Sunday, August 23, 2026

Ancestral Neanderthal Genes Deals The Out Of Africa Theory A Serious Blow But Evolutionists Stubbornly Continue To Hold To It

 




Evolutionists have long held that mankind had evolved from African apes and migrated from the African continent and dispersed throughout the rest of the world and if the theory were to be consistently applied, this would have to include archaic people groups such as Neanderthals, Denisovans, Cro Magnons, and Homo Erectus peoples but if the out of Africa theory were to have any merit, we should expect Neanderthals to carry ancestral genes from people migrating out of there and while there seems to be no dispute that Neanderthals were human, a perplexing anomaly is that while there appears to be gene flow from Neanderthals to modern peoples, there does not seem to be any gene flow from modern peoples to Neanderthals which might cause the evolutionists to instinctively declare the Neanderthal to be ancestral to modern men; even a missing link and that might seem like a scientifically logical conclusion were it not for the fact that archaeological, anthropological, and paleontological discoveries have revealed Neanderthal and modern man having once been contemporaries which would disqualify the Neanderthal from being a missing link or direct ancestor to modern man which the evolutionists know, which is why they are not suggesting the lack of gene flow from modern man to Neanderthal to be evidence or proof of the Neanderthal being a direct ancestor to man.  Instead, a likely and most tenable theory is that while male Neanderthal men were able to successfully produce viable offspring with women of other people groups, modern males were not able to successfully produce viable offspring with Neanderthal women and not necessarily because they weren’t attracted to each other, but due to genetic deficiencies as explained by Live Science:
 
 
 
…the PIEZO1 gene, which affects red blood cells and is found in both modern humans (Homo sapiens) and Neanderthals. They discovered that the PIEZO1 gene differed between Neanderthals and modern humans.
 
The Neanderthal variant…allowed the hemoglobin in red blood cells to cling more tightly to oxygen molecules, while the novel H. sapiens variant allowed oxygen to be passed more efficiently into surrounding tissue. Neanderthals may have maintained the original variant because it was beneficial for surviving extreme cold and periods of starvation, the researchers suggested.
 
But when maternal blood has abnormally high amounts of oxygen bound to hemoglobin, that means low levels of oxygen are passed on to a fetus through the placenta. This can cause hypoxia (oxygen deficiency) or restricted growth of the fetus or miscarriage.
 
But because of the way the PIEZO1 gene variants are inherited, the incompatibility would arise only when a hybrid Neanderthal-human mother mated with a modern-human father or with a hybrid Neanderthal-human father…
 
This, in turn, would mean Neanderthal women would pass on less of their mitochondrial DNA, which is carried in the egg and passes from mother to child…Over the course of several generations of mating between Neanderthals and humans, this may have significantly compromised hybrid Neanderthals' ability to have kids, the researchers noted.
 
The PIEZO1 incompatibility may have accelerated the demise of the Neanderthals by gradually eroding their reproductive capacity whenever the two groups interacted. [1]
 
 
 
This is reaffirmed by the fact that there seems to be no evidence of mitochondrial genes or DNA being passed from Neanderthals to modern men and though that might appear to be evidence against interbreeding, as explained by Science Mag:
 
 
 
The only part of the genome that has been examined from multiple Neandertals, the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) genome, consistently falls outside the variation found in present-day humans and thus provides no evidence for interbreeding.
 
However, this observation does not preclude some amount of interbreeding or the possibility that Neandertals contributed other parts of their genomes to present-day humans. In contrast, the nuclear genome is composed of tens of thousands of recombining, and hence independently evolving, DNA segments that provide an opportunity to obtain a clearer picture of the relationship between Neandertals and present-day humans…
 
Thus, even if no geneflow occurred, in many segments of the genome, Neandertals are expected to be more closely related to some present-day humans than they are to each other [2]
 
 
 
But what is even more significant is that Neanderthals seem to be further removed from Africans than from Europeans, Mid-East peoples, Asian peoples, and even pacific island dwelling peoples.  Science Mag states:
 
 
 
Neandertals are on average closer to individuals in Eurasia than to individuals in Africa. Furthermore, individuals in Eurasia today carry regions in their genome that are closely related to those in Neandertals and distant from other present-day humans. The data suggest that between 1 and 4% of the genomes of people in Eurasia are derived from Neandertals…
 
