Part 7

The facts in relation to the development and growth of the embryo are easily described and understood. But the real question is this: “What force or agency causes this development and growth?”

What force or agency causes the child to resemble its parents? Do the germ-cell and its daughter-cells spontaneously and automatically cause this resemblance; or does the Creator cause it?

Referring to the origin of life in the individual, Professor Martin says:

“At present we know nothing in physiology answering to the match which lights the furnace; those manifestations of energy we call life are handed down from generation to generation, as sacred fire in the temple of vesta from one watcher to another. Science may at some time teach us how to bring the chemical constituents of protoplasm into that combination in which they possess the faculty of starting the oxidations under those conditions which characterize life; then we shall have learnt to strike the vital match.” (Martin, Human Body, p. 312.)

I do not believe that life is handed down from generation to generation. On the contrary the Creator strikes “the vital match” when each fertilized ovum is formed; and every such human ovum is directly and specially endowed by the Creator, with the power to develop into a man or woman.

Sec. 32. Nature has no Power to Generate a New Human Being; nor to Evolve one from the Germ-Cell

Nature is defined as: “The forces or processes of the material world conceived of as an agency intermediate between the Creator and the world, producing all organisms and preserving the regular order of things; as in the old dictum, ‘nature abhors a vacuum.’ In this sense, _nature_ is often personified.” (Cent. Dic. 5, p. 3943.) It follows that “nature” is not a substantial nor a material entity or thing, like a man, a tree, or a stone; but is only a name for certain real or imaginary “forces or processes.” The word does not indicate by what agency these “forces or processes” are generated, guided nor controlled. But we use the word to indicate or describe certain phenomena, which we do not understand, in the same manner that we use the word “gravitation.”

The naturalist or materialist would say that nature generates the spermatozoön and ovum; that it unites and fuses them into the germ-cell; and that it develops this cell into a man or woman. One might as well say, historically, that the spermatozoön and ovum are generated and fused; and that a man or woman is produced from it. But this statement does not explain anything. It does not tell us what force selects, assembles and groups the atoms into the spermatozoön and ovum; nor what endows it with life; nor who nor what creates its soul; nor what force or agency causes the embryo to develop and grow to manhood or womanhood.

To say that “nature” generates and evolves new men and women, is no explanation of the phenomena of reproduction. Nature has no physical body, no weight, length, breadth, nor thickness, no intellect, memory nor will-power; nor can it voluntarily generate force nor motion. It follows that “nature” cannot form the spermatozoön nor the ovum; cannot cause them to unite and fuse into a germ-cell; nor cause the necessary atoms and cells to assemble and group themselves into the chemical combinations and mechanical arrangements required to build up the embryo body, its organs and parts.

In other words, “nature” works by and through the spermatozoön, the ovum and germ-cell or fertilized ovum. It has identically the same powers and potentialities that they have--no more nor less. It follows that nature cannot, automatically, generate nor evolve, a new man, nor a new woman.

Sec. 33. Every Human Being is a New, Direct and Special Creation by Almighty God; this Question to be Determined, How

To determine this question it is necessary: _first_, to ascertain what work has to be done in order to create a new human being; _secondly_, to consider whether this work can be done, spontaneously and automatically, by the germ-cell or fertilized ovum and its daughter-cells, or whether a supernatural psychic and creative force is necessary to do it.

Darwin ought to be accepted by the evolutionist and materialist as high authority on any biological question, and specially on the subject of special creation. I call him as my first witness. In his Origin of Species, last edition, 1872, (vol. 2, p. 298) he says:

“I believe that [all] animals are descended from at most only four or five progenitors, and plants from an equal or lesser number. Analogy would lead one step further, namely, to the belief that all animals and plants are descended from some one prototype.”

Again, on page 299, he says:

“If we admit this, we must likewise admit that all the organic beings, which have ever lived on this earth may have descended from one primordial form.”

The last ten lines in his Origin of Species (vol. 2, pp. 305-306) are in these words:

“Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms, or into one, and that whilst this planet has gone cycling on, according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful, have been and are being evolved.”

Thus, the reader will see that Darwin, himself believed that the first one, or the first few, animals and plants were directly and specially created by Almighty God.

I base the theory that every Human being is a new, direct and special creation by Almighty God, on the following propositions:

Sec. 34. Proposition 1. Animals and Plants First Appeared on the Earth at a Certain Time

There was a time when there were no animals, nor plants on our planet. Therefore, they must have appeared at a definite period.

