Bible chronologists, and those who believe in creationism, place Adam's creation around 4004 B.C. We have seen in the previous chapter that, according to paleontology, many different types of humans, sub-humans, and ape-men had lived long before this time of Adam's creation. Prof. Winchell described them as "pre-adamites," since they existed before Adam. The objection here by "Fundamental Bible believers" is that they claim the Bible says that Adam was the first man. Not only does science reveal the falsity of this statement, the Bible does also.

There is no evidence in the Scriptures that indicates Adam was the first man and the progenitor of all races or types of man. However, there is ample evidence that proves many other people were all ready in existence by the time Adam was created.

The book of Genesis provides most of this evidence. Chapter 4 of Genesis tells of the birth of Cain and Abel. All fundamentalists will state that at this time only four people existed on earth. After Cain killed Abel he was cursed and driven out of the land by God. Cain then realizes the dilemma of his expulsion and makes the statement:

Genesis 4:14: "I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me."

If only Adam and Eve existed, then who was Cain afraid might kill him? Who was it that he would be a fugitive from? It is quite clear that the "everyone" which Cain was referring to could not be Adam and Eve. The people Cain were referring to here were the other races of people that had existed thousands of years before Adam's time. Cain was well aware that many people existed in the lands around them. This fact is verified by God in His response to Cain in verse 15:

Genesis 4:15: "And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him."

God was thus telling Cain that "whosoever" of the other people that might slay you, vengeance shall be on that person. There were many other persons (humans) living at that time who could have slain Cain. Also, God set a "mark" on Cain. Why did God have to put some kind of identifying mark on Cain if the only people that existed (Adam and Eve or other siblings) knew Cain perfectly well? This mark was not a signal so Adam and Eve could recognize Cain, but rather so that "any" of the other people then living could recognize Cain upon their "finding him." The mark was a warning to these other people not to kill Cain, and "whosoever" did, vengeance would come upon that person.

The Bible offers further evidence that Adam and Eve were not the first man and woman. In verse 17 of Genesis chapter 4 we read:

Genesis 4:17: "And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he built a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch."

If Adam and Eve were the first and only people at this time, then from where did Cain find a wife? Not only was Cain able to find a wife, but there were obviously enough people on earth to be part of the city built by Cain. Where did these people come from? They were the Cro-Magnon and Neolithic people whose origins go back to 40,000 B.C., and who survived to modern times. Cain's marriage, the birth of his son Enoch, and his building of a city all took place before the birth of Seth. All these circumstances thus point to the existence of men independent of Adam.

Even at the time when Adam and Eve were in Eden there is evidence of other persons then existing. The serpent of Genesis 3 is an example. This word "serpent" comes from the Hebrew word "NACHASH" (Strong's O.T. #5172) and has reference to a spell or enchantment by an enchanter in a subtle manner (like a whisper). We often call someone who is sly, devious and crafty a "snake." Thus the name serpent (NACHASH) is more of a descriptive name, it describes the personal characteristics of this individual who "beguiled" Eve (Genesis 3:13). A snake itself is not considered to be a "cunning” [1] or "crafty” [2] creature, certainly not more "than any beast of the field," which would include foxes, leopards, apes, etc. Only a human being could be more cunning than all other creatures. Further, God told the "serpent" that He will put "enmity" between his seed and Eve's seed (Genesis 3:15). Are we to believe that the Adamic people would have reptilian snakes as age-long adversaries? That is not the case for the "serpent" was a human being and so are its descendants or "seed."

The word "serpent" is likewise used in the New Testament (2 Corinthians 11:3) in describing this same account in Genesis 3; and also by Christ in describing the scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 23:33). In each case the word "OPHIS" is translated "serpents" and means: "a snake figuratively, an artful malicious person.” [3] Both the "serpent" in Eden and the Pharisees were cunning and malicious persons, not literal snakes.

Thus, the Bible is quite clear about there being many people on the earth at the time of the story of Adam and Eve. Human types had walked the earth 40,000 years before Adam, and primitive hominid types a hundred thousand years earlier still. Since these "other" people existed before Adam, they are called "pre-Adamic." And since they are not of the same type or race as Adam, they are also called "non-Adamic,” that is, not of the Adamic family line.

