Photo Credit: Photodrama of Creation, Divine Plan of the Ages

Notes for
Is There a Creator Who Cares About You?

Chapter 6:  An Ancient Creation Record—Can You Trust It?

( Previous Chapter | Next Chapter | Intro Page )

C6 Pronunciation (þþ 85–102):

WORD	PAGE	NW TRANSLATION	PHONETIC PRONUNCIATION(S)
algae	92		al'gee
anthropolgist	95		an(t)'-thruh-pah'luh-jist
Antoine-Laurent	88		ahn-twahn' law-rahn, -twan', loh-
Brittanica	88		bri-ta'nik-uh
chloroplast	96		klohr'uh-plast, klawr'
credulity	102		kri-doo'luh-tee, -dyoo'-
denizens	97		de'nuh-zuhn, -ni-
detonation	89		de-tuhn-ay'shuhn, de-tuh-nay'-
Encyclopædia	88		in-sie-kluh-pee'dee-uh
Hiroshima	88		hir-uh-shee'muh, heer-oh-, huh-roh'shuh-muh, hi-roh'-
indelible	95		in-de'luh-buhl
Lavoisier	88		luhv-wah'zee-ay', -vwahz-yay', -vwa-zyay'
mitochondrial	98		mie'tuh-kahn'dree-uhl
oceanographer	95		oh'-shuh-nah'gruh-fuhr
pastoral	101		pas't(uh-)ruhl
photosynthetic	96		fo-to-sin'-thik, -sint'-
Rig-Veda	85		rig-vay'duh, -vee'duh
Rubbia	90		roo'bee-uh
sanskrit	85		san'skrit', sant'-, -skruht
supercritical	88		soo'puhr-kri-ti-kuhl
terrestrial	102		tuh-res'tee-uhl, -tree-, -res'chuhl, -resh'-
transcend	85		tran-send', trant-
uranium	88		yu-ray'nee-uhm

( Pronunciation KEY )

Want a definition to a word? Use the form below to find it on the online dictionary at m-w.com.

C6 þ 85   ¶ 1,2

The Rig ("praise") Veda is the oldest and to many the most important of the four Vedas. It is a written collection of bardic hymns singing praise for the Hindu gods, which were only orally passed down for centuries unril approximately 900 B.C.E. It is intersting that even though this book is considered the most holy of all Hindu texts, most of the gods about whom the hymns are the subjects have shifted in their importance. In these writings, Indra is the most prominant, and of lessor but still important prominence are a few others, such as Agni, Soma, Surya, and Varuna. In modern Hinduism, Vishnu is of major importance, and is first mentioned in this collection, but he was of very little importance at the time. Neither Shiva nor Brahma are even mentioned. The gods herein are held as the origin of thought and poetry, but of creation itself there is no mention.

Enheduanna of Ur is claimed to be the oldest known author. It might be better if that statement were qualified by "oldest known author whose original writing in human language has been discovered", as Moses at the very least preceded her. But to not stray on too wide a tangent from the main points of this book, I'll avoid continuing this train of thought. Her writings describe a cycle of creation and death of the gods, which allowed for subsequent priests and priestesses easy explanation as to how they too could become deities, just as Enheduanna had 'become one with Innana'. It is claimed by some that her influence extends down through even today, influencing by precedence modern mathematics and astronomy. A historical "line" of influential thought and preference is claimed to have been chained straight back to the sacred temples of the Babylonian and Sumerian Priests and Priestesses, stating that their work and influence "directed every essential activity of life, including trade, farming and crafts." Whether this is true or not, one thing for certain, is that it did certainly have an affect on the areas surrounding, and even unfortunately, within ancient Israel, as The Watchtower of February 15, 2001, pg. 13 para. 8 reminds us.

According to Egyptian theology, "In the beginning there was only the Nun: the great celestial waters of the Unmanifest", and eight of the gods were existing in this. If find the correlation between how many people were on the ark and this number of gods coming from the abyss interesting, as it correlates with ancient Chinese survivors of "the great flood" as eight in number as well. But, to again stick with the information at hand, this highlights that the gods of this ancient Egyptian creative story also began their existance within a framework that was already created or existing.

I find it of no little importance that the God of the Bible that was known and worshipped by Able is the same God that is worshipped by millions today. Thus, although many may claim the importance of many ancient writings and the methods of worship that were then employed, there is no match to the continuity of worship toward the one true God, Jehovah.

C6 þ 85   ¶ 3,4

Here is a NASA press release about astronomers studying nearby and far galaxies to gain clues to the early universe. In other words, they recognize that there was indeed a "first cause". In order to understand the comparison, it's important to remember that what can be seen from further away is in actuality peeking into the past. For example, when we look at Saturn in the night sky, we actually see where it was roughly an hour before, as the reflected sun light, traveling at the speed of one foot per nanosecond (1/1,000,000,000 of a second), takes that much time to arrive at our earth. When at an assembly or convention in a large auditorium, observers sitting in the 'nosebleed' section see the movement of the speaker on the stage 500 nanoseconds later than those sitting in the front row. As modern communications through two way conversations have indicated, this time-distance delay is insignificant when verbally communicating locally (ie: on the same planet). This delay does have to be accounted for with high speed instruments (such as modern cell phones and satellite connections), thus this is basic delay principle is used for Global Positioning System [GPS]. Knowing this as well, astronmers understand that by looking at stars and galaxies at further distances, they are actually looking into the past as some of the light/xrays/infrared signals took that long to arrive here at our assigned heavenly station. Currently the instrument limit is set to about 16 billion years into the past, although clarity, and therefore detail, becomes lost with distance as well.

