The following reproduces much of the first part of a research paper which Norbert Link wrote in 1982 while studying at Ambassador College in Pasadena, California. The relevance of the paper has not lost its impact, so we are bringing it to your attention at this point as a part of our ongoing series of articles on the creation of man and the pre-Adamic and post-Adamic world.

In 1856 the remains of a creature, later called “Homo Neanderthalensis”or the “Neanderthal Man,” were discovered in a cave in Western Germany. The remnants were carelessly dug up by two laborers so that many parts were lost. Only the skull and several parts of the skeleton were saved. Atonce a division arose in regard to the skull. Some scientists acknowledged it as modern and human and some thought it would belong to an unknown and primitive type of early man.

Even today, more than hundred years after this first discovery, the question still seems to be unanswered: Was the “Neanderthal” a human being as you and I or was he a primitive type of early man, not fully developed according to the evolution theory?

In order to answer this question, we have to recognize that scientific explanations in general may not be entirely correct. The Neanderthal is a good example which shows how interpretations of science can change.

The former belief of science was in many aspects different from what it is today. In the main two early discoveries of skeletons of the Neanderthal

Man led to the older scientific interpretations. The first find occurred – as mentioned above – in 1856. The surviving fragments were given to J.C.

Fuhlrott, founder of the Natural Science Society, who recognized a low skull with massive brows and bowed limbs, an ulna of the lower arm with an injury on it. He concluded that this skeleton was ‘antediluvian,’ that it was a fossil of a real man who had got washed into the cave by the Flood itself.

Professor Schaafhausen, however, anatomist at Bonn, who was asked to give his judgment next, stated that he was not sure at all that the skull was even ‘diluvial’; on the other hand, he felt that it must be older than such inhabitants of Europe as the Celts and the Germans. It is also interesting to note that Huxley, the great advocate of evolution, regarded the skeleton as one of modern man, as “Homo Sapiens.” Darwin kept silent. Only William King of Galway articulated his belief that the skeleton belonged to a primitive type of human and therefore named it “Homo Neanderthalensis.”

The next important discovery was made in 1908 in southern France. Three French priests had undertaken the excavation of a small cave near the village of La Chapelle-aux-Saints. Below the modern floor of the cave they found remains of a woolly rhinoceros, an extinct bison, a reindeer-and the skeleton of a Neanderthal-type man. The skeleton included the skull and most of the bones of the body. The remains of this skeleton were sent to the anatomist and paleontologist Marcellin Boule, director of the French Institute of Human Paleontology. He maintained that the body was that of an old man of the Neanderthal type and assigned its geological age to the Pleistocene period (120,000 – 10,000 B.C.). His memoir on this skeleton was published in 1908. In the main, he described it and with it the whole species of the Neanderthal Man as having massive brow ridges over the eyes and a puffing-out of the bone below the orbits, so that instead of a “canine fossa” there was a convexity. According to these examinations, the Neanderthal Man was viewed as a squat, stunted fellow about five feet one inch tall, or 155 cm. He was described as having a short, thick-set and coarsely built body and a shaggy covering of hair over most of the body.

However, since nearly thirty years [Note again: This article was written in 1982] we can find a changed scientific belief in the above-described appearance of the Neanderthals. This change started to take place in 1955, when William Strauss and A.J.E. Cave, professors of anatomy, re-examined the skeleton of La Chapelle-aux-Saints. They found that the forty-to fifty-year-old man was rotten with arthritis. The forward thrust of his head, noted by Professor Boule, was due to a wry neck, and the stunted stature and stooping posture were due to arthritic lesions in his vertebral column. Some scientists also realized that the great German pathologist Virchow had even stated in reference to the very first discovery of the Neanderthal Man in 1856 that this creature was a victim of disease and that he – Virchow – had upheld this conclusion for over thirty years.  At that time another important fact was brought back to mind, namely that the cranial capacity of that skull of La Chapelle-aux-Saints was very great, about 1,600 c.c., and that meant that the size of the Neanderthal’s brain was not less than that of modern man. Moreover, it was clearly asymmetric in the same way as that of modern man.

Since 1856, when the bones of the first Neanderthal Man were discovered, a very large number of remains of other creatures have been unearthed in caves of Europe, Asia and Africa. Among them are the Man of Spy, the Man of Krapina, the Man of Jersey, the La Guina Man, the Mousterian Man, the Peking Man, the Rhodesian Man and, of course, the Chapelle-aux-Saints Man. They all are classed together as the Neanderthal Man. Soon scientists realized that there was such variability in points of detail among the many known Neanderthal-type skulls that there was none that could be called “typical.” Therefore, many scientists believe today that the species had already divided up into a number of racial variants before the Neanderthal Man disappeared, comparable with the variants that can be seen in the races of living man today.  Some scientists go even further than that and state that the Neanderthal Man is no ancestor of the modern living man, but that he developed separately and independently of the modern man.

