Palestinians descended from Northern Kingdom (10-Tribe) Israelites?

Not long ago I was doing some Google keyword research and came upon an article claiming that the Palestinians are the best modern representation of the ancient Northern Kingdom-House of Joseph, otherwise known as the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Perplexed at the author’s ignorance of the historical account and the prophecies regarding the 10-Tribe return, I emailed him asking a couple quick questions which later became a much more lengthy dialog. Some may find it interesting. I realize the author has not and likely will not truly consider my critique of his evidence, but hopefully others may. Not wanting my time spent to be completely wasted, our correspondence is laid out below for others to read from start to finish (I’ve removed my and his email addresses for privacy reasons). It is a bit lengthy and not for the faint of heart.

————Original Message————-
From: Hanok [mailto:...@jewsandjoes.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5:51 PM
To: …@lycos.com
Subject: Israel and the Palestinians in Prophecy?

Just read your article here: http://www.angelfire.com/journal/bibleissues/israel/israel_palestinian.htm

I’m curious how you reconcile the prophecies that the House of Joseph (Israel) would become a multitude of nations? The Palestinians have certainly not become such. Also, prophecies record the House of Joseph would be brought back from the four corners of the earth. Have the Palestinians recently been re-gathered to the Land of Israel?

-Hanok
JewsAndJoes.com

“And I shall strengthen the House of Jew-dah, and I shall save the House of Joe-seph. And I shall bring them back, because I have compassion on them.” - Zechariah 10:6a

————Original Message————-
From: Jerry Chin [mailto:...@lycos.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 2:22 PM
To: …@jewsandjoes.com
Subject: [RE]Israel and the Palestinians in Prophecy?

The prophecy of Ephraim becoming a company of nations is contingent on obedience (Genesis 48:15-20 RSV).

Jacob’s blessing clearly states he and his fathers “walked” before God (v15). The Hebrew text concerning the angel reads, “may he bless.” What would happen if Joseph’s children didn’t walk as Jacob? In verse 16, Jacob says, “let my name be perpetuated”, and “let them grow into a multitude.” If the blessing was guaranteed, Jacob would have said “my name will be perpetuated,” and “they will grow into a multitude.”

The actual blessing takes priority over verse 19, where Jacob says Ephraim will become a company of nations. Verse 19 was Jacob’s explanation to Joseph why he placed his right hand on Ephraim. It probably reflected his true desire for Joseph’s children, but it was not part of the blessing.

Note how Zechariah 10 makes no mention of Joseph’s children being a company of nations. Nor does it say the house of Joseph would be great. It only states they will be numerous. This supports the idea that the blessing was contingent on obedience.

(If you have a concordance, just look up Ephraim. You’ll find many unflattering prophecies concerning Ephraim: Isaiah 9:9,21 11:13 28:1,3 Jeremiah 31:20 Hosea 4:47 7:8,11 9:3,11. If the blessing in Genesis 48:15-20 was guaranteed, it would not fit any of these verses. The Bible would not make any sense.)

This is not to say Jacob’s entire blessing came to nothing. In Genesis 49:26, we see that some aspects of what he said would come true.

The Palestinians currently have their own diaspora just like the Jews. Most of them are in the Middle East. Half of the kingdom of Jordan is Palestinian. (Palestine and Jordan used to be Transjordan.) There are sizeable communities/refugee camps in Egypt, Lebanon and Iraq. Zechariah 10:10 mentions these areas specifically. This prophecy only mentions the house of Joseph being numerous.

The prophecy in Zechariah is definite. Whether Ephraim and Manasseh are obedient or not does not change this prophecy. God will bring them back. This prophecy is still in the process of being fulfilled.

————Original Message————-
From: Hanok [mailto:...@jewsandjoes.com]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:41 PM
To: ‘Jerry Chin’
Subject: RE: [RE]Israel and the Palestinians in Prophecy?

Yes indeed. The Prophets were unflattering to the House of Joseph… and deservedly so, but almost always, it is followed up with statements of compassion. The scroll of Hosea is one of the best examples of this. In the very first chapter, it clearly says they would be punished and scattered, but then in their exile they would become as numerous as the “sand of the sea”. Have you not read verses such as this? Where were the conditions there Sir Jerry?