Note the NASA article entitled "Not seeing is believing when it comes to event horizon evidence"

Chandra uncovers new evidence for event horizons surrounding black holes

Photo Credit: CXC/M. Weiss

Here is a link to Chandra x-ray images of a black hole.
Here is a link to Chandra x-ray images of a neutron star.
Here is a NASA press release of the nearest known neutron star to the earth.

Here is a link to a professor's description of neutron stars. He also has a page that describes black holes as well.

Here is a press release of the Hubble's capture of black hole evidence.
Here is a link to an artists mpeg movie rendition of the Hubble telescope's capturing of a black hole "bath tub drain" event.
Here is a link to a NASA news release of some high density unseen object (suspected to be a black hole) passing in front of stars and causing a lensing effect (by bending the light of stars behind it with gravitational pull).

Here's an article discussing explaining how we all believe in things that we cannot see.

Here's another article discussing the most important reasons why we should sometimes believe what we cannot see.

C6 picture þ 86

Here's the picture of the one in the book. Here's a more recent picture of a black hole dust disk, discovered at about the same time the book was being printed.

A neutron star is not expected to give off enough light to be visible on the earth by even the most powerful optical telescopes. For this reason radio and xray telescopes are employed for this purpose. But even so, for years such stars have been elusive. Even neutron star RX J1856.5-3754 discovered by the ROSAT X-ray satellite was barely detectable by the Hubble telescope, and this mostly only because it left an ionized trail behind it called a "blow shock", which is actually gasses in space charged by the passing neutron star. Other neutron stars are "discovered" by studying the stellar displacement of nearby stars.

C6 þ 86   ¶ 1  to   þ 87   ¶ 1

It's interesting that humans have the ability to make the otherwise invisible, visible. For instance, through the study of aerodynamics one can begin to comprehend why a wing keeps birds and airplanes afloat in the atmosphere. Physics helps us to "see" gravity and how it works. Through electronics we can "see" a sports event occuring in South America, even if we might be in the Mid-East. Geometry allows us to "see" shapes and patterns, calculus allows us to "see" motion, probability theory "shows" us natural randomness, and on it goes... Thus in our everyday lives there are things we cannot see, but can come to see them through understanding. One thing ties all of the points I've mentioned in this paragraph thus far together, is Math. Keith Devlin stated in a commencement address he had delivered to a graduating class at the University of California in Berkeley in 1997 that Mathematics is The Science of Patterns and it makes the invisible visible. So, just as a methodology such as mathematics as a science is required in order for human understanding to see and understand otherwise invisible qualities of things right here on the same planet we live on, then is it too large an expectation that we would require a method such as a set written instructions from an authority on heavenly life to help us and allow us to "see" that there is invisible heavenly intelligence?

C6 þ 87   ¶ 2,3

In 1Timothy 3:16 it is stated that Jesus had appeared to angels, and 1Peter 3:22 states that the angels were made subject to him at the time he appeared before Jehovah. No amount of math, nor studies of physics, nor attempts at 'inventing' a blade of grass would give us much insight into such heavenly activities. No more so than the greatest physist in Russia could determine whether or not a family in Peru was awake, asleep, or eating their evening meal. Thus we have but one source for understanding such heavenly creatures. For instance there are specific qualities that can be ascertained about them, such as they have a language, can make personal choices, and have feelings. (Note Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 1, page 106 "Angel") Even what few glimpses of them that are included in the scriptures seem to be tailored toward necessary information.

I've heard some wonder aloud if supernova's were the result of negligent angels. (Jude 6) One thing that must be remembered is that when one is looking through a telescope at a supernova some 12 million light years away, it is to realize that the currently observed explosion actually occured some 12 million years ago The fall of Satan and the demon hordes that chose to follow him are a more recent event, being relegated to the last of the seven creative days (which is as of yet undefined in length and will be further discussed in the book over the next few pages)

C6 þ 88   ¶ 1,2

He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination.
--Andrew Lang

Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier is renowned as the father of modern chemistry. However he studied chemistry, botany, astronomy, and mathematics at Mazarin College. While he did prove incorrect on conservation of mass and matter, he was successful at disproving the then popular Phlogiston Theory, which held that all matter was made up of one or more of three elements, sulfur, mercury, or salt. Lavoisier burned all of his textbooks that supported phlogiston theory. Which led to the view that he was overly emotional and not given to logic on the subject. Old theories, no matter how incorrect, die slow and hard. The phlogiston theory even then permeated the scientific world to such a degree that even Joseph Priestly, who is credited with having discovered oxygen, reported it not as a chemical of it's own, but rather as dephlogisticated air", believing it to be such until his death. So one must realize that Lavoisier's error was small in comparison with the errors that the then modern science had yet to leave behind. Another success to Lavoisier's credit is the ground breaking description of the respiratory processes, and the production of heat in animals.

