Main page | Jari's writings

The early stages of mankind



The first 11 chapters of the Bible are real history. This includes creation, the Fall, the Flood, and the mixing of languages. Read here



The purpose of this text is to examine the early history of mankind in light of the Bible. Many things are said about the Creation, the special station of man, the Fall, the Flood and the confusing of languages, which are all crucial events in the early development of mankind. There is information about early mankind in other sources, also.

   For many people the previous events are problematic. They think that they cannot be true, and that is why they reject any talk about spiritual matters and God. They do not accept these events because they believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution that relies on our development over millions of years.  

   We are going to examine this area next. We can state now that many pieces of evidence fit better into the Bible’s description of creation than people commonly believe. That is why it is extremely reasonable to trust the announcement of the Bible also in these matters. There is enough evidence to draw the right conclusions about the beginning of the world and mankind.



   1. Creation

   2. According to their kind

   3. The special status of man

   4. The Fall

   5. The Flood

   6. The faculty of speech, confusion of language, the tower of Babel




- (Gen 1:1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.


- (Rom 1:19-22) Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has showed it to them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,


- (Acts 17:22-27) Then Paul stood in the middle of Mars’ hill, and said, You men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious.

23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore you ignorantly worship, him declare I to you.

24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands;

25 Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he gives to all life, and breath, and all things;

26 And has made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:


When we start from Genesis, we can see that God created everything: the heavens and earth and animals and plants. We and the visible universe did not self-develop but were created by the hand of God. Otherwise, these would not exist, according to the Bible.

   What kind of evidence can we find supporting Creation? What is it like and how convincing is it, or is Creation just another theory? This is what we are going to examine next.


Something exists. Firstly, the fact that something exists points to Creation. If we do not believe in the Creation described in Genesis, then nothing should exist: no world, no life. There should not be stars, moon, sun, mountains, seas, water, humans, lions, giraffes, elephants, mosquitoes, birds, butterflies, worms, fishes, trees, flowers, carrots, apples, strawberries, oranges, or anything else. Nothing could exist if Creation never happened.

   Yet, something does exist. All those things do exist. It is such an incredible truth, but we do not pay attention to it. These kinds of simple facts before us should get us to wake up from our sleep. These should not be considered self-evident:


The first point which each of us comprehends before he even starts to think is that something exists. In other words, all outlooks on life assume that something exists instead of that nothing exists. This presumption is in its primitiveness so elementary that many of us are not even conscious of it. We regard it as too self-evident even to be mentioned. Of course something exists! Indeed, so it does. And that is just the point! If we do not realize this, we will not get anywhere. However, this point may be extremely significant, just as many simple "facts " that are directly under our noses. (1) 


Nothing can be born by itself. When something exists, it is good to note next that the current universe and life must have had a beginning. They cannot have given birth to themselves. There must have been a moment when the Sun started to shine on Earth and life started because they have not always existed. Otherwise, for example, the Sun’s energy store would have been depleted a long time ago; the Earth’s temperature would be minus-273 degrees Celsius, which is impossible for life. The only possibility is that the Sun, life and the universe had their initial moment somewhere in the past – this clearly points to Creation: 


"If someone wants to conclude from the existence of the cosmos that it must have some principle, his reasoning is not in any way in conflict with our scientific information. No scientist has any kind of evidence by which such a conclusion could be resisted. This is true also because the principle would have to be searched for from outside of our three-dimensional world." (Werner Heisenburg, the pioneer of quantum mechanics and the Nobel Prize winner in physics, 1901–1976) (2) 


It is, of course, true that several scientists do not believe that the universe, the Earth and life upon the Earth got their beginning during the Creation as described in Genesis. They indeed admit without exception that the universe and life had a beginning, but they think that it arose from itself without external influence from God. They credit natural causes and chance for the existence of our universe and life. In this materialistic approach, there is no place for God.

   But what conclusion can we draw from facts? If being born out of one’s own elements is so simple, where is the evidence for spontaneous birth? Isn’t it a fact that each scientist who is familiar with the subject knows that the problem of the birth of life has not been solved at all. People have tried to examine the matter in laboratories but have completely failed. There remains a deep division between living and lifeless material, and there has not been any progress in the studies in the last century.

