Mercy Over Judgment: The Parable of Floyd and Chauvin

So, I was looking at the Chauvin trial and the political/racial media circus around it. I reviewed the known facts. I did this as a contingency in the event someone in the faith asks me about it as someone most certainly will. I reviewed medical reports, charges by the prosecution, defense, etc. The following is my unlearned legal observations and then my biblical/theological take which was my purpose for writing this.

We need to get past the political circus this is becoming and look at George Floyd and Officer Chauvin for the people that they were or are. It doesn’t matter where they moved the Chauvin trial to...they found this cop guilty the day the incident occurred in the court of public opinion. There is already a gathering mob online that is threatening to start riots if the verdict isn't guilty. If current patterns persist it is likely that Chauvin is 'dead man walking'. Once imprisoned he'll be a prime candidate for a shanking by the inmates if not put in protective custody. Prosecutors are setting the tone for the trial appealing to people's pathos as facts may not convict Chauvin of a murder charge. Negligence is what will condemn him. The defense will likely never be able to overcome the pathos with known medical facts though.

George Floyd took a massive overdose of Fentanyl just moments before he came into contact with Minneapolis Officer Derek Chauvin. Floyd was being arrested for passing a counterfeit bill (a felony). Security cameras show Floyd at least to some extent was resisting arrest. Floyd's autopsy report showed extremely high level of Fentanyl in his system at the time of death. The coroner's report was clear that there was no injury, including compression of the airway that could have inevitably been fatal.

Chauvin’s knee on the neck of Floyd likely wasn’t the cause of death. Negligence by Chauvin was though. It’s a fact that Chauvin showed (at least visually) what appeared to be a complete disregard for Floyd's pleas of not being able to breathe due to the overdose that killed Floyd. In other word, negligence. In order to establish negligence under the law of torts, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant had a duty to the plaintiff, the defendant breached that duty by failing to conform to the required standard of conduct, the defendant's negligent conduct was the cause of the harm to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff was, in fact, harmed.

Usually an officer’s sworn duty is to support the Constitution of the United States, their state, and the laws of their agency's jurisdiction. Additionally, officers also have the responsibility to ensure the safety and quality of life of the communities they serve. This includes the safety and quality of life of a suspect. Police officers as obligated by their duty are to ‘serve and protect’. That means to even protect the suspect from himself. Chauvin had a duty to Floyd as a police officer (or even as a human). All Chauvin needed to do was be more empathic and/or compassionate. Due to this lack of mercy and empathy harm came to Floyd in the form of death.

Chauvin isn’t guilty of 1st or even 2nd degree murder. He might be guilty of 3rd degree murder. Minnesota third-degree murder statute is defined as unintentional killing (involuntary manslaughter). He is unquestionably guilty of having zero empathy for the deceased and therefore guilty of criminal negligence.  Criminal negligence is defined as conduct in which a person ignores a known or obvious risk, or disregards the life and safety of others. Federal and state courts describe this behavior as a form of recklessness, where the person acts significantly different than an ordinary person under similar circumstances.

Ordinary people would’ve been concerned for Floyds breathing and the fact he had become immobile after just having resisted. I mean I would have. My moral compass requires it. So does the Bible if one reads it close enough and embodies it. Chauvin based on actions did not live up to a minimal moral criterion or to his oath as an officer. For the sake of my post he didn't live up to the Biblical standard either. Yes, George Floyd was likely acting in a criminal manner. Regardless, by duty Officer Chauvin had a moral and legal obligation to Floyd (and society) that was not fulfilled. I see this as a microcosm of the larger moral issues nationwide. We as Americans are becoming increasingly ethically/morally debased. The farther we drift from God the more immoral we are becoming. We are becoming inhumane due to our immorality. The George Floyd issue was another American litmus test and we failed…again.

This was never about race or politics. It was made into that mostly by those looking to capitalize on Floyd's death either monetarily or politically. Our reaction as a society to this tragedy is ten times worse than the actions of the two people involved. It was about mercy and grace and nearly all of us missed that point. It was about treating our neighbor as ourselves. This is just another symptom of the metastasization of a cancer that is overtaking our nation. The actions taken and society's reaction to them is symptomatic of a much larger dilemma facing Americans. We're rotting at the core.

Let’s review the Parable of the Good Samaritan as point of contrast which was also about two types of people. It is extremely ironic that a scribe (lawyer) is asking Jesus the question about how to treat others that solicits Jesus’ parable. What duty are we obliged to human to human?

Luke 10:25-27 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” “What is written in the Law?” Jesus replied. “How do you read it?” He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.” But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarius and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’ “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.” Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Foremost, the parable amplifies the second great commandment, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and, Love your neighbor as yourself.” Secondly, we need to realize that although this is a parable, the man in view may have been a real person and the incident Jesus described could have really happened. Jesus left the man's race and occupation unspecified, though His hearers would have assumed that he was a Jew. Truth is he could’ve been a Christian or even a non-believer. Regardless, he was overpowered by numbers or authority and suffered a near fatal defeat. What is of particular note is that the priest and Levite who were supposedly good men and morally obligated to help…did absolutely nothing. They decided to avoid the dying man completely.

The men morally obligated to act, failed to act in mercy and love even though common courtesy demanded that they stop and render aid. A priest (an authority figure like the police) of all people, should have shown compassion. He served the community in a "helping occupation," and he should’ve had frequent contact with the Law and/or the Scriptures and their demands. Just as a modern police officer should be versed in the law and ethical/moral behavior.

The third observer a Samaritan was the least likely of the three travelers to offer help, yet he did so. By placing "Samaritan" in the emphatic first position in the Greek sentence Jesus stressed the contrast between him and the other two travelers. The compassion that he felt overcame any racial prejudice against Jews that he might have had. Mercy and compassion ignored race. The Samaritan's compassion contrasts starkly with the callousness of the priest and the Levite (one of God's chosen). Treatment soothed the victim's wounds, and wine disinfected them. The Samaritan's love was obvious in his willingness to make generous and costly sacrifices for the other man's well-being. The genuineness of his love is clear from his provision of further care the next day.

Jesus thereby reversed the lawyer's original question and focused attention where it should have been, on the subject showing love rather than the object receiving and needing it. Exactly as we need to apply to the George Floyd / Officer Chauvin scenario. The answer to Jesus' question of who was the true ‘neighbor’ was simple and obvious. The true neighbor is the one who shows mercy, grace and love.

James 2:13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.

Showing mercy was the key issue, not the race or social status of the neighbor. Jesus wants us to look at the ‘who’ not the ‘what’ in this type of situation. Racial considerations were irrelevant. The same principle that applied in the Parable of The Good Samaritan also applies in the Parable of Floyd and Chauvin. Jesus ended the encounter by commanding the lawyer to begin to follow the Samaritan's example. So I will tell the same to you the reader. To not manifest these moral characteristics shows the fruit that resides within us all if we fail to do so. Those that do not afford basic moral actions to others in need of them are therefore morally bankrupt at best or condemned at worst.

The fact that aid does not get rendered where it is needed and instead contrary actions or callous indifference is shown speaks volumes to a man’s heart. Jesus showed that the real test of love is action, not inaction or just talk.

