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.
It is impossible to believe that the minute fertilized ovum when
divided into a million pieces, selects the atoms, generates, guides
and controls the forces and motions which build up the two hundred and
seventy-eight bones in the infant body. It is preposterous to suppose
that the millionth part of the germ-cell can determine the point in
the embryo body, in which the skull bones, the ear bones, the spinal
column, the arm-buds, leg-buds, etc., shall appear. Nor can we believe
that this little cell or any of its daughter-cells can spontaneously
and automatically produce any of the vital phenomena, manifested by the
human skeleton.
Every one knows that neither the father nor the mother has any
voluntary power, nor any control over the development and growth of the
embryo.
Does the embryo develop and grow by accident or chance? Surely not; for
each embryo develops and grows precisely as every other does, in every
age and country, thus showing that the same ubiquitous creative force
makes all of them.
“We must not assume any original creation, nor repeated creations,”
says Haeckel, “to explain this, but a natural, continuous and necessary
evolution.” (Evolution of Man, p. 26.) He argues that there is no
personal God.
Writing in the Encyclopedia Britannica (vol. 8, p. 746, 9 ed.)
Professor Huxley says:
“No exception is, at this time, known to the general law, established
upon an immense multitude of direct observations, that every living
thing is evolved from a particle of matter, in which no trace of the
distinctive characters of the adult form of that living thing is
discernible. This particle is termed a _germ_.…
“The definition of a germ as ‘matter potentially alive, and having,
_within itself_, the tendency to assume a definite living form,’
appears to meet all the requirements of modern science … And the
qualification of ‘potential’ has the advantage of reminding us that the
great characteristic of the germ is not so much _what it is_, but _what
it may, under suitable conditions, become_.…
“In all cases, the process of evolution consists in a succession
of changes of the form, structure and functions of the germ by
which it passes, step by step, from an extreme simplicity, or
relative homogeneity, of visible structure to a greater or less
degree of complexity or heterogeneity; and the course of progressive
differentiation is generally accompanied by growth, which is effected
by intussusception,” [interstitial deposit.]
“… And so far from the fully developed organism’s being simply the
germ _plus_ the nutriment, which it has absorbed, it is probable that
the adult contains neither in form, nor in substance, more than an
inappreciable fraction of the constituents of the germ, and that it is
almost wholly made up of assimilated and metamorphosed nutriment.”
This being true, it cannot be said that the germ (fertilized ovum) ever
develops into a man or woman. On the contrary it is annihilated; and
its identity is wholly lost among the daughter-cells which are made of
the mother’s food.
Herbert Spencer invented what he calls “physiological units” or
“constitutional units,” and “structural proclivity.” But neither he
nor any other man ever saw one of these “units,” they being wholly
imaginary. In his Principles of Biology (vol. 1, p. 368) under
“Genesis, heredity and variation,” he says:
“So that though all parts are composed of physiological units of the
same nature, yet everywhere, in virtue of local conditions and the
influence of its neighbors, each unit joins in forming a particular
structure appropriate to its place.”
Could anything be more absurd?
For Spencer’s view of “physiological units” and “structural proclivity”
see Principles of Biology 1, pp. 226, 361, 362, 365, 368, 372, and vol.
2, pp. 612-618.
The effect of the above quotations is that the atoms and cells of
which the embryo body is composed, do spontaneously and automatically
assemble and group themselves into the chemical combinations and
mechanical arrangements, which are necessary to build up the human
body, without the aid of any extraneous psychic or creative force
whatever. This is necessarily the theory of the evolutionist and
materialist; for they deny that there was ever any such thing as
special creation. Besides, every one knows that neither the father nor
the mother has any power, nor any control over the development and
growth of the embryo.
It follows that the blind, unthinking, fertilized ovum and
daughter-cells arising from it, spontaneously and automatically
assemble themselves together in the form of the two hundred and
seventy-eight bones of the embryo skeleton; or that the Creator
generates, guides, and controls the forces and motions which build up
the embryo body. Which theory is most plausible?