The rocks tell us that animals and plants first appeared on the earth in the archæozoic or primordial geological age, which, according to Haeckel, began 100,300,000 years ago. (Last words on Evolution, p. 165.) He also says that “life began to exist at a definite period,” “on our planet;” that “no organism can exist or discharge its functions without water. No water, no life!” and that the surface of the earth had to cool down so as to convert “the envelope of steam into water” before animals and plants could live. (Evolution of Man, p. 200.)

Sec. 35. Proposition 2. First Animal and Plant were Either Specially Created; or Arose by Spontaneous Generation from Inorganic Matter

Mysterious and miraculous as it may seem, animals and plants have lived on the earth during this eternity of time. The earth is now covered with countless millions of them. We know that we, ourselves, are here. How did they happen to be here? How did we get here? How did life originate on the earth?

It is obvious that the first animal or plant that appeared on the earth was either directly and specially made, by a supernatural psychic and creative force, of inorganic matter; or that it arose, by spontaneous generation, from such matter; for it must necessarily have originated in the one manner or in the other. How else could it have come into existence?

So far as I know, there are only two theories, among educated and scientific men, as to the origin of animals and plants. The one is that they were directly and specially made by the Creator; the other is that they arose by spontaneous generation, from inorganic matter. Which of these is most plausible? (Spencer, Principles of Biology, vol. 1, pp. 415-416.)

The evolutionist and materialist maintain that the course of nature is “uniform, continuous and everlasting;” that the earth is now behaving identically, as it has been ever since it came into existence; that animals and plants are now being evolved, as in the past, while others are becoming extinct, and that every animal and plant is merely a co-ordinated term in natures “great progression.” (Huxley, Man’s Place in Nature, p. 151.)

According to this view, if an animal or a plant was ever spontaneously generated from inorganic matter, we would naturally expect to find them arising in the same manner today, for there is no reason to suppose that the nature of the “inorganic matter,” which they say produced the first animal or plant, has been exhausted; nor that it has changed; nor that the conditions have changed, nor that the forces which are supposed to have caused the spontaneous generation of the first animal and plant have ceased to exist.

Sec. 36. Proposition 3. No Spontaneous Generation of Animals; nor of Plants

Professor Huxley (1825-1905) was a scientist and philosopher of the first magnitude. He was an intimate friend to Darwin; an evolutionist and materialist of the strictest sect and fully competent to speak for these schools of philosophy. Among other works on evolution, he wrote, “Man’s Place in Nature” (1863), in which he argued at great length that man is a descendant of an ape. Hence the following quotations from his works may be taken as authoritative admissions on the part of the evolutionist and materialist.

He says:

“The fact is that at the present moment there is not a shadow of trustworthy direct evidence that abiogenesis [spontaneous generation] does take place, or has taken place, within the period during which the existence of life on the globe is recorded.” (Huxley, Anat. Invert. An., pp. 40-41.)

Writing in the Encyclopedia Britannica (9 ed., vol. 8, p. 746) he says, in substance, that the aphorism: “omne vivum ex vivo” (“all life comes of life”) is a “well established law of the existing course of nature.”

The theory of spontaneous generation assumes that certain inorganic elements, spontaneously and automatically grouped themselves together in such proportions and in such a manner, chemically and mechanically, as to produce one or a very few animals or plants; and that all other animals and plants have descended from this one, or these few primordial forms. No one pretends to say that there is any direct evidence that any such thing ever happened. On the contrary every fact within our knowledge tends to negative the theory of spontaneous generation. But, in order to dispense with the theory of special creation, the evolutionist and materialist invented the theory of spontaneous generation. There is not only no evidence to support the theory of spontaneous generation, but after many trials scientific men have wholly failed to produce any living substance, whatever. On this point Professor Huxley says:

“To enable us to say that we know anything about the experimental origination of organization and life, the investigator ought to be able to take inorganic matters, such as carbonic acid, ammonia, water and salines, in any sort of inorganic combination, and be able to build them up into protein matter [nitrogenous or albuminoid bodies] and that protein matter ought to begin to live in an organic form. That, nobody has done as yet; and I suspect it will be a long while before anybody does it.” (Huxley, Origin of Species, p. 69.) After discussing the theory of spontaneous generation at length, and describing the experiments which are supposed to have destroyed that theory, he says:

“For my part, I conceive that with the particulars of M. Pasteur’s experiments before us, we cannot fail to arrive at his conclusions; and that the doctrine of spontaneous generation has received a final _coup de grace_” [stroke of mercy or death blow.]

After describing the experiments of a number of scientists the New International Encyclopedia, published in 1905, (vol. 1, p. 463) says:

“The result of these experiments and conclusions is that the view that spontaneous generation takes place at the present day, has been entirely discarded.”

If there was ever any such thing as spontaneous generation of animals and plants, from inorganic matter, why should it not continue to happen, down to the present time?