Some of the weak-kneed, Babylonian type theologians who do not want to accept this fact of Scripture will often quote I Corinthians 15 where it states:

I Corinthians 15:45: "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul;"

This half of verse 45 is often read to suggest that Adam was the first man. However, the rest of this verse is never read in conjunction with the explanation of Adam being the first man. The rest of verse 45 states:

I Corinthians 15:45: "the last Adam was made a quickening spirit."

This line is never read by ministers who preach the "unity of man" doctrine because it would make no sense. The question arises as to who is the last Adam? Does this mean the Adamic line became extinct? This verse is similar to most in the Bible in that it is referring only to the descendants of Adam. Adam was the "first man" of the Adamic line, not of all the family or racial lines that exist today. When the entire chapter is read, it helps to put verse 45 into its correct context which reveals the "last Adam" to be Jesus Christ. Christ was born out of the Adam -- Abraham -- Judah -- David lineage.

This, then, is simply a comparison between Adam and Christ. Verse 47 states:

I Corinthians 15:47: "The first man [Adam] is of the earth, earthy: the second man [Christ] is the Lord from heaven."

Adam was the "first man" only in the same sense that Christ was the "second man," for Adam "was the figure of Christ" (Romans 5:14). If one is to claim that these verses refer to Adam as the first human being in a physical, literal sense, then, according to verse 45, they have to say Christ was the last man. But according to verse 47 they would have to say Christ was the second human being on earth. This is why the equalitarians never use all of these verses in preaching their false and non-Biblical unity doctrine to their congregations. There is no consistency in their manner of interpretation. These verses outline a rather basic theme of the Bible: Death in Adam, Life in Christ. This is the "resurrected" life that was promised to be restored to Adam and his descendants, and thus pertains to no other races.

Perhaps the most frequently quoted verse in support of the unity of man doctrine is Acts 17:26, which reads in the King James Version as follows:

Acts 17:26: "And [God] hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their inhabitation."

Bible scholars now know that the word "blood" in this verse was not originally used. In many Bible translations the word "blood" is omitted but have a footnote which states, "Some later manuscripts read, one blood.” [4] The word "blood" was not originally written by the author of Acts and was added in later copies. Medical science has now proved that the various races do not have "one" or the same blood; as Dr. William Boyd (Races and People, 1955, p. 145) stated:

"A person's blood group is one of his physical characteristics, just as a dark skin may be, or blue eyes or a hooked nose. Like other physical characteristics, blood groups can be used to divide mankind into races."

Dr. Boyd shows how blood groups are "permanent" and how the "gene frequency" in blood is used to differentiate the races. Thus, science, fossil evidence and the Bible are in complete agreement that Adam was not the first human form that God created. Adam was only the first individual of a new species. Many other species had obviously been created before Adam. It is estimated that about 50 million people existed on earth when Adam was created around 4,000 B.C.

Race and the Flood

The doctrine of the creationists (those who hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible) declares that the Flood of Noah's time to be worldwide. The Flood has been the main battle ground in the debates over the origin of life on the planet. Their literal interpretation of the Flood also presents some obvious problems in regards to racial origins.

The belief of the creationists and "fundamentalist Christians" is that all the world was populated from the descendants of Noah's three sons. In other words, "all tribes and races came from a common ancestral population.” [5] Creationists are forced to place this common population some time after the Flood, since they believe it to have been worldwide thus destroying all people on earth at that time (c. 2,344 B.C.). Just how one racial family could have produced the numerous racial types that now exist is never specifically answered by them.

Noah and his family were obviously of one race. The Bible states that Noah was "perfect in his generations" (Genesis 6:9). The word "generations" here is the Hebrew word "TOLEDAH," and means "descent.” [6] Noah was perfect in his descent from Adam meaning his lineage had not mixed with any other races. Creationists try to tell us that this family, which was of one racial stock, developed (or evolved) into the numerous races that exist today.

The concept that all nations and races descended from Noah's sons did not originate with the early Christian Church. When Cuvier devised his classification of races in 1790, he listed three types: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid, who he likened after Noah's three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. As racial distinctions became more evident and debated, the churches and literalists picked up on Cuvier's classification and molded it into a new religious doctrine.