We cannot even imagine the dead atoms of carbon, chlorine, hydrogen,
lime, etc., which compose the bones, assemble and group themselves into
the twenty-two bones of the skull; nor into the thirty-three joints of
the spinal column; nor into the bones of the arms, hands, legs and feet
with all their pores, foraminæ, cavities, processes, joints and sutures.
But the evolutionist says that “heredity” produces the embryo; and
another says “nature” does this wonderful work. I reply that whatever
“heredity” and “nature” may do toward the production of the embryo must
necessarily be done by and through the fertilized ovum, and I have
already argued that this little atom is powerless to do any such thing.
See index, infra, “Heredity.”
Each bone in the skeleton, and all of them as a whole, testify that
they were designed and made by the Creator!
Sec. 41. Proposition 8. Each Human Eye is a New, Direct and Special
Creation
Two new eyes must be made, out and out, for each embryo.
The eye is formed before birth. This fact makes it clear that the
alleged factors of evolution have nothing to do with its production.
It is obvious that the father takes no part in the construction of
the child’s eyes; for he contributes the spermatozoön, only; and the
formation of the eye begins a considerable time after the spermatozoön
fuses with the ovum. It is equally clear that the mother has no
voluntary agency in the production of the child’s eyes. In brief, the
child develops and grows in the mother’s womb, as a parasite, she being
merely its host. Moreover, the reader will readily admit that all the
scientists on the earth, acting in concert, could not make a living eye
for a toad.
Each human eye has the same parts, the same construction, form, and
substantially the same size that every other such eye has; and performs
the same functions. So all human eyes occupy the same relative position
in the face. We are, therefore, compelled to believe that human eyes
are not produced by accident nor by chance; but they develop and grow
by force of a universal law; or that they are made by the Creator.
But the almost universal belief is that “heredity” or “nature” causes
the child’s eyes to grow, as those of the parents grew.
A cause is described as: “An antecedent, upon which an effect follows
according to the law of nature.” (Cent. Dic. 1, p. 868.)
Ordinarily, the word “cause” is understood to mean a force or agency
which produces a given effect or result, which could not happen without
that force or agency. Such a force or agency is termed an efficient
cause. (Cent. Dic. 3, p. 1849.)
It would be absurd to suppose that the eyes of the father and mother
cause or produce the eyes of the child. It follows that there is no
causative relation between the eyes of the parents and those of the
child. The most that could be said in this direction is that the same
force or agency which produced the eyes of the parents, namely: the
Creator, also caused and produced those of the child.
The fact that the father and mother have eyes is no reason why the
child should have them; for the forces and motions which made the
eyes of the parents ceased to exist long before the formation of the
germ-cell from which the child is produced.
Each human eye is a new combination of the atoms and cells of which
it is composed. No atom, in it, was ever a part of an eye of either
parent. The atoms and cells, of which it is made, are grouped into new
chemical combinations; and these are mechanically arranged in such a
manner as to construct the human eye for the first and last time. The
forces and motions, which build up each eye are peculiar to it. The
work done in making the eyes of the parents, has nothing to do with
the making of the eyes of the child; for the atoms and cells which are
employed in constructing the child’s eyes must be assembled and grouped
into the necessary chemical combinations and mechanical arrangements as
if the father and mother had no eyes. In other words, each eye must be
made anew, without regard to the eyes of the father and mother or any
other person. If a man make a million bricks, it requires the same work
to make the last one that it did to make the first one; so if a hundred
million silver dollars are coined at a mint it requires, identically,
the same work to coin each of them that it did to make every other; and
so of the eyes.
While discussing “organs of extreme perfection,” and referring to the
imaginary evolution of the human eye, in his Origin of Species (vol. 1,
p. 228), Darwin says:
“Let this process go on for millions of years, and during each year on
millions of individuals of many kinds, and may we not believe that a
living optical instrument might be thus formed, as superior to one of
glass as the works of the Creator are to those of man?”
