Available on YouTube and IsGenesisHistory.com
Runtime: 1h 44m
Rating: 4.5/5
Of the many dogmas of the Catholic Faith under attack in our time, the dogma of Creation is the one which the world seeks to induce men to deny first. Under the guise of “science”, Darwinian Evolution is touted as the sufficient and reasonable answer to the burning question of mankind’s origins. Thus, both the dominant ideologies of Marxism and Liberalism draw their anthropology from this worldview, purporting that man is merely an “advanced animal” as opposed to being a special creation of God. If man is an “advanced” animal, he is still an animal; thus justifying his rulers to organize society as they would a zoo. This analogy is not as absurd as it may seem at first glance, for the majority of men today are spiritually and physically in cages. Trapped in cages of debt and vice, they are barred from tradition, family, and the Faith in the unnaturally constraining environment of the modern concrete jungle.
This was no accident. The ideals of technocracy, which have been popular now for a considerable time among the international elites, claim to represent the most “advanced” elements of the populace. Because they see themselves as the “fit” and “chosen” by Nature, they therefore see it as their duty to dictate the development of the society in their pursuit of furthering the “evolution” of humanity. This is, after all, the sort of reasoning which guides men such as Klaus Schwab and Yuval Noah Harari.
However, if man is made in the image and likeness of God Himself (cf. Genesis 1:26, Wisdom 2:23), then the State must make itself subservient to the laws of his Creator. This was the view of human origins that built Christendom, and if we want to restore Christendom we must reclaim and propagate this view. That is where this film comes in.
Though a Protestant production, everything here is presented in a way that renders itself acceptable to Catholic minds. Following the journey of a gentleman named Del Tackett, the audience is guided on a tour through various branches of science, ranging from geology to astronomy, to examine the world around us in an objective manner. As is stated in the film, the debate between Evolutionism and Creationism is not one between “science and religion” as is often framed; it is a battle between two mutually opposing paradigms interpreting the same set of data. This is readily demonstrated on-screen, for the audience is given the rare opportunity to hear the voices of creationist sciences from differing fields of study as they are interviewed by Tackett about their area of expertise. These brave men unflinchingly point out how the world around us, with its fossils, rocks, and living organisms, vindicates the traditional teaching of Genesis over both modernist reinterpretation in the form of Theistic Evolution, and atheistic dismissal in the form of Darwinism. Furthermore, this film also dedicates a significant amount of time in demonstrating that once the erroneous twin frameworks of Uniformitarianism and Darwinism have been cast aside for what they are, the findings of geology and paleontology stand as unquestionable evidence of the cataclysmic Great Flood. Another subject of interest which is addressed in this film is that of the Tower of Babel, which is wisely given coverage towards the end of the film so as to correspond with the sequence of events presented in the sacred book of Genesis.
Concerning one point which represents a key example for how Church Tradition completes the truths those involved in this film touch on, I highlight certain statements made by Dr. Marcus Ross when he discusses the anatomy and purpose of the carnivorous dinosaurs. He argues that these creatures represent the world before the Flood, not the world before the Fall, this meaning (according to him) there was no death among animals in the Garden of Eden.
This however runs contrary to how St. Thomas Aquinas answered the question of animal death in the Garden in his Summa Theologiae:
Objection 2:
Further, it is unfitting that elements hostile to one another should be brought under the mastership of one. But many animals are hostile to one another, as the sheep and the wolf. Therefore all animals were not brought under the mastership of man.
His response is given below:
Reply to Objection 2:
In the opinion of some, those animals which now are fierce and kill others, would, in that state, have been tame, not only in regard to man, but also in regard to other animals. But this is quite unreasonable. For the nature of animals was not changed by man’s sin, as if those whose nature now it is to devour the flesh of others, would then have lived on herbs, as the lion and falcon. Nor does Bede’s gloss on Gn. 1:30, say that trees and herbs were given as food to all animals and birds, but to some. Thus there would have been a natural antipathy between some animals. They would not, however, on this account have been excepted from the mastership of man: as neither at present are they for that reason excepted from the mastership of God, Whose Providence has ordained all this. Of this Providence man would have been the executor, as appears even now in regard to domestic animals, since fowls are given by men as food to the trained falcon.
(ST I, Q. 96, A. I, AD 2)
Thus according to St. Thomas, there was animal death in the Garden; carnivorous dinosaurs (and other carnivores for that matter) would have had the predatory features and the behaviors they correspond with before the Fall. It was the nature of man that was changed by Original Sin, not the nature of the animals, though they were placed under his dominion by Almighty God. This being stated, I still maintain a great respect for Dr. Ross. Similar to other creationists, his position on this issue is understandable, yet stands in need of correction. Let us pray for him and the others involved in the production in this film, for their conversion, and that increasing numbers of Catholic souls both knowledgeable and talented may be brought into this realm of study, for “the harvest indeed is great, but the labourers are few” (Matthew 9:38).
Towards the beginning of the film, there is an interview with a scholar of Hebrew about the meaning of the Genesis text, and towards the very end, there is an interview with a Protestant pastor about the damaging effects of the Genesis account being rejected in favor of Darwinism that we see all around us. These sections are still worthwhile, but since these men are non-Catholics claiming to speak more explicitly with authority on religious matters than the others interviewed, what they say should be viewed with a questioning disposition.
The production value is simply excellent, from the visuals to the lighting, and this factor only induces one to further appreciate the effort and message of this documentary. It is certainly worthy of a Catholic’s time to view this highly informative and enjoyable film.
