Dissertation- 6 Day Creation’s Chronicle

Thank you for reviewing my (due out in Sep) final draft dissertation, “God’s Glory, God’s Handiwork, and God’s Word, The Genesis Account.” Please send any comments, corrections, concerns and critiques anytime in calendar year 2016. Please point out any incomplete, awkward, confusing and run-on sentences. If I receive the comments before December 2016 they will be addressed in my final draft.

Your comments may be marked up on the draft and returned or they may be emailed to Pastor-Rice@GSBaptistChurch.com. If comments are emailed please include the concerned page number, paragraph number and sufficient quote so that I can find it in my copy. If you return a marked up bound copy I will send you a replacement Final Draft bound copy next January.

The draft dissertation is available in a several formats.

Microsoft word (.doc) allows mark-up and is available at:

www.GSBaptistChurch.com/theology/6day_creation_dissertation_draft.doc

The Adobe (pdf) format is readable on many platforms but does not allow markup. Any comments and corrections must be emailed. The Adobe format is available for review at:

www.GSBaptistChurch.com/theology/6day_creation_dissertation_draft.pdf

The EPUB e-book format can be downloaded and read on a device like a smartphone, tablet, computer, or e-reader. The draft dissertation will soon be available as an ePub for review at:

www.GSBaptistChurch.com/theology/6day_creation_dissertation_draft.epub

Additionally bound printed drafts are soon to be available for $9.83 plus shipping at:

http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/GSBaptistChurch

Thank you for your comments.

Pastor Ed Rice

GOD’S GLORY, GOD’S HANDIWORK,

AND GOD’S WORD, THE GENESIS ACCOUNT

A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty

of Louisiana Baptist Theological Seminary

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for

Doctorate of Philosophy in Theological Studies

By

Edward Rice

January, 2017

God’s Glory, God’s Handiwork, and God’s Word, The Genesis Account

Contents

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figures

1. A cone forms a parabola 79

2. Graph of lines x + 1 and x + 7 80

3. Graph of x + 1 and x + 7 and their resulting parabola 81

4. Graph of x + 2 and x + 6 and their resulting parabola 82

5. Graph of x + 3 and x + 5 and their resulting parabola 82

6. Graph of x + 4 squared and the resulting parabola 83

7. Graph of parabolas from multiplied imaginary lines 84

8. Graphs of the six various parabolas 84

9. Graphs of the pairs of lines multiplied to form various parabolas 85

10. Graphic of a plane orthogonal to the blackboard. 86

11. Graphic of the imaginary planes relative to the blackboard 87

12. Planes Cutting Conic Sections (OpenStax Precalculus) 89

13. Curves Produced by Conic Sections (OpenStax Precalculus) 90

14. Degenerate Conic Sections, Lines and Points (OpenStax Precalculus) 91

15. Fixed Frame to Moving Frame of the Lorentz Transformation 107

16. (7-1) DeYoung’s Table 5-1 Data in a Bar Chart 140

17. (7-2) DeYoung’s Table 5-1 Data in a Stacked Bar Chart 141

Tables

Table 2.1 Maximum tide heights from proposed universe ages 34

Table 2.2 Cooling of Planet Times Based on Age of Solar System Estimates 40

Table 2.3 Evolutionist’s 15 billion Years vs the Bible Believer’s 6 Thousand Years 41

Table 2.4 Planet Cooling Times for various age of Earth hypothesis 41

Table 11-1 Taxonomies of Dog, Cat, and Bear 219

Table 11-2 Taxonomies of Gecko Lizard, Ostrich, and Bald Eagle 219

PREFACE

It has been a tremendous privilege to compile this dissertation. As a Bible student, electrical engineer, systems engineer, science and math teacher, and Baptist Pastor, the compilation has been going on since I first accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as my Saviour in my childhood. The information it contains has been bursting inside me for years and the act of writing it out has refined the detail and emboldened the message. That refining may not be completely evident in the writing, but any that is owes a special thanks to the Auburn Christians Writers Group that has spent three years critiquing and rebuffing my writing style. That detail has been meticulously critiqued by Bill Brown of thee Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship, to whom I am greatly indebted. The drive to write it down is credited to my father Levi Owen Rice, who instilled in me the desire to learn more. The whole process has been patiently driven, typed, and tolerated by my wife of 47 years, Beverly E. Rice. This work is never complete, but such as it is, to God be the glory.

God’s Glory, God’s Handiwork, and God’s Word, The Genesis Account

Abstract

God’s inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired word clearly depicts his six-day creation account, his account of his world flood wherein waters prevailed on the whole Earth for a hundred and fifty days¹, his purposes for man, who God made in his image and likeness, and the redeeming role of his only begotten Son in that purpose. A believer’s faith in that declaration need not be a blind faith. In the past few decades it has been discovered that 1) the black-hole swallows mass, space, and time back into the nothing that they were created from, 2) trapped between Earth’s crust and core, under great pressure and temperature, is three-fourths of all the world’s water, and 3) the continental glacier which covered much of America dissipated less than 6,000 years ago. True science, exploring and using Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity, can embed these truths into a believers defense of his faith, and put the atheistic evolutionist to shame. This dissertation explores black-holes, algebra’s multidimensions, relativity, and the glacier that formed the NYS Finger Lakes, to assemble some tools which ratify God’s exacting account of his creation of the universe and flooding of our planet.

God’s Glory, God’s Handiwork, and God’s Word,

The Genesis Account

Prologue

The Nineteenth Psalm

«To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.»

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.²

Personal Testimony of Pastor Edward Rice. I was saved in 1960 at the age of eight. My father and mother were saved and founding members of Fellowship Baptist Church in Gang Mills New York. In 1958 my dad, Levi O. Rice, an agnostic, was invited by Cecil Palm to be a founding member of a Baptist church; two weeks later both of my parents were born-again-saved. My mother, Doris was converted form Roman Catholicism, and became a Christian. She stopped her Roman penance and practiced Bible repentance, stopped praying to Mary and called upon the Lord Jesus Christ to save her. She was thus converted from Roman Catholicism to the Lord Jesus Christ. According to Matthew 18:3, everyone needs to be converted from something. Two years after my mom and dad were born again I was saved in revival services with Evangelist Dale and Opel Linbaugh. Opel cut the flannel graph burden of sin off little Christian’s back in her Pilgrim’s Progress presentation, and I was born-again-saved before it hit the basement floor. In 1995 I retired from the USAF as a systems engineer and became an ordained Baptist Preacher of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. “Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 18:3).

Introduction

If one is going to believe in the inerrancy of Holy Scripture in the 21^st century, they must give all diligence to add to their faith, virtue; and to virtue knowledge (2Pet 1:5); this work is intended to help with the latter. Science is a branch of learning dealing with systematic principles used to increase knowledge. A Christian, striving to increase in knowledge, should use science. We cannot be ignorant, there has been a highjacking of the name science. There are those striving to twist scientific principles in a global effort to find a natural explanation for everything in the LORD God’s universe. Their diabolical purpose is to disallow any consideration of the Super-Natural, even to deny Him in the very existence of his universe.

The opposition of God and highjacking of science must not, however, deter the Christian from using true science in the advancement of truth. When God created the universe in six-days, as the Bible clearly, and repeatedly affirms, then the branch of learning, dealing with systematic principles to increase knowledge, i.e. science, can support his explanations of exactly how he did it.

God’s word details that he created the universe out of nothing. Science exploring the tiniest particles of matter might discover that they are made of nothing; and our grandest telescopes peering into the outer bounds of God’s finite universe might find some “nothing” still coming and going. Indeed science has discovered both phenomena and investigating how that is so will increase your faith in God’s word. “Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself” (Isa 44:24).

When the LORD God’s inerrant revelation gives a chronology of events showing the universe to be just over 6,000 years old, then true science can discover the evidence that supports his truth. Not only so, but the science which contradicts that truth is flawed, fudged, and/or misleading.

There are three primary things that make the atheistic evolutionist insist that the Earth and universe are billions of years old: 1) light from outer regions of space, millions of light-years away, must have taken millions of years to get here; 2) geological ages of rocks show them to be millions and billions of years old; and 3) Darwinian evolution happens so-so slow that it must have taken millions of years to unfold. Man thinks about time as a natural, linear, and unchangable measure. In this study time is examined as a created entity which has multiple dimensions and interconnections. Time interacts with God’s space and matter continuums. These interactions of time with space and matter are just now being discovered and explored by science; they are easily understandable to the exploring mind of the Bible believer, and they can debunk the three myths just mentioned.

A Bible believer who understands the dimensions and interconnections of time in the universe of God can shake the house of cards built up by the atheistic evolutionist. It is well worth the effort, and can open vistas of depth to the believer who holds to the principle that God says what he means and means what he says.

After 1,800 years of mans prediluvian existence it repented the LORD God that he had made man, and he sent a world flood which destroyed all those not in his Ark. That is God’s revealed truth, and science, true science, can display the evidence for such a catastrophic destruction. God broke up the fountains of the great deep, to produce his world flood, and then he miraculously caused the flood waters to recede. This was not a natural event in any sense or understanding, but true science can find evidence, in mountain ranges, in erosion from run off, in glaciers, and in receding glaciers, that supports God’s record and time frame. There must be evidence which depicts the truth of God’s revealed Word and there is.

In general people believe pretty much what they want to believe. In the 17^th century Francesco Redi, a physician of Arrezzo Italy, set out to disprove the spontaneous generation of life that occurred when dead meat was left out in the sunshine. He put a fine screen over some and left some uncovered on the plate. The atheistic evolutionist of the day, who knew for a fact that spontaneous generation of life occurred in unattended meat, now began to investigate how sunlight passing through a fine screen some how inhibits spontaneous generation of life. People are going to believe pretty much what they want to believe. This is more true with the world flood evidence than with many other phenomena.

The believer looks at a large canyon and sees where water rapidly ran off after God’s world flood; the atheistic evolutionists sees millions of years of natural errosion. The believer walks through the two mile gorge in Watkins Glen, NY and sees the shear face of rock that was split asunder when God broke up the foundations of the deep; the atheistic evolutionist considers Sir Charles Lyell’s theory of uniformity and sees only millions of years of rock layers, which must have stacked one upon another. The believer considers evidence that a continental glacier once stood above the Finger Lakes of Upstate NY and supposes that it was left over after God’s world flood; the atheistic evolutionists knows for certain that there was an ice age during the Pleistocene Period, two and a half million years ago.

The information in this dissertation will not likely sway the atheistic evolutionists from his atheism or his evolution; “They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error’ (1John 4:5-6). This dissertation can, however engage the believer with facts that can add to his faith knowledge.