C6 þ 88   ¶ 3  to   þ 89   ¶ 1

If you get careless or go romanticizing about scientific information, giving it a flourish here and there, Nature will soon make a complete fool out of you.
--Robert Pirsig

The upper portion of the atmosphere (the heterosphere, above the ozone layer by about 50km [30 miles]) contains high levels of hydrogen and helium. The earth daily loses a bit of these two elements to empty space. The more helium/hydrogen tha floats up to this ~sphere eventually pushes more of these elements out into space. Which makes sense, since those elements are lighter than the air. However, consider the products of a hydrogen bomb, which is mostly two things: 1) a very large explosion and 2) helium. The helium's tendency to rise is what helps to give the "mushroom" look to the explosive cloud of these types of bombs. It's also partly what helps to bring about the return rush of wind after the initial explosion, which is nearly as devastating as the explosive wind. Between the rising explosive force, and the pressing wave of helium shooting up toward the heterosphere, it actually blows a 'hole' in the atmosphere. The atmosphere being exteremely fluid is the other part of why the return wind occurs. The atmosphere loathes a low pressure, and it must be filled. How much normal air is sucked into space along with the helium rush is not known, but if it could be measured I doubt it's an amount we would want to loose regularly.

C6 þ 89   ¶ 2  to   þ 90   ¶ 1

Einstein's original notes (currently at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem) containing the famous equation of E = mc² equation, by which he summed up the theory of relativity, had a crossed out "L". He did so because he quicly decided that the equation was weighty enough without unnecessary constants. It's a good thing he did this, as he likely saved many a mathemetician and theorist from being overwhelmed by the deceptive simplicity of the final formula.

To date there are only three types of energy discovered in nature: kinetic, potential, and mass. Kinetic is the energy of motion, such as a car on the highway. Potential energy is stored energy, as in the gasoline stored in the fuel tank. Mass is energy converted based on Einstein's famous equation. Energy such as fire, electricity, the blowing wind are all kinetic energy of atoms and molecules. Chemical energy, such as that not yet released by a car battery, is potential energy of electrons. The nuclear blasts proved that energy was stored inside of matter, thus if one could capture and store the equivalent amount of energy, then matter could be manufactured. Thus matter is literally an energy force field, structured energy. In fact it could be thought of as a set of gyroscopes within gyroscopes, as all atoms and the subcomponents all have specific spins to them. Like a fly wheel storing the energy for later sudden release, or long slow and directed power, depending on the decided use.

It is interesting that we can use what amounts to being a two dimensional map in order to understand certain realities of the three dimensional world we live in. Even a symbol on the map can offer a three dimensional understanding, such as a bridge, which can go over a river, or a road, depending on the legendary representation. So it is, using the structure of language, particular the words recorded for us in Gods word, the Bible, we can live in a three dimensional world, but come to understand what it is a Supreme Being of another dimension, or spiritual existance wants us to learn from Him. (This is not necessarily a fourth dimension in the sci-fi context, although, dare I say this without it being taken out of context?, Ephesians 3:18 could possibly be aluding to this; but in the context of the scripture it is most likely indicating a learning experience, as opposed to a physical reality) Imagine, the very being that created the universe and all of it's wonders. Who has heavenly companions by the millions rendering him worship and praise at any moment. And He is interested in each one of us on, not a statistical, nor a group herding level, no, but a personal one. He is intereseted in you and I. His grandness is humbling, but His sensitivity draws us.

C6 þ 90   ¶ 2,3

It should be noted that when the scriptures touch on science, and although the Bible writer recorded the statements, this does not necessarily mean that the writer fully understood the details or the full truth of the statement. (Daniel 12:8) Neither does it mean that certain others who were not servants of the true God did not understand certain specific portions of the laws and make up of our natural existance. Sometimes the full understanding of what was written in scriptures would become understood by Jehovah's servants later. For instance, Isaiah 40:22 makes the statement, "There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth," and many faithful Bible readers will argue with other doubters over whether or not Isaiah understood [chuwg] circle to mean a sphere or a flat circle. However, truly the issue at hand is not whether or not Isaiah understood the statement, but whether the statement by God is scientifically accurate. If God truly knows the universe, and really is the author of the Bible, then what is recorded in it will be timeless truth. Whereas any discovering or calculation by man is always subject to updates and fine tuning, such is not so of statements made by God, though the one recording them may or may not fully comprehend them. Just as 2+2 always did and still equals 4, then the fact that the earth is circular in shape from any viewable angle is also true. And the fact that I know and understand this in no way detracts from the fact that you know such as well. Therefor it in no way detracts from the fact that that scriptures indeed are accurate on this point.