James 2:14-18 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

This parable is a powerful polemic against prejudice and an encouragement of mercy and compassion. Sadly, Officer Chauvin showed little of either. It also shows that those who watched Chauvin’s callous actions and did nothing are just as morally destitute. The fact that we are now making this about politics is even worse. It is a sad commentary for our times. Ambivalence and apathy are the gatekeepers of tragedy.

Scientific Accuracy of The Bible V: The Precision of God's Equation

I will state outright that this post isn’t about science but mathematics. Regardless, I am placing it in this series as math is intertwined with science at many points of contact.

Qualities associated with mathematics are accuracy, consistency, lack of ambiguity and truth. Some will go as far as to say that numbers and math is the only true absolute in this world. Mathematics is very conspicuous in the material creation since quantity, arrangement and orderliness are here ever-present, in everything from astronomical phenomena to the sub-atomic phenomena. Order the signpost of God.

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.

Ecclesiastes 3:1 For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven…

Psalm 104:19 He made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows it’s time for setting.

Colossians 1:17 And He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

The works of God often manifest exquisite order in their arrangements. Mathematics, probability, the periodic table, the genome, gravity, the atom, crystal lattice structure of solid objects, symmetry of organic and chemical objects, etc. All of these things in static rest are conducive to inductive study (which they didn’t have to be). Since God is order it is hard think of anything coming from His hand that did not possess the aspects of mathematics. As to the quality of truth, His Word is accurate, concise, without ambiguity. When damage or flaw enters into any of these equations we see the effects as decay and error. In a word…sin or the effects of the Fall, entropy (of man).

Aside from time, distance, money, finance, weights and measures, mathematics may be used by Christians as an aid to a proper understanding of some aspects of Scripture such as prophecy. It is a simple matter to predict an event but unless there is a basis for the prediction like God who assures certainty of the predication, all potential predictions fall under the categorization of chance or odds. Only God can truly see and foretell the future as he is omni-temporal. For Him all time is the eternal present. Therefore the distinguishing mark of a prophet as given by Moses to the children of Israel, is that his prediction must come true.

Deuteronomy 18:20-22 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously.

If in our ordinary dealings with one another someone predicts that an event will take place, unless there are some extenuating circumstances, the chances are even, that it will happen. It is like drawing marbles from a bag when there are as many black marbles as white in the bag—the chances are even that a marble drawn will be white or black. One out of every two draws will on the average, be a white marble.

Putting it statistically, if white marbles are desired, then the probability of success is as 1 is to 2 or P=1/2. As the proportion of white marbles in the bag is increased, then the chance of success in drawing a white marble is increased until finally, when they are all white, p=1/1=1. But if the proportion of black marbles in increased then the chance of success is diminished until, when all the marbles are black, p=0/1=0. Thus there would be no chance of success for drawing a white marble, or an infinite number of draws would be required for a white marble to be drawn, that is p=l/∞=0 (∞ represents infinity). Then, in general, the probability of success would be given by the expression, p=1/s, where ‘s’ represents the number of draws required before a successful one is obtained, and may be equal to any number from 1 to ∞.

In the case of predicting an event, if there is no chance of success then p=1/∞=0; if the chances of success or failure are even then p=1/2, or 50%; and if you are predicting a “sure thing” (perhaps that the champion runner will win the race) then the chance of success becomes more nearly p=1/1 (or perhaps p=1/1.01, which is about 99%). If two events are predicted to happen to the same person, as the runner will win the race and then stumble at the finish line, the chances of both happening to the same person will be significantly reduced. If the man is a good runner but is given to stumbling so that we can say that the chance of success for each prediction is 1:4 (one to four, 1/4), then the chance of both happening is 1/4²=1/16. If three things are predicted to happen to the same person and the chance of success for each one is p=1/4, then the chance of success for all three happening is p=1/4³=1/64, a very hazardous guess. If the chance of success for the separate predictions is different, say p1=1/4, p2=1/6, p3=1/10; then the chance of success for all three taking place is p=p₁ x p₂ x p₃=1/(4 x 6 x 10) =1/240. This illustrates the principle that as the conditions of success are multiplied, the chance of success diminishes very rapidly.

Life Insurance Companies use tables to guide them in making estimates as to the life expectancy of a person. One such table is the Actuarial Life Table (mortality table) used by the Social Security Administration, which is based upon a year of death of 100,000 persons. The table which shows, for all ages what the probability is that a person of that age will die before their next birthday (probability of death"). In other words, it represents the survivorship of people from a certain population. They can also be explained as a long-term mathematical way to measure a population's longevity. You’re life insurance rates are based on this table based on your age. 

Similar charts are used for auto, home and other insurance. Insurance companies don’t gamble their money. They know statistically how much of a pool of people will need insurance and extract deductibles based on the age and size of a known pool to exact total to charge people to not lose money. Insurance companies are essentially taking money to the bank. They always come out on top. Casinos use similar methods. The House always wins in the end. You lose. It is literally a racket that the government regulates. Insurance is characterized as a business vested or affected with the public interest. Although insurance is primarily a matter of private contract, it is nevertheless of such concern to the public as a whole that it is subject to governmental regulation to protect the public’s interests. That’s why it is required by the state to have auto insurance.

The chance of success or failure in human relationships and interactions is found to take place in accordance with probability too. Predictions and their reliability are highly regarded. How do the mathematics of probability (statistics) affect our regard for Scripture? Let us look at a single example—the Old Testament prophecies concerning Christ; there are 351 of them that I am aware of (I can provide a word document for anyone that wants them listed). For the purposes of this post I will merely deal with a data set of (25) twenty-five of these Messianic prophecies for the sake of simplicity.

Regarding these cases of events foretold for Israel’s Messiah who was to come which I will notate as ‘n’ in the equations below, if the chances of success were even in the case of each (1) one or single prophecy, that is p=1/2 in every case, then the overall probability that all ‘n’ events would find their fulfillment in one person would be pⁿ= 1/(2ⁿ). Thus there would be but one chance in 2ⁿ (33 million, where n=25) of all these foretold events coming true if they were mere guesses. Now a glance at these prophecies concerning Christ reveals that they do not all have an even chance of success. In some instances it is highly improbable that the event could occur at all (as for a child to be born without a human father). A very conservative compromise would be p=1/4; and the overall probability for the n prophecies coming true would be pⁿ=1/(4ⁿ), or one chance out of a thousand trillion if n=25 or 10¹⁵.

Since there are many more than 25 prophecies of events surrounding the birth and life of Christ, and a compromise chance of success is undoubtedly less than 1 to 4, then the chance of success, if these predictions were all mere guesses, would be so infinitesimal that no one could maintain that these prophecies were mere guesses. The statisticians call it ‘statistically improbable’ or layman would say simply ‘impossible’. If not impossible (which the Bible clearly showed to be true). The alternative must be true which is that these prophecies were all foreseen/foreknown events and the prophet’s words were divinely inspired.

2 Peter 1:21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

While there can be no doubt that the 25 prophecies mentioned here were uttered hundreds of years be­fore the birth of Christ, some were not recognized as re­ferring to the Messiah until after He came. However, ex­cluding such and considering only those which were ad­mitted in Old Testament times as referring to the coming Messiah, the chance that all these events could just happen to be fulfilled in one person is statistically improbable.