There is evidence all around us that supports every detail of the LORD God’s revelation to man. Indeed there must be, for his truth is inerrant, his word is infallible. The Bible soundly and repeatedly makes claims of inerrancy, infallibility and inspiration (Psalm 12:6, Matt 5:18, 2Tim 3:16, 2Pet 1:21 et al.). This dissertation stands on that assurance expecting that the common Christian be plunged into the unsearchable riches of God’s Word as well as true science. The science that advances the LORD God’s meticulous detail has only been available in the past hundred years, yea, much in only the past couple decades. Understanding some nuclear physics, black-holes, imaginary dimensions, theories of relativity, and left over glacier formations will empower a new faith in what God says. Ones mind is herein to be exercised and stretched with some math and science that does not get taught in Bible college or Seminary. It will be well worth the effort. The leading edges of science are spellbinding to the student who is holding God’s inerrant, infallible, inspired Scriptures in his right hand.

The philosophy of the wisest of philosophers, King Solomon, states that man has an obligation to explore “all things that are done under heaven.” He calls such a responsibility a sore travail. “This sore travail hath God given to the son’s of man to be exercised therewith,” and that arduous, painful effort is fully described by Solomon, “I gave my heart to seek and search out, by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven” (Eccl 1:13). And again, “I have seen the travail, which God hath given to the sons of men to be exercised in it. He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end” (Eccl 3:10-11). And Scriptures tell us also, “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deut 29:29). Let us then step into that arduous task for the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1: The Creation Account

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

No grander introduction has ere been written, no more compelling first line, no more resounding compilation: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” This is communicated in seven Hebrew words, #rah taw ~ymVh ta ~yhla arB tyvarB (in Hebrew read from right to left). Introduced here are three continuums,³ and a Creator. The finite time continuum, holding our reference, had a beginning, and it had an initiator, his title is “God.” His action verb is “create”⁴. The space continuum, called “the heaven,” contains the universe. The matter continuum, called “the earth”, forms all mass, all that occupies space, and all that can be perceived by senses. In this revelation, time, space, and matter are made finite, and introduced as contained continuums. In this revelation God remains infinite, existing within and outside of the three tenses of the time continuum, existing within and outside of the three-dimensional space continuum, and existing within and outside of the material of the matter continuum. The rational mind is compelled to believe such an all inclusive revelation. The revelation states a rational truth, and every evidence available for observation compels the truth of the Bible’s opening line. Every impulse of human thought requires its consideration. Each rational mind pursues the questions, “Where did I come from? Why am I here? Where am I going?” This is but the opening line of the revelation that answers these questions. Yet, it is curious that man rebels against such a resolute clarifying introduction.

When one considers this revelation of God, it is not purely, just, and only believable by deductive reasoning, but there is an inner compulsion framed into the human’s very being, a compulsion to believe what they are told. This first sentence from God presumes a believing audience. It is communicated in words that are straight forward, understandable and comprehensible. That communication style draws the rational mind to simply trust each word, and such a communication style is a model for all authors. A trustworthy style is presumed in God’s first sentence. It is not figurative. It is not allegorical; despite the teachings from the Roman Empire in its hostile takeover of Christianity. When using the Roman Catholic, and later Protestant, definition of “allegorical,” NONE of the Bible is “allegorical.”⁵ The Bible is actually a straightforward and trustworthy revelation, discernible by the common man, which they call laity. “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him” (Prov 30:5). Even the first sentence pleads for the rational mind, the reader, the audience, to put their trust in this author: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” This first utterance of the revelation of God does indeed include the beginning of a time continuum, the beginning of a space continuum, and the beginning of a matter continuum. Implied with such beginnings is that each continuum has a middle and an upcoming ending. The components of the time continuum are a sequential past, present and future. There is thus an expectation for both the continuance and deportment of the three created continuums. The Creator, however, in order to create these three, must be outside of each. A Creator outside of this beginning, and outside of a presumed ending, is more fitting than a hypothesis of an uncaused, but of course, naturally occurring, big bang. An omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient Creator is thus implied. Thereby God is the uncaused cause. This is implied in the first line, and it is more fully “flushed out” with great detail in the rest of God’s revelation.

After such an intriguing all encompassing opening sentence the introduction must proceed without pause. “And the earth was without form, and void…” (Gen. 1:2a). As the earth is the matter continuum in the first sentence, so it must be in the second. Referencing earth with no planet would be like speaking of light with no sun. So it is, and so God does. Be careful of two things here, first there is not planet Earth spoken of at this point. Second, one must be wary of those who would wedge a gap and another whole universe in between God’s first two sentences of revelation. In using words in revelation to man God expeditiously says what he means, and means what he says.

The matter continuum, which is without form and void, is still not a planet. It is still only the matter continuum, which today is understood by man’s finite mind to be based on a simple hydrogen atom. The hydrogen atom is made of a proton, a neutron and an electron. It is now theorized that these tiny particles are made of tinier particles, and those are made of nothing at all; they are only strings of energy wrapped up in energy. That “string-theory” will be explored later, for now the matter continuum in God’s description is engulfed in darkness, that is, “darkness was upon the face of the deep…” (Gen 1:2b). As yet, in this exacting creation description, there is no planet, there is no sun, there is no universe. A “black-hole” is perceived today as a deep darkness, and doubtless has some similarities to God’s description here.⁶ The black-hole and the theories of relativity that brought it to “light”, so to speak, are given extensive coverage later in this work. For now just consider the description that God gives and similarity it might have to “black-hole.”

Taking God’s Holy Word exactly as given, and interpreting it with a grammatical-historical-literal methodology, produces clear evidence that God says what he means, and means what he says. This was true before liberal thinking unbelieving scholars convinced the modernists to deny the literal “day” in God’s six-day creation account. It was presumed true before the Roman Catholic Church embraced the allegorical method of interpreting Scripture. With that gross compromise the Roman Pope has now accepted the evolutionary “theory” and even the “theory” of the big bang. Such are only hypotheses of science-so-called, they are not bona fide theories in true science. Believing what God recorded as accurate, was the true and pure method of Biblical interpretation, and such allegorical hermeneutics is foreign and contrived. Protestants did not protest this Roman allegorical method, and thereby they accepted a hybrid tom-foolery called “theistic evolution.” Even the fundamentalist C. I. Scofield rationalized a huge gap between the first and second sentences of God’s creation account. He too, was attempting to appease the unbeliever using “science-so-called.” One cannot hold to the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture and insert your own wild hypothesis as fact. In Genesis God is clear, and through the psalmist he states, “It is time for thee, LORD, to work for they have made void thy law. Therefore I love thy commandments above gold; yea, above fine gold. Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way” (Psalms 119:126-128).

An exacting look at the words of God, aligns perfectly with present day observable phenomena. The facts perceptible with microscope and telescope, particle theory and relativity theory, the minutest atomic structures and the almost incomprehensible super novas of deep space, depict that, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.” On the cutting edge of man’s technology, God’s exacting truths are more compelling than has heretofore been documented. This dissertation may be a first advance into such documentation.

God’s Word to the prophet Daniel says that in the latter days knowledge shall increase. It has. Presently one can sit in most any living room in America and view detailed photographs of the moons which circle the planet of Saturn, or read what Saint Augustine of Hippo said to the Donatist Bible believers in AD 390 (just before having them killed). One can, in the next minute, preview the string theory lectures of Professor Brian Greene, a theoretical physicist of Columbia University, all available within thirty seconds of the point-and-click. Jesus said to whom much is given, much is required (Luke 12:48). That living room, even without access to the internet, has first and foremost access to the inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Word of God.

As a systems engineer with a twenty year background of attending conference rooms stuffed with PhDs of every ilk, this author has systematically reconciled the world’s increase in knowledge and the exactness of God’s Word. This dissertation documents some of that profound harmony.

A careful reading of God’s account combined with a meaningful knowledge of physics, can produce a greater scrutiny of what God has revealed. A believing scrutiny has not previously been matched with a diverse scientific, mathematical, and physics background in a seasoned systems engineer who has lived on the leading edge of scientific discovery. Herein such a combination will spotlight what many theologians have failed to capture, and what “science-so-called”⁷ has failed to consider. The combination of science, theology, and a belief of Bible inerrancy, cries out for capture in a dissertation. This work makes that noble attempt.

In that God has carefully detailed the events that initiated our universe, it behooves the rational mind of man to carefully consider the exactness of his revelation. The overriding theme introduced in Genesis is man’s fall from innocence, his lost union with God, and God’s resolve to restore him. Some refuse to see that theme, or and thus reject the detail that surrounds it. Some “religionists”, who may call themselves Christian, try to reasonably accept that theme while refusing to believe the detail that depicts it. This study, however, wholly accepts that theme, and then delves head long into the minutia of detail. God’s word affirms that his very words are inspired (2Tim 3:16, 2Peter 1:19-21), his words are inerrant (Matt 5:18), containing no error, and his words are infallible and preserved for every generation, they will not fail nor disappear from the earth (Psalm 12:6, Isa 40:8, 1Pet 1:24-25).⁸ In faith, believing what the Bible says about the Words of God, one can expect that God means what he says and says what he means, and he does so in an inerrant and infallible record. Approaching Genesis, the revelation of God, using Scripture with such fidelity of faith is ground breaking.

The terms inerrant and infallible need a caveat. Inerrant means that God’s word read in the historical, literal, grammatical sense, will not lead one into error. It does not mean what last century Bible critics, particularly textual critics, forced into its definition. They implied that variant spellings, or variant wordings implicated an error in the Holy Bible. Those critics used great craft to imply that the Bible that we have is riddled with error and unable to be understood as written. They sold the masses on the idea that they, the Bible critics, can restore what God meant to say by going back to “the most ancient manuscripts” from Alexandria Egypt, and providing a modernized, ecumenically approved, very copyrighted, completely revised translation of the Holy Bible. Their marketing was even effective on many Baptists. Baptist were never ecumenical, and were previously known as “people of the Book.” The Holy Bible is inerrant in that it will not lead one into error, the same cannot be said of the modernists translations.

The Bible is also infallible, meaning that it will not fail. These two concepts of Bible accuracy are defended eloquently by Gaussen in his AD 1840 book “Theopneustia – The plenary Inspiration of The Holy Scriptures deduced from Internal Evidence, and the Testimonies of Nature, History and Science.”⁹ It contends that the Holy Bible is always accurate whether it addresses God, nature, history, or science. That is the position taken whenever this dissertation refers to the Holy Bible or the Holy Bible’s inerrant, infallible, plenary, verbal inspiration. It represents a reliable understanding of 2Tim 3:16-17, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly¹⁰ furnished unto all good works.”