   The conclusion is that it is extremely reasonable to believe in the Creation as described in the beginning of the Bible. It is much more sensible to believe in it than believing that everything was born by itself, because it is more logical that everything has its maker. Or if birth by itself is scientific, supporting evidence should be brought out. Otherwise everything is just talk and empty words. It is not a question of science but of blind belief in a matter that cannot be properly proven. It is, of course, true that the Creation cannot be proven either, because conditions in the past cannot be recreated. At least it is more sensible to believe in Creation because it is the only possible alternative to spontaneous generation. There is no evidence for spontaneous generation.


Paul Davies: When I began to write this book, I was convinced that science had almost solved the mystery of the birth of life. (…) I have spent one or two years studying this area and now I think that there is an enormous gap in our knowledge. We have, of course, a good idea of the time and place of the birth of life but there is still a long way to go to understanding the series of events. This gap in our understanding is not mere ignorance about some technical details but it is a notable conceptual defect. (…) Many researchers are careful to say publicly that the birth of life is a mystery, although behind closed doors they openly admit to being confused.

… (3)


Andy Knoll, a professor at the University of Harvard: “As we try to compile a summary of what we know about the deep history of life on Earth, the origin of life and phases of its forming which led to the biology that can be seen around us now, we have to admit that it is in the dark. We do not know how life began on this planet. We do not know exactly when it began and under what conditions.” (4)




- (Gen 1:25) And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creeps on the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


Another point to which attention should be paid in Genesis is that God made different animals and plants according to their kinds. In other words, if God made these plants and animals, the evolution theory made known by Darwin cannot be true. One or the other of these alternatives is wrong.

   So what about the evidence? Does it refer to the theory of Darwin, according to which life began from a simple cell and evolved towards more and more complex forms, or does it point to the existence of basic kinds already in the very beginning?

   The answer is that evidence on behalf of Darwin’s theory is as difficult to find as evidence on behalf of spontaneous birth of life. All the examples used to support the evolution of species -- the finches of Darwin, peppered moths, resistant bacteria – show variation only within their species. It is not a question of the birth of a completely new species. Such minor discernible variation cannot be used as a justification for macroevolution or the changing of species into other species. There is still no evidence backing this theory up even though there are researchers who are unwilling to accept this.

   One should note that Darwin himself did not point out any example of the birth of new species in his thesis, “The Origin of Species,” even though the publication is known by that name. He was not able to do that but he showed good examples of ordinary changes in birds, ordinary in the same way as differences in the size and form of the human skull. Examples of so-called evolution are always restricted to this area. Encyclopaedia Britannica says about the issue: 


It must be emphasized that Darwin never claimed to have been able to prove evolution or the origin of species. He claimed that if evolution has taken place, many inexplicable facts can be explained. The evidence supporting evolution is thus indirect.


Let’s look at a few more passages which suggest that there is a reason to believe that species appeared in their own form, immediately, from the very beginning, just as described in Genesis. Since intermediate forms cannot be found from fossil material or in the current animal world, and examination of mutations in bacteria and banana flies over the past century have not produced any results, there is no other alternative than the one the Bible indicates. The basic groups have been ready from the very beginning. This is inconceivably difficult for evolutionists to admit but if evidence proves otherwise, it should be shown in some concrete form such as a photo, for example, so that everyone can see it (intermediate forms and/or evidence of the birth of life). It is that simple.

   The conclusion is that it is very justified to believe that different species have existed, in their unique form, from the very beginning as described in Genesis. Plants and animals were made as their own kinds, and did not evolve gradually, as presented in the theory of Darwin:


British bacteriologist Alan Linton: Science makers reject theories, which have been proven to be untrue. Based on this, Elredge claims that science has not been able to cancel the evolution theory in 150 years and that is why the evolution theory has won. In other words, the evolution theory is based on the idea that science has not proven the theory false. He believes that the evolution theory can be scientifically tested.