In the same way it may be shown that many other prophecies in Scripture are inspired, whether concerning persons, places, or events in general, for which the fulfill­ments are recorded either in the Bible or in secular history (ancient or modern) or in current events. Now all prophecy is so interwoven in the messages of the prophets that the conclusion must necessarily follow that the messages them­selves are inspired. Thus the entire Bible is set apart as an inspired book. It is a supernatural book written/inspired by a supernatural omniscient, omnipotent being. God.

All numbers are contained within an infinite set. In mathematics, infinity is considered an unidentifiable or 'undefined' but is represented by a symbol...  ∞  . In theology God's infinitude, indivisibility and simultaneous plurality are considered His incommunicable attributes of yet we in our finite minds still need to identify Him symbolically to comprehend Him. This is generally done with an Earthly object most associated to Him. The Cross.... † . 

But God has also revealed Himself through His Son. He has revealed Himself in Scripture as three persona in One Being. Functionally different but One. Even after identifying into three Persona, God is still technically Infinite yet also One. The Son is still infinite. The Spirit is still infinite. The Father is still infinite.

Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

Matthew 3:16-17 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on Him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with Him I am well pleased.”

Matthew 28:19 Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

Scientific Accuracy of the Bible V: A Shock to The System

[Continued from previous post]

The discovery of electric current opened a new era in the investigation of electricity and magnetism. At lightning speed throughout the 19th century, followed the discovery of electromagnetism, electromagnetic induction, electrolysis, the electromagnetic nature of light, electric waves, photoelectricity and even cosmic rays. The atomic nature of electricity and electrical constitution of matter, all combined to transmute the Newtonian mechanical world into the electrical/quantum world of today.

The three avenues of approach to the explanation of this new world, atomic physics, astrophysics and field physics, are evidently now converging. Though the quantum is everywhere around us, it's understandability is through matter alone. Furthermore, only by means of the electric, magnetic and a gravitational force is it possible for us to lay hold of quantum knowledge and bring it forth to measure. All of which were described at least elementarily by Ezekiel in antiquity.

At the atomic level the world is now fundamentally seen to be electrical instead of mechanical in its nature. A new and system of physics has become necessary and this need was supplied by Einstein with his theory of relativity. The world in consequence has ceased to be one of absolute quantities and dimensions and has become more akin to symbols and imagery. In Einstein’s world of Relativity not only are the fundamental quantities of mass, length and time variable but even the positions of the moving particles of matter can only be alluded to or hinted at via figurative language…just like Ezekiel’s prophetic language. 

The trend of physical and biological science in the latter half of the nineteenth century was to embrace a single mechanical scheme of nature and the animate/inanimate worlds in a Theory of Everything and in physics a Unified Field Theory. All this would be based upon the triple foundation of the atomic theory of matter, the principle of the conservation of energy or the theory of evolution, cells and genome. These theories would be then supported by a multitude of brilliant discoveries over the next centuries. The decline and fall away from previous held theories has now been shockingly swift. Fundamental premises formed over centuries are failing in mere years. The more we learn the more we are realizing the stalwart theories of old are obsolete and in some cases laughably incorrect. It has left science scrambling for footing.

Advocates of aforementioned theories made the fatal mistake of assuming that in physics and biology the true system of the world had unquestionably been reached and exactly defined. In its concentration upon matter and motion the disciples of materialism took no account of the growing significance of the revolution in thought which the development out of the electrical and quantum realm. With the opening of the present era in physics, the remarkable discoveries of the composite structure of the atom, of the electrical nature of its parts, and of their final resolution into wave-packets…new science discoveries have combined to demolish the chief physical foundations of materialism.

As a physical system, materialism becomes paradoxical and even grotesque at the quantum level. The principle of certainty has been superseded by the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg, in which the position and velocity of  particles cannot both be known simultaneously with certainty. It is now accepted in the 21^st century that physical science can give no absolute ultimate explanation of the nature of the world but merely symbolic descriptions of its phenomena just as Ezekiel did nearly 2500 years ago. The concept of the rigidity of physical law has vanished and in its place has come the understanding that the so-called laws of nature are now statistical probabilities of the universe. Statistics represented by variables and symbolic mathematical equations.  The rise of the doctrine of relativity has shown that the concept of the world as a combination of absolute qualities is in fact...wrong. It is clear that materialism which science has attempted to reinforce as an unassailable foundation of scientific fact has been in reality, founded upon a fantasy rather than a real knowledge.

In the realm of biology a similar condition has unfolded. The origin of species by natural selection as Darwin taught, finds diminishing support. It is now being set aside with no generally acceptable hypothesis to take its place. Why? No new species has ever appeared under observation, and even new varieties have no characters that were not either dominant or recessive in their parent forms. Species once obliterated never reappear. Their number seems to be fixed. As in Physics for reasons of dynamic instability a new element cannot be formed within the present limits from hydrogen to uranium, so too for reasons of biological instability a new species cannot exist. The attempts to breed one have been futile. Whatever their source, the number of permutations in physics and biology seem to be fixed just as Genesis 1 states...

Genesis 1:24 And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so.

If the so-called law of evolution has reached an impasse as apparently it has, it implies that the whole question of morphology must be considered afresh on a radically different basis. In the meantime the hypothesis of organic evolution affords no more secure a foundation for materialism than did physics or physical science.

The validity of a system of philosophy or  science is directly proportional to the strength and permanence of its foundation. Just as many of the basic concepts of physics of the nineteenth century have been completely superseded by those of the twentieth and twenty-first, so too the discoveries yet to be made will assuredly 'infold' old concepts of the universe into even more revolutionary ideas. To discover permanence among man-made theories has been shown to be foolishness or foolhardy.

From this point forward the reconciliation of the Bible with science must be approached with caution. Every single time theologians have attempted to merge theology with science it is the science that comes to naught. There is a risk tying the Bible to man-made theories or to the wisdom of the world or thoughts that exalt themselves against God as stated in 2 Cor 10:3-4. Many former theories of science have been crushed due to phenomena in the quantum realm. So too will many scientific theories we currently believe. 

Should we even be trying to reconcile the Bible with Science? I personally don’t think so. We're trying to force the current in the wrong direction. Current can only flow in one direction unless a larger power surge pushes back from the other end. The proverbial shock to the system. I believe God in His power is again pushing back on mankind to shock us back into reality. Everything flows from God not the other way. When trying to plug God into a man-shaped outlet He will never fit as God does not do or think as men do. Science needs to align itself with Scripture. Just the opposite of what is currently happening. The world has it completely backwards. No wonder our system is grounding out and short circuiting.

Psalm 62:11 Once God has spoken; twice have I heard this: That power belongs to God, and that to you, O Lord, belongs steadfast love. For you will render to a man according to his work

Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.

Volumes were once written to reconcile Genesis and its Hebrew text with Ptolemaic astronomy (geocentric) that said the earth was the center of the universe. It just wasn’t true. From the standpoint of Biblical person, reconciliation will come only when science itself is in possession of the perfect truth of the order of creation. In other words, Science needs to align itself with Scripture. Just the opposite of what is currently happening. The world has it completely backwards…just as Paul said about the wisdom and power of the world. As such I will close with two passages from Paul in 1 Corinthians.