Beginning such a ground breaking venture in the very place where God begins his revelation, cries out that the very latest of man’s understanding come to bear on what God has revealed. Where man’s understanding falls short, and it forever will, being finite, one should surrender to God’s exactness, and not modify, add to, or take away from it (cf Rev 22:18-19). Pressing the leading edge of man’s understanding about matter, space and time in God’s introduction, pushes one to explore both atomic theory and the findings of the Hubble Telescope, and this we shall do. After our due consideration of some of modern sciences leading-edges, the Genesis account of the six-day creation will be revisited with more pressing detail.

After losing a law suit over its advertising practices, Listerine Inc. was ordered to add disclaimers to all of their advertisements. They devised this ditty, “Listerine, it says what it does and it does what it says.” A similar slogan needs to be affirmed for God’s Holy Word. This dissertation makes that affirmation and it can empower any Bible believing Christian to do the same. God says what he means, and means what he says. That can increase one’s faith. It can also intensify the examination of God’s six day creation account.

Creation Out of Nothing

“And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” (Gen 1:2). Three sentences in one are interconnected in thought. As it is expressed in Hebrew, so it is carefully captured in English, where “earth” might mean a handful of dirt, it might mean a mountain of it, or it might reference a planet with that title. Exclude a reference to the whole planet because this is only on the brink of the creation account for the whole universe. The earth without form and void is likely a reference going right down to the atomic structure of matter itself.

It is energy alone which holds a mass together with any form. Lacking this energy, mass would indeed be without form and void. They say all the mass in the universe might occupy a space smaller than the dot at the end of this sentence. Such a statement is made here because science-so-called makes it regularly in attempts to justify a “big-bang.” Its absurdity will be brought to light as we can understand that matter is not compressed, per se, it is unraveled into the nothingness from which it came.

Hydrogen is the simplest and the basest of all atoms. A hydrogen atom consists of a single proton in a nucleus, and a single electron in a high speed orbit around the two. It has energy and structure enough to have form and not be called void. Genesis 1:2 references an unorganized matter continuum, perhaps nothing more than hydrogen and oxygen, but perhaps even formless, as protons, neutrons, and electrons and perhaps again, even more formless as only the theorized sixteen particles which seem to form them. Water is made up of two hydrogen atoms bonded with one oxygen atom. God does imply in his account that water is a basic building block.

Understand here that matter in its continuum cannot fully come together into any atomic structure without the addition of great amounts of energy. Such a great amount of energy is summoned with an upcoming command, “Let there be light.” But before that God impresses a difference between,“Darkness was upon the face of the deep,” and, “the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” One seems to have matter without form and void, the other has matter structured into molecules of water as H₂O. Considering how God went from matter without form and void, to water molecules with great form and structure.

Ex-nihilo is a Latin phrase which means “out of nothing.” The first sentence of God’s revelation to man has the word in Hebrew, bra (bara) – create shape or form. It has this constraint, that before “The beginning,” there was nothing. God created, he did not reform, develop, refine or evolve his creation; he created from nothing. After the beginning there was time, space, and matter continuums, and before the beginning there were not. Even so, God’s act of creation was not complete in this statement. In a transitional step that he reveals, the matter continuum was darkness and without form.

Man’s growing realization that matter is indeed nothing, nothing held together by strings of energy, and that the strings are somehow one-dimensional objects, objects which might easily be spoken into existence by an infinite source of energy, well, such a realization should be said out loud a few times. It is presently closed up in a physicist’s journal on the backside of an atheist’s library. They might never take such realization, that matter is made of nothing at all, and correlate it to God’s creation account. They might not corroborate that that is exactly what God told Moses to write in Holy Scripture in 1492 BC. There on the backside of a mountain, called Mount Sinai, God wrote the first three sentences of revelation, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” (Gen 1:1-2). A mere Christian might marvel, and a true believer will most certainly marvel, but few of them get to the backside of that physicist’s library. God created the world out of nothing, and just now Bible believers are understanding that he meant what he said and said what he meant. Our universe appears to be made out of nothing held together and consisting only because of some well organized strung together bands of energy. That has always been believed by faith, but now with a physicist’s own library, faith is becoming sight; or at least becoming insight. “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear” (Heb 11:1-3).

It is very conceivable that matter is made of nothing. Close examination of the microscopic reveals scientific theories which support the exactness of that statement. Close examination of the macroscopic should reveal the same. The microscopic involves delving into some atomic theory. The macroscopic involves reaching out into space with gargantuan telescopes.

Atomic Theory and “Ex-Nihilo” Creation

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear (Heb 11:3).

If one considers that God created matter out of nothing, it should follow that it can be reduced back to nothing. It should also follow that an extremely close examination of matter should reveal the ‘nothing’. And so it does.

Matter is the interconnection of the most minute imaginable particles called atoms. In 1915 Neil Bohr demonstrated that the atom is actually made up of even tinier particles interconnected by energy bands. In the mid 1990s it was surmised that these tinier particles were not particles at all, but bundles of energy wrapped in on themselves. In particle physics, string theory is a theoretical framework in which protons, neutrons, and even electrons, are made of other point-like particles, and all point-like particles, even the six flavors of quarks or their anti-quarks, are, in today’s developing theory, considered objects called strings.¹¹ Armed with this theory, which melds nuclear physics, quantum physics and the general theory of relativity, it can be conceived that mass is nothing but bundled energy.

Thus after 6,000 years of pondering matter’s consistency, man theorizes that it is made out of nothing at all. There is no solid particle inside the solid masses around us, it is nothing more than bundles of intertwined energy, intertwined like strings which interact as if they have mass and as if they know gravity. God loaned some of his energy to form mass and all this universe out of nothing at all. That is just what God revealed from the beginning and Christ clarifies this in Hebrews 11:3. “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” This stupendous observation cries out for additional analysis. Consider further what was learned about matter being made up of atoms.

Only 100 years ago it was supposed that all matter is made up of tiny particles, like BBs. Knowing that these BBs had both a positive and a negative presence it was supposed that negative charges were suspended inside of a pudding like substance. This “Plum Pudding Model” began to fall apart in 1909 when Ernest Rutherford directed “alpha” particles through an extremely thin gold foil. The pattern observed opened the door to suppose that an atom might follow a planetary model with a nucleus of protons stuck together with neutrons and electrons in an orbit, sort of like planets orbiting the Sun.

In 1915 Niels H. Bohr¹² refined this model to show that the electrons are not like orbiting planets at all. Understand that the gravitational forces holding planets to the Sun, are only roughly akin to the electrical forces pulling the electron to the proton. The Bohr model showed that each electron has an orbit based on an energy level. His analysis of the hydrogen atom showed that electrons either absorbed or else emitted a specific quantum of energy when they moved from one orbit to another.

Although Bohr’s input showed that the orbiting electron did not behave like a planet in a miniature solar system, it did allow that the vast majority of an atom was actually open space, just as the vast majority of our solar system is open space. The only missing ingredient for mass to be made up of nothing is found in comprehending that the proton, neutron, and electron are not really singular particles of mass at all, but are packages of even smaller particles. God readily changes protons to neutrons by inserting an electron, they thus transmute into neutrons. He changes neutrons to protons by extracting an electron. We observe this miracle in radioactive substances. In 2012 physicists got all excited because they broke a proton into pieces to see what God had put inside. That is not exactly how they worded it of course.

The Higgs boson was given the misnomer “The God particle.” It was expected that colliding a proton into a proton would give man insight to a particle (boson¹³) which revealed the theoretical Higgs field to be responsible for all mass. Mass holds the universe together, and man was about to explore its enclosed mysteries. There was a great physicist’s fanfare at its July 4^th 2012 revelation, but when the dust settled and the congratulatory champagne stopped, it was not a “God particle” at all. It was just standard.

At the heart of particle physics is what’s known as the Standard Model: a group of 17 elementary particles and the rules for how they should interact. Up until the Higgs discovery, physicists had observed 16 of these particles—and the field was desperate for a 17th that would push the model in new directions. But the Higgs turned out to be totally ordinary. It acted just like the model said it would act, obeyed every theorized rule.¹⁴

The fact that man built the $7-billion Large Hadron Collider in Europe and observed as a proton was smashed into its parts is a perfectly awesome piece of true science. The fact that physicists have completely upgraded the capability since 2012 and have a new agenda after the lackluster discovery of the Higgs boson, is equally remarkable.

This summer (2015), the LHC’s long-awaited restart came with a new promise: the chance to spot larger particles never before created in a human-made particle accelerator. Physicists believe they might glimpse the particles that make up dark matter—the unknown substance thought to make up a quarter of the universe—or even hints of other dimensions.¹⁵

The sad part of all this is that few Bible believers are staying abreast of this leading edge of science, while every bit of it reveals over and over again that God says what he means and means what he says. The atheistic evolutionist’s agenda and the explanations of their discoveries are saturated with the their Godless fingerprint. But buried in every avenue of their research God’s truths are readily available. God created these particles out of nothing.

The seventeen particles of the physicists Standard Model, particles found inside of protons and neutrons, are now theorized to be tightly bound bands of pure energy. This theoretical framework, in which point-like particles are replaced by one-dimensional objects called strings, is called string theory.¹⁶ This theory, developed in the late 1960s, takes this analysis to its conclusion. It is thus also worth some attention from the Bible believer who can grapple with its theoretical base. It is being pursued here that “matter” is indeed made out of nothing and that a detailed examination might shed more light on the “nothing.”

Quantum physics was altered forever when Albert Einstein demonstrated his general theory of relativity. Dismantling an atom produces great quantities of energy, as attested in the atomic bomb. It is now conceivable that dismantling a string particle would produce great quantities of gravity. Consider again, dismantling matter, i.e. unzipping the strings in string theory, might produce an inconceivable amount of gravity. When the Hubble telescope revealed the black-holes in outer space, Albert Einstein’s theories came to play in understanding a whole new phenomena. Theories of man are just now moving to substantiate just what God said, matter is made out of nothing. Matter, in current theory, is just bundles of energy which might be tied together with a single verse from an Infinite, Omnipotent Being. Thus the result has been called the Uni-Verse, and the Infinite Being revealed himself as the LORD God. These are profound implications which align perfectly with God’s revealed word, the Holy Bible, and not so much with science-so-called and their big bang hypothesis. Black-holes and Einstein’s theories of relativity are so essential to fully exploring God’s account of his creation that they are explored more fully in separate chapters of this work.

