Evidence for Creation: The Reptiles and Time

The creation of reptiles is narrated in verses 24 and 25 of Genesis 1 as follows: "And God said, Let the earth bring forth living animals according to their kind, cattle and creeping things and animals of the earth according to their kind; and it was so. And God made the animals of the earth according to their kind, and the cattle according to their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind, and God saw that it was good."

To understand these verses it is first necessary to grasp the meaning of the word kind. It is frequently understood as if it had been used in the plural, but in Hebrew the word is in the singular number. Therefore, each group of living beings mentioned in the text includes one kind and not several.

This particularity changes the interpretation of the verses transcribed. If God had created the animals according to their kinds, in the plural, we would have to understand that he created all of their species. But Genesis tells us something different. It tells us that God created the cattle after their only kind, the wild animals after their kind, and the reptiles also according to their unique kind.

This means that the domestic animals form one kind in the biblical sense of the word, the wild beasts, one kind, and the reptiles, also one kind. Fortunately, it is not difficult to establish the meaning of each of these groups or kinds for the Jews, since the Bible contains only one animal classification, that of Leviticus 11 repeated in Deuteronomy 14:3-21. No information is available that the Jews have ever used any other classification until a long time after the New Testament was written.

In Leviticus 11:2-8, one group of quadrupeds is mentioned, including the camel, the dormouse, the hare and the pig. The same group appears in Deuteronomy 14:4-8. But beyond these four animals, several others are mentioned: the ox, the sheep, the goat, the deer, the gazelle, the doe, the mountain goat, the antelope, the mountain sheep and the fallow deer. With the exception of the dormouse and the hare, all others are animals with four large legs. This is the main anatomical feature of the group. The other one is that it includes animals having the nail split and the hoof divided, in addition to not being plantigrades (not walking on the soles of the feet).

Some animals in this group are domesticated, others are not. The mountain goat is described as not domesticated in Job 39:1-4. The deer, the gazelle, the doe, the antelope and the fallow deer can be kept in captivity, but not domesticated. They are wild animals. The camel, the ox and the pig, in their turn, are domestic. Although not cited, the dog, the cat and other animals are also included in this group. Therefore, the biblical quadrupeds include both the domestic and the wild animals of Genesis 1.

Let us skip those groups that are not mentioned in the first chapter of the Bible, such as fish and insects, which are clearly defined as categories in Leviticus. The birds of the fifth day appear in Leviticus as a defined group, and the reptiles are mentioned in verses 29-30 and 43-44.

Thus, a complete classification of animals is provided in Leviticus, including a group of quadrupeds (domestic and wild), one of fish, one of birds, one of insects and one or two of reptiles. The basis of the classification is the means of locomotion: on legs, on the belly, on feet, by flippers or by wings. And in order to avoid all doubt that the groups are well defined and stagnant, each is reported to have a distinct criterion of ritual purity: for quadrupeds, the criteria are rumination, possession of split nails and cloven hooves and not being plantigrade; for fish, they are the flippers and scales; for birds it is belonging to a defined list of species; for insects, it is to have longer hind legs.

There are two reptile groups in Leviticus. This conclusion is based on several reasons. First, verses 29 and 30 mention no arthropods (millipede, arachnid etc.). Verse 42, in contrast, cites basically arthropods ("whatever goes on its belly, and whatever goes on all fours, or whatever has many feet"). Therefore, from an anatomical point of view, there are as good reasons to differentiate the animals of 29 and 30 from those of verse 42 as there are to distinguish them from the quadrupeds of verses 2 to 8.

In addition, the criteria of purity for the groups mentioned in 11:29-30 and 11:42 are different. All members of the first group have four feet, but most are considered pure. Only eight species are impure. In the second group, in contrast, all four feet animals and all beings that have many feet (millipedes) are unclean. By exclusion, therefore, only those with six feet (hexapods) are considered pure. These criteria confirm that we deal with different groups.

Both reptile groups are mentioned in Genesis 8:19, which states that "every animal, every creeping thing, every bird and everything that moves upon the earth" came out of Noah's ark. The group of Leviticus 11:29-30 is that of the "creeping things" mentioned in Genesis 8:19; that of Leviticus 11:42-43 is formed by "everything that moves on the earth." So, there is no doubt that the Bible refers to two groups of reptiles and not to one.

However, Genesis 1:25 says that God made "every creeping thing of the earth after its kind." The term kind in the singular means that only one group of reptiles of Leviticus 11 and Genesis 8:19 was created on the sixth day. Again, there is little doubt that the group is that of which arthropods are excluded because, on the fourth day, God created the lights in order to provide "signs and seasons" to animals. Plants are not guided by signs from celestial bodies. They also do not recognize seasons. Therefore, the arthropods seem to have been created in the fourth day or before, leaving only the other group of reptiles to be identified with the one created on the sixth day.

Based on the difference between the verbs create (in Hebrew bara) and make (asah), which we discussed elsewhere, we know that the created beings had not existed before, while those made in Genesis 1 were recreated. One of the reasons I adopt this interpretation is that Genesis 1:1—2:4 was written in order to tell the story of the origins, which is clear not only from the narrative of the seven days, but also from the last verse of the passage, which states: "This is the origin of the heavens and of the earth" (Genesis 2:4).