1 Corinthians 1:26-28 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are.

As for knowing things and knowledge...

1 Corinthians 13:8-12 …. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

Scientific Accuracy of the Bible IV: The Power Source

In this post I will attempt to link theology, science, electricity and predictability. Prediction or statements about the future which only God can do.

The more we know about the start condition of systems the more accurate we can ascertain their outcomes. It is a necessary attribute of a theory in physics that it should be capable of predicting new, as well as explaining old phenomena. The power of prediction is then most decisive proof of the validity of a theory. It is also the proof of the truth and veracity of Scripture and Scripture's prophecies. In physics and astronomy there are many examples of this power. The Bible itself conforms to this searching test of correctness. 

About one-third of the Old Testament is predictive prophecy encompassing the fate for over three thousand years of insignificant nations as well as the greatest empires that existed or will exist in the future. These nations include Assyria, Chaldea, Babylon, Egypt, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, Israel and many other vanished cities and peoples. Most importantly the Bible prophesied the arrival of the Messiah in nationality, place and time. Scripture, thereby God foresaw His sufferings, death and resurrection. All foretold with painstaking precision.

So science seeks to explain the future with the same exacting precision as the Bible via hypothesis or theory. Let us examine one of the oldest known observed scientific phenomena and the lengths to which it took science to understand it while the Bible understood and correctly identified it millennia beforehand.

The triboelectric effect is a type of contact electrification on which certain materials become electrically charged after they are separated from a different material with which they were in contact. Rubbing the two materials together increases the contact between their surfaces, and hence the triboelectric effect. Rubbing glass with fur for example, or a plastic comb through the hair, can build up triboelectricity. Most everyday static electricity is triboelectric. The polarity and strength of the charges produced differ according to the materials, surface roughness, temperature, strain, and other properties. This ‘effect’ was around for three millennia before it was accurately theorized and explained…or was it?

The triboelectric effect is unpredictable and only broad generalizations can be made about it. For example Amber or fossilized tree resin can acquire an electric charge by friction with a material like wool. Today we most often see it rubbing birthday balloons against our hair and then they stick to the wall.  This property was first recorded by Thales of Miletus. The word "electricity" is derived from William Gilbert's initial coinage, "electra", which originates in the Greek word for amber, ηλεκτρον/ēlektron.

The prefix tribo- (Greek for ‘rub’) refers to ‘friction’. The observation of the electrification of amber, which Thales recorded was destined in the course of ages to grow into the greatest of all trees beneath whose branches a multitude of the phenomena of physics would find shelter. For thousands of years this electrical effect lay dormant until Dr. Gilbert’s experiments in the 16^th century.

The triboelectric effect or static electricity is mentioned in the Bible every single time lightning is mentioned but nowhere is it more evident than Ezekiel 1:4. In it we see the word chashmal/חַשְׁמַל in the Greek Septuagint, you guessed it… ηλεκτρον/electron. In this verse we see that the triboelectric effect is correctly identified. Yet the description of lightning itself is contained in the ‘fire infolding’ wordage earlier in the passage. What should we make of the comment about ‘amber’? Ezekiel goes on to state that out of the midst of the fire there was a ‘color of amber’ (or around it). I posit that what the Bible is describing is what’s known as black-body radiation. Lightning is an electrostatic discharge causing the instantaneous release of energy. The discharge produces electromagnetic radiation from very hot or superheated plasma. That plasma is created by the rapid movement of electrons to brilliant flashes of visible light in the form of black-body radiation.

In the dark sky, a black body (object below visible light spectrum) at atmospheric temperature appears black because most of the energy it radiates is in the infrared spectrum and cannot be perceived by the human eye. Since the human eye cannot perceive light waves below the visible frequency, a black body at the lowest just faintly visible temperature subjectively appears black. It is invisible, even though its objective color spectrum is in the 'red' range. The human eye essentially does not perceive color at low light levels. When the object becomes a little hotter, it appears dull red…or amber. So it is ironic that this effect was observed by Thales on, of all things, amber the mineral or fossilized tree resin. The resin itself being an insulator like glass. The electrical charge is in reality only on the surface.

Ezekiel was essentially (and inadvertently scientifically) explaining the very end of the cooling process of the air after a lightning strike just prior to infrared in an accurate manner. Black Body Radiation was theorized in 1860. Max Planck's law of black-body radiation wasn’t formulated until 1900. We must consider the fact that Ezekiel was likely written between 590-570 BC or almost 2500 years before the black body effect was scientifically explained…yet the Bible was scientifically correct in its explanation.

Ezekiel 1:4 “And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself (lightening), and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the color of amber (chashmal / חַשְׁמַל/ηλεκτρον/elektron), out of the midst of the fire.”

Jump forward 2500 years to Alessandro Volta discovery of electric current, hence the term volt as a measure of electromotive force. In him we see the beginning of a monumental paradigm shift in science similar to Ezekiel paradigm shift foretelling of the fall of an empire. Volta and people like him would usher in a new age in science just as Ezekiel would usher in exile. Volta's change wouldn't just affect physics. It would also affect all the other sciences and even understanding of reality itself. Old science would be sent into exile never to return.

[That reality altering paradigm shift will be explained in the conclusion in my next post...]

Scientific Accuracy of the Bible III: The Center of the Universe

In my last post I discussed creation of the universe and why evidence and logic require the universe had to have been created. It is not eternal or the product of God's imagination. In this post I'll speak to the universe’s coherence or unity. The word continuity is closer to where this post ends. In truth, the next two posts took me places I hadn't originally intended. Sometimes studying Scriptures the Spirit reveals far more than we expect. These two posts go to that place. It is a location very strange as the Spirit sometimes reveals things extraordinary. 

The opening verse in Genesis implies the unity of the constitution of the universe. Apart from Genesis this fact is not obvious. Indeed the reverse seems to be true on the basis of philosophical speculation. For Greek philosophy, especially that of Aristotle, held that a complete difference in nature existed between terrestrial and celestial matter and motions. Earthly matter and the physical was tainted and corruptible, its motions were executed in straight lines and hence were temporal. Celestial matter (separate from this world) on the contrary was refined and incorruptible, there motions were circular, eternal, spiraling, elliptical, cyclical. This is why the Greek mindset of a Jesus only having come as a spiritual manifestation (Docetism) was much more desirable and easier to stomach to Hellenistic Jews. Sadly, Docetism allowed for denying the humanity Christ, therefore denying the Resurrection. The Devil loved that heresy.

Although the earth-centered theory prevailed for two thousand years, it was eventually challenged by the vortex theory of Rene Descartes. The identity of matter in the stars with that of the earth has been proved by spectroscopy and the theory of gravitation. These fields of study have been affirmed many surprising things. The deflection of rays of starlight when passing the sun and the lengthening of waves of light originating in the intense gravitational fields of the sun and at least other stars. Just as was theorized by Einstein. Something once thought impossible.