The Hubble Telescope and “Ex-Nihilo” Creation

“The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament (space) sheweth his handiwork” (Psalm 19). In his creation account God declares that darkness was on the face of the deep. Such a presence of darkness might imply only an absence of light, it might imply an absence of the energy that organizes the orbiting electron in an atom, and/or it might imply a darkness so deep that light is gravitated back into its depth. The latter of these was inconceivable until, in April of 1990, the Hubble Space Telescope launched and peered out through space with a clarity never before imagined. In view for the first time was the black-hole, a spot in our universe where a solar system, or perhaps a whole galaxy, is collapsing into itself. Ample consideration that you cannot “see” a black-hole is given in a subsequent chapter of this work; for this present discussion please excuse the generalization.

Suddenly man’s knowledge was grappling with the concept that matter in our universe can collapse into nothingness, nothing but some residual energy. Even like it might expand from nothingness into an existing and expanding galaxy, when God added his residual energies with a command like “Let there be light.” In a black-hole the collapsing matter releases so much gravity that even light gets “sucked” in to its emptiness. This understanding confounded the big bang enthusiast’s and their hypothesis that this universe evolved into being by random chance after a big bang. Suddenly, scattered into their hypothesized singular big bang there were a myriad of little bangs with things coming and going in every galaxy. This disappearance of mass into nothingness, this black-hole idea, completely fits into the revelation that God spoke the universe into existence, created from nothing whatsoever. Physicist and Professor Stephen Hawking, and atheistic evolutionists everywhere, are stuck on an idea that structure and form of mass, i.e. the mass continuum, must somehow continue inside of a black-hole. They theorize that it must compress into some sort of supermass. Such compressed mass, they suppose, produces super gravity. The creationist is free to supposes that mass disappears into nothing inside that black hole, and that the dissolution of the mass continuum produces nothing, nothing but energy from whence it came. There is a significant difference. Hawking and company insist that the compressed mass must maintain some information, i.e. ‘its intelligence,’ else it could not reform itself and be the source of evolved life. Creationists hold that such “intelligence” is in God not in matter.

Matter, being no more than energy folded in on itself, is pulled into a black-hole where it unfolds itself and disappears. In its disappearance it releases more gravitational pull, which adds to its blackness. The concept that matter is unraveled into nothing is quite conceivable, and now, with evidence for a phenomena seen through a Hubble Space Telescope, it is more than a conceivable concept, it is an observation. Again note the distinction; the atheistic evolutionists insists that matter is just compressed and maintains some sort of ‘knowledge’ of its previous form; Bible believers can let mass go back into nothingness from which it came.

The black-hole in outer space advances an excellent theory. Matter is made of nothing. It appears when an outside source organizes it into bundles of energy. It expands and expels energy when that outside source sends a command like, “Let there be light.” Overall this “creation-from-nothing,” formed by the spoken word, might be called a Uni-(out of one), Verse-(spoken phrase), making up a compound word, universe. It has been surmised that the universe has an expanding consistency. But it is not without spots which collapse into nothingness. Thus the universe consists of both matter expanding and releasing its energies and matter contracting and releasing its gravitational energies. It is controlled and kept in balance and by him, this Creator, this Outside Source, the Maker and Master of the universe, the Self-Existent one, and his Only Begotten Son; for by him all things consist (Col 1:17). Such a hypothesis turned into theory by more powerful telescopes, confounds the big bang hypothesis put forth by science-so-called, but it is in perfect accord to those who would trust in every word of God on the subject. Skeptics of God’s word, are not limited to the science-so-called community. One can learn some things about them in the archeologists world.

Archeology “proved” by the absence of archeological evidence, that there was no Belshazzar the king of the Medo-Persian Empire. A king who is so eloquently described by God’s prophet Daniel in Daniel 5. Years later, the archaeologist’s shovel uncovered a Babylonian record that spoke of King Belshazzar’s existence. Without apology, and without a word, these unbelieving skeptics buried their old journals and advanced other revised standard skepticism. If one waits for it, God’s decree, “Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written” (Rom 3:4), will carry the day.

The authors of a big bang hypothesis will do no less with their skepticism of the Bible. When they dig deep to understand a new phenomena and find it disproves their hypothesis about spontaneous generation of life, or about a random chance universe, when they launch a larger telescope, or deeper space probe, they are not on a quest for truth, they are on a quest to support their ill fated hypothesis, and nothing more. Believers have been slow to pick up their discarded puzzle pieces, but when they are sized up against what God revealed in His Holy Word, the perfect fit motivates this author to hold his Bible a little closer and look around for more of their discarded pieces.

In a black-hole particles which are thought to make up matter, go through an unfolding where they disappear into nothing. In some instances, the unfolding of nuclear matter releases tremendous heat and light. In another it releases such a gravitational field of energy that heat and light are sucked into its emptiness. The balance of it all is like the ying and yang of ancient Asian philosophy, or like the up and down of a child’s yo-yo. Matter coming and going confounds the evolutionary atheist, but it comforts the Bible believer.

Albert Einstein approached the edge of this understanding when he theorized that matter is energy and energy is matter and some relationship to the speed of light tied them together. That speed of light relationship somehow warps the time continuum as well, and thus the tick of the clock is in this relationship as well. Science-so-called mocked Einstein’s hypothesis. They had a law stating that energy and mass must remain constant. Mocking stopped when the atomic bomb launched the nuclear age. Suddenly E = m c² is called law.

Albert Einstein went beyond the edges of understanding in other areas. Each edge he broached challenged science-so-called and substantiated God’s Word as the more accurate source. The very existence of a black-hole tends to shake the atheistic student of the cosmos, while it settles the Bible believing student of the universe. I propose that three pillars of the atheistic student’s understanding are justifiably challenged in the analysis of the phenomena called the black-hole.

The scientist-so-called, who hypothesizes that the universe is uniformly expanding, in order to hold onto their trembling hypothesis that it exists because of a big bang, need to find a suitable explanation for why some pieces of the expansion are actually collapsing. They will contrive such an explanation without leaving their atheistic position. They always have.

The scientist-so-called who hypothesizes that the universe will collapse into a dot smaller than the punctuation at the end of this sentence, are perplexed that the black-hole is a tiny precursor to their universal squashing prediction. Universal Squashing is not large enough of a sarcastic phrase for this hypothesis, especially considering that they also suppose that the universe is unbounded and infinite! They hypothesize about an unbounded universe, and that their peering into larger telescopes is like peering back into time. All that is confounded by the observable phenomena wherein black-holes are found in every galaxy.

The scientist who hypothesizes that a super nova which occurred 168,000 light years away occurred 168,000 years ago, have now got to grapple with the truth that black-holes change the speed of light that they always considered constant, i.e. gravity changes the tick of the clock. Just because they are in lock step sync with our Newtonian and Gaussian laws in our little linear Cartesian coordinate systems, the speed of light and the tick of the clock are not so constrained in every corner of our universe. Light, space and time all warp, thus wonder, imagination, and investigation dare not escape the gravitational draw of a black-hole.

The scientist, however, who is first and foremost a Bible believer, is not to be shaken at all by the observations of black-holes in God’s universe. He knows from revelation that the universe is created from nothing, and when some of it disappears back into nothing it is almost poetic. He also knows from God’s dissertation that neither global warming, nor global squashing will bring this world to its end. He always knew that a 6,000 year old universe cannot support a 168,000 year old supernova. While Bible rejecting scientists rush around, again, trying to bolster their Godless conjecturing, the Bible believers can whistle a hymn which states, “Only trust him, only trust him, only trust him now.” The three pillars challenged when the black-hole crashed into their big bang theory was 1) the ongoing expansion from the big bang, 2) the soon coming collapsing or the big crunch, and 3) the lockstep measure of light and time. The latter of these, the warping of the time continuum in the outer edges of the universe, will be the undertaking of the next chapter, and a complete examination of black-holes is found in Chapter 4.

Creation Accounting Conclusions

The opening line of the Holy Bible has seven Hebrew words that mark the first day of the universe and it says, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Here time begins, three-dimensional space begins, and matter begins. They are necessarily created by a force outside of time, outside of 3-D space, and outside of matter; the self-existent one is called God. The modernist scholars know that eventually heaven becomes the heavens, so they set out to correct his first seven words by making “heaven”, the three-dimensional space, be “heavens”, the three layers of the heavens, a commodity yet to be created. For the sake of a copyright they ignore God’s warnings about changing his words. Shame on every copyright one of them. When atheistic evolutionists “proved” rocks were a million years old, accommodating Bible students inserted a million years of time after God’s first seven words. These gaptist then invented a whole civilization created and destroyed in the imagined gap after God’s seven word opening. They are fiction writers! Roman allegorists then decided a day wasn’t a day and developed a profound allegorical teaching where “evening and morning” really meant millions of years. Only a remnant, holding to the inerrancy of verbally inspired Scriptures, believe what God said in his opening ten sentences. Written on a 5^th grade reading level, God said matter was at first without form and void, and that 3D space had darkness on the face of the deep. He ordered matter into atoms, i.e. molecules of H₂O, and he pierced the darkness with light. God says what he means and means what he says. Here he describes what he considers a day’s work and ends it with nothing but water and light. Trust God’s word, don’t trust gaptists or modern scholars.

2: The Age of the Earth

Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth:

and the heavens are the work of thy hands (Psalm 102:25).

I have considered the days of old, the years of ancient times.

I will remember the works of the LORD: surely I will

remember thy wonders of old (Psalm 77:5,11).

How old is the Earth? How old is the universe? The Bible believer, holding to the inerrant, infallible Word of God, sides with James Ussher (1581-1656) to contend that the creation of the universe was 4000 years before the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ, that is only 6,019¹⁷ years ago. The atheistic evolutionist, believing their creator is Random-Chance, believes, at present, that the world is 4.5 billion years old. There is significant variance between these two possibilities. Many “Christians-so-called” wish to compromise the accuracy of God’s Word and give in to “science-so-called”¹⁸ and their demands for millions and millions of years. But of necessity, the many orders of magnitude in difference for these beliefs allows no compromise that can remedy the disparity. One is right, and one is wrong. One is truth, one is error.

Three principle things drive the atheistic evolutionist to contend for a 4.5 billion year old universe: 1) The speed of light in the open space, 2) the age of rocks from radiometric dating, and 3) the need of huge numbers to make their evolutionary hypothesis conceivable, if not perhaps even believable. Keep in mind that they consider their creator to be Random-Chance, and Random-Chance requires billions of years to work out the odds for intelligent life ending up on the Earth. Kent Hovind used to say, “After teaching high school for 20 years I am not sure there is intelligent life on Earth.” Two of these three contentions for billions-not-thousands will be given further evaluation in this effort. The last one, it is clear, is not a “scientific” consideration. The massive effort to take facts “out of their way” to justify the evolutionary hypothesis is a subtle but salient feature of science-so-called. We will expose their bias by considering the misrepresentation of the speed of light, and the misrepresentation of the age of rocks.