   But where is the experimental evidence? In scientific literature, there is no evidence that one species would have evolved from another species. The bacteria are the simplest examples of independent life and they fit ideally well to this kind of study. The age of one generation is 20–30 minutes. A population can be achieved in 18 hours. However, the history of bacteriology of 150 years does not offer any evidence that one bacteria species would have changed into another in spite of the population having been exposed to powerful chemical and physical mutative genes and that only the bacteria have outside DNA molecules of the chromosomes (plasmids) which can move from a bacterium family to another. Because there is no evidence of species changes in the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not surprising that there is no evidence of evolution from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, not to mention species changes between higher multicellular organisms. (5)


Palaeontologist Stephen Jay Gould:  The extreme rareness of intermediate forms in fossil material continues to be the trade secret of palaeontologists. The evolution trees appearing in our textbooks include facts only at the heads and folding points of the branches. The rest is reasoning, no matter how reasonable it is, not evidence of fossils –- I do not want in any way to belittle the potential competence of the gradual evolution view. I want only to remark that it has never 'been observed' in rocks. (...)

    (...) The history of most fossil species includes two features, which are incompatible with the gradually evolution view: (1) Permanence. Most species do not have any change in any particular direction in their lifetime on earth. They appear in fossil material looking like they do when disappearing from there. The morphological changes are generally restricted and without a certain direction. (2) Abrupt appearance. The species do not originate gradually by means of continuous changes in forefathers on each geographical area. They appear abruptly and “completely formed''. (6)


Niles Eldredge:  We palaeontologists have said that the history of life supports [a story about changes that promote gradual adapting], even though we know all the while that it does not.

 (...) It looks like each new generation produces a few young palaeontologists that are enthusiastic in documenting examples of evolutionary changes in fossils. They have, naturally, always searched for changes, which are by nature gradual and developing. Usually, their efforts have been to no avail – their fossils have not revealed the expected model but they have been almost unchangeable. (...) This special permanence looked to a palaeontologist who searched for developmental change like any evolution had not taken place. Thus, examinations, which document conservative permanence instead of gradual evolutional change were regarded unsuccessful and were usually not even published. Most palaeontologists were conscious of the permanence and the lack of change, which we call stasis. (7)


3. The special STATUS of man. Thirdly, attention can be paid to the special status of man among the rest of creation. Man is not at the same level with animals, and he has not descended from some other animal such as the ape as has been proposed by Darwin. Such mention of the origin of man probably does not appear in old cuneiforms, other texts, or the traditional knowledge of people. Instead, these sources repeatedly mention the creation of man, the Fall, the Flood, even the confusion of languages as described in Genesis, so these stories are closer to the writings of the Bible, even though there are some differences in them.

   So, how can we see that humans are in a special position and that humans are different from other parts of creation? This can be seen in the following ways, for example:

   Firstly, we should mention that God created us in His image. We are somehow like God in that we:

   - are unique because God is unique

   - have the ability to see things from perspectives other than our own

   - are conscious of ourselves and we have superior intelligence when compared to animals

   - are creative, i.e. able to plan and do complex things     

   - are moral, i.e. we can differentiate between what is right and what is wrong

The image of God can still clearly be seen in people today, even though our morals were distorted by the Fall. We inherited this likeness of God when we were created:


- (Gen 5:1,2) This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.


Still, the difference nowadays can be seen in that man builds, travels by airplane and rockets, writes, practises agriculture, speaks and uses technology. If the origin of man does not deviate from other animals or if we got our beginning from an initial cell or even from an atom the size of a pinhead in the Big Bang, these abilities would certainly not be possible. It would be difficult to explain them by coincidence alone. What is more likely is – as taught by the Bible – that people have a special status in the eyes of God, separate from animals.

   Man’s special status is also suggested in Genesis by his naming of other animals, an activity still occurring. Thus, animals and man were present together at the beginning of Creation (Mark 10:6: But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.) and man then named all the animals. This is the right order of historical events and illustrates how man differs from other creations and animals. It is a difference, which existed in the beginning, since the Creation:


- (Gen 2:19) And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: and whatever Adam called every living creature that was the name thereof.