A striking observation is that Neandertals are as closely related to a Chinese and Papuan individual as to a French individual, even though morphologically recognizable Neandertals exist only in the fossil record of Europe and western Asia. Thus, the gene flow between Neandertals and modern humans that we detect most likely occurred before the divergence of Europeans, East Asians, and Papuans. This may be explained by mixing of early modern humans ancestral to present-day non-Africans with Neandertals in the Middle East before their expansion into Eurasia. [3]
 
 
 
To a creationist who accepts the Genesis account of creation and origins as history, what Science Mag describes sounds very consistent with what would be expected if the point of origin of all the known peoples of the world (both living and extinct) was not in Africa but somewhere in the Mid-East and if the point of origin for the divergence of all these different known groups were to have taken place in the Mid-East we would also expect certain peoples to be further removed from that point of origin than others; for example, African peoples would be expected to be genetically further removed from that point of origin than Mid-East, European, or even central and east Asian peoples but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the ancestors of all of those people necessarily interbred with Neanderthals.  It just means that all known peoples share a common ancestry and that at some point in history, they diverged from that shared lineage and eventually became the different distinct nations and peoples that they are today and to which the account of scripture does bear witness.
 
Scripture states that one man and woman mankind descended.  The first recorded divergence from the line of Adam was that of Cain and Seth. (Gen. 4-5) The second recorded divergence took place with the sons of Noah from who the different nations and peoples of the world are descended (Gen. 10-11) but this divergence experienced an acceleration through a forced dispersion at a place called Babel. (Gen. 11:1-9)
 
And where did the forced dispersion at Babel take place? In the Mid-East, same as where evolutionists admit that some interbreeding may have taken place between Neanderthals and modern men before expanding throughout Eurasia and other parts of the globe albeit before the forced dispersion at Babel, and like all other peoples, Neanderthals may not have been nearly as distinct from other peoples as they had become after the forced dispersion and yet despite the data being in agreement with the biblical account of civilization’s point of origin, evolutionists still stubbornly hold to the claim that humanity originated in Africa.  In attempting to explain away the data bearing witness against the out of Africa theory, Science Mag states:
 
 
 
One model for modern human origins suggests that all present-day humans trace all their ancestry back to a small African population that expanded and replaced archaic forms of humans without admixture.
 
Our analysis of the Neandertal genome may not be compatible with this view because Neandertals are on average closer to individuals in Eurasia than to individuals in Africa. Furthermore, individuals in Eurasia today carry regions in their genome that are closely related to those in Neandertals and distant from other present-day humans.
 
The data suggest that between 1 and 4% of the genomes of people in Eurasia are derived from
Neandertals. Thus, while the Neandertal genome presents a challenge to the simplest version of an “out-of-Africa” model for modern human origins, it continues to support the view that the vast majority of genetic variants that exist at appreciable frequencies outside Africa came from Africa with the spread of anatomically modern humans. [4]
 
 
 
Penn Today, a publication run by Penn State University, proposed that at least two migratory waves of modern men might explain why humanity carries Neanderthal genes:
 
 
 
Modern humans migrated to Eurasia 75,000 years ago, where they encountered and interbred with Neanderthals. A new study published in the journal Current Biology shows that at this time Neanderthals were already carrying human DNA from a much older encounter with modern humans. The Penn-led research team, including collaborators from Addis Ababa University, the University of Botswana, Fudan University, Hubert Kairuki Memorial University, and the University of Yaoundé, showed that an ancient lineage of modern humans migrated to Eurasia over 250,000 years ago where they interbred with Neanderthals. Over time, these humans died out, leaving a population with predominantly Neanderthal ancestry.
 
Because most Neanderthal-human interbreeding is thought to have occurred in Eurasia, not in Africa, Neanderthal ancestry is expected to be limited in sub-Saharan Africa; however, a recent study made the puzzling observation that several sub-Saharan populations contain chunks of DNA that resemble Neanderthal DNA. The study was unable to determine how this Neanderthal-like DNA entered these populations, whether it originated from modern humans who had migrated from Africa, interbred with Neanderthals in Eurasia, and then returned, or whether it was the result of an earlier encounter between Neanderthals and humans. Because the study relied on a limited number of genomes from the 1,000 Genomes Project, all of which share a relatively recent common ancestry in Central and Western Africa, it was also unclear whether Neanderthal-like DNA is widespread among sub-Saharan populations. [5]
 
 
 
Contrary to what other studies have claimed to have shown, Penn Today stated that Neanderthals did in fact carry traces of the modern human genome:
 
 
 
To try to understand whether carrying modern human DNA was helpful or harmful when introduced into the Neanderthal genome, the researchers also investigated where these chunks of modern human DNA were located. To try to understand whether carrying modern human DNA was helpful or harmful, the researchers also investigated where these chunks of modern human DNA were located within the Neanderthal genome. They found that most of the modern human DNA was in noncoding regions of the Neanderthal genome, indicating that modern human gene variants were being preferentially lost from coding sections of the genome, which suggests that having modern human genes in a Neanderthal background is detrimental to fitness.
 