It is at first obvious that if light coming from a star that is a hundred and sixty eight thousand light years away might take a hundred and sixty eight thousand years to get here. This would only fail if light traveling through outer space does not follow the same rules as observed for light traveling through our inner space. The space continuum that God created is complex. The time continuum that God created is complex, and so is the matter continuum. We now understand that these three continuums have interconnections and interference patterns, and that the interference has a singularity at thee speed of light. Consequently time warps, for lack of a better word, as boundary conditions for each of the continuums are approached. Gravity warps time, moving through the space continuum warps time, and the time continuum itself is not as linear as we once supposed. All these obscure considerations need to be kept in perspective as we consider how fast does light really travel through outer space? A time warp is indeed a very realistic consideration.

A Time Warp Needs Due Consideration.

To the chief Musician for the sons of Korah, Maschil. We have heard with our ears, O God, our fathers have told us, what work thou didst in their days, in the times of old (Psalm 44:1).

Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, and he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee (Deu 32:7).

Starlight and time connect with the question, “If the universe is so young, how can we see light from stars that are more than 10,000 light-years away?”¹⁹ Dr. Russell Humphreys presented papers dealing with just that question at the Creation Science Fellowship of New Mexico. Therein he states, “I hope this paper will help convince some of the doubters that relativity is not an enemy of creationism, but is instead a friend.”²⁰ Dr. Humphreys’ 1994 work “Starlight and Time” made necessary baby-steps exploring time dilation.²¹ What is herein developed on this subject adds needed dimensions to that early explanation. His explanations have introductory clarity but it is essential to go a layer deeper than that early work.

Stephen Hawking lectures the errant time hypothesis well. He says,

“As we look out at the universe, we are looking back in time, because light had to leave distant objects a long time ago to reach us at the present time. This means that the events we observe lie on what is called our past light cone. The point of the cone is at our position, at the present time. As one goes back in time on the diagram, the light cone spreads out too greater distances, and its area increases.”²²

Professor Hawking goes on to explain that the cone encircling more and more mass causes a focusing of light and time on to a point of beginning. The focusing of light by the accumulation of mass is purposely left very vague by Professor Hawking, but it will be further explored in this work with regards to Albert Einstein’s two relativity theories. Hawking supposes that time had a beginning fifteen billion years ago. Even though Professor Hawking argues for a creator and a beginning of time, he is no friend of the Holy Bible and/or its Author, Jehovah God.

The argument that the universe is billions of years old, that is billions, with a “B,” was preposterous enough. One can never get such exaggerated numbers from observing the aging processes here on Earth, or even in our observable solar system. Niagara Falls is naturally eroding a canyon. It is moving inland on the continent, moving towards its headwaters in Michigan. Its erosion has gone on for only 4,000 years, that is ever since the world flood receded. The erosion would actually have started after the continental glacier retreated from America. If it had eroded for a mere couple million years, that is million, with an “M,” it would be in Cleveland Ohio and Lake Erie would be a very large wheat field today.

If there was no world flood, and the Colorado River had cut out the Grand Canyon all by itself, then the river must have flowed uphill for the first few thousand years of the canyon’s formation.²³ Even if that were possible, there are unexplained petrified trees²⁴ reaching upward from the canyon floor. They stretch right through millions of years of such a wild hypothesis. By all evidence, the Grand Canyon has not been in formation for millions of years. It could not possibly be substantiated as being in formation for over a thousand million years! A thousand million years is a billion, with a “B.” However, erosion from runoff, which resulted from the continent being completely under water, could produce the Grand Canyon in a rather short period.. Such would also account for those petrified trees. Less-grand canyons which formed completely in one or two years due to volcanic or glacier activity stand to justify this hypothesis. The Grand Canyon forming in only a couple of years supports all the evidence, but it supposes a world flood which atheistic evolutionists refuse to consider. Atheistic evolutionists regularly develop theories against all evidence, because it fits into their preconceived notions about evolution.

Look toward the heavens and see the moon 238,900 miles above. It seems to collects space dust while it is orbiting the Earth. In only 2 million years it might have enough dust collected to sink the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander completely out of sight. Cosmologist Isaac Asimov made this foolish prediction in 1958: “I get a picture, of the first spaceship picking out a nice level place for landing purposes, coming slowly downward tail-first and sinking majestically out of sight.”²⁵ Some of the skeptics, who speculated that the moon was millions of years old, speculated that there would be several feet of space dust accumulated on its surface.²⁶ When Apollo 11 settled its landing pads into the tentative dust bowl, the speculated millions of years of accrued dust was not there. The moon had not orbited the Earth for millions of years. There could be no accounting that it might have been there for a thousand million years!

While thinking on the moon, consider also that the moon is moving away from the Earth at about 1 1/2 inches per year. That means it used to be closer to the Earth. The moon’s gravity produces the tides on Earth, and its gravitational pull is proportional to the square of its distance from us. The table below shows that if the Earth and moon existed in this relationship two millions years ago, tides would only be 1/4 inch higher than now. However, if they were around 5 billion years ago, as scientist now hypothesize, tides would be approaching 196 feet, and if 15 billion years, as Professor Hawking suggested, tides would be 15 feet higher still. Obviously, two hundred foot tides wearing down coastlines for 5 billion years would leave this planet very different than is in evidence today. There is no evidence for this kind of drastic tidal activity on our planet. Table 3.1 shows this influence for the various universe ages proposed.

Table 3.1 Maximum tide heights from proposed universe ages.

Age of the Moon Source	Moon’s age in years *	Moon’s Distance Closer, in miles	Resulting Tides in Feet **
Bible Numbers	6000	0.14	50.00006′
Science-So-Called	2000000	47.35	50.02′ ( 1/4 in. rise)
Grosser Speculation	5000000000	118371	196
Hawking’s Speculation	15000000000	355114	211

* Currently the moon is moving away from Earth at 1 ½ inches per year

** Highest tides today are in the Bay of Fundy, Nova Scotia, and reach 50 feet

Further, when considering the moon’s present drift away from the Earth, the question must be asked how long has this actually been going on and where did the moon originate. Inquiring minds want to know these things. In Jonathan Henery’s article “The Moon’s Recession and Age” published in Journal of Creation²⁷ the billions of years birth certificate for the moon is dogmatically shown to be a forgery. His introduction states it,

The history of modern lunar origins theories traces back to George Darwin in the 1800s. Such naturalistic theories have presumed that the moon is extremely old, but all have been plagued by irresolvable difficulties. In addition, the moon is slowly receding from the Earth, a phenomenon which establishes an upper limit for the moon’s age of approximately one-third the conventional age of 4.6 Ga. This issue has been a long-standing challenge to conventional chronology. Use of adjustable tidal parameters presumes conventional age rather than proving it, so is no support for a long chronology.²⁸

Dr. Ed Boudreaux, president of Rocky Mountain Christian Fellowship, who suggested I investigate this article, explains Henry’s argument clearly, “In slightly more than 1.3 billion years ago the Moon would have been touching the Earth and within the Roche limit whereby gravity forces would have destroyed the Moon.” The billions of years birth certificate that atheistic evolutionists are trying to propagate is by all evidence a gross forgery.

A Time Warp Substantiates The Age of Planets

Sing unto God, ye kingdoms of the earth; O sing praises unto the Lord; Selah: To him that rideth upon the heavens of heavens, which were of old; lo, he doth send out his voice, and that a mighty voice. Ascribe ye strength unto God: his excellency is over Israel, and his strength is in the clouds. O God, thou art terrible out of thy holy places: the God of Israel is he that giveth strength and power unto his people. Blessed be God (Psalm 68:32-35).

The Bible and the Jewish Calendar say that the Earth and universe were created just over 6,000 years ago. Consider the planets in our solar system. It has been hypothesized that they began as molten cores of magma which cooled, crusted and solidified in to a fractured mantle over a molten core, and that this took some time. We live on just such a fractured mantle, and the depth of this crust can serve as a ticking clock.

The Bible believer is comfortable when these evidences show the Earth to be 6,000 years old, just like God said. The atheistic evolutionists must conceal and ignore massive amounts of local evidence to speculate into the millions of years. They might become boldface liars to pretend that our planet could have existed for billions of years, that is billion, with a “B.” Recall that a billion years is a thousand million years!

There are many hypotheses about how the planets formed and a planet cooing from a ball of molten rock is only one such hypothesis. The molten core within our own planet, however lends credence to the concept that all the planets started in such a condition. Even if the ball of dirt was not a completely molten, and only had a molten core, the analysis that follows has reasonable credence. The Bible accounts that our core had an inhabitable crust over it on the third day of creation, but such a circumstance is very tenable for a Bible believer because the LORD God, is God Almighty and need not rely on “natural science” or “natural means.” In general, however, consider how a planet with a molten core might naturally cool over time.

A cold, dead planet has no dynamo-driven magnetic field left. Earth’s moon is cooled enough to be cold and dead, that is, it has solidified to its core. So to is the planet Mars. But the planet Earth is not yet solid to the core; neither is Venus. Venus is called Earth’s twin because it is approximately the same size and mass. It seems to have volcanic activity and thus still has some molten core. It is not a dead planet like Mars. A planet’s cooling and turning into solid rock with no molten core left, is a clock which tells us how long it has been cooling. The clock on Mars has stopped. It is solidified to the core. The clock on Earth is still ticking. Earth is still cooling and will be for a few more thousand years, or for science-so-called a few more million years, or for atheistic evolutionists holding to the big bang and random chance, a few more billion years. The atheistic evolutionist KNOWS that it took Mars 4.5 billion years to cool, because he KNOWS that that is how old this solar system is. Bible believers KNOW that, barring any Supernatural intervention, it took 6,000 years for Mars to cool naturally, because they KNOW that is how old the Universe is. One assumption is wrong.

Consider that the amount of heat loss for a planet will be pretty standard. The time clock might be estimated by a scale model planet constructed from molten rock and hung in a vacuum until it cools and is solid to its core. The time that takes would be proportionally scaled to a planet the size of Mars and that would produce a ballpark age of that planet. Scale that to the planet Earth and one can predict when this planet will be a cold dead planet.

When one presumes that planets have a similar composition and that they began their existence in a similar molten phase, one expects a correlated cooling rate. Understand that how planets began their existence is the controversy addressed in this dissertation as a whole. Creationists have a very different model for this, but in general the molten core of planet cooling slowly over time is generally understood, if not readily accepted. When considering such a cooling down process, the shear magnitude of difference between 15 billion years of cooling and say, 10,000 years of cooling will carry the argument in this instance.