- (James 3:7,8) For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and has been tamed of mankind:

8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.




When reading further in Genesis, we see that the third chapter mentions the Fall, which many rationalists want to deny.

   It is worth noting, however, that in the world there are illnesses, suffering, death and evil, which are consequences of this event. The world is not such a paradise that many hope but it is very imperfect. It is as imperfect and wrong as Genesis indicates. Man lived originally in miraculous harmony together with animals, but the situation changed after the Fall. Then, the sense of man darkened, his will bent towards bad and he lost his peace of conscience. The image of God in man was also spoiled, and sin and death came into the world, as is described in the Letter of Paul to the Romans. It is difficult to deny that the world is in the condition described in the Bible:


- (Rom 5:12) Why, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed on all men, for that all have sinned


It is noteworthy that many nations have similar accounts of an idyllic past gone wrong. The description of paradise is not only characteristic of Christianity and Judaism, but also appears in other religions and cultures. It is common knowledge because it appears in different parts of the world.

   Traditional stories told by the Karens who live in Burma also describe the Fall. Their description of the Fall is very similar to the account in the Bible. In one of their songs they tell that in the beginning Y'wa, the true God, created the world, that there was "the test fruit" and that “Mu-kaw-lee betrayed two persons.” As a result of his betrayal people started to become ill and grow old and death came into the world. The Karen description does not differ much from the account in Genesis:


In the beginning Y'wa gave form to the world.

He indicated food and drink.

He indicated "the test fruit".

He gave accurate commands.

Mu-kaw-lee betrayed two persons.

He got them to eat the test fruit.

They disobeyed; did not believe Y'wa...

When they ate the test fruit,

they faced illnesses, ageing, and death. (8)


Thus, the Fall really happened. It can be seen as the time when evil, suffering, selfishness and death were introduced. Furthermore, the Fall can be seen as the reason that societies need police and armies. They are needed because people do not trust in the kindness of man. The question is not only one of education and natural conditions, but of the original sin, which lives in us. This is what the Bible teaches in many places. The practical evidence of the Fall is too significant to deny:


- “Professor Joad was an intelligent and quick-witted opponent of the gospel,the pastor interrupted him. “I remember, as I was in England, how a vicar preached about the subject, ‘God, the devil and Professor C.E.M. Joad’.”

   Everyone burst into laughter.

   Michael continued his speech:

- Professor Joad was of the opinion that in human nature there is no fault that higher civilization, better possibilities and better environment could not improve.

   Then came war. When Joad contemplated misery of the pain and destruction, he came to the conclusion that the events of that moment and also of history are a long account of man’s inhumanity towards other people. He came to notice that theologians had one common viewpoint, which the philosophers did not emphasize, namely that in human nature there is some fault, and that fault could be called original sin. From these starting points, Joad progressed from sin to the need for salvation, and from Saviour to God, who sent Him to reconcile the sins of the people. Joad experienced an intellectual conversion to Christianity, and he became a member of the Anglican Church. "Higher civilization, better possibilities and better environment,” he finally said, “have not even nowadays brought about a better society, as the growing crime statistics of the welfare countries indicate.” (9)


5. THE FLOOD. One major event described in Genesis is the Flood. It is a question of its being a historical event and not just a mere story, as many rationalists think. We should also note that Jesus spoke about the Flood and about the days of Noah. He considered self-evident that the events in question were true and historical. Had they not been, He would have made a mistake in his speeches:


- (Matt 24:37-39) But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.


What about the evidence? Has there been a global Flood and any proof it really happened or is it merely a story?