Sometimes it's argued that historical humans had concluded that the world is indeed not flat, or is not just a circular plate in the heavens. Greek scholar Eratosthenes is said to have measured the diameter of the earth using simple trigonometry, (calculated 8900 miles, close to the true value of 7964 miles). Aristotle, in the 4th century B.C., offered three proofs that the earth is a globe:
(1) ships leaving port disappear over the horizon;
(2) as one travels to the south, stars that are not visible in Greece appear above the southern horizon; and
(3) during an eclipse, the earth's shadow on the moon is visibly curved.
Discovered cuneiform writings in Shadippur, Iraq seem to indicate the Sumerians knew the earth was spherical. But none of this is relavent to the fact that the author of the Bible knew the truth about the properties of nature. And the facts of the Bible support the basis that Jehovah does know, evidence growing as time passes and new discoveries are uncovered. (note C6 þ 10 ¶ 1, gauze) Thus, even though it can be pointed out that some few did indeed figure such out, there is little record of religions accepting such facts until recently, and yet the scriptures promoted such a concept during a time when it was religiously contrary to do so.

If Isaac Newton can be considered a visionary because he recognized the role that gravity plays in nature, and this despite that his theory was modified later by Einstein, then why is the Bible rebuffed for having made statements that still accurately reflect realities discovered long after the writing? It would appear that perhaps a double standard is at play. Here is an interesting article that discusses this and other similar points.

C6 þ 91   ¶ 1

As I mentioned preceding the "Pillars of Creation" photo in the introduction page of these notes, all matter we are made of comes from the stars at some point. So the understanding the process used, although interesting and may be surmised some day, is not important to understanding that the mechanics that caused the surprizing exactitude of components required to support life, our lives, is beyond the statistical odds of random behavior of the inert material. So asking who did this, where the power came from to accomplish it is no less logical and sensible than asking which auto manufacturer made your neighbors car. The structure and function of the object proves to your sense of understanding that someone made that car, and that is indeed a car. Even if it broke down, there is a sense of design behind it. Yet, the 'living' earth has been functioning for milleniums upon milleniums, and even despite the recent abuse, still runs.

C6 þ 92   ¶ 1

The earth is just the right distance from the sun to provide life without too much extreme toward sterilization by ultraviolet bombardment and solar flares. (Envision the planets of Mercury and Venus) Yet it is not so far out that we are finding it difficult to survive freezing temperatures, as the asteroid belt and planets beyond Mars experience. It's worth noting too that the earth is within a influence boundary by the sun that prevents too much gamma radiation from space from bombarding the planet. And it doesn't stop there, even our sun is just the right distance from the center of the Milky Way Galaxy to allow for sufficient heavy elements for life, but not so close as to suffer too much displacement from passing stars and other forms of mass measured in astronomical proportions. And even beyond this, our home galaxy seems to be in a 'safe' position and a tug of war between different forms of mass that are measured on an intergalactic scale, avoiding the pitfalls of having our sun ripped off into space and becoming essentially homeless sun without a galaxy, which according to some theories could cause the sun to flame out prematurely. At such proportions beyond human ability, to assume that all of these perfect conditions came about by mere chance of the stellar draw, would be to assume that the impossible is standard fare. Unless the intelligence behind such mechanics is recognized, which really is the only sensible understanding that one can arrive at without appearing stupid. (Deuteronomy 32:6; Jeremiah 10:6,8)

C6 þ 92   ¶ 2

The previous two paragraphs mentioned the varieties of life on this planet, and the abundance of it, as well as us having the "right to be amazed at it all". This is an understatement, if one considers that if even life that is compatable with our own evironment can be amazing, then how much beyond amazement when one considers that life exists in extreme and once thought as prohibitive enviornments. For example, could anything be expected to thrive in a sulfuric acid pool? Yet Sulfolobus Acidocaldarius finds this to be home sweet home. And salt was once thought of as being able to kill anything, yet Haloferax Volcanii love a lake that is saltier than any sea. Alkali lakes are home to Nanobacterium Gregoryi, deep sea vents house Methanopyrus Kandleri, and ice fields are favorites of Polaromonas Vacuolata. When one considers that some of these same extremes would be deadly to any 'normal' organism, it leaves little room to avoid the implication that there was intentional design in the placement of these creatures. Man is just learning to find uses for these extremophiles. For example, there are hydrocarbon-eating bacteria usually live off of terpenes (a product of coniferous trees). Man has learned to harvest these microorganisms for use in cleaning up oil spills, as molecules of crude oil are close enough to their natural food to be just as edible. If such creatures can be intelligently placed according to need and desire for human errors, then how much more so should it be appreciated that they were designed and placed in their environments by a superior intelligence that was able to design them in the first place?

C6 þ 92   ¶ 3  to   þ 93   ¶ 1

It's interesting the one of the biggest arguments between evolutionists and creationists, is over the length of the creative days. Fanatical religionists hold that each "day" is a specific 24 hour period, while fanatical evolutionists hold that the entire process took millions of millions of years, therefor conflicts with creationism. But a careful analysis of the scriptures indicates that the creative "days" are a measure of events, and not necessarily a specific time period. (Note: Insight on the scriptures, Vol. 1, "Day" þ 591, ¶ 1.) Therefor, it is possible that even if one could actually measure the length of one of the creative days, it might not necessarily tie in to the lengths of another creative day.