A planet’s cooling rate would be proportional to the ratio of its surface area, which radiates the heat, from its volume, which contains the heat. Thus:

SurfArea/Vol = (4 p r²)/(4/3 p r³) = 3 / r

Where r is the radius of the planet.

Thus, the larger the planet the slower it would solidify. The cooling of a planet would not be a linear process because as more crust accumulates above the mantle, the more slowly the core heat would radiate out. But the process would be very similar for Mars, Earth, and our molten rock scale model hung in a vacuum. Also the density of each planet might differ slightly from our molten rock model so only a ballpark figure will be obtained in this experiment. Barring the resources to suspend a 1 meter radius ball of molten rock in a vacuum until it solidified, consider the possible outcomes.

Take the following multiple choice test. Choose the most logical answer (A meter is about a yard long, for engineers 1.094 yards or 39.384 inches):

A molten rock ball of 1 meter radius has been formed to simulate the cooling of a planet. How long would one expect to wait until the molten rock is solid to the core?

A. 1,472 years B. Over 14 months C. 26 hours D. 15.5 hours

If one answered A, “1,472 years,” one corresponds very closely to what science-so-called wanted us to believe about the cooling of the planet Mars taking 5 billion years.

If one answered B, “Over 14 months,” one corresponds very closely to what was thought before the Hubble Telescope, when science-so-called wanted us to believe that the cooling of the planet Mars took 4 million years.

If one answered C, “26 hours,” one is beginning to correspond to reality and is lining up with what the young Earth enthusiasts think about the cooling of the planet Mars in under 10,000 years.

If one answered D, “15.5 hours,” a very realistic number, one corresponds to what the Bible believer would hold to when he believes what God revealed about dates, times and creation as recorded in the Holy Bible.

The point here is that the planet cooling and its mantle solidifying over a period of 6,000 years of its existence is far more fitting than supposing a one meter molten glob might take thousands of years to solidify.

Steven Hawking’s answer must be E, None of the Above. His model has the planet Mars cooling for 15 billion years, which would equate to the scale modeled molten ball cooling for 4,416 years before it is solidified. Think of that, if the Bible prophet Ezekiel, who saw God’s mobile throne as a wheel spinning in the middle of a wheel, had hung a molten rock model and let it start cooling, Steven Hawking speculates that it would just this last year have solidified to its core! Get real Steven.

With no molten rock ball suspended in a vacuum, a better comprehension of the planet cooling model can come from a molten ball of glass cooling and solidifying. I undertook a trip to the Corning Museum of Glass and spoke with several workers of molten glass. The most senior of them, one Len LaBarr had spent over 20 years melting and molding glass objects. He spent fifteen years working in the now closed Steuben Glass factory. Mr. LaBarr simply scoffed at the idea that such a molten model, made of glass anyway, would take years or months to solidify. It would be solid to the core in hours at the most. Their glass objects must be cooled very gently in an annealing oven to prevent them from fracture. If they were left in a room temperature environment they would fracture and be solidified in mere minutes. “A one meter diameter ball of glass would be solidified and cooled within 24 hours,” said Mr. LaBarr.

The contrast between the atheistic evolutionist, who thinks Mars cooled over fifteen billion years, and the Bible believer, is likened to the one who thinks a two inch paper weight would take thirty seven years to cool, and the realist who thinks it would solidify in a half hour. It is likened to the “scientist” who thinks a basket ball sized rock, nine inches in diameter, might take 168 years to solidify, vs the realist who expects it solidified and cooled in three hours. It is likened to the atheistic big bang believer thinking a one meter rock solidifying would take over 4 thousand years, vs the realistic scientist expecting it solidified within twenty-four hours.

Mars did not cool and become a dead planet over 15 billion years, nor did it take a million years. If physics and thermodynamics are true in our solar system, Mars and other dead planets have been cooling for less than 10,000 years, Earth will be a dead planet in the next ten thousand years, and the largest planet, Jupiter will cool to its core in 123 thousand years. The atheistic evolutionist, holding to a 15 billion year old solar system, must expect Earth to keep cooling for all of twenty-eight billion years, and Jupiter to be cooling for 309 billion years. The atheists’ expectations are off by several orders of magnitude. Our solar system cannot be more than thousands of years old.

The tables with the data for this analysis are shown below.

Cooling of Planet Times Based on Age of Solar System Estimates

		Age = 5 billion	Age = 4million	Age = 10,000	Age = 6,000
	k =age*r/3 =	4,415,661	3,533	8.831	5.299
	km	Years to cool	Years to cool	Years to cool	Years to cool
rMars = 3,397 km	3397	5,000,000,000	4,000,000	10,000	6,000
rEarth = 6,378 km	6378	9,387,695,025	7,510,156	18,775	11,265
rMoon = 1,738 km	1738	2,558,139,535	2,046,512	5,116	3,070
rMoltenRock = 1.0 m	0.001 km or 1 m	1,472 years	14.13 months	25.79 hours	15.47 hours
rBball = 4.5 inches	0.0001143 or 4.5 in.	168 years	1.62 months	2.95 hours	1.77 hours
rPaperWeight = 1.0 inch	0.0000254 or 1 in.	37 years	0.36 months or 10.92 days	0.66 hours or 39.3 min	0.39 hours or 23.58 min

The Atheistic Evolutionist’s 15 billion Years vs the Bible Believer’s 6 Thousand Years

		Age = 15billion	Age = 6,000
	k =age*r/3 =	13,246,983	5.299
	km	Years to cool	Years to cool
rMars = 3,397 km	3397	15,000,000,000	6,000
rEarth = 6,378 km	6378	28,163,085,075	11,265
rMoon = 1,738 km	1738	7,674,418,605	3,070
rMoltenRock = 1.0 m	0.001 km or 1 m	4,416	15.47 hours
rBball = 4.5 inches	0.0001143 or 4.5 in.	505	1.77 hours
rPaperWeight = 1.0 inch	0.0000254 or 1 in.	112	0.39 hours or 23.58 min

Using Mars cooled to its core in x years, and with a cooling rate proportional to surface-area/volume =

(4 π r²)/(4/3 π r³) = 3 / r. These planets will similarly cool and die in y years.

Body	r km29	Mass (Me)	Density g/cm3	Age = 15billion	4million	10000	6000
			k =age*r/3 =	13,276,294	3,540	8.851	5.311
Jupiter	69911	317.83	1.33	309,386,340,168	82,503,024	206,258	123,755
Saturn	58232	182.9	1.32	257,701,725,918	68,720,460	171,801	103,081
Uranus	25362	14.536	1.3	112,237,793,185	29,930,078	74,825	44,895
Neptune	24622	17.147	1.76	108,962,973,890	29,056,793	72,642	43,585
Earth	6371	1	5.515	28,194,423,956	7,518,513	18,796	11,278
Venus	6052	0.09	5.5	26,782,711,314	7,142,056	17,855	10,713
Mars	3389.5	0.107	3.94	15,000,000,000	4,000,000	10,000	6,000
Jupiter III	2634	0.0248	1.936	11,656,586,517	3,108,423	7,771	4,663
Saturn VI	2576	0.04	3	11,399,911,491	3,039,976	7,600	4,560
Mercury	2440	0.0553	5.43	10,798,052,810	2,879,481	7,199	4,319
Jupiter IV	2410	0.018	1.83	10,665,289,866	2,844,077	7,110	4,266
Jupiter I	1821	0.015	3.528	8,058,710,724	2,148,990	5,372	3,223
Earth I	1737	0.0123	3.3464	7,686,974,480	2,049,860	5,125	3,075
Jupiter II	1560	0.00803	3.01	6,903,673,108	1,840,979	4,602	2,761
Neptune I	1353	0.00359	2.061	5,987,608,792	1,596,696	3,992	2,395
Dwarf	1184	0.0022	2	5,239,710,872	1,397,256	3,493	2,096
Uranus III	788	0.00059	1.72	3,487,240,006	929,931	2,325	1,395
Saturn V	764	0.00039	1.23	3,381,029,650	901,608	2,254	1,352
Uranus IV	761	0.0005	1.63	3,367,753,356	898,068	2,245	1,347
Saturn VIII	735	0.00033	1.08	3,252,692,137	867,385	2,168	1,301
Pluto I	604	0.00025	1.65	2,672,960,614	712,789	1,782	1,069
Uranus II	585	0.0002	1.4	2,588,877,416	690,367	1,726	1,036
Uranus I	578	0.00022	1.67	2,557,899,395	682,107	1,705	1,023
Saturn IV	561	0.000183	1.48	2,482,667,060	662,045	1,655	993
Saturn III	531	0.000103	1.48	2,349,904,116	626,641	1,567	940
Dwarf	476.2	0.000159	2.08	2,107,390,471	561,971	1,405	843

The Bible believer holds to Supernatural events happening in creation, and throughout the Earth’s existence. Therefore, one need not wait around for natural cooling to make our planet habitable. Believing God’s record to be exactly true as stated, one understands that just three days after Earth’s creation, it was being occupied by plant life, and two days after that, God created animals. Whether one believes that or not is a matter of faith and trust. But to believe that the Earth has been in existence for 15 billion years necessitates that one disregard or fudge over all the evidence in our existing solar system. The majority has chosen to follow and believe those huge numbers, but a majority does not determine truth.

A Time Warp Is In Evidence

The only evidence of a billion year old Earth is derived from the constant speed of light passing through an immense universe. This makes a notable contradiction to all other observed phenomena. This is a contradiction which will not be broached by any scientist wishing to maintain his “political correctness.” Despite the contradiction, and all the evidence in our own solar system, many Bible believers have remained intimidated by the overwhelming majority opinion of these atheistic evolutionists. The options to be considered in this contradiction are A) the observations inside of our own solar system give the best indication for our age, i.e. the things we can observe on Earth and surmise from our closest planets, and B) the light emanating from distant galaxies and traversing across the universe to our galaxy gives the best indication of our age. Option A gives an age of less than 10,000 years. Option B gives an age of three to five plus billion years. The latter estimate increases by millions with every larger telescope, space probe, or “scientific” hypothesis. The former option settles in very comfortably with an exact rendering of the Word of God, and his 6,000 year old accounting.

The Bible believing scientist, who holds a written creation record in his hand, and has God’s Word on it, holds staunchly to option A. The atheistic evolutionist, who believes the universe came into being by random chance, believes in spontaneous generation of life, and believes that inbreeding lizards could produce a bald eagle, he staunchly holds onto Option B. To say that one of these positions is bias and the other is not, is naive. To try to stand in the middle of the road and believe a little of each side is even more naive. To assert that all those scientists, PhDs, Journals and public media outlets are pursuing the wrong option may be militant, but it is the only option for the Bible believer. An introductory review of some of Albert Einstein’s works will ensure that the believed Bible truths are sound, and that God meant what he said, and said what he meant.