   The answer is that there are thousands of pieces of evidence if we only want to search for them. They appear both in the traditional knowledge of people and nature. Consider the following points: 


Flood stories have been found in about 500 places in the world, which suggests the historical nature of the Flood and number of societies that knew about it. Many of these stories have, naturally, changed over time, but they all have in common the fact that water was the cause of the devastation. Many of these stories also mention an earlier good time, the fall of man and the confusion of the language, so there is a reason to believe that these are historical events and represent part of the early history of mankind: 


If the world-wide Flood was not real, some nations would have explained that frightening volcanic eruptions, large snow storms, droughts (...) have destroyed their evil ancestors. The universality of the story of the Flood is therefore one of the best pieces of evidence of its truthfulness. We could dismiss any of these individual legends and think it was only imagination, but together, from a global perspective, they are almost indisputable. (A book called The Earth)


Almost all nations have a consistent story about the Flood. In this respect, it is very miraculous how nations in opposite parts of the world are able to tell so precisely of a large flood that covered all mountains, a large ship that saved eight or four persons, and even be consistent in many details. The Europeans in North America found a native American tribe that regards the wild dove as a holy bird and does not kill it. When they were asked the reason for this, they explained that this bird brought to their forefathers in a large ship a leaf of a willow tree. The leaf of a willow tree is similar to the leaf of an olive tree as comes to the shape, size, and color. Does this not clearly prove the ancient story of Noah and his sons? (10)


Marine creatures and parts of them are found on dry land – often thousands of kilometres from the sea, showing that water once covered these areas. They can be found on all six continents and on all high mountains (the Himalayas, Andes, Alps, Rocky Mountains, Ural, Altai…), and so they are a clear indication of the Flood. The following descriptions found in books written by geologists are an indication of the matter. Many other examples appear in similar types of books but the researchers have not been able to, or have not wanted to, connect them to the Flood because of their outlook on life (such a person should ask himself what is sufficient evidence that would make him change his view about the issue; if the remains of the sea on all high mountains is not it, what is?):


Harutaka Sakai from the Japanese University in Kyushu has for many years researched these marine fossils in the Himalayan Mountains. He and his group have listed a whole aquarium from the Mesozoic period. Tender sea lilies, relatives to the current sea urchins and starfishes, were found on cliffs over three kilometers above the sea level. Ammonites, belemnites, corals, and plankton fossils are found in the rocks of the mountains. (…)

   At an altitude of two kilometers above the sea level, the geologists found markings the sea had made. There was a wavelike rock surface, similar to that which is formed by waves on sand in low water. Yellow stripes of limestone have been found even on the peak of Mount Everest, formed from innumerable remains of marine creatures under water. (Maapallo ihmeiden planeetta, p. 55)


There is a reason to look closely at the original nature of the rocks in mountain ranges. It is best seen in the Alps, in the lime Alps of the northern, so-called Helvetian zone. Limestone is the main rock material. If we were to scale the steep slopes of some mountain or peak – if we had the energy to climb up there – we would find fossilized remains of marine creatures. They are often badly damaged but it is possible to find recognizable pieces. All those fossils are lime shells or skeletons of sea creatures. Among them are spiral twisted ammonites and many bivalves. (…) The reader might wonder at this point what it means that mountain ranges hold so many sediments, which can also be found stratified in the bottom of the sea. (p. 236,237, Pentti Eskola, Muuttuva maa)


6. The faculty of speech, confusiON of the languages and the tower of Babel. One distinction between man and animals is man’s ability to communicate using language and speech. Animals do not have the faculties of speech and language but humans do. As a matter of fact, as tribes of the world have been examined, it has been noted that every tribe has thousands of words and a complicated system in the use of words, i.e., grammar. There is no known exception to this rule. The languages of even all primitive nations have been shown to be highly developed, at a higher level than the modern languages of "civilized” people. Thus, there is a reason to believe that language and the faculty of speech have existed since the birth of man; they are not a product of evolution, as suggested by Darwin’s theory. This matches the description in the Bible stating that humans have had these characteristics from the very beginning. Things like construction of buildings or cities, use of metals, making of ceramics and development of agriculture came into being at the same time. They did not happen millions or hundreds of thousands of years ago but fairly “recently”, only a couple of millennia ago.