So, the scientific world today has no specific description of THE Neanderthal Man and it is not even sure that he was a forefather of modern man. However, most scientists profess that the Neanderthal was not a human being, although even this question is not kept without arguments. For example, Sir Arthur Keith, author of the book, “Antiquity of Man,” felt that the Neanderthal Man was certainly “not a dawn form of humanity.” And William Strauss and A.J.E. Cave wrote in their report about the fossil from La Chapelle-aux-Saints: “If he could be reincarnated and placed in a New York Subway – provided that he were bathed, shaved and dressed in modern clothing – it is doubtful whether he would attract any more attention than some of its other citizens.”

In recognition of this kind of confusion whether or not the Neanderthal man was a human being, we want to look very carefully at the archeological records discovered by scientists. Many scientists – and sometimes religious people as well – believe that the Neanderthals were no human beings. They feel that they are supported by some of the following discoveries.

The main argument for this belief refers to the primitive way in which Neanderthals lived. There is little doubt that they dwelled in caves which protected them from the cold during the cold seasons and that they hunted wild animals, either individually or collectively. When they had killed an animal, they used stones or stone tools to remove the skin and ate the meat raw or roasted over the fire, while they used the skin to cover their bodies and to sleep on. It is believed, too, that they ate carrion. But these facts do not prove by themselves that the Neanderthals were no human beings. Even today primitive tribes are known living in the same way the Neanderthals did-for example, the tribe of the Tasaday on the Philippine islands-and no scientist states that these people are not human.

Another argument why the Neanderthals are not considered as human beings is the assumption that their language capabilities were limited. Philip Lieberman and Edmund Crelin of Yale made a series of measurements of the skull of the fossil found at La Chapelle-aux-Saints. The measurements suggested that the Neanderthals lacked a modern pharynx and that they were unable to utter some vowel sounds or form some consonants. On the other hand, both scientists stated that Rhodesia Man, another creature of the Neanderthal race, had a slightly more modern pharynx. These controversial results do not prove that the Neanderthals were not human. First of all, do we know that the fossil from La Chapelle was representative for the whole race of the Neanderthals? As a matter of fact, this was not the case because the results were different in regard to the Rhodesia Man. Furthermore, these results prove that the Neanderthal Man could speak-and this is also true for the Chapelle-aux-Saints Man-although the vocabulary might have consisted of fewer consonants and vowel sounds. Therefore, limited language capabilities are also no proof for the assumption that Neanderthal Man was not human.

But there is still a third argument for this belief which is brought forth mainly by religiously-oriented people who state that the Bible mentions the Neanderthals as “nephilim” and distinguishes them herewith from the modern living man. In Genesis 6:4, the King James Version translates the Hebrew word “nephilim” with “giants” and reads: “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” It is considered that these “giants” were descendants from the ancient Neanderthal types, from “pre-Adamic races.”

According to this theory, the Neanderthals were creatures without the spirit in man, and that means without understanding; they were not fully conscious of their own self-existence as we are self-aware and conscious. In other words, without the spirit in man, the Neanderthals should have lived on the level with animals (1 Corinthians 2:11).

However, the following discoveries will prove that the Neanderthal lived beyond that level and, therefore, that he was a human being. 

This ends the first part of the research paper. We will reproduce the second part in the next Update, which will present proof as to why Neanderthal Man was indeed a modern human being or “homo sapiens,” and how this can be reconciled with science postulating that the Neanderthal Man was about 40,000 or at least 30,000 years old.

The interested reader is referred to two Q&A’s related to the subject. One Q&A addresses the question of the existence of “giants” in the past and perhaps today, and discusses the “nephilim” in Genesis 6:4. The second Q&A discusses the origin of the “nephilim” and answers the question whether angelic beings had intercourse with women and thereby produced giants.

At this point, we would also like to quote the following article from the Washington Post, dated June 19, 2014, which we cited in the Current

Events portion of our weekly Update #645, June 26, 2014:

“In a cave in northern Spain, a team of scientists has retrieved the remains of 28 prehistoric humans, members of an enigmatic species that could be described as a little bit Neanderthal. They had Neanderthal faces, with heavy brows and protruding noses. They had powerful mandibles and mouths that could open extremely wide, indicating that they used their teeth as gripping tools. But they didn’t have the large skulls or other robust skeletal features seen in the prototypical Neanderthals who, hundreds of millennia later, roamed Ice Age Europe. “The discovery does not dramatically change the general picture of human evolution, but it complicates it a bit, providing new evidence that there were many distinct, and largely isolated, human species existing simultaneously.