This is similar to what is seen in modern humans, where natural selection has slowly been removing Neanderthal genes from modern human populations [6]
 
 
 
A publication called Current Biology also stated:
 
 
 
In addition to the primary migration of AMHs out of Africa within the past 75 ky, there is also evidence of earlier migrations of AMHs from Africa that did not contribute substantially to the genomes of AMH populations outside of Africa. It is possible that these early migrations of AMHs from Africa introduced AMH ancestry into Neanderthal genomes through introgression. The notion that Neanderthals carry some variants derived from AMHs has been implied by the observation that Late Pleistocene Neanderthal mitochondria come from an African source that introgressed into Neanderthals between 268 and 413 kya.25 Additionally, comparisons of Neanderthal and AMH nuclear genomes suggested that the Altai Neanderthal, which lived 122 kya,11 has 3% AMH ancestry from interbreeding between AMHs and Neanderthals that occurred between 200 and 300 kya.26 [7]
 
 
 
 
Yet even they admit that at the same time, Neanderthal-modern human hybrids were not viable. [8-9]
 
 
 
So, how can they claim that on the one hand that interbreeding between modern man and Neanderthals could produce viable offspring and yet on the other hand state that hybrids were not viable?
 
It doesn’t make any sense unless we are to accept the claim made by the Live Science item that male Neanderthals were able to successfully produce viable offspring with modern females but modern males were unable to produce viable which would mean, if that were the case, any ancestral gene flow from modern man to Neanderthal could not be from a paternal lineage, but only a maternal lineage since it appears and likewise, any gene flow passed down from Neanderthals to modern day man would have to be paternal and not maternal which can only lead to the conclusion that any viable offspring produced between Neanderthals and modern people would have to be through the paternal line of the Neanderthal and the maternal line of the modern man.
 
But even if some gene flow from modern man to that of the Neanderthal did take place, that doesn’t necessarily mean that humanity originated from Africa and if modern man did originate in Africa, then where was the point of origin for the Neanderthals and other archaic peoples?
 
Insofar as anyone is concerned, no Neanderthal remains have ever been discovered in Africa.  Their remains have only been discovered in Europe and in more recent years, the Mid-East.
Evolutionists concede that Neanderthals and modern man both share a common ancestry and at some point, there was a divergence of both from that ancestral line, and if the origins of modern man were indeed to be in Africa, then so Neanderthal origins and those of other archaic people groups would have to be there as well and that the first migratory wave from Africa would have had to have begun, not with modern man, but with these archaic groups, with the succeeding migratory waves being those of modern man, and if that is not an acceptable possibility to evolutionists, then the only other option is that the divergence of both Neanderthal and modern man from the shared ancestral line would have had to have taken place somewhere outside of Africa be it in Europe or somewhere in the Mid-East because to claim that two lines of humanity were to have evolved separately would neither be scientifically nor logically tenable because archaic and modern peoples are too identical to one another, both in appearance and genetically, in order for this to have been the case and yet in spite of such a notion not being supported by genetic and paleontological evidence, they would rather resort to the hypothesis of humanity evolving independently from two separate ancestral lines than to concede that the place of divergence of modern man and the Neanderthal from the main ancestral might have taken place in the Mid-East because if they were to concede that point, then they would also have to concede that humanity’s origins are not in Africa, but in the Middle East, which would be in agreement with the Genesis account of the origins of the distinct nations and peoples as they are known today and if there is to be any scientific evidence that might support the Genesis account of the diversification of humanity into distinct people groups, it would be that European, Mid-East, and even East Asian peoples are less removed from the Neanderthal line than African peoples which Science Mag admits to be the case:
 
 
 
The greater genetic proximity of Neandertals to Europeans and Asians than to Africans is seen
no matter how we subdivide the data by individual pairs of humans by chromosome, by substitutions that are transitions or transversions, by hypermutable CpG versus all other sites, by Neandertal sequences shorter or longer than 50 bp, and by 454 or Illumina data.
 