Genesis 1:2-3 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Whether the earth “was” without form and void in the beginning or “became” so is impossible to decide since the verb “to be”. In truth it is irrelevant. In Hebrew as in other languages "to be" also has the meaning “to become.” Regardless, the Spirit of God hovered like a hen brooding over the fluid mass and molded the earth into shape. Then came physical light for until matter/atoms are organized into suitable radiating mechanisms light cannot be emitted from them as photons. Matter is antecedent to physical light not light to matter. So the order of Creation is scientifically accurate.

The geocentric or earth-centered system was set forth by Hipparchus (150 B.C.) and completed in detail by Ptolomy (130 A.D.) also of Alexandria. It was then passed on to the scholars of Europe and was held by them until the Copernican doctrines finally prevailed. For about sixteen hundred years the Ptolemaic astronomy (geocentric) was accepted by the world of scholarship, and it was officially adopted by the Papacy as Galileo learned to his regret when he sought to establish the Copernican sun-centered (heliocentric) views.

The book of Genesis was composed some fifteen hundred years before the Ptolemaic system came into existence. But when the Septuagint Greek version of the Old Testament was made about 280 B.C. in Alexandria the idea of earth centered systems held sway.

How little progress the ideas of Copernicus, which were published in 1543, had made in a century is evident from the persecution of Galileo in 1642 for promoting them. As the King James Version of the Bible was issued in 1611, it is clear that the translators did not question the still current Ptolemaic doctrines which did not completely vanish until Newtonian astronomy in 1687 prevailed in the publication of the great “Principia”…hence the use of the word firmament in Genesis 1.

Genesis 1: 6-8 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Genesis 1:14-17 And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth…”

The Hebrew word “רָקִ֖יעַ/raqia” which is translated “firmament,” is now more properly translated “expanse, extended surface or plane”. The meaning of the Hebrew word for heaven is “uplifted.” When beholding at night the widespread starry heavens, one realizes how accurate the words “expanse” and “uplifted” are to express the sublime magnificence of the scene.

Two additional comments may be made. In the tenth verse it is declared: “And God called the dry land Earth.” This assertion is a simple definition of the future meaning of the word “Earth.” In the first nine verses “earth” refers to the planet; but in the tenth it becomes restricted to the dry land as distinguished from the great waters. Throughout the rest of the chapter and the Old Testament, unless the contrary is stated or implied in the context, the word “earth” refers to the land surface of the world or to its inhabitants. Thus the “ends of the earth” are its coastlands, and it so appears in modem translations. Geographically and geologically accurate terminology by modern expectations.

Much controversy and claims of error arise around the statement in verse 16: “And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.” This last clause, notwithstanding the fact that the words “he made” and “also” are not in the original Hebrew but are supplied by the translators, has been taken to imply a later creation of these several bodies, despite the knowledge that they are all included in the first verse. If scholars and critics had studied the Hebrew text instead of the early English translations (specifically the KJV) no controversy could have arisen. The word translated "made” is not the word “create.” Among the possible meanings of the Hebrew word for “made” can also be “constituted” or more specifically “appointed.”

To use a modern illustration, when a new state is formed, an already existing city is constituted or appointed to be its capital. In ancient Israel the same word is used to indicate that certain cities were appointed or separated (בָּדל/badal) to be “cities of refuge” (Deuteronomy 4:41). So the verse obviously means that the already existing sun, moon and stars already existed but now had new functions conferred upon them, the sun being appointed to rule the day and the moon and the stars to rule the night. The Hebrew psalmist, not being concerned with a modern liberal translators consternations makes this meaning clear in Psalm 136: 8, 9

Psalm 136:7-9 “…to him who made the great lights, for his steadfast love endures forever; the sun to rule over the day, for his steadfast love endures forever; the moon and stars to rule over the night, for his steadfast love endures forever….”

In view of these simple grammatical and etymological facts it is impossible to see these statements as anything but completely accurate scientifically and etymologically.

While there are some disagreements chiefly with regard to the use of the word "day,” and what is meant by the length of these ‘days’ or timeframes, these are likely arising from our ignorance not only of the mode of creation but also of its elements of time. The preponderant pattern of Scripture having studied intensely for nearly two decades is that is trustworthy in what it speaks about and 99% of the time the conflict about 1% of the text is usually based in human ignorance of the text. It must be remem­bered that the word “day” has many meanings in English as well as in Hebrew. In Hebrew there are about twenty meanings in Hebrew dictionary that I have printed in the 1990’s. Probably the advance­ment of science will throw some future light upon the subject of which our present knowledge leaves us in ignorant darkness. Perhaps time hasn’t always unfolded at the same rate since creation. The theory of uniformitarianism states that this might not be the case.

Uniformitarianism, also known as the Doctrine of Uniformity or the Uniformitarian Principle, is the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in our present-day scientific observations have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe. It refers to invariance in the metaphysical principles underpinning science, such as the constancy of cause/effect, space/time but has also been used to describe spatiotemporal invariance of physical laws. Although it is an unprovable postulate that cannot be verified using the scientific method, some consider that uniformitarianism should be a required first principle in scientific research.

Galileo hit on a pertinent fact when he quoted Cardinal Baronius when, in defense of his scientific views, he declared that the Bible was not intended to inform us how the heavens go, but how to go to heaven. While it is true that the Bible is not a textbook of science if its scientific statements are found to be false, it invariably will difficult to believe in its divine inspiration because if they can be found in error…everything else in the Bible can too. That includes the spiritual and theological truths. That is why the Bible is inerrant both in theological statements and scientific. I'll challenge all comers to prove that statement wrong theologically and philosophically.

So, although the Bible never specifically says that the Earth is the center of the Universe, in a spiritual manner...it most certainly is. Spiritual…is the essence which science can neither prove or disprove because it is another realm of knowledge completely (metaphysical). What the Bible does assert about the physical is that the Earth is round (Isaiah 40:22) and hangs on nothing (Job 26:7) and it asserts  that Jesus came here once for all and nowhere else to save the lost (Hebrews 10:10, Luke 19:10). These verse and statements are foundational not only for the Christian faith but also our understanding of the physical world we live on.

Isaiah 40:22 It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in…

Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing.

Hebrews 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Luke 19:10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.

Scientific Accuracy of the Bible II: God Shaped the Universe

Physics (φυσικός/phusikos/natural). It is the science that studies matter and its motion or behavior through space and time. It also studies the related entities of energy and force. Physics is one of the most fundamental scientific disciplines. Its main goal is to understand how the universe behaves. As the origin of the word implies, physics is the study of nature and speculation on the constitution of the natural world. It had its origin in the primal speculations of Thales of Miletus (640-546 B.C.) the founder of science and philosophy who set forth two doctrines of fundamental scientific importance (1) that of a single elementary type of matter from which all other things are formed (atomist); and, (2) that of motion or change inherently associated with substance.

Thales' ideas of elementariness and changeability were embodied in his choice of water as the primitive substance...out of which endless modifications all else was made. Succeeding philosophers adopted his ideas but with the substitution of earth, air, fire, or all four as the elementary substances. By the time of Aristotle the substances themselves were replaced by the properties, cold, heat, moist and dry, to which he added the divine “quinta essentia,” or fifth essence of which the refined and perfect substance of the heavenly bodies consisted. The doctrine of elements had previously been enlarged by Empedocles with the opposing principles of “love” and “hate” later replaced by the non-metaphysical forms of “warmth” and “cold” to account for the coherence and diffusion of matter.