In brief, Darwin’s theory is that the eyes of each individual are
better than those of his parents; and that he transmits to his child
all the improvements made on his eyes during his life and so on to the
latest generation. In other words, according to Darwin, the eyes of
today are the “accumulated improvements” of millions of years.
Apparently Darwin thinks that each individual gets the benefit of all
improvements made in the eyes of every other individual of all other
species without regard to genetic relations, for he says, “on millions
of individuals of many kinds,” etc. According to this view, a man would
avail himself of any improvement that might be made in the eye of a
fly, which is preposterous.
There would be some force in Darwin’s argument if it were possible to
transfer the father’s or the mother’s eyes, bodily, to the child. But
such a thing is too absurd to be dreamed of.
Every one knows that each eye, and every part of it, grows anew, as
if the parents of the embryo had no eyes. Neither Darwin, nor any
other man has ever shown how it is possible for the eyes of the father
or mother to modify or affect the development, growth, form, size,
color, qualities or characteristics of the child’s eyes. According
to Darwin’s theory of “gemmules” the eyes of the father and mother
give off gemmules which get into his or her blood and thence into the
spermatozoön and the ovum and thence into the fertilized ovum and these
produce eyes, in the child, like those of its parents. But everybody
saw that these “gemmules” would have great difficulty in finding the
spermatozoön and ovum, and in getting into them when found; and that
after they reached the fertilized ovum, which divides into two, four,
eight, sixteen or a million daughter-cells, these gemmules would have
great difficulty in finding the orbit where the new eye is to grow; and
that they were as apt to land in the back, heel or toe of the embryo as
in the orbit.
Besides, if there were any such thing as Darwin’s gemmules there would
have to be at least one for each coat, muscle, artery, vein, nerve
and part of the eye; and it would be impossible for them to arrange
themselves in the proper order in the embryo eye. Moreover, there
might be too many or too few gemmules; some of them might get lost and
leave the embryo eye without one or more of its coats or parts; then
the gemmules from the father’s ayes might clash with those from the
mother’s.
No other man has ever suggested any more plausible theory, than
Darwin’s “gemmules,” of the manner in which the organs and parts of
the parents’ bodies may be supposed to modify and affect those of the
child. But this theory was rejected by every one, but Darwin, as absurd
and impossible.
Every human being begins life as fertilized ovum, in which there is no
eye. No part of the eyes of the father is transferred, bodily, to those
of the child; nor is any part of the eyes of the mother. Every part of
each eye must be made anew; each part must have the proper structure,
form, and size; must be adjusted to and correlated with every other;
finally, the several parts must be arranged in the proper order in the
eye. In other words, two entirely new eyes must be made for each child.
Either the blind unthinking atoms and cells, of which the several parts
of the eye, namely: the several coats, the aqueous humor, the lens,
the vitreous body, the optic nerve, the muscles, arteries, veins,
nerves, etc., are built up, do, spontaneously and automatically, and
without the aid of any extraneous, supernatural, psychic and creative
force, assemble and group themselves into the chemical combinations and
mechanical arrangements necessary to construct the embryo eye; or the
Creator, directly and specially, makes it. Which hypothesis is most
plausible?
Sec. 42. Proposition 9. Each Human Ear is a New, Direct and Special
Creation
Two new ears must be made, out and out, for each embryo.
The ear is a complex acoustic apparatus; is more complex, and has more
parts, than the eye; and every part of it is well fitted to perform the
function assigned to it. What was said in the two preceding sections,
of skeleton and eye, as tending to establish the theory of special
creation, applies equally to the construction of the ear.
Intellect, memory, will-power, force and motion are required to
form the chemical combinations and make the mechanical arrangements
necessary to construct the ear; and every part of it testifies that it
was contrived and made by the Creator!