It is also seen when we restrict the analysis to A/T and C/G substitutions, showing
that our observations are unlikely to be due to biased allele calling or biased gene conversion. [10]
 
 
 
If African peoples are more removed from the Neanderthal lineage than other peoples, then that is another challenge to the African origins theory that evolutionists are going to have to address because if African peoples are further removed from the Neanderthal line than Europeans, Mid-Eastern peoples, and Asian peoples, then that would also mean that African peoples are also further removed from humanity’s point of origin than the rest of humanity and if Africans had dispersed further away from the point of origin than the rest of humanity at the time that any dispersals had taken place, then that means they would have interacted less with the other peoples, including Neanderthals, than Neanderthals and other peoples would have interacted with each other and if Neanderthals had interacted with other peoples more so than with Africans, then that would mean that Neanderthals and other peoples were not as far removed from humanity’s point of origin than Africans were, and if Neanderthals and other peoples not of African origin are not as far removed from the point of humanity’s origin, as Africans are, then it can only be concluded that the point of origin of humanity could not be in Africa but either in Europe or somewhere in Asia though any given region in Asia, including the Middle East, would be a much more logical conclusion for the location of that point of origin than even Europe since it is not only Europeans who are more closely related to Neanderthals than Africans, but also Asian peoples, including Mid-East peoples, as well.
 
But if humanity’s point of origin is to be in Africa, then we would expect Neanderthals to be more closely related to African peoples than they are and possibly even less related to other peoples than to Africans overall, but that does not appear to be the case; the opposite appears to be true with Africans being less related to Neanderthals than Neanderthals are to other peoples.
 
The fact that African peoples are further removed from Neanderthals than Neanderthals are from other peoples will serve to creationists as being evidence of the Genesis account of how the different peoples and nations of the world originating from a rapid dispersion that took place in an ancient city called Babel (better known as Babylon) and lend credence to the Genesis account of origins, for they would expect that if the Genesis account of origins, including the forced dispersion at the tower of Babel, to be true, that those furthest removed from that point of origin to also be further removed from those peoples closer to the point of origin than those closest to that point of origin would be from each other because creationists do accept that the further isolated that people are from each other, the more distinct they become from each other over time as humanity is just as subject to natural selection as any other form of life and undeniably African peoples are, in physical appearance, more distinct from European, Mid-East, and Asian peoples than European, Mid-East, and Asian peoples are from each other which arguably would also, if the dispersal of humanity is where scripture says that it is, make African peoples further removed from that point of origin than the rest of humanity due to having, at some point in history, experienced more isolation from the rest of humanity for a longer period of time than the rest of the people groups did from each other.
 
But the evolutionist might very well counter that the rest of humanity became further removed from the point of origin than Africans are and over time became further removed from the African lineage than from each other.
 
From an objective scientific standpoint, the evidence, insofar as the gene flow between Neanderthals and modern mankind go, does not show us where humanity’s point of origin is either way and so remains inconclusive on the matter.
 
What evolutionists and creationists will agree on is that both Neanderthals and modern man both, at some point in time, lived contemporaneously, that they both shared a common lineage, and that at some point in history, Neanderthals and all other peoples diverged from this shared lineage, and that there was a point of origin from which humanity diverged, dispersed, and became divided into all the known distinct people groups we see today.
 
But what puts evolutionists and creationists at odds with one another is who or what the common ancestor of both Neanderthals and modern man was, when in history this divergence from the base lineage took place, how quickly it took place, how rapidly human dispersion commenced over the face of the earth, and what caused the dispersion from humanity’s place of origin, and where that place of origin was.
 
The same evidence is before both sides but since the evidence in this matter appears to be ambiguous and subject to interpretation, both sides are going to examine and interpret the evidence according to their own respective presuppositions just as they will anything else, but both sides also admit that we might be getting the full picture due to Neanderthal DNA being poorly preserved and being subject to contamination.  Rob Carter of Creation Ministries International stated:
 
 
 
In several recent articles on the Neanderthal mitochondrial genome, I was hesitant to make many predictions about the full Neanderthal nuclear genome because I had questions about the quality of ancient DNA (aDNA) and because I was not sure if I could trust the data, since it would have been thoroughly filtered by the evolutionary gatekeepers. Even if I had made predictions, I would not have dared to make any as bold as the conclusions of these evolutionary scientists. Needless to say, I am quite pleased with what they said. This is certainly not the last word, though, as there is always controversy within such forensic science.
 