The idea of opposing or dueling opposites involved in the constitution of the world as One or Many originated another train of speculation which in the course of time developed into philosophy. Ultimately the world and human nature became comprehensively embraced in an all-inclusive scheme of mental philosophy, moral philosophy and natural philosophy.

When the separation of these great branches of knowledge into philosophy, ethics and physical science occurred their cohesive unity was lost. Today these three are even made to appear they are mutually exclusive or even antagonistic to each other. Just as metaphysical and physical or irrationalism and rationalism are viewed today. But of course this is philosophically incorrect when done by science and the atheist philosophers when they preclude the existence of a priori or metaphysical knowledge. Yes, you heard me correctly. Science ignores the metaphysical on purpose because it cannot be proven or disproven via empirical physical evidence (even though it can be reasoned for through logical syllogism philosophically).

The enormous expansion of the study of nature in modern times by establishing the sciences of astronomy, geology, paleontology, meteorology, chemistry and biology, has deprived physics of much of its primitive colossal empire and the term physics is now used in the severely restricted sense of the study of the properties and laws of inorganic matter and energy under the titles mechanics, heat, radiation, sound, electricity, magnetism and radioactivity. The metaphysical elements of reality are diminished in importance and relegated to irrelevance.

Physical science was developed in ancient Greece by attempting to establish uniform principles of nature by philosophical speculation by the only means then known which were in opposition to the popular mythology which attributed the phenomena of nature to the capricious actions of the jealous and quarrelsome deities. 

The Greek philosophers dimly perceived an ordered world through the operation of principles and laws which they struggled to formulate. Though God as revealed in the Bible bears no resemblance to the mythical deities of Greece, the process of separation of the ordered world from a Creator God has been vehemently pursued in modern science by some of its adherents until it is often made to appear that the universe does not require nor has it at any time needed, a creating God. The truth is that metaphysical belief is now viewed as contrary to the principles of physics itself.

Although physics is concerned with the origin of matter, force and energy (origin of the universe) this cannot actually be studied by physicists. Why? Creation physics cannot be studied because there was no human there to observe it. Nor can the Creation or Big Bang be repeated. At best it is a subject for only physical speculation and theory. Four solutions of the problem of the origin of the universe may be proposed though.

The universe is an illusion

It spontaneously arose of nothing autonomously

It had no origin but has existed eternally

It was created

The proposal that the universe is illusion has had and still has more adherents than one would initially believe possible. The theory generally asserts that there is no problem to solve except the metaphysical one of human consciousness. Recently the idea of the world as an illusion has been revived in physical science in the last century. The ideas of relativity, quantum physics and wave-mechanics, the constitution of the electron and proton, are so novel that sufficient time has not been available to obtain a full theoretical knowledge of their nature and relationship to each other. The semi-obscurity that veils them lends itself to metaphysical speculation on the fundamental nature of the world of matter, energy and space especially at the quantum level. I mean a majority of matter is indeed empty space. Yet metaphysical speculation makes this argument a moot point. There's no proof.

Here’s the problem… matter as merely a mental concept then energy and waves are mere abstractions. The works of an Architect are only an illusion for which no Architect is needed. In whatever way the universe is reduced to an illusion, the argument invariably self-contradicts. To offset these metaphysical opinions it need only be stated that all the data on which these discussions and theories are based would be obtained by experimental physics. To physical science it is undeniable that the world exists, and therefore the suggestion that it is an illusion isn’t worth pursuing further.

Did the universe spontaneously and autonomously appear from nothing on its own? It is unthinkable, that out of nothing, nothing of itself can come without having first being created. If you don't believe me...try and physically describe nothingness. Its not possible. In an infinite void there is no conceivable way of differentiating one point either of space or duration from another. There would be no point of reference in order that a spontaneous change can occur from nothing to something when no forces of any kind are in existence. This proposed solution of the problem of the origin of the universe is therefore dismissed.

Has the universe always existed? These remaining two solutions of the origin of the cosmos have one significant characteristic in common; something, either matter and energy or a Creator, must be eternal. We cannot escape from acknowledging an eternal Creator except by admitting the eternality of matter and energy. Since entropy exists in the universe we can dismiss the infinite universe theory also.

The assumption of an eternal material universe in the past leads to insurmountable difficulties. If the universe has eternally existed, then, since energy is being constantly dissipated, every event of which time is an element must already have taken place ages ago, and nothing could occur now. An eternal universe would now be a universe without events. Heat death should’ve happened at some infinitely distant point in the past. We know that since the time of Edwin Hubble in the 1930s that astronomy shows galaxies are slowly spreading out and retreating from each other with velocities increasing as they recede. In an eternal duration the expanding universe would already have expanded to infinity leaving the exhausted sun with its desolated planets to wander aimlessly alone in space. The visible presence of the universe in its current state is therefore proof of its temporal nature.

It is generally recognized in physics that all types of energy can be transformed into other energy on the basis of a strict equivalence. But this is not the whole of the universal picture. There is a steadily progressing degradation of energy in which all forms of heat are ultimately being dissipated into coldness at so low a temperature (heat death) that it can no longer be available. In scientific terms it is described this way. The universe and its energy is constantly tending toward a state of maximum entropy, which shows that all energy is gradually being degraded into heat energy at a uniform temperature near absolute zero or where no more work can be extrapolated from the universe.

When the process is completed the universe will be dead. In an eternal universe such termination would long ago have been reached. The second law of thermodynamics points to the ultimate end of the world by cold. It is only while energy is passing from high to low potentials that work can be done. The motion even of your eye reading this when traced to its ultimate origin (God) is therefore proof that the world is temporal and not eternal. Even if heat death or maximum entropy is the way the universe will end….it bypasses the divine intervention mentioned in 2 Peter. It doesn’t describe us freezing but rather burning up. Thermally, it hints towards just the opposite end of the thermometer. It appears to describe reality just coming apart or fission.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.

This leaves one plausible solution. The universe was created. The Bible and facts of science endorse a universe that must have had an origin in time so it is entirely proper to speak of a preexistent Creator since it is logically not possible spawn something autonomously from nothingness. There had to be a first cause. The account in Genesis seems to be the only story of creation which is free from the gross concepts of idolatry and mythology. In the very first verse of the Bible we see all the things needed for reality to exist physically. For reality to "be" in terms of scientific thought we have the following four statements…all of which are simultaneously scientifically and theologically accurate.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Time: In the beginning

Force/Energy: God created

Space: the heavens

Matter: and the earth

The Creation account opens bluntly with little room for misunderstanding. God created the heavens (plural form) and the earth (singular, there was no other). Furthermore He didn't just create it. The Hebrew word here for create also has the connotation of shaping or fashioning something like an artist. Like a sculptor bringing form from a monolithic stone. In this verse no argument can be introduced to argue against the eternality of God. If God exists, which this text assumes, He exists by His very nature eternally. 