“[Scientists] think these proto-Neanderthals possessed the power of speech and lived in social groups. There are few human ancestors more intriguing than the Neanderthals, who could be described as the best example in the history of the planet of an intelligent species that has gone extinct. They had large craniums and larger brains than modern humans (although that doesn’t mean they were smarter). They existed as recently as about 30,000 years ago, when their kind disappears from the fossil record.

“How they died out, and why, and to what extent they may have interbred with anatomically modern humans is an ongoing source of debate and contentiousness among highly credentialed scientists. But as a species, the Neanderthal vanished. In their place came anatomically modern humans, who evolved in Africa and are the ancestors of everyone alive today.

“The Neanderthals, [one expert] said, ‘obviously were very intuitively smart. They were great toolmakers. They were ingenious. They were resourceful. They were living through difficult times.'”

How smart they were, and why they were indeed human beings, will be shown in the next installment.

(To Be Continued)

Lead Writer: Norbert Link 

Let’s first examine the question about those who are disfellowshipped.. 

Paul stated: “Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear” (1 Timothy 5:20). The Church of God in Corinth experienced just such a situation when one among them committed incest, and the sinning person was put out:

“In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:4-5).

Carefully note that while the punishment was public and forceful, Paul’s objective was to protect the Church and to save the individual (compare 2 Corinthians 13:10). That is what happened, for, we find that later on, Paul told the members to restore him to fellowship because of his repentance:

“This punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient for such a man, so that, on the contrary, you ought rather to forgive and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too much SORROW. Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love to him. For to this end I also wrote, that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive. For if indeed I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven that one for your sakes in the presence of Christ, lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices” (2 Corinthians 2:6-11).

The key to understanding this example is the fact that the man repented of his sin. His sorrow was deeply felt. He did not become bitter and resentful against God to the point of rejecting Him in his life.

Another example is found in the Old Testament. In this case David committed adultery with Uriah’s wife and then arranged his murder.  When Nathan the prophet confronted him with God’s judgment, David immediately admitted his sin:

“So David said to Nathan, ‘I have sinned against the LORD.’ And Nathan said to David, ‘The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die’” (2 Samuel 12:13).

David repented of his sins. In Psalm 32:1, 5 and in Psalm 51, David pours out his heart in praise to God for forgiving and restoring him. Quoting from some of what David wrote reveals the kind of attitude that God will accept from those whose sins have separated them from the Church of God:

“Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me away from Your presence, And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me” (Psalm 51:10-11).

“The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, A broken and a contrite heart— These, O God, You will not despise” (Psalm 51:17).

God’s fervent desire is for those who are sinning to repent:

“‘But if a wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; because of the righteousness which he has done, he shall live. Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?’ says the Lord GOD, ‘and not that he should turn from his ways and live?’” (Ezekiel 18:21-23).

Those who have been called into the Church of God and then choose to leave, for any number of reasons, must wake up—before it is too late! Jesus taught in a parable known as “The Prodigal Son” about the willingness of the father to have his son return:

“‘And he arose and came to his father. But when he was still a great way off, his father saw him and had compassion, and ran and fell on his neck and kissed him. And the son said to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight, and am no longer worthy to be called your son.” But the father said to his servants, “Bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet. And bring the fatted calf here and kill it, and let us eat and be merry; for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.” And they began to be merry’” (Luke 15:20-24).

This parable reflects the attitude of God, Himself, as we can also note in verses 7 and 10 of Luke 15:

“‘I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance… Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.’”

In His messages to the Church of God, from its beginning to the time of His return, Jesus Christ sternly warned many in generation after generation to repent! (Compare Revelation 2 and 3.) Why? For a whole multitude of reasons—which could ultimately lead to some having their names blotted out of the Book of Life! (Compare Revelation 3:5.)

Those who remain faithful to God and Jesus Christ also bear a responsibility to fellow members who stumble in their calling:

“Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins” (James 5:19-20).

Also:

“Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself” (Galatians 6:1-3).

The ominous truth for the Church of God during the coming years is that a falling away will continue and become even worse! In recent years we have witnessed the wholesale departure of long-standing members and ministers—often embracing the very doctrines they had once rejected as false and inspired by Satan—the spiritual ruler of this world. God’s commandments, statutes and judgments—all laws of life—were cast off as burdens, and membership within the true body of believers was summarily rejected. 