Cuvier's classification of races was just prior to the advent of Egyptology -- the studying and discovering of the ruins of ancient Egypt by such men as Jean Francois Champollion in the 1820's. The ancient Egyptian monuments, tombs, and temples reveal a vast storehouse of ethnographical records in the form of paintings, mummies, sculptures and fossil remains revealing the ancient existence of many different racial types of man. Certain racial types can be distinguished by such evidence dating as far back as the 4th millennium B.C., as Prof. Coon explains:

“...racial differentiation can be traced back to at least 3,000 B.C., as evidenced in Egyptian records, particularly the artistic representations.” [7]

In the era just after the Flood (2300 to 2000 B.C.), there still appear many clear and well marked racial types in the paintings, sculptures, etc., from Egypt. By 1,600 B.C., an even greater diversity of distinct racial types can be found. Each of these types are represented as they appear today showing that they were permanent throughout all history.

Assyrian Type	White Ionian Type	Asiatic Type
Some various racial types from the celebrated tombs of Beni-Hassan (c. 2,200 B.C.) illustrating the antiquity and permanence of human racial types and features. After: Nott, Types of Mankind.

Creationists would have us believe that eight white people that existed after the Flood, somehow changed into different racial types almost instantaneously. Why is it that this type of drastic evolutionary change has never occurred since? If we can believe that such a racial transformation occurred, then there should be no reason not to believe any manner of evolution occurring over tens of millions of years, for the latter is more believable than the former.

It is important to understand the hypocrisy and inconsistency that "creationism" rests upon. Creationists are allowed to do the impossible with genetics because they are on God's side, but evolutionists are not allowed to use the same principles in presenting their ideas.

Evolution is evolution whether used by "creationists" or "evolutionists." Thus if an amphibian could not gradually evolve into a reptile, then a group of white people could not have evolved into Negroes, Indians, Chinese, Polynesians, etc., especially in just a few hundred years time or less.

The racial evidence supplied to us by the ancient Egyptian artists clearly dispels any foolish notion of a worldwide flood. Every single racial type that existed prior to the Flood existed after it, since the Flood of Genesis was confined to a specific geographical area. All people on earth were not destroyed as creationists claim. In Luke 17:26-29, Christ likens the "days of Noah" with the "days of Lot." In each case the people experienced a catastrophe which destroyed them all." Yet everyone acknowledges that "in the days of Lot" all the people on earth were not destroyed, only all the people in Sodom were. Likewise, only all the people in the Flood were destroyed, not all the people on earth. Most races and civilizations survived the Flood.

The Tenth Chapter of Genesis

Those who follow the prevalent idea that Adam and Eve were the parents of the "human race" (the monogenists), need to employ principles of evolution along with distorted Scripture in presenting their concept. The unity of racial origins doctrine could not be sustained in Christendom without reference to the Bible as to how the various races had developed from one original pair. The supposed answer to this was found in the tenth Chapter of Genesis.

It is in the Tenth Chapter of Genesis that the monogenists claim a "division of the races" occurred from Noah's three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. They claim Noah's sons had spread out from Mesopotamia -- Japheth going to the north and becoming "Caucasians," Ham going to the southern regions and becoming Negroes, and Seth occupying the middle regions and becoming the Asiatic types. Because of this claim by the monogenists, the Tenth Chapter of Genesis is said to be "the oldest ethnological record in existence."

The Scriptural validity of this claim, however, cannot be maintained. The Tenth Chapter of Genesis describes tribes of one racial stock settling in various geographical locations only. It does not describe any manner of a creation of races by the division of one stock into three. Prof. Sayce gives the following explanation of this chapter:

"The Tenth chapter of Genesis is ethnographical rather than ethnological. It does not profess to give an account of the different races of the world and to separate them one from another according, to their various characteristics. It is descriptive merely, and such races of men as fell within the horizon of the writer are described from the point of view of the geographer and not the ethnologist. The Greeks and Medes, for example, are grouped along with the Tibaerian and Moschian tribes because they all alike lived in the north; the Egyptian and the Canaanite are similarly classed together, while the Semitic Assyrian and the non-Semitic Elamite are both the children of Shem. We shall never understand the chapter rightly unless we bear in mind that its purpose is geographical. In Hebrew, as in other Semitic languages, the relation between a mother-state to its colony, or of a town or country to its inhabitants, was expressed in a genealogical form. The inhabitants of Jerusalem were regarded as 'the daughter of Jerusalem,' the people of the east were 'the children' of the district to which they belonged.