No formal argument can possibly be framed to prove it but logic requires it. Logic dictates that if all other intelligence in the Creation are temporal, it would be using the temporal to prove the eternal. The eternity of God must therefore fundamentally rest upon the declaration of that fact by Himself, and secondarily by implication from the fact of His existence which Genesis 1:1 implies. The existence of God is self-evident in the statements above. All matter, energy, force apart from life, must therefore have come into existence by divine fiat at the same time. No differences in age, though many in state, confront us. This identity in age of all inanimate matter of the universe is in harmony with the basic assumptions of our current expanding universe. 

The Bible is therefore scientifically coherent and accurate about origins.

The Barcelona Chair and Plato's Forms

Barcelona Chair

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe

Modernist

1929

(Knoll)

Life is at times paradoxical and enigmatic. At times it is strange to see that things within life are inextricably linked. Then, while pondering these enigmas we see that they're connected because of our interaction with them. We are the link. The tie between two completely disparate entities. We are the puzzle piece that is needed to form the grand design. The bridge designed to cross the chasm.

 I recently read an article where the Barcelona Chair by Mies van der Rohe was referred to as "the Platonic ideal of chair" by author Tom Wolfe. I though to myself, "That's a pretty interesting statement" Wolfe of course is referring to Plato’s Forms in ancient Greek philosophy. According to Plato, the 'Forms' are the perfect non-physical essences of all things, of which objects and matter in the physical world are merely imitations. High praise from Wolfe about the chair designed by Mies. Mies who was specifically known for his fondness of the aphorism, "God is in the details". 

It is ironic for me that Wolfe would tie the chair to Plato. The Barcelona Chair has been made by Knoll in East Greenville since the 1950’s. It is part of the German Bauhaus tradition known for its approach to design. Bauhaus actually utilized a modernist philosophical approach to the entire design process that strove to combine form and function into a design. Here again we see allusion to ‘forms’. In a word: Utilitarianism. A philosophical approach that I bring to my theology when I try to teach others systematically. No frills. Stoic. Spartan. Straightforward. Pragmatic. Practical. Facts, not feelings.

Also ironic is the fact that Knoll was my first full-time employer who hired me as an entry level draftsman in 1987 at 18 years old. A very emotive scatterbrained 18 years I might add. I was virtually all rhyme and no reason. Ron Snyder was the man that hired me (not sure why, I was a moron).  I guess he saw something promising in my unformed and unrefined state (thanks Ron). I gained a comprehensive foundation for my later career in my short 5 years at Knoll. It began a formation that would lead me to where I am today. As a Quality Engineer, Theologian, Writer and hack philosopher. 

Interestingly during my tenure at Knoll I was fortunate enough to have been in the Product Development and the Manufacturing departments where the original blueprints for the Barcelona Chair resided. The prints were done on large drafting linen/clothe in 1929. I was fortunate enough to do a change to the original linen. If I’m not mistaken I changed a weld on cross-over of the legs. The welds were failing so they were made slightly thicker. In the hindsight of 30 years of weld inspections I believe it was use of the wrong filler metal and poor cleaning of the weld joint. That didn't warrant a design change but that's I believe what happened. Regardless, changes to such an iconic design were never taken lightly but inevitably the weld designs were reformed / changed to become stronger and more resilient. Just as life would do to me. Change me. Make me new...reformed (theology joke).

Later in life I would return to school to complete degrees. The primarily degree in theology and secondarily in philosophy. Philosophy...in which Plato’s forms reside. The ‘Forms’ which are a direct reference made by Tom Wolfe about the chair that I changed prints for 30 years ago while I was in an unformed state. Changes to a chair that in its production lifetime had reached maturity. Just as I have now. Soundly built. Functionally robust.

Thereby, I essentially changed the form of the chair that was itself referenced as Plato’s ‘Form’ for 'chair'. In the employment that allowed a chance to change a weld on that chair (pretty sure it was the Barcelona). That employment would also allow me a chance to change and reform. A change to my form 30 years ago in a job that would form the prototype or benchmark for the rest of my adult life.

Paradox and interconnectivity. As if it was designed that way…or for you of a theological bend...

Sovereignty and providence.

Read Between the Lines: The Fear of Offending

I was originally just going to post this on Facebook but having proofread it I realized there was a high probability that it would be censored by those deadbeats. It contained certain words that I couldn't avoid using to get my point across and I knew I had been blocked for them on Facebook in the past. I opted to post here to avoid that censorship. So unless they click on the link when I post this article to Facebook and actually read this it is unlikely this will go down the rabbit hole on Facebook.

Americans are worried about ever-increasing deletion of ideas. Rewritings of history. Those responsible for these deletions and revisions have managed to amplify it by creating a climate of self-censorship (via fear). Due to psychological contrivance of self-censorship, a post, video or blog blocked has a broader negative effect of killing speech. Policy debates aren’t occurring. Real news isn’t being circulated. Truthful history books aren’t being published. Media and corporations are employing psychological tactics on people with impunity. The principle of self-limiting is that just to be on the safe side people refrain from saying even things that aren’t banned outright for fear of ‘offending’. That’s how tyranny works you toadies…through fear.

The Chinese Communists (CCP) for decades used a method of making its policies deliberately vague. During campaigns central leadership would issue a decree that “rightists” and “counterrevolutionaries” were to be punished. The next rung of Party officials wouldn’t be told what exactly makes one a “rightist” or a “counterrevolutionary” or even what the punishment should be. Fear ensued, then silence.

In February Amazon updated its policies to ban things they deemed “hate speech” without explaining what it considers hate speech. Amazon controls > 80% of the book market. One can only guess whether a book may become “hate speech”. If publishers bow to Amazonian pressures, they may now go even further avoiding certain topics altogether proactively. Tech platforms such as Facebook and Twitter usually provided some definition of hate speech and other content rules but have admitted that they intentionally keep part of their policies undisclosed to prevent people from circumventing them. Yet we are now seeing erasure of cartoons like Dr. Seuss and Pepe Le Pew. The effect is users guess the boundaries of censorship. This leads to self-censorship. If you don’t believe me…try posting something on FB that states the coronation of Uncle Joe wasn’t legit or portrays transgenders ‘incorrectly’ (I self-censored this sentence to get past Blogger's moderation).

The tech platforms openly acknowledge content policies are a work in progress. Over the years, new rules have been added and applied retroactively. The content that was acceptable yesterday may get banned today. Rules are bent for political convenience. Facebook for example considers verbal attacks on people based on race, sex, or sexual proclivities are hate speech. But its contracted moderators were informed attacks on straight white males would be exempted. Yes, really…go do your homework.

In current ideologies denying that you are racist or have “white privilege” counts as a proof of accusation. There’s a script for white people and a script for people who aren’t white. Even other black people and other minorities have been silenced or 'disappeared' for not towing the line. There is no room for disagreement. You can’t talk about it aloud without risk. You can’t even express your doubts because dissent isn’t allowed. It’s how this ideology works. It gets into your head and it’s damaging. Frankly, this is exactly why I became more offensive and abrasive. I’m not playing the game being someone’s unwitting toady. I will not be a mindless vessel for dissemination of this idiocy.

We’re already doing it in society. How long until this is practiced universally in the church or is it already through BLM and Social Justice? Read between the lines. Before long this may be the only way to determine the truth. Reading between the lines to find the truth…as it may no longer be in black and white for fear of offending. 