The promise of multitudes was first given to Abraham, was it not? And was it conditional? And if it wasn’t conditional, then who are his promised multitudes? And what multitude could be his who walked perfectly in his way of righteousness? There isn’t any Jerry. House of Joseph has suffered miserably because of their evil, but yet they have multiplied not on their own account but on the account of Abraham’s righteousness.

Genesis 48:15-16 references the righteousness of Abraham and Isaac, thus the unconditional future promises to them that their seed would become a great multitude. You’re doing a lot of theological gymnastics to come upon your “conditional” conclusion. The promises to Abraham (Gen.35:11) and Isaac (Gen.22:17) were NOT contingent upon their seed being righteous. Ephraim simply inherited their unconditional promises. If Ephraim didn’t, then who did… since Abraham and Isaac had no conditions attached to their respective promises? Besides, why would Flavius Josephus reference the ten tribes of Israel in the 1st Century CE as being an immense multitude east of the Euphrates if they weren’t so?

Mildly sizable Palestinian populations in Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq do not fit with the ingathering prophecies … where they are regarded as being at the four corners of the earth (besides, why are you referencing so-called large populations in the Middle East when you already said the Ephraimite promise was “conditional”?).

I do not at all doubt the Palestinian people have Joseph, Judah, Ishmael, Canaan and who knows what else mixed in their gene pool. But to diminish the promise given to Ephraim is to unwittingly call YHVH, the Creator of the Universe, a liar. You would do well to reconsider that suggestion.

-Hanok
JewsAndJoes.com

————Original Message————-
From: R J Chin [mailto:...@accessv.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 9:41 AM
To: …@jewsandjoes.com
Subject: re: Palestinians as Israel

Sorry for the long time taken to reply. I seem to have email problems.

Did Ephraim really inherit Jacob’s blessing? You can’t assume he did just because it was Jacob’s wish. Abraham was perfectly happy to have two sons until Sarah insisted on Isaac. God later confirmed her decision. Isaac was going to bless Esau (not Jacob), but Rebekah intervened. It was only much later that an angel confirmed Isaac’s reluctant blessing of Jacob. Just as it was not up to Abraham or Isaac, so it was not up to Jacob. It was up to God’s sovereign will. And in this case there is no evidence God confirmed Jacob’s blessing of Ephraim.

You mention Josephus stating that Israel was numerous north east of the Euphrates. You’re not the first. Others have proposed the theory of Israel moving north and on into Europe. Of course the Europeans colonized and gave birth to many nations throughout the world. Thus it was claimed that either Britain or the USA was Ephraim. The current peoples of Europe all came out of the Siberian plateau. This is the land of Gog and Magog. I don’t think it wise to label anyone from this region as any part of Israel. Besides, Hosea 5:13, 7:11, 9:3, 11:5 and 11:11 all associate Ephraim with Assyria and Egypt in the Middle East. How do you explain these verses?

God did not promise Abraham that each generation of his descendants would be more numerous than the last. He promised an uncountable number of descendants as a whole. Abraham’s family line was never going to end, and thus his descendants would be uncountable. God’s promise did not guarantee that any of these generations would be extraordinarily numerous. Descendants numbering like the “sand of the sea” may not be as numerous as you think. Israel in King Solomon’s time was already said to be like the “sand” of the sea (1 Kings 4:20, 29). At that time, Israel probably numbered no more than 10 million.

Deuteronomy 4:27, and Isaiah 10:22 clearly state there will not be a massive return of exiles. Revelation 7:4 raises the possibility only 144000 from all the tribes will be accepted by God at the end. How do you reconcile your ideas with this?

You claim God’s promises to Abraham were unconditional. Isn’t circumcision a condition (Genesis 7:10)? What do you think the word “covenant” means? How do you explain the entire book of Deuteronomy? Deuteronomy 28:62 and Isaiah 48:17 clearly give the “conditions” necessary for God to make Abraham’s descendants like the “sand of the sea.”

I’m afraid you’re the one really out on a limb, stretching Abraham’s righteousness like a magic charm to support a blessing to Ephraim that never took place. (Abraham’s belief that God would do as He said, was “reckoned as righteous.” This is very different from saying Abraham himself was righteous.) Good luck trying to reconcile your ideas to the verses above, and to all parts of the Bible.