"When, therefore, we are told that 'Canaan begat Zidon his firstborn, and Heth,' all that is meant is that the city of Sidon, and the Hittites to whom reference is made, were alike to be found in the country called Canaan. It does not follow that there was ethnological kinship between the Phoenician builders of Sidon and the prognathous Hittites from the north. Indeed, we know from modern research that there was none. But the Hittite and Zidonian were both of them inhabitants of Canaan, or, as we should say, Canaanites; they were both, accordingly, the children of Canaan.

"...Attempts have been made to explain the names of the three sons of Noah as referring to the color of the skin. Japheth has been compared with the Assyrian ippatu 'white,' Shem with the Assyrian samu 'olive-colored,' while Ham etymologists have seen the Hebrew kham 'to be hot.' But all such attempts are of very doubtful value. It is, for instance, a long stride from the meaning of 'heat' to that of 'blackness' -- a meaning, indeed, which the Hebrew word never bears. Moreover, 'the sons of Ham' were none of them black-skinned. Prof. Virchow has shown that the Egyptian, like the Canaanite, belong so to the white race, his red skin being merely the result of sunburn." [8]

Being an inhabitant or citizen of a town or country does not necessarily tell us anything about the racial family line of the person. We know that different racial types inhabited Babylon and Egypt yet they were all called Babylonians or Egyptians.

The Tenth Chapter of Genesis gives no account of racial origins or birth of racial types and great inconsistencies result if this view is taken. For instance, the "children of Sheba" are reported as being under both Ham (Genesis 10:7) and Shem (Genesis 10:28). Were the "children of Sheba" both Arabs and Negroes? The southern province of Sheba spread far into the north and thus its people are mentioned under the head of Ham (south) and under the head of Shem (center). Further, it has been claimed that both the Oriental and Arabian types were descended from Shem. We can see that if we look at this chapter ethnologically, it makes no sense. But if we understand these verses to represent geographical boundaries then they make sense. This view is consistent with archaeological evidence that shows each racial type has been permanent throughout history.

The three sons of Noah are each assigned a separate place of settlement and are accordingly regarded as the heads or fathers of certain nations or cities in a geographical sense, not ethnologically. In other words, the people of these areas are not necessarily the racial descendants of them. A particular nation under their names could, and did in some cases, contain different racial types. The adoption of the name of a nation or geographical location proves nothing as to the racial affinities of the borrowers.

From the Egyptian monuments we know that there were various races of man in existence during the three centuries that followed the Flood. Dr. Nott states that the Egyptian dynasty following the "Deluge" started about the year 2337 B.C. and closed about the year 2124 B.C. He shows that:

"The monuments of this dynasty afford abundant evidence not only of the existence of Egypto-Caucasian races, but of Asiatic nations, as well as of Negroes and other African groups, at the said diluvian era....The Negroes may be traced on the monuments of Egypt, with certainty, as nations, back to the [VIth] dynasty, about 2300 B.C.: and it cannot be assumed that they were not then as old as any other race of our geological epoch." [9]

The races have been permanent throughout history, proving that all of the true racial types of man that exist today existed when Shem, Ham and Japheth settled in their respective territories. If such historical and archaeological evidence of the races of man cannot be accepted, then one must believe in an unprecedented racial evolution.

Adam Was of the White Race

It is quite apparent, by the authority of the Bible, that Adam was very unique and different from all the other types of people on earth. The Bible is actually a book of Adam's history and destiny. Thus, it is only Adam's lineage or genealogy that is covered throughout the Bible. It was only Adam and his descendants that God had ever dwelt among, conversed with, gave laws and commandments to, and brought judgment and punishment upon for disobedience to these commandments, all for their benefit.