As the sacred author chose to narrate the origins in a sequence of days, we face two and only two alternatives: if we do not admit that God recreated the Earth after a catastrophe devastated it, Genesis will convey only one sequence of creative acts by God; but if we adopt the interpretation that there were an original creation and a re-creation, two series of divine acts will appear instead of one. In the latter case, the days will be applied in sequence both to the original creation and to the re-creation, with the sole exception of the fifth and the last part of the sixth day, for the beings mentioned in them were created (bara), and did not exist before. 

Thus, the difference between create and make is the criterion that allows us to compose the sequence in which the original creation occurred. This sequence consists of the first four days and the first part of the sixth. When it is compared with the information provided by science, we have the following picture:

Bible	Science
Origin of light on the 1st day	Origin of light 4,5 to 3,9 billion years ago
Origin of the atmosphere, clouds and ocean on the 2nd day	Origin of the atmosphere, clouds and ocean 3,9 to 3,5 billion years ago
Origin of the Earth’s crust, herbs and fruit trees on the 3rd day	Origin of the Earth’s crust, herbs and fruit trees 3,5 billion to 360 million years ago
Origin of lights on the 4th day	Origin of lights 360 million years ago
Origin of earth animals on the first part of the 6th day	Origin of earth animals 360 to 50 million years ago

As I showed in detail in the book Darwin's hypothesis, the table above points out that, according to scientific data, the items of the original creation arose in the exact sequence indicated by the days of Genesis 1. Of course, this interpretation depends on taking the days of Genesis as ages, but that is one of the possible translations of the Hebrew word yom (day).

It is important to remember that the origin of celestial bodies mentioned in the table consisted of the clearing of the atmosphere, after a meteor collision with the Earth, 360 ​​million years ago. The collision was proven by the discovery, in 2013, of a crater in the East Warburton Basin in South Australia, with no less than 10 to 20 km in diameter. The scientist Andrew Glikson, from the Australian National University, declared that the fall of the asteroid that opened the crater caused a "regional and global impact" (Glikson, Andrew. UOL News. 20.02.2013, 1932 hours).

This cataclysmic event marks the time when the work of the fourth day took place. The age of the reptiles began not long after, from the viewpoint of geological time. Thus, in addition to the items mentioned in the table (light, atmosphere etc.), we have to place the creation of "every creeping thing" between 360 million and 50 million years ago.

Fortunately, the geological date of the origin of most forms of life can be found in available sources like the Wikipedia. Of 123 families of animals with the characteristics of the reptiles mentioned in Genesis 1:24-25 and Leviticus 11:29-30 I could find 92 which originated between 360 and 50 million years ago, only five that came after, and none preexistent. About 26 families no information was provided.

This means we have 92 correct locations of living creatures besides those listed in the table. To form a concept, albeit rough, of what that means, consider how many combinations of the 92 items with the others mentioned in the four and a half days are possible. The link http://matematica2.no.sapo.pt/12Year/Matemilhoes2.htm helps us to estimate this number as it calculates how many bets combinations of six numbers out of the 49 of the lottery known as Lotto are possible. The answer is 13,983,816.

The calculation is simple. To win the Lotto, a gambler needs to hit the combination of six of the 49 numbers included in the draw. It is not necessary to add that the chance of someone hitting the "right" combination is almost zero, because otherwise the lottery would not exist for lack of means to pay the premiums.

What about the 92 families of living beings located correctly in Genesis 1? In fact, the selection of the living beings that make up the biblical sequence is much more unlikely than that of the lottery numbers, since 92 is not the number of options from which we must take the items of our sequence. The 92 families of reptiles are for the biblical sequence as the six drawn numbers are for Lotto. Therefore, the number of options from which the 92 families were taken is much higher. It equals the number of varities of living beings that were known in Antiquity. That means all kinds of plants, trees, fish, arthropods and other living beings that old man knew.

This number is much higher than 92, which increases the difficulty in choosing the correct sequence. If that sequence is made of 92 items (of more than 100, in fact, since it also includes inanimate things), the universe from which they were taken is much higher. It certainly includes thousands of groups of living beings that could have been placed in the biblical sequence.

How many different forms of fish, insects, arthropods did old man know? The truth is that we do not know. But we know that they were too many. How many fish, insects and other arthropods did Aristotle know, when he wrote his History of animals with hundreds of pages? When it mentions "all reptiles" and other groups of animals, the Bible utilises a knowledge of kinds that was probably not inferior to that of Aristotle, for a simple reason: the Jews needed to separate clean animals from unclean, which forced them to create one of the most comprehensive and rigorous classification of animals known in ancient times.

This is a very important point. Historical data show that the Jews needed to separate clean and unclean animals not only for religious, but also for social reasons. Therefore, they created the broad classification of clean and unclean animals found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy that is rigidly repeated throughout the Bible. It is essential to realize that the only way a Jew could always decide whether an animal was pure or impure was by creating a comprehensive ranking. That was what they did, from the time of the Babylonian Exile, when the Jews were exposed to a different diet, and were forced to differentiate not only a few, but all kinds of clean and unclean animals.