There is an ongoing struggle to demonstrate or explain exactly how time dilation, time warp, or speed of light travel could account for the time factor when light travels over and beyond a six-thousand light-year distance. This dissertation is meant to open the vista’s so that the Bible believer can see those possibilities more clearly. Our own galaxy appears to be over 100,000 light years in diameter. Millions of other galaxies populate God’s universe. The argument perpetuated here is that the speed of light traversing a vacuum at a constant rate of travel is far to simplistic a view of God’s universe. There are dimensions not seen, there are boundaries where things change, there are time warps and relativity considerations that can cause the Bible believer to hold tenaciously to the exact detail of God’s accounting and keep an ever skeptical eye on man’s deviant explanations. The spirit of this effort is to expose the believer to some profound possibilities contained in genuine science. Remember, “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deut 29:29).

3: A Time Warp Was Conceived by Albert Einstein

This is not a digression. The thesis was to demonstrate that God meant what he said about a six-day creation, in which he made the universe out of nothing. Now, it is pursued that he did it, just when he said he did it, 4,000 years before he sent his Only Begotten Son as the Messiah of Israel and Saviour of the world. Bear with this pursuit that space-time travel is not what “science-so-called” makes it out to be. Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity insist that things are not as they appear. It will be well worth the effort to explore these theories in a little more depth.

Enter Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity.

One hundred years ago Albert Einstein spent his days pondering and developing what he published as the general theory of relativity. This theory has been comprehended by few, maligned by more, and wholly ignored by those who believe the super nova in the Large Magellanic Cloud happened 168,000 years ago. The existence and study of black-holes resurrects Einstein’s neglected theory, and thrusts it anew into the focus of the true scientist. His theories reveal that time does indeed warp in the outer edges of space.

Albert Einstein was enthralled with gravity. There had to be a reason why the force of gravity and the force required to overcome inertia were identical forces acting on a mass. His special theory of relativity demonstrated that the speed of light was constant even when there was relative motion between its source and its receptors. He thus demonstrated that time is relative, and not a constant as previously assumed. When time is not fixed, but relative to a location, relative to a motion, and relative to the gravity present, everything in Newtonian physics and Euclidean geometry begins to take on a new and uncertain character. One cannot just ignore these new characteristics and pretend that light traveling from that Large Magellanic Cloud took 168,000 years to get here. three-dimensional space, gravity and mass all warp the speed of light, and thus time itself is not constant but experiences a warp in itself.

In the spring of 1998 Florida State University offered an astrophysics course that walked through a proof of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity. That course demonstrated that his equations for relativity are valid and proven. The course material stated:

“After ten years of arduous intellectual searching, in 1915, Einstein succeeded, finally, in translating his profound physical intuitions about nature into a rigorous mathematical theory of free motion in curved space-times. Thus was born the General Theory of Relativity. Einstein’s equations:

G ^{m n} = – (8 p G / c² ) T ^{m n}

connect matter and energy (the right-hand side) with geometry of space-time (the left-hand side). Each superscript stands for one of the four coordinates of space time (x, y, z, t); so what looks like one equation is actually 4 x 4 = 16 equations. But some (equations) are repeated (and so) there are really (only) 10 equations. Contrast this with the single gravitational law of Newton! That alone gives a hint of the complexity of these equations. Indeed, they are amongst the most difficult equations in science. Happily, however, some exact solutions have been found.”³⁰

Suffice it to say that the Florida State University course went on to publish and explore the details of the 1916 Schwarzchild Solution, which computed the space time interval between any two nearby points, given an assumed distribution of matter and energy. Most readers will delight to hear that this dissertation will not delve any deeper into the mathematical jargon than is necessary for an introductory coverage. The purpose in this examination is to demonstrate that Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity has not been fully absorbed by science-so-called. For “nearby points, and an assumed distribution of matter and energy,” Schwarzchild has demonstrated this theory of relativity to be true. It is pertinent that for non-nearby points of deep space, a day might be as a thousand years, and a thousand years as a single day. Indeed for a Bible believer that is not only the likely result, it is a promise (2 Pet 3:8, Psalm90:4).³¹ (Be careful here; these verses have been taken out of context by those wishing to make a day of creation a much longer period of time. These verses have also been taken out of context by those denying the thousand year reign of Christ recorded in Revelation 20. In their proper context they are referencing God’s perspective about time not God’s communications about time.) A more in-depth examination of Albert Einstein’s theories can be found in a later chapter.

Given just that amount of time warp, i.e. a day being a thousand years, the light from the February 23rd 1987 super nova in the Large Magellanic Cloud, supposed 168,000 light years away, would reach us in only 168 days. The light from Galaxy Andromeda II, supposed 2.13 million light years away, would reach us in a mere 2,130 days, or just under 5 years and 9 months. Just the threshold of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, gives a Bible believer ample cause to completely trust what God has revealed about a six-day creation that happened only 6,019³² years ago. Previously we contrasted two means of calculating the age of the Earth, Option A, where evidence in our own solar system carries the weight, and Option B, where the speed of light from distant galaxies carries the weight. Option A is still the best choice. It is, however, the least chosen by mankind in general.

Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, unites the speed of light, the tick of the clock, the relative velocities of space, and gravity’s influence. All combine into one complex understanding. This is only the first step in realizing the possibility of great error in man’s “scientific” age setting. Their age setting is based solely on the speed of light coming from distant galaxies. Einstein’s theories make for a very significant first step in upsetting their apple-cart. These theories of relativity were completely side stepped by the atheistic evolutionist. Einstein’s theories of special relativity, and general relativity have realized the existence of massive time warps in the universe. The atheistic evolutionists took these realizations and explored every conceivable notion about time travel and reaching distant galaxies with their sci-fy space adventures, but they barely considered³³ that such time warps might muck up their speed of light dependence in their Earth dating methods.

The universe’s age of four billion to fifteen billion years is the “sacred cow” of the atheistic evolutionist. It helps them digest the extreme notion that breeding beagles could produce a Clydesdale horse! Or lizards, a bald eagle! Those huge numbers soothe their concept that everything happened by random chance. Even the spontaneous generation of life from two rocks in a primeval sea might therein be called a theory. Indeed an organized universe springing from random chances must needs have billions of years to account for the one in a billion chance of its truth. What is more disconcerting in all this is that in the fifty years of their control of our government schools, they have a majority of Americans believing their unsubstantiated notions.

The Bible believer is perfectly justified in holding to a 6,019 year old Earth. All the evidences in our solar system support such a supposition. The only thing that supports the atheistic evolutionist’s supposition about millions and billions of years is the speed of light perceived as approaching us from distant galaxies. Such approaching light, supposed to be traveling at c = 299,792,458 m / s for the whole distance, in actuality goes through time warps explored via the general theory of relativity.

Darkness on the face of matter created out of nothing, and the analysis of the black-hole has led to some pertinent conjecture about space and time. It is fitting to press this a little further. Einstein’s two theories make time, space, matter and electromagnetic-gravitational energies so interrelated that science cannot perceive where one starts and another stops. That makes all of the atheistic evolutionist’s concepts of eons of time a fairy tale at best. Such scientists will no more admit that, than would the Emperor’s adviser admit his Emperor was on parade stark naked.³⁴ Judging from the mocking, scoffing and slandering, leveled by Professor Colin Groves,³⁵ of Australian National University, the atheistic evolutionist will never expose the exposed Emperor. But Albert Einstein’s concepts cut even deeper into their myth.

A Bounded Universe Causes Even Greater Time Warps

Albert Einstein perceived a bounded finite universe. The atheistic evolutionist perceives an infinite, unbounded universe which exists by random chance. In mathematics the difference in a bounded problem and an unbounded problem is astronomical, no pun intended. The Holy Bible distinguishes three distinct heavens (Deut 10:14, Neh 9:6).³⁶ The heaven where the clouds and birds fly (Deut 33:28, Job 35:5, Heb 1:10³⁷), the heavens where the stars camp out (Ps 8:3 Ps 104:2³⁸), and the heaven where God dwells in the fullness of his glory (2Ch 2:6, 6:18, 6:33, Ps 2:4, Ps 57:5, Ps 123:1³⁹). Some have thought that the latter observation confounded his omnipresence. It does not. He is present in every portion of his finite creation, but he is present in his full glory in the third heaven. The clarity pursued here, is that God is infinite, but the universe which he created is finite. The Bible believer should side with Albert Einstein’s concept of a bounded universe, and reject the atheistic conjecture that the universe is both unbounded and infinite. This is an important realization mathematically, causing Albert Einstein’s theories to make mathematical harmony with observable phenomena. It is also another milestone in justifying the believing faith in God’s Word. Yet it makes the atheistic evolutionist’s conjectures untenable.

The impact of a bounded universe is best understood by considering what must happen when a boundary is approached. In mathematics going through a boundary places one in what is called the world of imaginary numbers. After teaching algebra for 20 years, this author considers that title, “imaginary,” to be misleading. The imaginary number, is indeed very real. It is just as real as Albert Einstein’s ability to step off into a 4^th, 5^th, 6^th and 10^th dimension of space and time. When one begins to balance and solve mathematical equations they step off into an imaginary dimension in the early stages of their problem solving. In about AD 820 a Persian mathematician in Baghdad published The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing. That title in Arabic is pronounced “Algebra.” It, as well as Arabic numerals, “grew up together.” Algebra has demonstrated and justified a cause to jump from our secure three-dimensional world into the imaginary dimension, designated “i.” When one squares this imaginary term, or multiplies any two imaginary terms together, they pop back into the real dimensions of time and space. Algebra has been taking full advantage of this ability since 2,000 BC, when it was explored in the city of Babylon, in a land between two rivers, translated “Mesopotamia.” The exploration of this imaginary dimension is explored further in the next chapter.

Ergo Albert Einstein’s venture into this 10^th dimension of space and time is not new, but his comprehension of it was unprecedented. His ability to teach such excursions into imaginary dimensions to university students was equally unprecedented. When Albert Einstein, therefore, concludes that one is operating in a bounded universe, it behooves every student of the cosmos to pay attention. The mathematician has even more cause to heed that declaration, having understood from the beginning how math folds in on itself and behaves in a non-linear fashion near any boundary condition.