Note that the creative days of Genesis chapter 1 might be measured on a reverse logarithmic scale, as verses 2-5 apparently would have taken 10¹⁸ million years, whereas the current unclosed seventh day can be measured in mere thousands of years, as all beasts and humans were created in the sixth "day" (verses 24-31). (Note: If Genesis 1:1 is to be measured inside of the first creative day, then this would only serve to promote this possibility)

These seven creative days are the source of our weeks being seven days long, as opposed to any other number. Calendars as far back as can be measured in human history have had seven day weeks, and it continues on to our day and time. Such was the influence this creative account had on mankind's efforts at measuring the stream of time (Genesis 1:14b; Exodus 31:15,17).

C6 þ 93   ¶ 2  to   þ 94   ¶ 1

...in science, as in criminology, we speak of discovering - rather than inventing or creating evidence.
--Laura J. Snyder

Scientists who study meteorites find that the surface of many of them are layered with silicon carbide, a heavy silicon isotope that is manufactured in the cores of massive stars. This was surprising to them because the levels were higher than those of our sun. which appears to have very little of this component. The explanation is that they must have wandered from some distant star, only to get captured by the gravitational pull of our home planet. This indicates that the motions of many components of this universe are still in apparent random motion. So there is no telling if during the first creative day through the fourth had passed through a Nebula absorption cloud, or that the earth was still surrounded by remnants of proto-planetary dust.

Here's an article that describes why our sun is unique, despite that many educators teach that it is a typical star.

C6 þ 95   ¶ 1

Did Each Creative Day Always Finish What It Started?
On the second creative day, God caused a separation to develop between the waters on the surface of the earth and those above it, leaving an expanse, or atmosphere, between the waters above and the waters below. As Genesis 1:6, 7, Watts' translation, expresses it: "Then God continued, saying, 'Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, also let there be a separation between the waters.' Accordingly, God proceeded to divide the waters which were under the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and gradually it came to be so." (Italics ours.) Just as day one saw the first appearance of light at the earth's surface but not its final state, so day two saw the start of the expanse. The completed state was not immediately reached

Genesis 1:9, 11, Watts' translation, says concerning day three: "Then God continued, saying, 'Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together to one place, and let the dry land appear'; and gradually it came to be so. Then God continued, saying, 'Let the earth produce grass, herbs yielding seed, fruit-trees which have their seed in them bearing fruit according to their kind upon the earth'; and gradually it came to be so." ... The use of the word "gradually" indicates progressive creative activity, as opposed to a single event at a single point in the stream of time.
--Awake! 1991, June 8, þþ13-14.

It's interesting that many worry about "global warming". While it's true that Jehovah does not approve of those ruining the earth (Revelation 11:18), I personally don't think there is any reason to worry to an extreme degree, because just as an expert might calmly correct the mistake of a trainee, Jehovah could possibly just snap the rising sea waters into the upper expanse as he had done once before (Genesis 1:6-8). Whatever His solution to this problem, though, it will not eliminate the righteous from the earth. (Psalm 37:11)

C6 þ 95   ¶ 2

The earth, even after the length of time has passed from it's having been formed from stellar dust, until today, is far from being a dead planet. It is static and always changing. In our lifetimes we may have seen landslides, floods, rising sea levels (3 inches for most of us), and sinking islands. Even whole mountains have literally lost their tops in recent years. But all of these are mere specks in the mantle density that makes up the surface of our earth. By using vibrations that resonate through the earth, geophysicists have developed methods for measuring varying densities within the planet. Also sensitive gravitational measuring devices on satellites are employed to find where gravity is stronger and weaker. These methods help to pinpoint oddities within the structure of the mantle, which shows up surprising bulges and troughs where one might not expect to. The largest single structure is a 'mushroom' shaped superplume directly beneath the southern tip of Africa. The stem of the 'mushroom' at the outer core is approximately 900 miles wide, and the upper portion spreads across several thousands of miles. Also measured is a massive downwelling, or subduction zone, in the sea south of Indonesia. Thus the continents are described as "bobbing" vertically as well as "sliding" tectonic plates horizontally on the surface. Such motions could easily account for changes in the surface of the earth, both during the creative days, and also during the global flood of Genesis chapter 6. Thus it would appear that not only people, but also God likes to "rearrange the furniture" once in a while.

What the Genesis account says is in full harmony with the description given by the apostle Peter. Because the dry land rose above the surface of the terrestrial water, the 'earth stood compactly out of water.' Yet, by reason of the water surrounding the earth above the expanse (which contained the gases needed for supporting life), the earth also stood "in the midst of water." (Compare Proverbs 8:24-29.) This arrangement came into being by the "word of God."