Sec. 43. Proposition 10. Each Human Brain is a New, Direct and Special
Creation
An entirely new brain must be made for each embryo. What has been said
of the several parts of the skeleton and of the eye, (section 40 and
41, supra), applies equally to the size, form, structure, position and
number of the several parts of the brain.
Sec. 44. Proposition 11. The Sexual Organs of Each Individual are New,
Direct and Special Creations
Every human being begins life as a fertilized ovum, in which there are
no sexual organs whatever. It follows that a new set of such organs
must be made, out and out, for each individual embryo.
Who or what determines whether the child shall be a male or female?
For several weeks after the formation of the fertilized ovum there is
nothing to indicate whether the child is to be a boy or girl. If it
is finally decided that it shall be a male, a full set of male sexual
organs is made for him. On the other hand, if it is to be a female,
a set of female organs is made for her. But the production of male
organs for the one, or female organs for the other is not the only
thing to be done; for every organ and part of the body is modified,
adjusted to and correlated with, the sexual characters whether male or
female. The reader will readily recall all the distinctive differences
between a man and woman, including the secondary sexual characters. In
other words, if it is determined that the child shall be a male, every
non-sexual organ and part of his body must be so differentiated and
modified as to make a man of him, in both mind and body. On the other
hand, if the child is to be a female, all of her non-sexual organs and
parts must be so differentiated and modified as to make a woman of her,
with all of the qualities, characteristics and traits that belong to
woman.
Intellect, memory, will-power, force and motion--creative force--are
necessary to convert a sexless embryo body into a male or female
child. This cannot be done by accident nor by blind chance; nor by the
alleged “factors” of evolution; for this work is done before the birth
of the child and before the “factors” have had an opportunity to do
their “work;” besides, we cannot believe that the blind “factors” can
metamorphose a sexless embryo into a male or female child.
Neither the father nor the mother has any power to determine the sex of
their child; nor has the fertilized ovum any such power; for it has no
intellect, memory nor will-power, nor any knowledge of sexual organs
nor of anything else. Moreover, before the sex of the child has been
determined this ovum has been annihilated by division among a million
of daughter-cells, which are made of animal and vegetable food eaten
by the mother, which was never a part of any other human body.
Can we believe that the blind, unthinking atoms and cells of which
the embryo body is built up, do, spontaneously, automatically and
without the aid of any extraneous psychic force, group themselves into
the chemical combinations and mechanical arrangements, necessary to
construct the sexual organs of a male or female child? How can these
atoms and cells elect whether it shall be a boy or a girl? If they do
so elect, how can they differentiate and modify all the non-sexual
organs and parts of the body so as to correlate them with the sexual
organs?
The evolutionist and materialist will say that “heredity” or “nature”
determines the sex of the embryo. I reply that the force and power of
“heredity” and of “nature” are identical with those the fertilized
ovum because they can act, only, by and through it; and it has no
intellect, memory nor will-power to determine the sex of the child;
nor to construct the male nor the female sexual organs after electing
between them, even if such a thing were possible; nor any power to
correlate the non-sexual organs and parts, with the male or female
sexual organs so as to produce a man or a woman. In fact the germ-cell
has no knowledge of sexual organs, nor of their form, size, structure
nor functions. It follows that neither “heredity,” nor “nature” has
any power to determine the sex of the child, nor to correlate its
non-sexual organs with its sexual ones.
We are, therefore, compelled to believe that the sex of every human
being is determined by the Creator; and that all sexual organs are
directly and specially made by him.
For like reasons, we are compelled to believe that the heart, lungs,
stomach, liver, kidneys, muscles, arteries, veins, nerves, and other
organs and parts of the body are directly and specially made by the
Creator.
Sec. 45. Proposition 12. Form, Size, Structure and Position of the
Several Organs and Parts of the Body and Their Number are Conclusive
Evidence that Each Human Body is a New, Direct and Special Creation
For example, the form, size, structure and position of the several
bones in each skeleton, and the number of them, are proof that they are
all made by the Creator.