Jerry

————Original Message————-
From: Hanok [mailto:...@jewsandjoes.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 1:04 AM
To: ‘R J Chin’
Subject: RE: Palestinians as Israel

Fundamentally, we aren’t going to see eye to eye because you are arguing from the premise that the Palestinians are Israelites, while I’m arguing from the premise that Israel became the “fullness of the nations”(Genesis 48:19). I believe history, prophecy, and genetics all confirm my premise. If you like to see how genetics is confirming it, check it out here: Israelite and Noahic Haplogroup Hypotheses

Even so, I’d like to make an attempt to respond to your last email, particularly where you wish me “luck” in reconciling my ideas with all parts of the Bible:

1. The Almighty confirmed Ephraim inherited Jacob’s promise of “multitudes” through the Prophet Hosea, Isaiah, and others.

Isaiah 54:3: “For you shall break forth to the right and to the left, and your seed inherit the nations, and make the deserted cities inhabited.”

Hosea 1:10: “Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which is not measured nor counted. And it shall be in the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ they shall be called, ‘You are the sons of the living El.’”

2. You refer to Flavius Josephus as if he was some trivial historical source… which is interesting since most scholars who study the 1st century have high regards for what he recorded, being one of the most prominent sources of information from that period. He said Israel became a vast multitude in the same regions Assyria deported them to, yet you turn a blind-arrogant eye to what he said… even though it confirms what the Prophets said would come of Israel.

3. You assume the Europeans came out of the Siberian plateau based upon who knows what. Yet, genetics has confirmed they came to Europe via the Middle East and the Caucasus/Caspian (the region of the Medes to which the Assyrians deported Israel). Many of the Hebrew Prophets indicate Jacob would return from the north country (Zechariah 2:6) and from all the places YHVH scattered them (Isaiah 43:6; Jeremiah 31:8). Gog and Magog are also in the north country. This shouldn’t be alarming since Genesis confirms Japheth would dwell in the tents of Shem (Genesis 9:27). Hosea being commanded to marry a woman named “Gomer” is also a picture of Israelites and Japhetic peoples mixing in some fashion.

4. You’re right, the Most High “did not promise Abraham that each generation of his descendants would be more numerous than the last.” At least not in those words. But He did promise to Abraham that he would be a “father of many nations” (Genesis 17:5)… albeit… the promise was given in the Hebrew language and the English translation is remarkably true to the original text. Yet, you can and likely will interpret that to fit your Palestinian premise. But I’m going to interpret it as this: Abraham is going to be a “father of many nations”. I’ve documented a long list of the scriptural multitude promises here: The Birthright Promise of Multitudes in Scripture.

5. 10 million Israelites in King Solomon’s day? I’m not sure where you’re getting that number from, but let us assume you’re approximately correct. What can Exponential Population Growth do with 10 million Israelites after 3,000 years? I can tell you one thing: the meager Palestinian population doesn’t represent it!!!!! See my article here: Exponential Human Population Growth from Noah. You are either blind to the power of exponents or willfully ignorant of them. Also, your referencing 1Kings 4:20 (sands of the sea shore) doesn’t diminish the Prophecy of Hosea… but instead, it actually lends even greater credibility to what Israel has become over the last 3000 years sense.

6. I have not said there will be massive return of the House of Joseph to the Land. I’ve only verified that they themselves have become a multitude just as the Torah and Prophets said they would. There is no doubt in my mind that only a remnant will return to the Land of Israel, namely because that is what the Prophets indicate (i.e. Jeremiah 31:7). And I suspect even that remnant is going to shock the socks off of all the “theological gymnasts” like yourself… because even a remnant of the House of Joseph is going to cause them to cry out for more room when they return to the Land of Israel.

Isaiah 49:20 “The children of whom you were bereaved will yet say in your ears, ‘The place is too cramped for me; Make room for me that I may live here.”

Note: The Palestinians don’t need more room in Israel. They just want the Jews to be gone. They only crowd in to under-capacity cities in the Gaza. There is plenty of room yet in Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon where the bulk of their populations dwell.

7. Assyria’s capital was east of the Euphrates and east of the Euphrates is the location of most of the deportations. Yet, most of the Palestinians have no historical evidence of returning from Assyria. Maybe you’re getting confused with modern nation of Syria which is west of the Euphrates.

8. Now lets look at your Hosea references:

Hosea 5:13 When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah saw his wound, then went Ephraim to the Assyrian, and sent to king Jareb: yet could he not heal you, nor cure you of your wound.

Ephraim was deported to Assyria. No one is arguing about that. But this reference is to their call for alliance and help. Not deportation yet.