We are therefore compelled to believe that there never was any such thing as spontaneous generation from inorganic matters; and we know that all the men of the earth, acting in concert, could not produce a single live worm!

Sec. 37. Proposition 4. Creator Could Have Made a Million Animals or Plants as Well as One

If it be admitted, as Darwin does, that the Creator made “one or a few” animals and plants, in the beginning, we may well suppose that He could have made a million, or a million of millions, as easily as one.

Sec. 38. Proposition 5. If the Creator Made the First Animal and the First Plant He Made All Others

If it be admitted that He created the first one, or the first few, animals and plants, why should we doubt that He created all of them? If He began to create them, why should He cease to do so? His works are uniform, continuous and everlasting.

But in his “Origin of Species” (vol. 2, p. 304-305) Darwin says:

“Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual.”

What are “the laws impressed on matter by the Creator,” that have anything to do with the reproduction of animals and plants? What laws “impressed on matter” have any bearing on the question whether animals and plants have arisen from inorganic matter, by spontaneous generation or by special creation? Perhaps Darwin means to say that he supposes the Creator would naturally make one or a few primordial forms of animal and plant and turn them loose upon the earth to shift for themselves subject to “secondary causes,” namely, the factors of evolution. But he does not profess to have any special knowledge of the Divine Mind; nor does he pretend to know more of it than any other man does.

Perhaps Lamarck (1744-1829) was the first to suggest the theory of spontaneous generation, in the sense in which these words are now used, and the evolution of species. (Encyclopedia Britannica 14, p. 232.) Down to his time, no one doubted the Mosaic story of the creation. Belief in the theory of special creation was well nigh universal down to the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species, in 1859. This belief was shared alike by both scientists and laymen. But shortly after the publication of that work, belief in the theory of organic evolution became a fad among educated people; and that belief was supposed to indicate intellectual power and independence of thought.

Sec. 39. Proposition 6. Human Body is Either Specially Created or Spontaneously Generated, Which?

According to the evolutionist and materialist, the reproduction of the human body from a fertilized ovum is, in substance and effect, the same thing as spontaneous generation of such a body from inorganic matter. The work to be done in the one case is identically the same as that to be done in the other. In fact the spermatozoön and the ovum are made of dead matter; and if we consider the making of the spermatozoön and the ovum as the first steps in the process of reproduction as they are; and also assume that the Creator takes no part in that process, we would then have to say that the human body arises by spontaneous generation from inorganic matter; for it is undoubtedly true that the spermatozoön and ovum are made of inorganic substances, namely: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen. It is equally true that the fertilized ovum has no more intellect, memory nor will-power than its component atoms of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen had; nor has it any more power to generate, guide and control forces and motions than they had. It follows that the same psychic and creative force is necessary to produce a new human being whether it be made from a germ of inorganic matter or from a fertilized ovum; the ovum being only one remove from inorganic matter. Moreover, the entire human body is made of dead matter except the infinitesimal fertilized ovum.

There is no middle ground between special creation on the one side and spontaneous generation on the other; either the Creator generates, guides and controls the forces and motions which build up the embryo body, its organs and parts; or the atoms and cells, of which they are made, do, spontaneously and automatically, assemble and group themselves into the chemical combinations, and into the mechanical arrangements, which are necessary to make them.

The reader may argue that “nature,” “heredity” or the germ-cell (fertilized ovum) does this wonderful work of building up the embryo body; and, therefore, that neither the Creator nor spontaneous generation does it. But “nature” and “heredity” do all their work by and through the germ-cell; so their powers are identical with those of the germ-cell. This germ is a tiny bit of protoplasm composed of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen, with a possible trace of sulphur and phosphorus. It has no brain, eyes, ears, nose, touch, nor taste; no intellect, memory, nor will-power; no knowledge of anatomy, chemical elements, chemical affinity, form, size, time, nor space; nor any constructive power nor force; has no power to generate forces nor to guide and control motions.

Therefore, it is impossible for the germ-cell, or its daughter-cells, to build up, automatically, the embryo body, with all its organs and parts. It follows that this body must be directly and specially created by Almighty God.

Again, every embryo body is made of cells (organic bricks) and these are made of dead atoms. In order to construct this body it is necessary to group a certain number of these atoms into certain chemical combinations; next these combinations must be grouped into certain mechanical arrangements. Thus, the skeleton is made of bones; they are made of cells, which in turn are made of dead atoms of lime, carbon, phosphorus, etc.; these cells must be grouped into phosphate of lime, carbonate of lime, gelatin, etc. These combinations must then be grouped into the two hundred and seventy-eight bones of the embryo skeleton, giving each bone its proper form, size, structure and place in the skeleton. It is clear that neither the father nor the mother takes any part in making these chemical combinations nor in making the mechanical arrangements. It is equally clear that they are not made by chance nor by accident; nor by the “factors” of evolution.