Why is the Neanderthal genome controversial? First, there are always questions about aDNA. Neanderthal bones are thousands of years old and the DNA within them is always highly degraded. In this case, most of the Neanderthal DNA has broken down into pieces no more than 50 nucleotides long and more than 95% of the DNA found within these bones was from contaminating bacteria. The fact that they were able to get useable DNA out of their samples is simply amazing. Also, aDNA techniques are extremely sensitive to contamination. DNA from modern humans is of exceptionally high quality compared to the highly degraded DNA within old samples. However, the scientists went to extreme lengths to prevent and test for contamination and they concluded that no significant contamination occurred after performing several critical tests. But the question of contamination will always be present in studies of this nature. [11]
 
 
 
And evolutionist Richard E. Green, contributing to Science Mag, also concurring:
 
 
 
Several features of DNA extracted from Late Pleistocene remains make its study challenging. The DNA is invariably degraded to a small average size of less than 200 base pairs (bp), it is chemically modified, and extracts almost always contain only small amounts of endogenous DNA but large amounts of DNA from microbial organisms that colonized the specimens after death. Over the past 20 years, methods for ancient DNA retrieval have been developed, largely based on the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). In the case of the nuclear genome of Neandertals, four short gene sequences have been determined by PCR: fragments of the MC1R gene involved in skin pigmentation, a segment of the FOXP2 gene involved in speech and language, parts of the ABO blood group locus, and a taste receptor gene. However, although PCR of ancient DNA can be multiplexed, it does not allow the retrieval of a large proportion of the genome of an organism.
 
The development of high-throughput DNA sequencing technologies allows large-scale, genome-wide sequencing of random pieces of DNA extracted from ancient specimens and has recently made it feasible to sequence genomes from late Pleistocene species. However, because a large proportion of the DNA present in most fossils is of microbial origin, comparison to genome sequences of closely related organisms is necessary to identify the DNA molecules that derive from the organism under study…
 
However, because a large proportion of the DNA present in most fossils is of microbial origin, comparison to genome sequences of closely related organisms is necessary to identify the DNA molecules that derive from the organism under study. In the case of Neandertals, the finished human genome sequence and the chimpanzee genome offer the opportunity to identify Neandertal DNA sequences.
 
A special challenge in analyzing DNA sequences from the Neandertal nuclear genome is that most DNA fragments in a Neandertal are expected to be identical to present-day humans. Thus, contamination of the experiments with DNA from present-day humans may be mistaken for endogenous DNA. [12]
 
 
 
While granted that evidence and information are very vital and instrumental in drawing hearts, minds, and souls to one side of the origins debate or the other, in the end, what each person decides to believe will have nothing to do with evidence presented before them but with what resides in the heart of each person and what resides in the heart of each person is what will determine in the end what it is that they give themselves over to.
 
But what each person, each household, each institution, each community, each culture, society, nation, kingdom, and empire gives themselves over to does, for better worse have consequences for the course of that life, household, institution, community, culture, society, nation, civilization, kingdom, and empire.  It can mean the difference between:
 
Life and death,
Greatness or downfall,
Preservation or destruction,
Peace and order or chaos and disorder,
Liberty or tyranny,
Salvation or damnation,
Heaven or Hell.
 
 
Because we are all given a choice between the following:
 
 
 
Life or death
Good or evil
Light or darkness
Truth or falsehood
Wisdom or foolishness
Holiness or sinfulness
Purity or corruption
Righteousness or unrighteousness
Order or chaos
Liberty or oppression
Angels or demons
God or Satan
Heaven or Hell
Salvation or damnation
 
 
 
And that has been the choice laid before each person since the beginning of humanity itself and it was that very same choice that was laid before Adam who was the first man God created and Eve who was the first woman God had created and Adam’s wife and that choice was set before them in the form of two trees: The tree of life (Gen. 2:9) which would have granted them life eternal (Gen 3:22) and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which brought death into world, but before evil, death, and suffering entered into the world, God had created the world to be a place of goodness, peace, tranquility, happiness, and contentment.  He never intended for the world to become filled with the evil, death, and suffering that we witness and experience today, but rather the world in the state that it presently is in now is suffering the consequences of a fateful act of disobedience that Adam and Eve had committed when they had eaten of the fruit of the very tree and the only tree that God had forbidden them to eat from and that was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, having been warned that in the day that they ate thereof, they would surely die. (Gen. 2:16-17, 3:3)
 
And when they had eaten of that forbidden fruit, the sentence of death was pronounced upon their disobedience to which they eventually succumbed. (Gen. 3:19)
 