Another unique aspect about Adam was his race. All Scriptural evidence indicates Adam was created a white man. Evidently the various "colored" types were created before Adam. The name "ADAM" (aw-dawm') in Hebrew means a "ruddy human being" (Strong's O.T. #120). It is derived from Strong's O.T. #119 -- ADAM (aw-dam'), which means "to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy." Only the white race has the characteristic of blushing or showing blood in the face or skin. The attributes of skin color are described by one geneticist as follows:

"The color of normal human skin is due to the presence of three kinds of colored chemicals, or pigments. The most important of these pigments is melanin, a dark-brown substance....The second of the three pigments is carotene. This is a yellow substance which is present in carrots (from which it gets it name) and egg yokes as well as human skin....The third pigment is hemoglobin, which is the red coloring matter of blood....the hemoglobin occurs in the blood vessels beneath the skin, so that very little can show through. The presence of fair amounts of either melanin or carotene in the skin covers it up completely. Hemoglobin does show up however in the skin of white men, particularly in those of light complexion. It is the hemoglobin that accounts for pink cheeks and the ability to blush.

"On the basis of these differences in coloring, mankind is sometimes divided into (1) a "Black Race," high in melanin, (2) a "Yellow Race," low in melanin but high in carotene; and (3) a "White Race," low in both melanin and carotene." [10]

Adam was fair and white which caused the hemoglobin (blood) to show in his skin making him look "ruddy" or to give him a "flush" look. Thus the word "ADAM," like the word "serpent," is a descriptive name, but here indicates certain physical characteristics that the man Adam possessed. It is a common practice in both the Hebrew and English languages to name something according to some outstanding feature or characteristic. We thus call a bird a "red-headed woodpecker" because it has a red head and pecks wood.

Adam was evidently called or named "ADAM" because he possessed aw-dam characteristics -- that being of a ruddy or rosy complexion coming from the blood (hemoglobin) showing through his non-pigmented skin. This is what ADAM meant. These physical characteristics of aw-dam are found only in the white race. People of a very fair complexion often appear as though they are reddish or sun-burnt since the hemoglobin readily shows through their skin. This was the case with Adam. Eve also had these characteristics.

That Adam and Eve were of the white race with this fair, ruddy or rosy complexion is verified in the Bible by the descriptions of their descendants. King David, who was one of Adam's direct descendants, was described as being "ruddy, and of fair countenance.” [11] David's daughter Tamar was "fair.” [12] Sarah and Rebekah, who were both descendant from Adam, were both described as being ''very fair.” [13] Moses was "exceedingly fair.” [14] The daughters of Job, one of the Adamic patriarchs, were known as the fairest women "in all the land.” [15] Solomon was described as being "white and ruddy.” [16] The Nazarites (consecrated persons) of Judah were "whiter than milk" and "more ruddy in body than rubies" (Lamentations 4:7).

Adam, thus, was not the progenitor of the human races but rather only the progenitor of the white race -- the Adamic race. Each race was a distinct and separate creation which would mean that each race is a distinct species of the Genus category Homo.

Color in Scripture

It becomes self-evident that in nature certain colors represent or symbolize certain things, and we can only conclude that this was the intent and plan of the Creator. Yellow, for example, is an alarming color and for a certain poisonous plant or snake to have a yellow coloration would make sense. Green represents vegetation and is symbolic of life or living things. A dark cloud is threatening but a white cloud is pleasant to look at. The scheme of color was obviously by design and we perceive this in nature and refer to it as the natural order of things.

Since colors symbolize and represent certain characteristics, qualities, attributes and features when used in nature (the works of God), it should be expected that Nature's God had likewise used the same principles of color characterization in His word. We know from Scripture that God created Adam white, being "ruddy" only because of the blood showing through his non-pigmented or colorless skin. Things that are non-pigmented or colorless are white -- that is the actual meaning of white -- "lacking color; colorless.” [17]

The question is, why did God create Adam non-pigmented or white, while other types of man were pigmented brown, yellow, black, bronze, etc? Scripture reveals that God had assigned a specific meaning and characteristic to white which is always used in a positive, Godly and honorable manner as follows:

God has assigned a significant meaning to "white" in Scripture which is always opposite from that which is colored or dark. The white horse of Revelations 6:2 signifies the spreading of the Gospel and victory, while the red horse represents war as result of the ride of the white horse (6:4), the black horse signifies false religion (6:5,6), and the green horse Islam and death (6:8). God and his armies are upon white horses (Rev. 19:11, 14). We thus see white is represented as that which is Godly, pure, good and peaceful. Black, or some dark hue, is the symbol of false "Christianity" disaster, mourning, or suffering (Job 3:5 & 30:30; Jeremiah 8:21 & 14:2; Lamentations 4:8 & 5:10; Joel 2:6; Nahum 2:10).