It follows that the atoms and cells of which the embryo body is made, do, spontaneously and automatically group themselves into the chemical combinations and mechanical arrangements, which are necessary to construct the several organs and parts of the embryo body without the aid or guidance of any extraneous psychic or creative force; or that every organ and part of the embryo body is directly and specially made by the Creator.

Sec. 40. Proposition 7. Human Skeleton is a Special Creation

Human bones are composed of ten chemical elements, namely: carbon, chlorin, hydrogen, lime, magnesium, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, sodium and sulphur. As found in the bones, these elements are grouped into the five chemical combinations, following: phosphate of lime, carbonate of lime, carbonate of soda, chloride of soda, and gelatin.

There are eight bones in the cranium, fourteen in the face and six in the ears, making twenty-eight in the skull, besides the thirty-two teeth. (Encyc. Brit. (9 ed.) vol. 1, p. 822.) In the infant there are thirty-three vertebræ (joints) in the spinal column, namely: seven cervical, in the neck; twelve dorsal, in the back; five lumbar, in the small of the back; five sacral, in the sacrum; and four coccygeal, in the coccyx. But in the adult, there are only twenty-six, the five sacral joints having fused into one bone, and the four in the coccyx having fused into another; these two and the twenty-four regular vertebræ (joints) making twenty-six. (Same book, p. 820.) In the chest there are twelve pairs of ribs, the sternum or breast bone and the hyoid or tongue bone, twenty-six in all. (Same book, p. 822.) Each arm and hand, including the scapula or shoulder blade, consists of thirty-two bones, making sixty-four in the two arms and hands. In each leg and foot, including the bones of the pelvis, there are thirty-one bones, making sixty-two in the pelvis, legs and feet. So that the adult human skeleton consists of two hundred and six bones, besides the thirty-two teeth. (Johnson’s Universal Cyclopedia, 7, p. 553.)

The same book, (p. 533) says:

“At birth their number is 278; at the age of twenty-five, 224; in advanced old age, 194. About 660 segments are needed in the formation of the 206 bones.”

In another place it says:

“Thus, the thigh bone or femur represents the fusion of at least five distinct segments, the union not being fully completed until about the twentieth year.” (Same book, p. 553, column 1.)

There is no bone in the fertilized ovum; therefore each skeleton and each bone is produced anew; that is, it grows anew for itself. No two bones are exactly alike. In the case of pairs similar bones are on opposite sides of the body, thus half the ribs, one arm, hand, leg, and foot are on each side of the body. Each of the twenty-four regular joints in the spinal column is similar to every other joint except the atlas. But, beginning at the top and going downward, each joint is smaller than the one next below it.

The bones of the skeleton have pores, foraminæ (holes), cavities, processes, joints and sutures. Some of them are long, others short, broad and irregular. Each is attached to one or more other bones by a joint or a suture. Each is adjusted to, and correlated with every other, in structure, form, size and function. The bones in the infant body grow inside of it and while in the mother’s womb. There is no model present by which to make it.

Who determines at what points in the embryo body these two hundred and seventy-eight bones shall be built up? Who ordains that there shall be twenty-two in the skull, thirty-three in the spinal column, etc.? Who fixes the structure, form, and size of each bone? Who adjusts and correlates each bone in the skeleton to every other? Who counts them? Who guides and controls the forces and motions that build up the skeleton, in such a manner that the bones on the right side have the same structure, form and size as those on the left? How does it happen that the bones on the right side are the reverse of those on the left? How does it happen that each human skeleton is exactly like every other. Who fixes nine months as the time in which the infant skeleton shall mature sufficiently for birth?

The father contributes the spermatozoön and the mother the ovum; these two cells fuse into the germ-cell (fertilized ovum), which is composed of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen, with a possible trace of phosphorus and sulphur. Whatever qualities, characteristics, traits and potentialities pass from the parents to the child must necessarily be transmitted by and through the germ-cell (or fertilized ovum), for nothing else passes from the parents to the child. This cell is about the size of one-sixth of a common pin’s head; and is barely visible to the naked eye under the most favorable conditions. It has no intellect, memory nor will-power; no knowledge of anatomy, nor of the human body.

It is immediately divided into two daughter-cells, these into four, eight, sixteen, thirty-two and so on to infinity. Thus, it appears that the infinitesimal fertilized ovum is soon disintegrated, divided into millions of pieces and distributed among the new cells which are made from the food of the mother.