is addressed, I wanted more information about the hyoid. I couldn't find an index in the book for language, speech, hyoid, hypoglossal, or larynx.

Another weakness is a tendency to equate evidence for "common descent" with evolutionism in the chapter on "junk dna." You can still be a creationist and believe that the Creator only changed what was absolutely necessary to get the desired complexities in DNA by fiat, at the right moments in history, but have no problem with "mostly common descent". The book doesn't seems to follow the preponderance of evidence in regards to function in non-coding dna but instead takes a hopeful approach. I think there is some truth to the idea that the reason so little function has been found in non-coding dna is because of the relative infancy of fully decoded genomes and of the tools to examine function, and even to some extent evolutionary dogma itself, but this is weak in my opinion. Mutation rates in pseudogenes of mammals is roughly that of fourfold degenerate sites, so I'm not persuaded that the Markorkin-1 pseudogene they talk about is typical of pseudogenes. Its absence before the real gene is lethal. But, that a preponderance of non-coding dna types generally will have function is a testable prediction. I just hope that a creationist model will be given the same chance to adapt with new data that the evolutionary approach has been, without throwing it out (e.g. gradualism to punctuated equilibrium).

There are many today who would reject a book of this nature as being "science;" however, the back of the book endorsement of Dr. Ross and Dr. Rana's last two book projects by Nobel Prize winning chemist Richard Smalley leaves no room for doubt as to the scientific meritorious nature of these two men's writings. Similarly, endorsements by Jack Hayford, Norm Geisler, Walt Keiser and other leading Christian scholars and theologians assures the Christian reader that they are getting an book that they will find compatible with Christian teachings.

Reading this book provided a unique look at the issue of humanities origin. Rana and Ross address the issue head on, dealing with the relevant scientific evidence on its own terms rather than trying to "explain it away." The ultimate conclusion is that an honest analysis of the data demonstrates an amazing harmony between the historical record and the teachings of Scripture.

An important feature of the book, which makes it very accessible to the reader with a limited science background, is that the chapters that by necessity include information that might be difficult for many lay readers to follow are "bottom lined" at the end of each section. Additionally, side boxes explain important concepts and data in an easy to follow manner that most average readers would find quite understandable.

One thing that did seem to be out of place, however, was the chapter entitled "The Best Possible Time." The material in this chapter, as excellent as it was, did not seem to fit in well with the rest of the book and would have perhaps been better as an appendix.

In conclusion, this book overall does an excellent job of providing a detailed analysis of the pertinent scientific information, showing how and why it harmonizes with a Biblically based model, and does so in a manner that is easily accessible manner that most readers would find quite enjoyable.

For those of us Christians who are interested in the question of human origins, this book is a real help. As a teacher of the Bible to graduate students desiring to be ministers and teachers, I often am asked how we can reconcile the Bible's statements about the creation of Adam and Eve with the findings of modern science. And how does the universal flood fit in, along with the historic occupation of the various continents by human beings? Most people have the impression that the two accounts-the Bible's and that provided by physical and historical anthropology-are contradictory. They assume that the Bible is mythological at this point, intended to teach only spiritual truths.


Who Was Adam? is a high quality work that presents a convincing case for what is called the RTB (Reasons to Believe) model. This model assumes that the Bible, interpreted consistently in all the relevant passages, is historically accurate, and that Adam and Eve were two humans created directly by God about 50,000-100,000 years ago. It also assumes the reliability of modern scientific investigations and conclusions, subject to correction by future discoveries. It concludes that the RTB model agrees with these two sources of information. In so doing, it favors the modern Out-of-Africa theory, that all humans descend from a small population in one location in the Middle East or eastern Africa. It further offers specific predictions for future research which can falsify or modify the model. This approach is unique in the modern theology-science debate and discussion.


In several chapters Rana and Ross summarize the latest findings in paleoanthropology, including the rapidly developing field of genetic history. Rana's specialization in molecular biology is especially evident in these chapters. Special attention is given to the appearance of bipedalism and increased brain size, and a lengthy chapter demonstrates that Neanderthals were not human. This book is a convenient collection of information from all the important scientific disciplines as they relate to the origin of humans. It is amply footnoted, with more than enough references to current original scientific papers and books written by leaders in the field.


I have few criticisms. A glossary would be helpful; while Rana and Ross explain the technical terms and abbreviations at their first usage, it is hard to find that definition when it reappears later. I also would like to see a more complete treatment of the arguments used by their opponents to suggest human characteristics in hominids, as the use of fire and simple tools, and how these may be based on communicating and learning from each other. There is a typo at footnote 20 of chapter 1.


As a non-scientist, I found the book particularly helpful in making the complicated array of ancient hominids understandable, and in offering a sensible and realistic way to understand the Bible's perspective on the origin of human beings. I highly recommend this book.


John A. Battle, Th.D., President and Professor of New Testament and Theology, Western Reformed Seminary, Tacoma, WA

This is fascinating work on the parts of Drs. Rana and Ross. The origin of humanity debate has long needed this scientifically testable creation model. The book lays out the model, as well as the scriptural setting behind it. Citing hundreds of journal articles they show how the latest research supports their model. As dutiful scientists, they make specific and often bold predictions concerning the findings of future research into the hominid fossil record, "junk" DNA, and more. As a sophomore biochemistry student at Case Western Reserve University, I will be eagerly watching to see how their predictions pan out.