Coming to the irretrievable state of having committed the unpardonable sin is a process of hardening of one’s heart and spiritually searing the conscience, so that a person no longer cares or even wants to repent. Judgment is then self-imposed—the second death and eternal destruction.

God—through Jesus Christ—will judge all of us according to our ways. That judgment is now on the household of God—the Church (compare 1 Peter 4:17). The beginning point for anyone who has left the Church is to repent! The ministry is very willing to counsel anyone who seeks restoration in the Church!

And unless some might erroneously believe that they have committed the unpardonable sin by being out of the Church, consider what Daniel wrote:

“‘And some of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify them, and make them white, UNTIL THE TIME OF THE END; because it is still for the appointed time’” (Daniel 11:35).

If you are among those who have become separate from the Church of God, NOW is the time to turn back to God!

Lead Writer: Dave Harris

“Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple.”

Circumstances such as described in these verses are difficult for all concerned, but what Paul is instructing can be clearly understood and followed. When these guidelines are obeyed, the results will lead to peace within the Church of God.

The reason that obstinate, divisive people must be dealt with is that the faithful membership needs to be protected, and this is a solemn responsibility placed upon the ministry, in particular:

“Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you” (Hebrews 13:17).

Rebellious people want to “tell their side” of a matter and to put their slant on things. However, the way that these kinds of problems should be handled is through counsel with the ministry and not by tales of discord among the brethren. A characteristic common to those who are disgruntled and who have become openly defiant is an unwillingness to submit to the leadership established by Jesus Christ. Oftentimes, this attitude is accompanied with an unyielding and absolute refusal to discuss matters with a minister of God.

If someone is disorderly, contentious or promotes different doctrines—including challenging the organization and administration of the Church of God—the Bible clearly teaches that this must not be allowed to continue. This kind of opposition causes confusion. It plants seeds of doubt and questioning. By disruptive and argumentative murmuring, people begin to believe lying testimonies—even to the point of having their faith compromised, and unless repented of, to losing the Holy Spirit and eternal life in God’s Kingdom (compare Hebrews 6:4-6).

While it may be heart breaking to separate from those who once walked with us in the way of Christianity but have now become disobedient, God’s instructions must not be ignored or watered down!

Consider these powerful admonitions:

“But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless. Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned” (Titus 3:9-11);

“But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary in doing good. And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother” (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15);

And,

“I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner–not even to eat with such a person. For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore ‘put away from yourselves the evil person’” (1 Corinthians 5:9-13).

Earlier in chapter 5, Paul identified the sin of one of the members. His correction was not only to the individual, but to the membership who willingly permitted this man to continue to be among them.

Paul’s message to the Corinthians regarding their affiliations left little room for compromising:

“Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever” (2 Corinthians 6:14-15)?

People who do not continue in the truth of God are in grave danger of falling back into the world—the society whose god is Satan (compare 2 Peter 2). Their light will fade into darkness, and they will become an unbeliever. This is why we have such strong warnings against fellowshipping with dissident individuals. In his day, Paul had to contend with those who rejected the leadership of Christ—as we do in our time:

“Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern. For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame–who set their mind on earthly things” (Philippians 3:17-19).

The option for anyone is always open to quietly leave our fellowship without trying to cause alienation or to have others follow them. Yet, one must keep in mind the stern pronouncement made by Samuel to King Saul: “‘For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry’” (1Samuel 15:23).

How then should the faithful members treat those who no longer walk with us?

Here, godly wisdom is vital. Some will be weak and need encouragement, and we can pray that God will help them—leading them to repentance (It is only God who can grant them repentance—compare 2 Timothy 2:24-26). Others, who are blatantly rebellious and full of resentment and accusations, must be avoided. Understand that these attitudes are often masked by deceptive representations in order to justify themselves.

There may be times when an individual is publicly identified for causing division, and the ministry will so note that person (compare 2 Timothy 1:15; 2:17; 3 John 1:9). In addition, it is the responsibility for each member to avoid those who contend with the Church of God—even if their situation is dealt with more privately. Being a sympathetic ear to those who are in rebellion is very dangerous!

Remember and mark well what Jesus said would occur in the time leading to His return:

“‘And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another’” (Matthew 24:10).

The faithful people of God must heed the instructions we have been given! We must not compromise with the decisions of the Church of God which are made to protect us and to maintain peace and harmony among ourselves.

Let us also apply what the apostle John taught. His instructions were given several decades following the establishment of the Church of God in 31 AD, and they apply today equally as they did then:

“Look to yourselves, that we do not lose those things we worked for, but that we may receive a full reward. Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds” (2 John 1:8-11).

Lead Writer: Dave Harris