The atheist or agnostic has no answers as to the origin of homo sapiens, that is to say, human beings—male and female. Only the inspired Scriptures given by the Holy Spirit accounts for the beginning, or start, of humanity. A perusal of the literature of unbelievers reveals that they do not distinquish between the animal kingdom and the kingdom of humanity—all are one and the same. Evolution is the common name assigned to justify such absurbities. Yes, skeptics who deny the existence of God and His supernatural revelation also disavow, or repudiate, that men and women are priviledged beings in this world. There is a confessed ignorance of atheists as they seek to account for the source of matter, the principle of motion in matter, the specific origin of the earth with its unique enviornment to sustain animal life, plant life, and human life, and so on.

The unbeliever has to admit much ignorance and to believe more mysteries than believers. For the atheist, unbelief is a far greater miracle than belief in the biblical account of creation for the Christian. The miracle of unbelief is that “nothing” created “something.” This mindset of unbelief is to swallow a camel and strain out a gnat, that is, the belief that God created the heavens and the earth. How does one account for both male and female in evolution. Did both evolve at the same time as infants or did they both evolve at the same time as full grown male and female? Were both male and female produced as coordinates with the existence of the earth as infants with no parents? If so, they could not have arrived to maturity. Do infants survive today without care? No! Experience teaches that the first pair must have been adults when first ushered into being. For one to deny the plain evidence of one’s survival as infants, one has to suppose, contrary to all experience, that the first pair (male and female) were not the same as the species known today.

Which came first the chicken or the egg? One knows that the chicken had to exist before the egg. If not where did the egg come from? Did the acorn, or seed, exist before the tree? In the vegetable kingdom, there had first to be the plant before a seed could fall to the earth. Even in the animal kingdom, there first had to be the male and female in its prime before there could be offspring. Nature cannot now produce a new genus, or classification, in the vegetable kingdom nor produce a new species, or variety, in the animal kingdom. By what rational evidence can it be shown or demonstrated that nature ever had such a power? If the first pair were infants, they could not have reached maturity; they would have perished. One can only conclude, based upon experience, that both must have been adults.

How does one account for the idea of God that is so universally known among the various races of the world? How does one account for the motion of matter. For example, the earth revoling around the sun. Some planets have more than one moon—some revolving clockwise (in the same direction as the rotating hands of a clock) and others in the reverse (counterclockwise). What gives regularity to motion? Why do the planets choose to move in a uniform course, or order? How did the five senses come into existence? The five senses are essential for life. Even though some may be lacking in some of the five senses, nevertheless, they must depend upon others who possess these senses in order to survive. How does one account for the eye? How does one account for the sense of smell? How does one account for the sense of hearing? How does one account for the sense of taste? How does one account for the sense of feel?

The atheist thinks that the five senses just came about through blind and mindless chance. Which is the greater miracle—blind chance or God. There is not one single instance of “blind laws” or mindless chance creating anything. Did the blind laws of nature produce the computer, the space craft, the dictionary, the watch, the automobile, the airplane, and so on? If not, why should individuals assert that which is contrary to all experience and observation. If the universe was so irregular at one time, what causued its regularity? If the atheist or agnostic will reason from effect to cause, he or she will be confounded with an indisolubility of the following questions: (1) were the first man and woman infants or adults? Or (2) was there an acorn or an oak first? If one deals with these questions, one must also deal with other questions. For example, did the first man invent language himself and then pass this on to his offspring? Or, was there a convention of men and women co-existent who agreed upon names for every thing even before they could speak? No one has ever spoken who was not first spoken to. Athesit are ignorant of the origin of language.

Atheists are also ignorant of the origin of matter. Who made me? Where did I come from? These are questions that confronts the inquiring mind. For the atheists or agnostics have no reason to believe themselves a priviledged being in the scale of creation over any creature of the animal kingdom. According to their philosophy, a human is no better than a bee, an ant, a beaver, an elepant, a dog, a cat, and so on. Is this true according to one’s experiences in life? Do labortories use live human beings to dissect, or separate into pieces, as they do animals? If not, why not? How did the first couple know what to eat? This information came directly from special revelation—revelation from Deity. Adam and Eve were able to narrate the information received by Divine revelation about the origin of things. One wonders how the first pair could remember, no doubt, the first time they saw the sun and not be able to know the author of their existence. God revealed Himself to both. In the original state of the first man and the first woman, they were able to converse with their Creator. Man is inferior to the animal kingdom in “instintive powers.” But, on the other hand, men and women are governed by reason, not instinct.

When the first man and the first woman opened their eyes, their reason and senses were at their meridian, or peak, strength. From Adam and Eve, testimony was passed on to each generation concerning the origin of the universe and the existence of God. The ability to rely upon testimony distinguishes and elevates humanity above the brute beast. It goes almost with saying that without testimony there could be no improvability in the world of humanity. Without testimony, both men and women would cease to be progressive beings. In the world of the atheist and the agnostic, one witnesses readiness or willingness to believe anything that is totally outside the bounds of reason. Christians are asked to swallow a camel (atheism) instead of straning out a gnat (Christianity). Is it more reasonable to believe that God created or that nothing created something?