There is also significance in the words "light" and "dark" in Scripture which are symbolized as opposites (2 Corinthians 6:14; Romans 13:12). God's word is light (Psalms 119:105; 2 Corinthians 4:4). Also, "God is light, and in him is no darkness at all" (1 John 1:5). Likewise, Jesus Christ is referred to as Light (John 1:7). Consequently, God's chosen people are referred to as the "children of light" (John 12:36; Luke 16:8; Ephesians 5:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:5; Colossians 1:12). Darkness is representative of evil, wickedness and corruption (Proverbs 4:19; Isaiah 8:22; John 3:19; Luke 11:34; Ephesians 5:11; 6:12) and something the righteous seek to be delivered from (Ezekiel 34:12; Colossians 1:13).

We can see that God had assigned an honorable, pure, good, and Godly attribute to those things that are white or light in appearance. But those things that are evil, corrupted, or bring misery are represented as black, dark, or colored. Does it not logically follow that God would have created His supreme creation, Adam, and consequently His chosen people, "white" or "light" in appearance instead of colored black, yellow, copper, brown or some dark hue?

In light of the meaning and symbology God used in Scripture, it can be deduced that God made Adam white -- symbolizing something pure, holy, and Godly. God certainly would not have made his chosen race dark or capable of "developing" into dark or colored types as the creationists and Christian churches believe and teach.

In the Image of God

The equalitarians, those who promote the "unity of man" concept, often state, in reference to Genesis 1:26-27, that "the Negro was created in God's image but carved in ebony." They thus maintain that the Negro has the same common origin, the same essential attributes, the same moral and spiritual character as a white man. However, the word "man" used in these verses is "ADAM" (aw-dawm'), thus indicating that God made the white, ruddy, Adamic race in His image.

God also created Adam white so as to resemble Himself in sort of a symbolic manner. We have seen that "white" represents certain things in Scripture. God is represented as being white in the same manner He is represented as being male. This figurative concept was transmuted into God's literal and physical creation of Adam, who was created a white male. Adam was made white in the likeness or image of God, since all Godly things in Scripture are white or light.

Genesis 5 therefore affirms that only Adam was created in the image or likeness of God:

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

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

(3) And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness after his image (TSELEM); and called his name Seth.

Adam was also the "son of God" (Luke 3:38) just as Seth was the son of Adam (Gen. 5:3). Thus, Adam was created in a type of comparable resemblance to God in a symbolic sense, which must of had something to do with Adam's physical and racial make-up. Adam was of the white race because God's color scheme in Scripture portrays Godly things only as white or light, never dark or colored.

God's Chosen Race

The Bible does make some references to certain other races, sometimes designated as nations, families, or people. There is reference to the Syrians, the Hittites, the Libyans, the Edomites, Chaldeans, the Egyptians, etc., which existed at the time of Israel (the Hebrews). To these surrounding nations Israel was usually looked upon as just another race or nation. But to God they were very special and different.

The Bible is a very racially oriented book -- oriented towards one race. It was written about and for one racial family line that descended from Adam. Only Adam's genealogy is traced throughout the Bible. It was not written in regards to other people or races. It no more traces the history of Neanderthal men than it does Chinese or native Australians since it is a history book of only one man's family, that man is Adam. As stated in Genesis -- "This is the book of the generations of Adam" (Genesis 5:1).