But the consequences of that act of disobedience did not stop with Adam and Eve, but were extended to the rest of mankind who are descended from them for it is from Adam and Eve that the sin that entered into them was inherited by all of mankind (Rom. 5:12) sin being defined not by just an evil act or ill-spoken words but by the corrupted condition of our nature which not only influences our outward behavior and what we speak, but it also influences our thoughts, motives, and attitudes which then, if given into, produce what is said and the acts that are done which is why it is written that we are not defiled by what comes from without but what is from within (Mt. 15:11, 18-20) and which is why that we all sin and fall short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23) which in turn subjugates us to death which is why it is written that the wages of sins is death (Rom. 6:23) but the consequences of Adam and Eve’s disobedience still does not stop with even mankind, but extends to all of creation and is why death, sin, suffering, pain, sorrow, grief, anguish, and evil abound in this present world and throughout all of creation which is why it is written that the entire creation groans and travails in pain to this day. (Rom. 8:19-22)
 
And what led Adam and Eve to eat of that forbidden fruit which led to a changing of the entire world for the worst was a lie and it was the first lie known to be told and which is why that very lie made the one who told the lie to Adam and his wife Eve and which deceived them into that fateful act of disobedience, the father of lies (Jn. 8:44) and that very first lie that made the one who told it the father of lies was a lie that falsely assured Adam and Eve that they would not surely die if they would eat the fruit that God had forbidden them to eat and deceived them into thinking that they would instead attain to greater things (Gen. 3:4-5) but instead of attaining to greater things, they were reduced to an inferior and lesser status, and were subjected to an unprecedented tyranny and oppression sin and death and not only they themselves but the entire creation itself and the one who told them the lie that led them into that astronomically consequential transgression was a certain angelic being named Lucifer who had once served as a covering cherub at the throne of God until he had become so lifted up in pride that he thought he could be equal to his Creator which ended with him and all who sided with him against God to be cast from their places in Heaven. (Is. 14:11-21, Ezek. 28:12-19)
 
It was in that day that Lucifer had become better known as Satan or the Devil and what he was not able to accomplish in Heaven, he, through the lie that made him the father of lies, accomplished on the earth and not only did he, through the lie subjugate mankind and all of creation to the tyranny of sin, death, and the curse that has brought pain, suffering, grief, misery, and hardship upon the entire earth of every kind, degree, and severity known and imaginable, he also, through the lie, diminished the dominion initially given to man (Gen. 1:26) by claiming lordship over the nations, kingdoms, peoples, and empires of the world (Mt. 4:8-9, Lk. 4:6-7) having felt justified in doing so by the transgression that he caused Adam and Eve to commit.
 
And that lie that Satan used to bring sin, death, and evil into the world, to subjugate the entire creation to a curse, and to usurp the dominion that was initially given to man, has been followed by an innumerable number of lies since then, and of the lies that he has used to such a great and devastating effect is the lie that tells us that we are just a product of unthinking, unplanning, and unguided random processes over a long period of time,
that there is no God to whom we must give an account for what we have said and done and who will take even every thought, motive and attitude into account,
that there is no such thing  as sin and that death, suffering, hardship, and misery are just as much a part of the natural cycle as life, peace, happiness, and joy,
that truth and morality are not unchanging absolutes but are relative and subjective,
that there is no such thing as good and evil and even he himself doesn’t exist,
that there is only predator and prey,
that there is the superior and the inferior and the strong and the weak,
that the inferior and the weak are to be ruled over and dominated by the superior and the strong and which will eventually be eliminated by the superior and the strong,
and that there is no heaven and no hell; that this present life is all that there is and that the end of this life is the end of all existence.
 
And this lie, as well as many others, has been used to blind multitudes who might otherwise not be, to the truth that there is a God by whom all things are made and to whom all things owe their existence, who is the source of all truth, (Jn. 14:6)
who is the decider of what is right and what is wrong and what is good and what is evil,
who is the source of morality, law, and order,
who decides what rights and liberties mankind is entitled to have,
that we were created with a purpose and a plan in mind and that we were created for the glory and pleasure of God,
that we are all created in His image, (Gen. 1:26)
that we are all created equal in His sight, (Acts 10:34, 17:26, Gal. 3:28, Col. 3:11),
that He has established for us all one law and one standard to be applied to all and not just to some, (Num. 15:16)
that we are all equally fallen being who are not as we should be in His sight, before whom all people must give an account for all that they have said and done, and who will take ever thought, motive, and attitude into account as well,
that it will be He who hands out the final honors and rewards and the final sentences,
that this present life is not all that there but that there are also two eternal destinations where each person will eventually end up which will either be Heaven or Hell,
that sin, death, evil, suffering, pain, grief, sorrow, hardship, and misery were never a part of God’s initial design for His creation nor for mankind, but are consequence of Adam and Eve’s disobedience and which will eventually be done away with and when that day comes, it will require the elimination of all who take pleasure of all who take pleasure in those things that are evil and displeasing in the sight of God,
and that God does not take pleasure in judgment and punishment but offers redemption for all willing to receive it and that is the truth that brings freedom (Jn. 8:32) from the tyranny and oppression that the lies of Satan have brought the world under and the truth that brings freedom to all willing to receive it is that the Lord God in His mercy is not willing that any should perish but that all come to repentance (2 Pet. 3:9) and that redemption that He offers is found in Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior whom God sent into the world to offer Himself up on our behalf for our sins and to take away the sins of the world which He did by His death on the cross upon which He was crucified whose sinless blood purchased redemption on behalf of sinful man and after having purchased in His death our redemption, was raised again from the dead so that we, if we will but place our faith in Him for the forgiveness of our sin and for the salvation of our souls, will be made justified in Him in the sight of God the Father. (Rom. 4:25)
 