Hosea 7:11 Ephraim also is like a silly dove without heart: they call to Egypt, they go to Assyria.

The Northern Kingdom called for the help of their old ally Egypt (Egypt and Phoenicia were allied with King David) when the King of Israel reneged on his promised financial tributes to the Assyrian king. As punishment, Assyria swiftly invaded and deported the first lot to “Assyria”, hence Hosea says “they go to Assyria”. It doesn’t say they went to Egypt in deportation… ONLY that they called for their help to fight against Assyria. Egypt didn’t nor could help at that stage.

Hosea 9:3 They shall not dwell in the LORD’S land; but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean things in Assyria.

The word “Egypt” here is translated from the Hebrew “Mitrayim” meaning “tribulation”… which is what Israel experienced in Egypt on the first go round. The prophets indicate the next Exodus will be so great it will cause us to forget the first Exodus out of Egypt, meaning it will be much larger than your ridiculous Israelite attribution to the Palestinian people (Jeremiah 23:7-8).

Hosea 11:5 He shall not return into the land of Egypt, but the Assyrian shall be his king, because they refused to return.
Hosea 11:11 They shall tremble as a bird out of Egypt, and as a dove out of the land of Assyria: and I will place them in their houses, saith the LORD.

Verse 5 actually says Israel WON’T return to Egypt but instead to Assyria… which is the historical reality. Then verse 11 apparently contradicts verse 5 by saying Israel will come out of Egypt. This apparent contradiction is unraveled when considered with what I said earlier about “Mitrayim” connected to “Tribulation”… which makes even more sense when you consider verse eleven speaks of “trembling as a bird” out of Egypt… which is referencing “Jacob’s Trouble” (Jeremiah 30:1-11) during the period Christians call “the Tribulation”.

9. And regarding your tirade regarding the “promise of multitudes” being contingent or conditioned on Israel needing to keep the Torah covenant. When you consider the verses surrounding the promises of multitudes, you don’t find any conditions connected to the promise. And the fact that Hosea (mainly chapter 1), first showing the Northern Kingdom being punished and exiled because of their breaking of the covenant, and yet then still receiving the binding and unconditional promise of: “Will be like the sand of the sea, Which cannot be measured or numbered”

Theological gymnastics of the most bizarre.

-Hanok

Creationist persecuted? Darwinian consensus?

Creationist (Intelligent Design advocates) persecuted by “Secular” Educational Establishment?

Ben Stein: eXpelled: No Intelligence Allowed - Ben blows the horn on the Educational Establishment’s suppression of scientists who question Darwinian theory or question complex existence without design.

Darwinian (Macro-evolution) consensus within the scientific community?

A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism by Discovery Institute

Related Content:

There is Only ONE Human Race

I recently found this wonderful website, dedicated to bringing racism to an end: OneHumanRace.

There is indeed only ONE human race. We all descend from Noah. See Noah and Exponential Population Growth . We may have different colors and slightly different shapes now, but those are only biological developments (variation) due to location, isolation, and a whole host of other factors which didn’t take tens of thousands of years to variate as the Evolutionists would like to have us believe. There are strong possibilities that Noah’s sons and wives contained much variation themselves. In other words, Shem, Ham, Japheth, and their wives could have appeared quite dissimilar physically amongst their small group, jump starting the vast variation that would ensue among their descendants, those whom rapidly re-populated planet Earth.

Below are some important quotes from Population Geneticists and science writers regarding genetics and the human race:

“The human genome is not partitioned according to any definitions of racial groups. In fact, there are no parts of the genome that define every member of a racial or population group. The number of genes that have changed to produce all of the variation observed in different racial groups is minuscule compared with the backdrop of natural genetic variation in humans.”
-Georgia Dunston (Quoted on pg.68 Mapping Human History by Steve Olson).

The next quote is a bit long. It is from the last page of a chapter that Steve Olson dedicated to the topic of the interconnectedness of the human race.

Using the genetic differences between individuals and groups to reconstruct human history, as I do in this book, can be a dangerous undertaking. It may seem to imply that the genetic differences between groups are as substantial as the cultural differences that divide us. It even may seem to imply that genetic factors are the cause of these cultural differences.