Thus, we are forced conclude that, when Genesis 1 refers to the broad groups of living beings, such as herbs, trees, birds and quadrupeds, without adding the word all, the origin of the groups as wholes is mentioned. But when verse 25 mentions all reptiles something different is involved. The reference is no longer to the broad group of reptiles, that is, to the first species of it that ever existed, but to all the varieties comprised in the group. That makes a big difference, since it adds hundreds and not only one form of life to the biblical sequence. 
For all that, the main requirement for one to understand the chances of mentioning the correct sequence of origins by chance is not the number of broad groups cited in Genesis 1, but the number of varieties known by the ancient Jews. Only this last number allows a realistic idea of ​​the degree of difficulty involved in composing the sequences of creation and re-creation. It is amazing that this number is not 49 or 92, but thousands! And from that number we should take not only one, but 92 groups in the correct sequence!

It is not easy to understand the comparison of the Genesis sequence and the Lotto. As the structure of the sequence is composed not only by the reptiles of the sixth day, but by all the items that originated on other days, to put one group of reptiles in the correct place of the sequence corresponds to hitting the Lotto once. And placing the 92 groups in the right order is equivalent to hitting the Lotto 92 times in a row. Not forgetting, of course, that the Lotto draws 6 numbers out of 49, while to make up the Genesis sequence 92 groups of reptiles are to be chosen out of hundreds or even thousands of other categories.

Let us reason calmly: how many combinations of hundreds or thousands of integers are possible? We can calculate, but it will be in vain. We have no idea of ​​the difference between a million and this defiantly high number. The magnitude of the number involved is so high that we cannot understand it.

Have we finished? Not yet. We still have to consider other factors that may possibly influence the number of combinations. The results of the draws of Lotto are sets of numbers. The task of choosing the right sequence of origins is infinitely more complex because, in addition to choosing the right items among thousands of others, we have to locate them in the correct time frame, as living beings were not created in a week or in a month. It will be useless to put the right sequence in the wrong places of the timeline. Only the right sequence in the right places will be of advantage.

Someone will say that the biblical sequence is undated. That the Bible merely puts the items created one after the other, without locating them here or there in time. Only the scientific sequence is dated. I agree in part. Scientific sequence is really dated, but Genesis does not state its sequence is timeless. Quite otherwise, the implication is that it fits into the timeline in one way among infinite others.

The same sequence can be seen differently, as we stretch it more or less on the timeline. In how many ways can it be seen? Under how many chronological variations can it be conceived? In infinite ways and under infinite variations, since time and numbers are infinite. However, the claim of the biblical text is not that any one of the infinite ways and of the infinite variations is true. The intention is to say that one way and one variation are correct.

This implies that, as a single event (e.g. the origin of the ocean) is identified with a particular event on the timeline, the place of all the others will necessarily be before or after it. This conception does not lead to random distribution of the biblical sequence in time. It leads to a specific location. So, the more we identify the statements of Genesis with facts of Cosmic History, the more determined the chronological meaning of the sequence will become. Since time is infinite, the selection of the right sequence can be described as a number among infinite others.

This seems to be the most correct way to deduce the meaning of the sequence of origins in Genesis. But let us make a concession to skepticism. In fact, a big one. Let us admit that the correct sequence was not taken from endless others. Given this hypothesis, we have two ways to estimate the correctness of the sequence. One is to consider that it comprises a hundred items among thousands of others that could have been cited, since the Jews knew thousands of groups of living beings. The number of combinations of these thousands is very high, but finite. On the other hand, we can consider that the parallel between the divine acts of creation and the corresponding cosmic events implies that the items of the sequence are distributed in a limited section of time. Thus, the chance of reaching the correct sequence by chance should be assessed as one in an infinite number.

For a non-alienated science, what practical difference can be said to exist between one or two trillions and an infinite number? The chances of random selection of a number out of the two are not equal for all relevant purposes? The method employed to come to both numbers is not scientific? Why cannot that method be used to establish a fact?

What is a fact? Is creation a fact? And evolution? In Darwin's hypothesis, I admitted evolution as a fact, and that creation was considered a hypothesis by Darwin. Is it not necessary to consider that the hypothesis was confirmed?

In the fourth century, Hilary of Poitiers expressed the difference not only logical, but existential between believing that the world is a fluke and that it was created by God in the following words: "It would not be worthy of God to let man take part in counsel and wisdom in this life [...] in a way he would be brought into this world in order to cease to exist. Therefore, it must be discerned that the reason for our creation is not that what started to exist should cease to be, but that what was not should start to exist" (POITIERS, Hilary Treaty on the Trinity. São Paulo: Paulus, 2005. p. 31).
Is it possible to ignore so huge a difference? Is it possible not to consider that unbelief implies the contradiction of a being who aspires immortality due to his rational tendency existing only in order to cease to exist? Is it not more rational to think, with Hilary, we were lovingly created by God, so that also by him we would have access to immortality?