RIL News

Language history confirms the Bible

Publicerad: 2009-12-29

Facts about language history and development supports the Bible's data, but causes problems for evolutionary theory

Dr. of Theology. Roger Liebi 1 summarizes in a lecture 2 notable facts showing how language history and development confirms the Bible, but contradicts the theory of evolution, which would require that the languages evolved from a single language and that they have gone from primitive to highly developed.

Ongoing changes in language runs counter to evolutionary theory

The direction of language development, was one of the main points of the lecture, and Liebi raised example after example of how languages are shown to go from having staggering complexity, to less complex - thus the opposite direction of what the theory of evolution claims.*

* A more detailed account of these facts are - due to space limits - going to be published in a separate article shortly.

"Babel of tongues" confirmed by the family tree of languages

Another key point was how even the "family tree of languages" contradicts the theory of evolution, which would require all languages to branch off from a single primitive language.

Facts namely confirm what the Bible reports, that the current languages are derived from a group of entirely separate language groups, which according to the Bible is the result of the confusion of tongues at Babel (Exodus 11:6-9).

Today's language can namely not be traced to a single primitive language, but only to a group of languages (the origin of modern language families) that have nothing in common with each other, just as the Bible claims.

Human language ability unique in biology

Dr. Liebi mentions several other interesting data. Fox example, he notes that the human ability to produce language - which is very highly advanced - is unique in the biological world. This applies also (neuro-)biologically; The centers of the brain that accounts for language perception and production, are unique to humans.

Dating of the languages fits the theory of evolution poorly

Dr. Liebi goes on to mention another remarkable thing. Today's highly developed languages are dated, even within the theory of evolution, to between 4 000 and 23 000 years BC, 3 i.e. a very young age, given the enormous periods of time that evolution is considered to had to work.

These dating are not at all surprising in light of the Biblical data. According to the Bible, the creation of earth - and thus the advent of languages, namely happened about 4 000 BC. It is indeed within such a timeframe that we can find traces of advanced human language.

Observations of reality supports the Bible

 Biblical data is again confirmed by honest investigation of reality. The Bible claims itself to the observation of reality bears witness to the God who is behind the Bible:

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, [...] so that men are without excuse."

(Rom 1:20)

Samuel Lampa
RIL News


Note: More articles, which go into the facts in more detail, will be published shortly here on RIL News.

1: Dr. of Theology. Roger Liebi was born in 1958 in Zurich, Switzerland, and has studied among other things Biblical languages (Greek, classical and modern Hebrew, Aramaic, and Akkadian), and Theology. He is active as a Bible teacher, and a guest speaker in different countries. He has been involved in Bible translation in three different projects, and is the author of numerous publications. He received his Ph.D. from Whitefield Theological College in Florida (USA) with a thesis on the Second Temple in Jerusalem, and did his Masters project on the theme of 'Origin of Languages".

2: The lecture is available as an mp3-recording on CD-ROM, at the Genesis' web shop.

 3: Please note that datings within the theory of evolution in general have very low reliability. Particularly radiometric datings, with ages ranging to more than thousands of years, almost totally lack credibility since they are totally dependent on assumptions that can not be re-examined with repeatable experiments, and therefore must be confirmed by the dating of the geological time scale, which in turn has been dated by radiometic methods, resulting in a false circle without foundation.