Sometimes the key to true communication is the ability to hear or see what isn’t being said. Offensiveness isn't offensive...its censorship and silencing. Today, Dr. Seuss. Tomorrow, the Bible and the Constitution.

Scientific Accuracy of the Bible I: As Compared to Other Ancient Sources

Along with my series on trades and occupations I am concurrently working on a series about the veracity of scientific statements made in the Bible too. This is the first post in that series. 

Chemistry and the periodic table as science is a newer branch of knowledge for all its achievements it has only been around for the last few centuries. It can hardly be compared to or bear much relation to the alchemy of the Middle-Ages. Alchemy that wanted the famous philosopher’s stone in order to transform the base metals into gold. The Bible does not agree with any of these speculations or abilities of alchemists. Then again it doesn’t speak directly to modern science of chemistry either. The word chemistry itself comes from a modification of the word alchemy, which referred to an earlier set of practices (of pseudoscience) that encompassed elements of chemistry, metallurgy, philosophy, astrology, astronomy, mysticism and medicine. It is likely the word chemistry was purposely taken from the word alchemy specifically to differentiate from it.

It is important to note however, that contrary to most uniformed opinions the Bible nowhere conflicts with the conceptions of modern chemistry whereas other ancient writings do. From what I can tell the Bible presents a few very interesting examples of chemistry now better understood and these make fine points of contact and contrast in bringing the claims of the Scriptures to acolytes of science. I will review some of them over the next few posts in this series.

I imagine the true composition of matter and its changes when heated, burned, etc., must have been a mystery and a subject of wonder to Biblical authors as well as to the other ancients. Several chemical processes such as smelting metals, burning lime, etc. were known to the Bible authors and are mentioned. But a scientific explanation of the processes is never given. They were content to leave these items and processes as unknown and dependent on the providence and sovereignty of God.

Ecclesiastes 11:5 As you do not know the path of the wind, or how the body is formed in a mother's womb, so you cannot understand the work of God, the Maker of all things

Job 28:2 Iron is taken out of the earth (עָפָר / aphar/dry dust), and copper is smelted from the ore.

Job knew that iron comes from dust (probably hematite or limonite ore) and copper from stone (such as malachite) but no explanation of the process is attempted by Job. It is merely stated as a matter-of-fact.  It is in these matter-of-fact statements that we see the mark of divine inspiration. That someone like Job who could have so many erroneous thoughts and make so many erroneous statements to God, Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar but when making absolute truth statements about a field like chemistry and its elements…he was correct.

So is the Bible free from contemporaneous scientific error? Let’s first examine some documented secular sources. Let's first contrast the Bible’s statements with that of Herodotus in Book IV in his Histories which were supposed to be a historical record of the ancient traditions, politics, geography, and clashes of various cultures that were known in Greece, Western Asia and Northern Africa at that time. In other words, what he wrote in Histories should’ve been accurate history. In reality it was so ridiculously wrong it was laughable. Yet, the Bible as history is routinely mocked. SMH. Evidently Herodotus wasn’t aware of moose and reindeer...

“To me it seems that the cold may likewise be the cause which prevents the oxen in Scythia from having horns... in countries where the cold is severe animals either have no horns or grow them with difficulty—the cold being the cause in this instance.”

Now let us also review Jewish historian Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews, Book II, Ch. 10. Josephus states that a section of Egypt has, “….a multitude of serpents, some of which ascend out of the ground unseen, and also fly in the air, and so come upon men at unawares.” Josephus here obviously made a mistake in natural history.

As a last counterpoint I mention Aristotle makes similar mistakes in Part of Animals, Book II, Chapter 3 & Chapter 7. Thankfully Aristotle wasn’t my cardiologist or neurologist. He states, “…digestion is effected through natural heat” that “the brain is a compound of earth and water” that the brain is a cold organ and is “a counterbalancing effect to the heart with its contained heat” and that “it is the brain…which is the cause of sleep. For either by chilling the blood that streams upwards after food or by some other similar influences, it produces heaviness in the region in which it lies (which is the reason why drowsy persons hang the head).”

The Bible makes no such errors.

How much ridicule and scorn would’ve additionally been heaped upon the Bible had they made these types of obvious scientific errors? How different would the picture be if the Bible taught as the errant alchemists did, that gold could be transmuted from base metals by driving out the impure quality called sulfur?

What do we think would’ve happened if the Bible said that all matter was composed of varying combinations of four elements—earth, air, fire, and water as Empedocles of Ancient Greece taught and believed? Christians would’ve been laughed off the face of the Earth. Suppose the Bible taught the spontaneous generation of plants or animals. Up until the Middle-Ages there were superstitions that rags and corn meal created/bred mice. The Bible in Genesis 1, on the contrary, clearly and positively teaches that like-begets-like and there is procreation in no other way.

Another point where the ancients went astray, but the Bible did not, is in the employment of magic in chemical processes. The Bible warns against all sorcery and magic. It is literally prohibited to engage in the supernatural outside of dealing with God that is the hallmark of Scriptural obedience. The supernatural realm is reserved for God and angelic messengers alone.

Enough about errors outside of the Bible, as we will see in the next few posts the infallible character of the Bible is maintained even under closer scientific scrutiny. We will see Solomon was one of the greatest metal magnates of ancient times. We have considerable examples of his wisdom and many details of his metal work for the temple, but there is no hint of the efficacy of magic in either the smelting or foundry operations for the Temple. Solomon’s Phoenician workers may indeed have used charms, but the Bible never sanctions them. The metallurgy of the temple is that of science and one of the regularity of natural law—interrupted only by miracles at the direct interposition of God for some special purpose. Since mentioned I should address miracles too.

The presence of miracles in the Scripture narrative is in no way a contradiction of science. They are paradoxical but not contradictory. True miracles in the restricted Biblical sense are not phenomena brought about by occult laws nor are they the balancing of one natural law against another as when air pressure on the wings keeps an a plane from falling. Miracles are reasonable, divine interruptions of natural law worked by immediate will of the personal Creator. 

There is no difference between a little or great miracle. Both are utterly impossible for man to accomplish but easy for God. Example: The stopping of the rotation of the world for a few hours…if this is the correct explanation of Joshua’s long day. The whole point of the miraculous is to have it function as a signpost that points us to God. It is in-fact the nature and main character of the miraculous that miracles contradict the “natural laws” of chemistry, physics, etc. The miracles very purpose was/is to show there is a God above the universe, the Author of natural laws that can also alter them. In altering those so-called physical laws He reveals Himself and in His Son.

Miracles in the true sense are believable only for a theist. An atheist will never acknowledge the miraculous as coming from God. There would need to be a naturalistic explanation since they don’t believe God exists. The atheist precludes the existence of a priori metaphysical knowledge. It would be contradictory to them. But for a theist they are no problem at all regardless of his belief in natural law, atomic structure or even quantum phenomena. Paul the Apostle would allude to this incredulity in the Book of Acts while addressing a real king (King Agrippa) about the miracle of the Resurrection in real history at his trial.

Acts 26:8 Why is it thought incredible by any of you that God raises the dead?