Ten Generations from Adam came Noah and ten generations from Noah came Abraham. In Genesis 12, God blesses Abraham and promises to make him into a great nation. In Genesis 21 Isaac is born to Abraham's wife Sarah, and in Genesis 25, Isaac's wife, Rebekah, gives birth to Esau and Jacob. Then in Genesis 35:9-12, God appeared unto Jacob, changed his name to Israel, and reaffirmed the blessings he promised Abraham. From that point on the Bible concerns itself only with the white Adamic descendants of Israel. All of God's prophets were of Israel; the law was given only to Israel; the old and new covenants were made only with Israel, the right to inherit God's 'holy mountain' pertains only to Israel. Thus, God specifically chose only one racial family -- the white, Adamic, Israelite family -- to be His people:

This group of foreign captives is an accurate portrayal of racial characteristics. On the left is a Libyan, followed by a Syrian type from Syria or Palestine. The third has the typical profile of an Hittite. The fourth, wearing a feathered headdress, is a Philistine. The last one is a Semite (Hebrew). From the Temple of Ramses III at Medinet Habu in Egypt, c. 1150 B.C.

"Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant: and Israel, whom I have chosen: ...I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring." [20]

A specific election of one race implies the rejection of others for the purpose they were elected. The manner of this election or choosing is revealed in the Old Testament:

"For thou [Israel] art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all the people [races] that are upon the face of the earth. [21]

"At the same time, saith the LORD, will I be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people. [22]

"Only the LORD had a delight in thy [Israel's] fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even you above all people [races], as it is this day." [23]

"You only [Israel) have I known of all the families [races) of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities. [24]

"And I will walk among you [Israel), and will be your God, and you shall be my people. [25]

"He [the LORD God) sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel.

"He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they [other races) have not known them. Praise ye the LORD." [26]

The Scriptures are quite clear that the God of the Bible is not the God of all the races or "families" of man, rather He is only the God of the race of Israel whom He has "chosen for His own inheritance" (Psalm 33:12), and has chosen "for His peculiar treasure" (Psalm 135:4). Only the Israel race is chosen by God to be his servant (1 Chronicles 16:13). God clearly favors one race -- the Israel race -- over all other races that have existed on earth, past or present.

Sons of God

In Luke 3:38, Adam is referred to as the "son of God," Only the racial descendants of the Adamic family line are ever referred to as the "sons of God" or "children of God." Israel is identified as "the sons of the living God" (Hosea 1 :10) . God calls Israel his "son" (Isaiah 45:11, Exodus 4:22, Hosea 11:1). Christ refers to Israel as "the children of your Father which is in heaven" (Matthew 5:45). There thus exists a type of father-son relationship between God and Israelites.

Christians are also referred to by this title. The Apostle John in writing to fellow Christian-Israelites states:

"Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

"Beloved, now are we the sons of God," [27]

In his letter to the Philippians the Apostle Paul refers to his Christian supporters as the "sons of God" (Philippians 2:15). In Paul's letter to the Galatians, he informs them the reason Christ came into the world:

"But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

"To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

"And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father." [28]

Christ came to redeem only those "that were under the law." Only Israel entered into an agreement at Mt. Sinai and thus only Israel was ever under the law. Christ did not come to redeem the Tasmanians, for example, who had become extinct in 1877. [29] The Tasmanians could not be "sons of God" since they were not of the Adam-Jacob lineage. Consequently, God never placed the "Spirit of the Son" or of Christ into any Tasmanians. The Father provides for and protects only His sons. God Implied that He would not "cast off all the seed of Israel" (Jeremiah 31:37), and that they would be scattered but preserved and later gathered together (Amos 9:9; Ezekiel 34:11-14). David's seed was to be "established for ever" (Psalms 89:3-4). Evidently God would not allow His "sons" to fall into extinction as happened with the Tasmanians.

The last surviving Tasmanian. Drawing of a photograph about 1875.

Being "sons of God" is, however, more than a racial thing, it is a status that God bestows on certain persons (John 1:12-13, Romans 8:14). But there is nothing to indicate that anyone except those of Adam were chosen or "born of God" as sons.

Note: This article was extracted from Mr. Weisman's book, The Origin of Race and Civilization: As Studied and Verified from Science, History and the Holy Scriptures.

Hope of Israel Ministries -- Courage for the Sake of Truth is Far Better Than Silence for the Sake of Unity!

Hope of Israel Ministries P.O. Box 853 Azusa, CA 91702, U.S.A. www.hope-of-israel.org

Scan with your Smartphone for more information