And it is the redemption of our souls that we receive in us an inward transformation (2 Cor. 5:17) that causes us to no longer desire to follow after selfish and worldly pursuits but after those things that pertain to the Kingdom of Heaven,
to no longer take pleasure in those things that are evil and displeasing in the sight of the Lord, but in that which is good, right, and pleasing in His sight,
to no longer desire to walk in the lies of this present world, but only in the truth that comes from Christ Almighty who is the source of all truth, (Jn. 14:6)
no longer placing our hopes in the things of this present world, but looking forward to that new and better world to come, (Rev. 21-22)
to no longer rely on worldly resources, men, or even our own power, abilities, skills, and wisdom for our needs and provision but upon God who is able to meet all of our needs, recognizing that the resources of this world and even the people He brings into our lives are but instruments and vessels through which God meets our needs and that the skills, power, knowledge, and wisdom by which we might acquire our provision are provided and instilled in us by God, (Mt. 6:25-33)
to no longer fear what men can do to us, but rather fearing the God before whom we will have to one day give an account for how we lived our lives, (Mt. 10:28)
to no longer look to corruptible institutions within our society for direction and order in our lives but to God who, by His written Word has given us laws and precepts to be applied to our lives and which serve to produce and maintain an ordered life, and who, by His Holy Spirit which comes to dwell within us upon repentance, establishes in our lives a course and direction in our lives to pursue for His glory,
to no longer seek our own glory but the glory of God,
to no longer rally behind corruptible men, but instead behind the incorruptible God in Heaven bearing in mind that those men and women God raises up for our edification are but instruments and servants of His for that respective purpose to which He has called them,
to no longer seek to align ourselves with the things of darkness but only with the things of the light,
to no longer trust in the wisdom of the world but only on the wisdom and knowledge that comes from above, (Jas. 1:5) nor depend on corruptible earthly authorities to swiftly administer justice, but only in the power of God to deliver us from evil.
 
And a day is coming when, just as our souls have been redeemed and cleansed from sin, so also we will eventually be liberated from bodily death itself when the corruptible forms in which we live are transformed into that which is incorruptible and exempt from death (1 Cor. 15:51-55, 1 Thess. 4:13-18) because they will be bodies in which sin will not well, for where sin does not dwell, neither does death.
 
And finally, creation itself will one day be liberated when the adversary of our souls who is the enemy of our Creator is handed his final sentence and is cast into the lake of fire (Mt. 25:41, Rev. 20:10-15) and when creation itself is made anew and when it is made anew, it will be a world and universe in which there is no death, no sin, no evil, no darkness, no suffering, no pain, no hardship, no grief, and no misery because all of those things will be done away with and every tear will be wiped away and it will be a place in which there will only be life, light, peace, happiness, joy, and contentment before the Lord God Almighty.
 
 
There will be those who will choose:
 
Life,
light,
truth,
righteousness,
purity,
goodness,
lawful order,
liberty,
angels,
God,
Heaven,
and salvation.
 
Because they desire life, goodness, truth, love, mercy, order, liberty, and salvation and because they have chosen to love and fear their Creator and to receive in them the love that He offers them.
 
 
And there will be those who will persist in choosing:
 
 
Death,
darkness,
falsehood,
evil,
ungodliness,
corruption,
chaos, destruction,
demons,
oppression,
Satan,
and Hell
 
Because they enjoy their sin and the things of evil too much and because they despise the love, mercy, and authority of their Maker.
 
