Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
I was a bit disappointed to read the lead story in the “Tower of Babel” section (“The World in Revolt” by Mike Matthews). The author apparently rejects (or is ignorant of) the view of Henry Morris on the authorship of Genesis.
As Henry Morris sets forth in The Genesis Record, Genesis was written by eyewitnesses, beginning with Adam. Genesis 5:1 states, “This is the book of the generations of Adam.” . . . This is one of a dozen toledoth sections [generations of family history] in the book of Genesis, each indicating the author.
Ross L., Jr., Lafayette, Louisiana
Author’s Note: I did not intend to give the impression that I reject Henry Morris’s interpretation. In fact, the wording of the article was written and reviewed in an effort to ensure that we left the door open for the toledoth theory (the idea that the people listed in the generational accounts were the original authors of Genesis, which Moses later compiled).
Morris presents the toledoth documentary view as a hypothesis, and he still gives Moses credit for the book. In the Defender’s Study Bible, Morris says, “It seems very likely that Moses was the compiler and editor of a number of earlier documents, written by Adam and other ancient patriarchs.” The article used the words “Moses presented” rather than “Moses wrote” the account of Babel, but it’s still Moses’s book (Luke 24:27).
So, all is calm and quiet on a beautiful Saturday morning in the Bailey household (amazing, considering there are 3 boys under the age of 10!). Then Mom tries to innocently steal a few moments of reading time alone. Answers magazine lies open to the article on the Tower of Babel.
Suddenly, war erupts between all the boys and my husband, fighting over the magazine. “Look at the fossil of the fish having a baby!” “I want to see!” “I’m trying to figure out the language thing!” “Cool—look at the twins!” “Look at the beautiful scales on those butterflies!”
Needless to say, I thank you for coming into my home, stirring up interest and passion about all things created by God!
Jane B., Cotati, California
I am responding to the short article in the Culture News section where you state, “Another origins-related film, 10,000 B.C., . . . tells the story of ‘primitive’ people living during a time of mammoths and saber-toothed tigers. Not only does it depict these early people as backward ‘caveman,’ who are evolutionary forebearers . . .”.
Actually seeing the movie myself, there is no mention of any evolutionary content. . . . The film does not depict them as cavemen. . . . So it’s hardly justifiable to bash a movie when none of the things listed in the article were even implied in the film.
Roger W., Las Vegas, Nevada
Editor’s Note: We authored this short preview of 10,000 B.C. based on the information available when the April issue of Answers went to print. While the concept behind the movie rejects the biblical history of mankind’s spread from Babel, we were pleasantly surprised with how little evolutionary indoctrination made it to the final product. For a full review, see www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/03/10/10000-bc.
I just got done reading the article “Four Women, a Boat, and Lots of Kids” in your most recent Answers magazine, and I am a little confused on something. Dr. Wood says that mtDNA always comes from the mother. Dr. Wood claims that the differences in the mtDNA between Neanderthal and current Homo sapiens is easily accounted for by the four different women on the Ark having four different sets of mtDNA.
Well, herein lies the problem. Wouldn’t all humans have the exact same mtDNA since we all have the same original mother, i.e. Eve? How could the four women on the Ark have such different mtDNA when they all descended from Eve?
Jon B., Visalia, California
Author’s Note: The answer is simple: mutation. Most modern genetic variation ultimately came from mutations, alterations in the DNA nucleotide sequence. Mitochondrial DNA is especially prone to mutations. The only way that one of the women aboard the Ark could have carried Eve’s mitochondrial DNA is if somehow the DNA had been preserved despite mutations for more than 1,500 years. The same goes for all human DNA.
Another important thing to note is that these variations are very, very minor, maybe 1 nucleotide out of 100. That’s enough variation to do a meaningful statistical analysis, but it’s not that different.
On the Kids Answers poster (pp. 44–47), the butterfly identified as a monarch is really a viceroy. Viceroys have a distinct black line running across the lower wing. To download a corrected poster, go to www.answersmagazine.com/go/butterfly-correction.