The waters suspended far above earth's surface and the terrestrial waters created the possibility for a global deluge and did prove to be the means by which the Most High destroyed an ungodly world. Hence, the Flood stands as a warning example to all who ridicule the certainty of divine intervention in human affairs during the time of Christ's presence. The powerful word that brought into being the possibilities for a global deluge is the same word that points to the destruction of the present wicked system of things. The apostle Peter continues: "But by the same word the heavens and the earth that are now are stored up for fire and are being reserved to the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly men."-2 Peter 3:7.
--Choosing the Best Way of Life, chapter 10, þþ 172-3, ¶ 48, 49.

It's interesting to note as well, that the Hebrew word for "dry land" [yabbashah] (Genesis 1:9) allows for the possibility of the waters simply allowing it to recede, and finally dry off. As in: the rains slowed enough and the bulging rivers and streams were given opportunity to slim down a bit. (Note also Exodus 14:16 and Joshua 4:22 where this same word is employed)

Whether both methods were employed by God, or one, or even another of which man has yet to imagine or discover, doesn't matter. It's sufficient that the possiblities exist, and cannot be refuted by man, nor doubted by the sensible mind.

C6 þ 96   ¶ 1-3

Anyone who studies the architectures of life has to admit that they cannot explain the forces that guide atoms to assemble in molecules. And they know even less about how molecules join to become living cells. And what drives the cells of higher organisms to cooperate, or become the specialized cells of the different parts. And why is it when someone sees a geodesic form, such as the triangular domes of some sports arenas, they can tout the superior and fundamentally intelligent design. Yet many of these same people when presented with the same forms found in cytoskeletons, mammalian cells, protein enzymes, and even molecules such as the buckyball, they mark it up to pure chance. Even the DNA protein structure is a marvelous feat in of itself, let alone the higher order processes that occur that occur in the organisms, such as the food consumption of animals, and the photosynthesis of plants. If anyone brushes off processes of photosynthesis as not being a process of intelligent design, the please ask them to read the white paper entitled "Complete Structure of the Chloroplast Genome of a Legume" so they can explain it to me. And that's just a description of the genes, not the process. It's only the tool, not the activity. In trying to study the activity of photosynthesis, researchers measure many different aspects of it in an attempt to understand it. But to date cannot replicate the process.

C6 þ 97   ¶ 1

Even if Stanley Miller's 1953 experiments can claim success in having discovered how lifes building blocks could be chemically formed, it fell far short of discovering or explaining what process could have selected and organized the molecular structures into proteins and DNA. Proposals such as the theory that somehow sunlight and chemistry organized the necessary chains near the sea surface, the odds of a correct sequence being increased by evaporation, which would increase the concentration of the amino acid 'soup'. However, this theory falls apart in many ways, such as water could never provide a sufficient concentrated supply of energy to allow DNA folding. More recently it is being proposed that instead rocks along coastlines were used as microscopic 'egg cartons', crystaline structures that helped to align the 'just right' sequences necessary to bring about life. Thermal vents are the energy source offered in this most recent theory. Very briefly, this more recent theory offers the following process:

First, Stanley Miller's amino acids are created in the atmosphere by charged gases. They rain down into the sea, whereupon the right handed amino acids are 'weeded' out of the 50-50 mix. Then, somehow, without remixing, the correct left handed aminio acids collect as precursor molecules in weathered pits on Felspar and other minerals. Here they are protected from deadly radiation (one of the pitfalls of the sea surface theory). In the meantime iron oxide minerals recombine nitrogen and hydrogen to make ammonia, which living cells require to acquire nitrogen. This happens somehow without the random wash of the sea coast causing a rediluting the ammonia mix with the sea water. Then, somehow all of these necessary components become trapped toghether in layers of clay. Combined high pressure and heat then forces iron and sulfur into the central portion of the previous molecules, and somehow a living cell is formed.

I'll quit the 'dance' around the theory here, as I think it sufficiently covers the fact that there are holes. At this point, one must ask, is it more sensible to believe that an intelligent source caused the varieties of life we see on the land around us? Or to believe the above well written stories, supported only by guesswork and a few disconnected chemical processes? To date, no one has ever found a half-processed cell. Everything found is either alive, or it isn't.

We can appreciate too, that not only have so many creatures of both sea and land been created in variety, going beyond simple functional existance. But that they are also filled with beauty, and wonderment. Even humor and delight can be found. Such artistic marvels strongly assert that something far in excess of survival was involved in the creative process. Something that equats the love and enjoyment of life we find promised to us in the scriptures.