 
Which will you choose reader?  If you choose to be on the side of God and want to be assured that you have made your peace with Him, then I urge you reader to call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins today.  It is but a simple prayer of repentance away:
 
 
 
"Lord Jesus I need you.
 
 
I realize that I am a sinner
who has fallen short of the glory of God
and that my goodness falls short
of your standard of Moral perfection.
 
Please forgive me of all of my sins.
Come into my heart and into my life
to be the Savior and Lord of my life.
Make me into the servant and follower
that you want me to be.
In your name Lord Jesus, I pray.
 
 
Amen."
 
 
Know that God is not concerned with the words that you use to call upon Him forgiveness, but with the attitude of your heart and if you have, with all sincerity, have asked Christ to forgive you of your sins, placing your trust in Him only for your salvation and in nothing else, then your sins are forgiven and your place in Heaven is certain.
 
 
 
End notes:
 
 
 
1.  Kristina Killgrove, “Differences in red blood cells may have 'hastened the extinction' of our Neanderthal cousins, new study suggests,” Live Science, October 27, 2025
https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/neanderthals/some-of-the-last-surviving-neanderthals-were-remarkably-diverse-suggesting-inbreeding-didnt-doom-them?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pushly&utm_campaign=Archaeology
 
2.  Richard E. Green, “A Draft Sequence of the Neandertal Genome,”
Science Mag, Vol. 328, pg. 710, May 7, 2010
https://web.archive.org/web/20100509162327/http:/www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/328/5979/710
 
3. Ibid. pg. 721
 
4. Ibid. pg. 721
 
5. “Neanderthals carried genes acquired from ancient interactions with ‘cousins’ of modern humans,” Penn Today, October 23, 2023
https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/neanderthals-carried-genes-acquired-ancient-interactions-cousins-modern-humans
 
6. Ibid.
 
7. Daniel N. Harris, Alexander Platt, Matthew E.B. Hansen, Shaohua Fan, Michael A. McQuillan, Thomas Nyambo, Sununguko Wata Mpoloka, Gaonyadiwe George Mokone, Gurja Belay, Charles Fokunang, Alfred K. Njamnshi, Sarah A. Tishkoff, “Diverse African genomes reveal selection on ancient modern human introgressions in Neanderthals,” Current Biology, November 20, 2023
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(23)01315-5
 
8. “Neanderthals carried genes acquired from ancient interactions with ‘cousins’ of modern humans,” Penn Today,  October 23, 2023
 
9. “Diverse African genomes reveal selection on ancient modern human introgressions in Neanderthals,” Current Biology, November 20, 2023
 
10.  Green, “A Draft Sequence of the Neandertal Genome,”
Science Mag, Vol. 328, pg. 718, May 7, 2010
 
11. Rob Carter, “Neanderthal genome like ours,”
Creation Ministries International, May 19, 2010
https://creation.com/en/articles/neandertal-genome-like-ours
 
12.  Green, “A Draft Sequence of the Neandertal Genome,”
Science Mag, Vol. 328, pg. 710-711, May 7, 2010
 
 
 
Scripture references:
 
 
 
1.  Genesis 4-5
 
2.  Genesis 10-11
 
3.  Genesis 11:1-9
 
4.  Genesis 2:9
 
5.  Genesis 3:22
 
6.  Genesis 2:16-17, 3:3
 
7.  Genesis 3:19
 
8.  Romans 5:12
 
10.  Matthew 15:11, 18-20
 
11.  Romans 3:23
 
12.  Romans 6:23
 
13.  Romans 8:19-22
 
14.  John 8:44
 
15.  Genesis 3:4-5
 
16.  Isaiah 14:11-21, Ezekiel 28:12-19
 
17.  Matthew 4:8-9, Luke 4:6-7

18.  John 14:6

19.  Genesis 1:26

20.  Acts 10:34, 17:26
 
21.  Galatians 3:28
 
22.  Colossians 3:11

23.  John 8:32
  
24.  2 Peter 3:9
 
25.  Romans 4:25
 
26.  2 Corinthians 5:17
 
27.  John 14:6
 
28.  Revelation 21-22
 
29.  Matthew 6:25-33
 
30.  Matthew 10:28
 
31.  James 1:5
 
32.  1 Corinthians 15:51-55, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18
 
33.  Matthew 25:41, Revelation 20:10-15



For those who like my work and wish to make a financial donation, you can donate to Contender’s Edge at:

 

Ko-fi
 
Or consider becoming a paid subscriber at the Contender’s Edge Substack
https://contendersedge.substack.com/

No comments:

Post a Comment