To avoid these misinterpretations of genetic information, we need to think carefully about what our genes are saying. First, we have to keep in mind the extreme fluidity of human groups. The word “race,” for example, can’t begin to capture the commonalities and differences of our shared history. Most African Americans have European ancestors; all European Americans have African ancestors. “Race” disguises rather than acknowledges our multifaceted histories.

Second, we have to remember how small the genetic differences among groups are. The genetic variants affecting skin color and facial features probably involve a few hundred of the billions of nucleotides in a person’s DNA - an insignificant amount. Yet societies have built elaborate systems of privilege and control around these minuscule genetic differences.

Finally, we must become much better at putting genetics in context. People tend to attribute great importance to the findings of geneticists. But the striking homogeneity of our DNA actually emphasizes the centrality of individual and group experience in determining who we are. Everyone is the product of a particular human and genetic history. Yet this history is shared as well as unique, universal as well as individual. As we learn more about our relationship to the past, we need to find ways of interpreting this information that don’t constrain the human spirit.
-Steve Olson Mapping Human History pg.69

Next are quotes from Spencer Wells‘ recent work Deep Ancestry: Inside the Genographic Project.

Rather than belonging to discrete subspecies, humans are part of one big extended family. pg.22

One of the most tantalizing results to come out of the studies by Cavalli-Sforza and Lewontin was the finding that humans might be more closely related to each other than previously suspected. The tree derived by Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards, as with all family trees, traces back to a common source-that vertical line up at the top from which all of the other lines descend. And Lewontin showed that the genetic variation among human races was less than would have been expected if they had been diverging from each other for millions of years. The take-home message was that humans were all family.

What does this mean for everyone’s concept of race? Of course humans come in a wide variety of colors, shapes, and sizes. Over the years these differences have been used to divide humanity. What the genetic data was saying, though, was that underneath the surface we are all much more closely related than we ever suspected. pg.24

Ephraim’s seed has been scattered to the four winds, four corners of the Earth, but Israelite or not, we are all family in a very real sense. Unfortunately, we behave like sheeple in relation to each other. Also, elementary children forming small clicks is another superb example of humanity, minus the fact that elementary children don’t generally kill each other physically, only emotionally and mentally.

See also: Salvation and Genetics; Pure Breed or Pure Non-sense?

The Republic of Sakha, ancient Israelite residue

Recently, I explored Russia’s eastern territories using Google Earth, and I gleefully came upon the Republic of Sakha. It is an enormous land mass north of Mongolia/China which is heavily populated by a people known as Sakha-Yakuts. Y Chromosomal Haplogroup N dominates their population (estimated to be more than 80% Hg. N). Y-Haplogroup Q is predominantly still found in the nearby Ket, Selkup, and Altay peoples centered around the Altai mountains. By the way, Scythian-Saka peoples lived all around the Altai mountainous region. Some of their royal burial mounds have been found there. This is interesting because Haplogroups Q, R, and N are found together frequently stretching from Europe to Siberia and many of those peoples claim descent from ancient Saka-Scythia.

So what caused my glee? I had absolutely no idea any name so closely resembling the ancient Saka still existed in modern Asian countries but I knew the Saka-Scythians extended near to this remote northeastern region during and after the Parthian period.

The modern Sakha speak a “so-called” Turkic family of languages that are predominatly spoken by, well Turkey, but also many Central Asian peoples. I might add, they’re all very near and surrounding the ancient Parthian Empire, and note, Josephus linked the Parthian-Saka multitude to the lost ten tribes of Israel (see Quotes by Flavius Josephus).

Interestingly, here is some evidence that even Native Americans (predominantly y-Haplogroup Q) also have Turkic linguistic connections. The article concludes with this: “Ancient Central Asiatic peoples, among them the ancestors of Turks, are known to have migrated from their homelands in steps of Central Asia and Siberia to east, west, north and south. It is also known that the Native peoples of Americas have migrated from Asia to their new homelands in the Americas thousands of years ago. However, in the known history, the ancestors of Turks and the ancestors of Native Peoples of Americas are not known to have made contact with each other. Yet in spite of this fact, it is surprising to see that Turkish, as a member of the Altaic languages, should have common living words with some of the native languages of Americas. The presence of these words in these languages can not be attributed to random and independent development of these languages in two widely separated continents. I believe their presence is a definite indication of the existence of linguistic and cultural kinship between the ancestors of Turks and the other Altaic peoples and the ancestors of some of the Native Peoples of Americas that they had while they were living in the steps of Central Asia and Siberia before they were separated some 10 000 or more years ago.”