   Some evolution researchers have arrived at the same conclusion – that man’s faculty of speech has existed from the very beginning. They base this opinion on Skull 1470. Inside this skull lies evidence of Broca’s Area, the part of the brain that is associated with man’s ability to speak. The skull is supposed to have belonged to one of the early forefathers of man: 


Two leading experts of evolution of human brain in the United States – Dean Falk (State University of New York, Albany) and Ralph Holloway (Columbia University) – are generally of different opinion about issues but even they are of the same opinion that the Area of Broca can be seen in the skull found from East Turkana, which is known by the number 1470. Philip Tobias (...) a well-known South African expert of the brain, is of the same opinion. So, if the brain required by speech is an essential matter, so obviously man has had it from the very beginning. (11)


The confusION of the languages and the tower of Babel


- (Gen 11:1,4, 6-9) And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach to heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad on the face of the whole earth.

6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do.

7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language that they may not understand one another’s speech.

8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from there on the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from there did the LORD scatter them abroad on the face of all the earth.


We learn in the eleventh chapter of Genesis about man’s faculty of speech, and about the confusion of man’s single language, and about the tower of Babel. Many scientists consider these events to be fictional but actually there is a good reason to believe in their historical accuracy.

   One good reason is that there are innumerable languages in the world, as one would expect to see based on the Genesis account. There is not only one language or a few, but thousands. This agrees with the Biblical account. It is possible, of course that all modern languages did not spring from the confusion of one language. Some languages could have a common ancestry. When people pulled away from one another their languages could have become so different that nowadays they are considered different languages. There are such languages that are “relative” to each other. This does not, however, change the fact that many languages are very different from each other; there is hardly anything they have in common.

   Also Paul described the existence of several languages when speaking about charisma almost 2,000 years ago.


- (1 Cor 14:10,11) There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.

11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that speaks a barbarian, and he that speaks shall be a barbarian to me.


An interesting analogy to the confusion of language can be found in the events on Pentecost. People spoke in many languages because they were given the gift of languages. Those present understood what was being said, in their own language.


- (Acts 2:1-13) And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

3 And there appeared to them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat on each of them.

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7 And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What means this?

13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.


Mentions of the mixing of languages and the tower of Babel are found in many sources. Here are some examples:


- In the history of Mexico (Mexican antiquity, 9. Part, p. 321), a story has been preserved in which we can find many similarities to the texts of the Bible. It describes the Flood, the increase of the people after it, the building of the tower and the confusion of languages. One significant similarity is that the mountains were under water to the depth of 15 cubits, as is mentioned in Genesis (Gen 7:20):


Frightening rains and lightning from the sky destroyed the people and also the whole country without exception, and also the highest mountains were covered by water, to the depth of fifteen cubits. After the Flood, the people multiplied on earth and built a very high zacual (tower) for protection, in case the other world would be destroyed. Shortly after this, their language was confused, and when they could not understand each other, they scattered around the earth. (12)


- One more reference to the confusion of the languages is a story found from Babel about the destruction of the tower and confusion of the languages in the same way as the Bible describes. The only major difference is that the story is told polytheistically.

   What is interesting both in this and the preceding story (which appears also in the Bible) is the dispersion of people to different parts of the globe because they no longer understood each other. It should be noted that the same settlement and increase of population has continued up to these days, so that areas like North and South America and Australia have become mainly populated during the last 200 to 300 years. Before that, they were rather sparsely populated. This is an indication that man has not been on the Earth for a very long time. If man had already been on the Earth hundreds of thousands or millions of years ago, the globe would have already become populated a long time ago, which is not the case.


Building this temple insulted the Gods. One night they threw to the ground what had been built. They scattered people to different countries and made their speech strange. They prevented any progress of work. (13)


- The Sumerians have been regarded as the earliest civilized nation in the Middle East. They also told stories about mankind’s development. One of their poems is included below; it is connected to the early history of mankind. It describes the time before the confusion of the language when all people praised one supreme god Enlil in one language. This, too, matches the biblical explanation that in the beginning “the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. (Gen 11:1):


Once upon a time there were no snakes,

no scorpions,

no hyenas, no lions,

no fear, no fright,

the man did not have any competition.