C6 þ 97   ¶ 2,3

Humans are the epitomy of creative beauty and architectural design in biology. The previous pages and chapters of this publication have borne this out, but what truly indicates this above all else, is that Jehovah prepared the earth for humans. (Genesis 2:8; Luke 12:48) Just as a couple will prepare their home in anticipation of a newborn infant, with high expectations and plans of loving care and guidance, this planet was made to be our comfort and home. This from, not just a very important member of the most powerful organization in the universe, no, but from the director of all things, Jehovah the Creator. What a delight it must have been for Adam to name the animals, mentally cataloging all that he was responsible to care for. (Genesis 2:20) As the book points out, humans are a higher form of life than the animals, in that we have a free will. Apparently the proper use of this free will is what differentiates those who have a prospect for resurrection and life, as opposed to everlasting death and the only future of animals. (2Peter 2:12)

C6 þ 98   ¶ 1

It's interesting that Genetists have been able to decipher the typical DNA of the ancient Jewish priestly tribe of Levi. What they have not been able to determine, though, is the DNA pattern of the more important tribe of Juday. (Genesis 49:10) So, DNA variation can be a useful measurement to determine particular sources of life for a line of organisms. This is significant because biologists have discovered that primates, even among the same species, have more variety in their DNA and the entire 6,000,000,000+ population of humans. In fact, Pascal Gagneux of the University of California at San Diego found that even a single group of 55 chimpanzees in west Africa has more genetic variablity than the entire human genome collective. Humans are indeed unique, very unique.

C6 þ 98   ¶ 2  to   þ 99   ¶ 1

I have to wonder if Adam came up with humorous names like Humuhumunukunukuapua'a (Rhinecanthusrectangulus, which is almost as silly), the Hawaiian State fish, which basically means "fish with a beak". They use their beaks to chew on coral, grinding out the micro-organisms which provide them nourishment. And I wonder if Adam reacted the same to the platypus as we do today? Did he think a tiger was silly looking, or beautiful? Did a giraffe make him wonder why God would make a walking tree? It must have been a joy to go through all of that, but it's interesting that he noted the lack of companionship. Such thrills would have brought a strong desire to have someone to share these wonders with. Hence the fact that he missed having a companion, although he never knew one before.

...the Bible record shows that God's creations on the "day" just preceeding ... [the] "rest day" did not end with Adam's creation. It shows a time lapse between the creation of Adam and that of his wife, Eve. During that time, God had Adam name the animals. Whether that period amounted to weeks or months or years, we do not know. So we do not know exactly when Jehovah's great "rest day" began, nor do we know exactly when it will end. The same applies to the beginning of Christ's millenial reign. The Bible provides no way to fix the date, and so it does no good to speculate when that date may be. Gen. 2:18-25; Matt. 24:42,44.
The Watchtower, 1975, Oct. 1, þ 579.

C6 þ 100   ¶ 1

Informed choice is the rule of the universe. If a person chooses to, which they can, ignore the laws of gravity, then they must live (for however short a time it might be) with the results of this choice whenever they step off of a cliff. If a person chose to ignore the risks of biological suicide by drinking or injecting poison, or risking all kinds of sexually transimittable diseases, then they too would have to live with the results. Whether they accept them or not. This carries over into moral and social structures as well. Such as a person might decide that the restrictions placed on them by the local financial institution are too tight, hence they walk in with a weapon and make a forced "withdrawel". They will find the results are a visit by law enforcement. So should it be any surprise that God, the most powerful and righteous being in the universe, would hold us to certain standards of conduct as well? He is not a wimp, nor is He unduly restrictive, as the universe and local nature would prove. Instead he provides loving guidance, providing the most perfect balance between personal freedoms and not encroaching upon the freedoms of others. And He is secure enough in His godship and correctness, that He is allowing all of the results of the original rebellion to take place, in order to prove once and forever that He is right. His name will be sanctified, and will be vindicated forever.

Why can this be claimed? As the Insight on the Scriptures points out, Adam was perfect, the warning to him and his wife was clear, and the test was miniscule compared to the tests that many men have faced and are facing since then. (Vol. 1, þ 604, under the subject "Declare Righteous") In this context, Jehovah has already been vindicated to some degree in two ways. One, that Jesus himself was perfect (Hebrews 7:26), and his living conditions were worse than what Adam and Eve were subjected to, yet he maintained his integrity to the end. Second, there were and are many men who were/are imperfect, yet maintaine(d) their integrity toward God and His righteous standards despite not only the conditions in which they live, but the imperfect conditions of their own existance. (Matthew 26:41; James 2:20-23) Both situations prove that the first couple could have maintained their integrity under conditions which made it far easier to do, and that the choice was their own (1John 2:16; Genesis 3:6), not a flaw in their design. They could have chosen to hold their integrity before God, and the test was comparatively simple. It was very simple. They could have done it.

A good article on this can be found in the Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 1, SIN,I, þ 963, "Revolt in Eden". In contrast, a good article that shows how any one of us can conquer this can be found in The Watchtower 1999, October 15, starting on þ 8, "Learning the Excelling Way of Love".