Now, if we could just get our heads out of the butt of Oxford’s carbon-dating lab, we may start to see the Native Americans didn’t migrate to the America’s 10,000 years ago… although I realize that is a tall order, especially for the Priests of Evolution.

How long did it take Virginian settlers to migrate via horse and buggy to California? Hmmm… just more European-American bigotry to think it took Asian Hg. Q’s 10,000 years to migrate a similar distance from Siberia to the Americas? The Asian Q’s and C’s didn’t take one step forward, two steps back. I don’t know how many of you have experienced Canadian winters, but two steps backward isn’t an option. If they had any women in their ranks (and obviously they did), many chiefs were being nagged about the warm hope of Costa Rica and Brazil.

To end, I think this only scratches the surface of all the evidence for Israelite identities in the world today. It doesn’t take a ball room of Phd’s to link the account of Josephus to the Saka-Parthian multitude and the genetics of their descendant peoples in modern time.

A little miffed, but very excited at these connections. Thank you Google Earth!

~ Related Posts ~
Israelite Haplogroup (DNA) Hypotheses

Ephraim: Founder of Y-Chromosome Haplogroup P (Genesis 48:19, a multitude of nations)

~ External Links ~
Saka Connection Theories

The Israelite Origin of the Scythians

The Priests of Evolution

Evolutionism (that which dominates the current secular learning in$titution$ around the world) has all the markings of a “Religion”. It is a religion with priests who promote it feverishly on a global scale. It’s members donate large sums religiously to their temples of worship and study. And even more compelling is this fact: if you don’t embrace the creed of Darwin, you are removed from prominent places of the Priesthood. The latter point is why this list of scientists rejecting Darwinian evolution is not more lengthy. “But why?” you ask. Because they would likely lose their jobs and/or their credibility and/or their funding within their respective in$titution$.

There are at least 6 meanings for the word “Evolution”, and all of them minus one are purely religious. You’ll see them listed further below. The reason I refer to scientists who zealously teach Evolutionistic doctrines as Priests of Evolution is because they blindly teach the precepts of their religion (largely based upon Faith) with similar dedication as a Catholic Priest would, although I think the Catholic priest has much better evidence to support his belief.

The reason I even bother to talk about the Priests of Evolution here is because they are the keepers of most all the genetic evidence we need to identify Israelites in the world today. They look at most all the genetic evidence through a mental filter called “Evolution” and thus they feed the world Evolutionistic interpretations of the data and you must accept it because they are “Scientists”. Never question a Priest, right?

I realize most Evolutionists are brilliant and very capable scientists, but their religion often gets disguised as “science” by association and it then impedes the real science that employs them. To be fair, I also realize that religious non-biblical doctrines have impeded science more than once in the past. The raw biblical data generally doesn’t conflict with any realm of science. It is usually just religious people and their own ideas or agendas which come into conflict with scientific progress, and sometimes rightfully so.

The following is taken from Dr. Hovind’s 250,000 Offer.

Students in tax-supported schools are being taught that evolution is a fact. We are convinced that evolution is a religion masquerading as science and should not be part of any science curriculum. It has nothing to do with the subject of science. There are at least six different and unrelated meanings to the word “evolution” as used in science textbooks.

1. Cosmic evolution- the origin of time, space and matter. Big Bang.
2. Chemical evolution- the origin of higher elements from hydrogen.
3. Stellar and planetary evolution- Origin of stars and planets.
4. Organic evolution- Origin of life from inanimate matter.
5. Macroevolution- Origin of major kinds.
6. Microevolution Variations within kinds- Only this one has been observed, the first five are religious. They are believed, by faith, even though there is no empirical evidence to prove them in any way. While I admire the great faith of the evolutionists who accept the first five I object to having this religious propaganda included in with legitimate science at taxpayer’s expense.

Even a quick review of a typical public school textbook will show that students are being deceived into thinking all six types of evolution above have been proven because evidence is given for minor variations called micro-evolution. The first five are smuggled in when no one is watching.

This deception is a classic case of bait and switch. One definition of evolution (such as “descent with modification”) is given and the others are assumed to be true by association. The first five meanings are believed by faith, have never been observed and are religious. Only the last one is scientific. It is also what the Bible predicted would happen. The animals and plants would bring forth “after their kind” in Genesis 1.

← Previous Page — Next Page →