There was a time when the countries of Subur and Hamaz

(later) multilingual Sumer, the great land of princely divine laws,

Uri that had everything that is imaginable,

The land of Martu, which rested in security,

The whole world, all people together

praised supreme Enlil in one language. (14)


- One special reference to the ancient tower of Babel can be found in the writings of Nabopolassar, who was the founder of the New Babylonian kingdom (626–605 B.C.) and the father of famous Nebuchadnezzar. In his statement about the tower of Babel and about building it, he says:


At that time Marduk commanded me to build the tower of Babel, which had been destroyed in the old days, to lay down a firm foundation when the top of the tower reached heaven.


His son Nebuchadnezzar continued the same topic and spoke about the tower competing with heaven:


I still built the tower for Etemenank so that it competed with heaven.







1. James W. Sire: Missä maailmassa? (The Universe Next Door. A Basic World View Catalog), p. 14

2. Cit. in: Hans Kung: Does God exist.

3. Paul Davies: Viides ihme, 1999, p. 14,15

4. Andy Knoll (2004) PBS Nova interview, 3. may 2004,  cit. Antony Flew & Roy Varghese (2007) There is A God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind. New York: HarperOne

5. Alan Linton: ”Scant Search for the Maker”, Times Higher Education Supplement, April 20, 2001

6. Stephen Jay Gould: The Panda’s Thumb, (1988), p. 182,183. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

7. Niles Eldredge (1985): “Evolutionary Tempos and Modes: A Paleontological Perspective” in book Godrey (edit.) What Darwin Began: Modern Darwinian and non-Darwinian Perspectives on Evolution

8. Don Richardson: Iankaikkisuus heidän sydämissään (Eternity in their Hearts), p. 96.

9. J. Edwin Orr: 100 kysymystä Jumalasta (100 Questions about God), p. 59 - 60

10. Fr. Bettex: Raamatun ensimmäinen lehti, p. 5

11. ”AnthroQuest”, The Leakey Foundation News number 43 (spring) 1991): 13

12. Cit. from: "Oliko vedenpaisumus ja Nooan arkki mahdollinen?", Toivo Seljavaara, p. 6,7.

13. Joseph P. Free: Archaeology and Bible history, 12. p. 1973 – Cit. from: "Voiko Raamattuun luottaa", Uuras Saarnivaara, p. 187.

14. Armas Salonen: Sumeri ja sen henkinen perintö (Keuruu 1962), p. 138,139.)



More on this topic:

The Flood. There is ample evidence for the historical nature of the Flood in nature and in human tradition. Read how much evidence there is

The Bible and history. There is tremendous evidence for biblical events and the historicity of individuals - including Jesus. Check out this evidence

Can we trust in Criticism of the Bible? Bible criticism and liberal theology are contemporary phenomena. However, critics have a naturalistic preconception that is not based on science and facts

"The Bible isn’t historically reliable"


Josephus' book War of the Jews and biblical history. The same people and events mentioned on the pages of the Bible also appear in other sources. Read what the historian Josephus has written


Apocrypha of the Old Testament and the history of the Bible. The same persons and events mentioned on the pages of the Bible also appear in other sources, such as the Old Testament apocryphal books. Read more here


Has there been an ice age? Ice age or ice ages. Read how there is no sensible theory for the origin of ice ages, and how signs in nature refer to the Flood, not ice ages





































Jesus is the way, the truth and the life





Grap to eternal life!


More on this topic:

The Flood. There is ample evidence for the historical nature of the Flood in nature and in human tradition. Read how much evidence there is

The Bible and history. There is tremendous evidence for biblical events and the historicity of individuals - including Jesus. Check out this evidence

Can we trust in Criticism of the Bible? Bible criticism and liberal theology are contemporary phenomena. However, critics have a naturalistic preconception that is not based on science and facts

"The Bible isn’t historically reliable"


Josephus' book War of the Jews and biblical history. The same people and events mentioned on the pages of the Bible also appear in other sources. Read what the historian Josephus has written


Apocrypha of the Old Testament and the history of the Bible. The same persons and events mentioned on the pages of the Bible also appear in other sources, such as the Old Testament apocryphal books. Read more here


Has there been an ice age? Ice age or ice ages. Read how there is no sensible theory for the origin of ice ages, and how signs in nature refer to the Flood, not ice ages




shopify analytics ecommerce