C6 þ 100   ¶ 2

Humans generally seem to promote their own works greater than their actual worth. As one comedian pointed out some years ago, "man makes a refridgerator, and God makes a rabbit... Man says, 'awesome'. God says, 'good'. The 'fridge breaks down, and the rabbit keeps running." Often human nature leans toward presenting facts askew from their proper reality in order to minimize errors or uncertainties. For example, a sales person might hightlight certain features of a product in an effort to keep a potential customer from noticing certain properties of the product that might detract from a potential sale. Or someone who is of low self esteem might continually promote their good aspects for fear that others will reject them if they ever notice their personal perceived 'flaws'. Jehovah, being the ultimate security and self-assuredness, knowing that when he sends forth His word, that results will be just so, simply calls His creations 'good'. 'Good' coming from a perfect being is sufficient, as anything less than perfect would not be 'good'. (Deuteronomy 32:4; 1Timothy 4:4) So to add 'very' to the 'good' would be an indication of an added quality of appreciation. Note that God did not combine 'very' with 'good' during any of the creative days until after man had been created. (Genesis 1:31)

For an interesting article discussing the appreciation of creativity and our source of it, read The Watchtower 1995, Feb. 1, starting on þ 32, "Creativity—A Generous Gift From God". It's a gift and joy that He's only too happy to share with us.

C6 þ 101   ¶ 1  to   þ 102   ¶ 1

Wallace Everette Pratt was petroleum geologist and conservationist until he died in 1981 in Tuscon, Arizona, USA. He understood the earth's sediment layers and features, as some felt he had an uncanny knack to find oil in areas that many experts had deemed sterile. His success rate at striking oil was over 97%, high even when compared to todays technologies and collected knowledge. His successes drove Humble Oil Company toward national recognition. When many experts felt that Texas was 'oil dry', Pratt convinced Humble to drill on the King Ranch, and the rest is history as Texas became known as 'oil country'. His oil exploits took him as far as the Phillipines, Alaska, and more. He asserted his desire to maintain environmental safety by pushing for wide spacing of oil and gas wells. He also spoke against the practice of flaring natural gas, and pressed for controls to prevent water pollution by tankers and refineries. He was also key to establishing the Guadalupe Mountains National Park in Texas.

To get an idea of how difficult it would be for Moses to have gotten the sequential order of the creative process, as well as the geological sediment record correct, try this mental experiment. Or technological if you have the equipment available to you. Answer this: What sequence of events occured on Mars to form the features we see on it's surface, as well as the underlying layers of it's mantle? We are in roughly the same position today to answer about Mars' structure as Moses was when he was collecting the information about our creative days. He could have made many a guess, if it was 'made up' as some Bible critics promote. However, the fact that he 'got it right' in the order that the evidence since then shows it would strongly indicate that his source did indeed know the whole of it. It's be interesting to compare what scientists theorize about Mars today with what actual discoveries will be made tomorrow. For instance, it was once thought that there had never been water or fluids on Mars. Until apparent river beds were discovered as a result of closer scrutiny. How many errors Moses could have made if he had tried to make it all up! But he didn't. He simply recorded the history as it had been handed to him, possibly from his own father who might have known Levi, or through Job, or documents that had been handed down through the tribes of Israel. (Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 1, þ 919, "From where did Moses get the information he included in Genesis?"; and (Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 2, þ 1212, "Writing")

C6 þ 102   ¶ 2,3

Comparing the definition of 'faith' from the dictionary I have at the top of these pages, which states in part, "(1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust"; with the scriptural definition of faith in Hebrews 11:1, which defines it as, "Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld". It doesn't take a semantic genius to figure out that there is a conceptual difference between the english dictionaries definition, and that of the scriptures. The dictionary version supports blind acceptance, whereas the scriptures support acceptance of a hope following sustantiated proof of it's reliance. Thus the scriptures help us to understand a faith that is much closer to the empirical knowledge upon which researchers and scientists train themselves to lean upon. Yet, even within the scope of scientific evidence, not all accept the data at face value. For example, smoking was understood for decades to be harmful to the human organism. Yet many, both industrialists and individual citizens, refuted the claims. Even now many excuse their behavior with suggestions of living 'only once', or 'all of us will die someday anyhow'. Or as a recent study suggested that children that are sent to day care centers before kindergarten are three times more aggressive than children who were cared for by a parent at home. Many are aghast at the study, and cite many examples of successful child rearing where children were sent to child care before kindergarten. While citing specific successes might prove that it's possible to overcome the odds with hard work and intensive effort (which many single parents stuck in such a postion can be hopeful for), such uncontrolled citings do not refute the statistical average toward aggression. In this case too, the overall evidence is being refuted by some, and so they are probably doomed to failure, while the evidence of the successes can be embraced by the others who accept to offer a real hope so they can work toward it. Fortunate for us as imperfect humans, however, that the hopes of the scriptures do not rely on us, but rather on a God who cannot fail. (Isaiah 55:8-11)

So if many are willing to ignore the facts and evidence regarding life important matters which are directly apparent and important, then it should come as no surprise that many will ignore the facts and evidences as they relate to having a faith according to the scriptural definition. Many for selfish reasons, just as the smoker today who knows it'll cause cancer or emphesema, or others for fear of 'losing face' with friends or peers, as a teenager with a group who behave as though they're invincible. Would either prospect be wise? Or rather would it not be much more reasonable to stick close to the facts and avoid the harmful effects of avoiding truthful and accurate analysis?

Back to Top of Page  |  Back to Chapter 5  |  Next to Chapter 7

^{Copyright © 2001}