So, the form, size, structure, and position of the several parts of the
brain, eye, ear, heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, etc.; and their number
cannot be explained on any hypothesis, other than that of special
creation. The same is true of the muscles, arteries, veins, etc.
Sec. 46. Proposition 13. Universal Sameness of all Human Bodies, is
Conclusive Evidence that Each of Them was Directly and Specially Made
by the Creator
Every human body that ever lived in any age or country was composed
of identically the same chemical elements that were or are found in
every other such body, in whatever age or country such other body may
have lived. So, each normal body, in whatever age or country it may
have lived, had the same chemical combinations; the same mechanical
arrangements; the same structure, the same organs and parts, and
substantially the same form and size, that every other such body, of
the same sex, had, whenever, and wherever such other body may have
lived.
How could this universal sameness of chemical elements, chemical
combinations, mechanical arrangements, etc., in all human bodies have
happened? Could it have happened by accident or chance; or by force
of the blind factors of evolution; or did the blind, unthinking atoms
and cells, of which each human body was built up, spontaneously, and
automatically, group themselves into identically the same chemical
combinations, and mechanical arrangements that the atoms and cells in
every other human body had grouped themselves; thus making chemical
elements, chemical combinations, the mechanical arrangements, the
organs and parts in each human body, identically the same as those in
every other such body, whenever and wherever it may have lived? Such
a thing is impossible; specially when we consider that each body grew
anew, for itself.
But the evolutionist may say that this universal sameness in all human
bodies is caused by “heredity.”
I reply that each human body begins life as a fertilized ovum; that it
develops and grows anew for itself, independently of the development
and growth of any other body; it is a new combination of the atoms and
cells--“organic bricks”--of which it is composed; it was made by new
forces and motions of new materials, peculiar to itself. In order to
build each body the atoms and cells, of which it was composed, must
have been selected, assembled at the building site and there grouped
into the necessary chemical combinations and mechanical arrangement.
Intellect, memory, will-power, force and motion were necessary to do
this work, in each instance.
Heredity is only a name for certain vital phenomena. It it not a
material entity; it has no weight, length, breadth nor thickness; no
constructive force; no intellect, memory nor will-power; nor any power
to generate force nor motion. Nor has it any power to assemble the
atoms and cells; nor to group and arrange them in such a manner as to
form the body, its organs and parts. Nor can “heredity” “breathe the
breath of life” into the fertilized ovum nor create a soul for the
embryo body.
“Heredity” does all its work by and through the fertilized ovum. It
has identically the same properties and potentialities that this ovum
has, no more nor less. Surely this ovum has no knowledge of the bodies
of its parents, nor of their organs and parts; nor can it have any
memory of a thing that it never knew; nor has it any inherent power to
reproduce the bodies of its parents or either of them.
It is impossible to explain and account for this universal sameness of
all human bodies without assuming that each of them was made by one and
the same hand, namely: Almighty God. We cannot doubt that He directly
and specially created every human being that ever lived on our planet.
Sec. 47. Proposition 14. Creator’s Supervision of the Development and
Growth of the Embryo is Necessary to Produce the Human Body
The watchmaker makes one piece of a watch at a time; but every organ
and part of the embryo body grows all the time. Thus the body and all
its internal organs and parts; and both arms, hands, legs and feet are
growing continuously until it is grown. If the growth of each organ and
part of the body were not so regulated as to keep pace with every other
organ and part, there would be no proper proportion among them. One arm
and hand would be larger and longer than the other; one leg larger and
longer than the other; the five segments in the femur would not meet
and unite to form the complete bone. (Johnson’s Cyclopedia 7, p. 553.)
If there were no extraneous supervising architect to adjust and
correlate each organ and part to every other, there would be no
harmony of form, size, nor structure in the edifice. Surely, the atoms
and cells in the right leg would have no knowledge of the form, size,
nor structure of the left; and no organ, nor any part of the body,
would have any power to adjust itself, automatically, to any other.