Why then must the atheistic evolutionist reject the obvious bounding of our universe? If the universe is “created” by Random Chance, as they hypothesize, without a purposeful Creator, as they speculate, it must not be, yea it cannot be earthocentric,⁴⁰ i.e. Earth is centric in the creation of the universe, it is the point where this unique creation centers its genesis and attention, and there is no other intelligence or life form in outer space which holds the attention of the Creator. Consider the non-earthocentric dilemma. If by random chance another “Goldilocks” planet exists in the millions of galaxies out there, let’s say it is 1 million light years away, their Hubble Telescope peers out from their location and it must, of necessity, see from their perspective, the same universe that we see from our perspective. After all, they surmise, there is nothing unique about our perspective, it is just random chance, as is theirs. They, in their perspective, now look at another galaxy one million light years from theirs, two million light years from ours, and they ponder, “I wonder if there is intelligent life out there?” Of course, by the rule of random chance, their must be, else they themselves might be unique in all of the universe. Thus the atheistic evolutionist is forced by his Random Chance Creator, to establish nothing less than an unbounded infinite universe, even though that assumption begins to unravel the core theories of Albert Einstein and dismiss 4,000 years of algebra.

Consider some boundary conditions that might depict the mathematical warp of the universe.

Einstein’s Mainstay E = mc² And Its Boundary Conditions

There are almost incomprehensible transformations which take place when approaching a boundary condition. Consider two things about Albert Einstein’s famous equation:

E = mc²

Where: E = energy

m = mass

c = speed of light

First consider that this equation⁴¹ provides the clearest illustration of these energy to matter and matter to energy transformations,⁴² and second, consider that one must approach the boundary of abstract reasoning before this makes sense. This author enjoys teaching math and science in high school and college because of the joy of seeing little lights go on when students comprehend a new concept. Math is not arithmetic, it is the art of abstract reasoning. Many have not wandered very deep into math so this illustration will be low on math and high on reasoning. It will still, however, require grappling with some abstractions. Such an exercise can be enlightening, but it can, for some, be intimidating. No matter the education or mathematical background, then, this illustration will walk towards the human boundary of abstract reasoning. It is good for the finite mind to explore its boundaries in this way.

“And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven: this sore travail hath God given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith” (Ecc 1:13).

Imagine a boundary between mass and energy, then look at Albert Einstein’s famous equation again (see above). This equation tells us that mass and energy are two forms of the same thing. To some extent this was explored when we considered ex-nihilo creation. Mass is nothing more than a translated form of energy. Many have thought this equation, E = mc², was well illustrated when a tiny ball of enriched plutonium was compressed so tightly that nuclear fission released enough energy to annihilate a small city. That gave a good example of how much energy is contained in a tiny mass, but it does not serve much purpose in exploring the boundary condition between mass and energy. Consider instead a pitcher throwing a baseball. That ball thrown at 100 mph has had its mass converted to energy.⁴³ That kinetic⁴⁴ energy can be measured with the equation,

e_k = ½ m v²

where: e_k is the kinetic energy of the ball,

m is the mass of the ball,

and v is the velocity of the ball.

In reality that ball has had a tiny bit of its mass converted into energy. Perhaps tiny-tiny should have been used here, but imagine that the ball, because of its velocity, has gotten ever so slightly smaller.

The fastest pitch ever recorded in major league baseball was 105.1 mph, on Sep 24^th 2010. This illustration requires that one exceed Chapman’s pitch to the San Diego Padres. Imagine the ball going 1,000 mph, or 447 meters / second. A baseball’s mass is about 0.145 kg and the kinetic energy of the ball is:

e_k = ½ (0.145 kg) (447 m/s)^{^2}

e_k = 14,488.7 kg m² / s²

That may seem like a relatively large number, and one would not want to get hit by this pitch, but relative to the speed of light, which is a velocity which has no relativity,⁴⁵ it is quite small.

Consider the speed of light to be approximately 448,900,000,000,000,000 mph. This speed of light is so imperceptible, and this number is so astronomically large, that there is a whole section in this work to annotate the amazing way it came to be accurately measured. The speed of light, however, is the boundary condition between mass and energy. When crossing that boundary, yea when approaching that boundary, mass is wholly transformed into energy. And coming back this way from that boundary, the boundary being the speed of light, energy can transform into mass, if, and only if, the creative forces are in place to form it into what one now considers elemental matter. A blundering fool can tear matter apart. Only a creative force can form it into the organized structure of atom or molecule, that is a creative art.⁴⁶

For this very fast pitch there is only (v / c)² converted from mass to energy. That is:

(v / c)^{^2} = (1000 / 448.9 x 10^{^15})^{^2} = 0.5 x 10^{^-30}

(that is a decimal, thirty zeros, and a 5… which is a tiny-tiny number).

So at 1,000 mph, how much mass is converted to energy? Granted it is an imperceptible amount of mass which transforms to energy, however, the principle is intact. The baseball, at that speed, is smaller than it was when held in the pitchers hand. Now conceive that as the ball approaches the speed of light its mass is converted all the more to electromagnetic energy. And when it attains the speed of light it is no more a mass, it is completely transformed into electromagnetic energy. It may be helpful to recall that visible light itself is a small segment of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum. Infrared, ultraviolet, and radio waves are outside of that segment, but they are, just the same, electromagnetic energies. Also consider that gravity is an energy in this phenomena as well. Gravity is not included in this analysis per-se, because it is not yet understood as a radiating energy form.

This phenomena, where mass approaching the speed of light is converted to energy, was advanced when the quantum physics of light was explored. Light behaves like a wave on the one hand, and like a speeding tiny pebble of mass, called a photon, on the other hand. These two phenomena are at odds but both find their applications in our understanding. Consider then that light can be understood as a tiny particle which attains a speed of 449×10^{^15} mph, or c, and looses its properties of mass as it achieves the properties of the electromagnetic energy wave. In some instances it can still display the moving mass attribute, as it does when light collides with an electron in a photo electric cell, wherein the electron is ejected from its orbit.

The phenomena of mass transitioning into energy and energy transitioning into mass by crossing some boundary related to space and time (i.e. velocity) has occurred since the beginning of time. Einstein’s theories of relativity just begin to bring it into a logical focus. The thesis being explored is that approaching and passing into these boundary conditions suspends the Newtonian and Gaussian laws of physics that we humans are accustomed to. Likewise when one leaves this solar system and enters into deep space, the understanding of time, speed, space and energy so intermingle that science cannot say with certainty that when an object appears to be 168 thousand light years away, its light takes 168 thousand years to get here. Neither can science say with any certainty whatsoever, that physical operations at the boundary of a finite universe react exactly as they do in our tiny little Cartesian coordinate system of space. In fact one can say with more certainty that they do not behave with our simplified rules.

One can see from this analysis that mass and energy are the same physical entity. There are laws which control this passing from one form to the other, E = mc², M = m/(1-v²/c²)^1/2, and these laws noticeably supersede our Newtonian and Gaussian laws we normally live in. There are boundaries where we cross out of our comfortable world and enter a world where our old laws are not relative. The speed of light marks a boundary, a critical mass marks a boundary, the measure of God’s firmament has a boundary and even the passing of time must likewise have a boundary. The three continuums which God created are not infinite, they are bounded. Thus when approaching boundary conditions our simplified Newtonian physics, arranged in our simplified Cartesian coordinate systems must give way to the more profound and relative understandings. This is where Einstein’s theories of relativity live and thrive. This is where science-so-called has its major shortfall. With the development of Einstein’s theories we will hypothesize that it did not take the light coming from the 1987 supernova⁴⁷ in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), 168,000 years to travel to us even though it appears to be 168,000 light years away. To the atheistic, evolutionary, science-so-called Ph.D., this realization will be written off as nothing more than “smoke and mirrors.” But to the Bible believing born again Christian, who is indwelt with the Spirit of God, and possesses a belief in an inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Word of God, the realization bolsters the knowledge that God says what he means and means what he says.

Many creationists spend much energy, contemplation, and verbose explanation on exactly how such a time dilation or time warping might have occurred. Bill Brown of Rocky Mountain Creation fellowship explains Dr. Humphrey’s extensive work:

“One claims that the cosmic clock ticks much faster than the earth clock, due to concentration of gravity out in space, due to a huge amount of water “above the expanse.” In Humphreys’ cosmology, time on earth is stopped on Day 4 so that the starlight could arrive for Adam to see on Day 6.”

Such explanations are nothing short of genius, but they still fall short of a rational understanding of “how” the LORD God does what he does, and “how” he did what he did. Further they gender some ugly sectarian squabbles among Christians. It is enough, this work contends, to understand and believe in faith that God did what he said and said what he did. The tools to glimpse into just “how” he may have done a six day creation are herein alluded to, but the mechanics of it all are left to the more imaginative, and those should not wax dogmatic and gender more sectarianism. All need to realize more fully that “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork” (Psalm 19:1).

4: The Black-Hole

The black-hole, referenced when we considered the third sentence of God’s revelation, was only recently verified to exist. It was given consideration because Albert Einstein’s very complex general theory of relativity could explain very clear images from recent high resolution telescopes. “Black Hole” is a descriptive title, almost as clear as God’s describing sentence where “darkness was upon the face of the deep.” It is a place in the time and space continuums where gravity (even today a force not understood) is so strong that there is a massive distortion of the whole time-space-matter continuum. All matter and light entering a black-hole disappear into nothingness and produce nothing more than a more intense gravitational pull. The gravity therein is so powerful that it swallows light and is thus black. Science-so-called hypothesizes that the matter entering into a black-hole is compressed, but a more realistic consideration is that matter was created from nothing but God’s energy, and in a black-hole it unravels back into nothing but energy.

The black-hole is the epitome of darkness, and the Holy Bible has much to say about darkness. It uses darkness to speak of things that are hidden, of things pertaining to evil, and of things pertaining to death. In the last hundred years we have discovered a physical place of darkness. For lack of any other understanding we have called this place a black-hole. Black-holes have been around since creation. It has recently been found that there is one at the center of each of God’s galaxies.⁴⁸ Before delving into the wonders of this phenomenon, consider some of the many things that its Creator says about darkness.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 ¶ And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

2Sam 22:10 He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under his feet. 11 And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: and he was seen upon the wings of the wind. 12 And he made darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies. 13 Through the brightness before him were coals of fire kindled. 14 The LORD thundered from heaven, and the most High uttered his voice (cf Psalm 18).

2Ch 6:1 Then said Solomon, The LORD hath said that he would dwell in the thick darkness.

Job 10:22 A land of darkness, as darkness itself; and of the shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is as darkness.

Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I (the LORD) laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, 10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, 11 And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?

Ps 97:2 Clouds and darkness are round about him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne.

Ps 139:12 Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.

Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Matt 8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matt 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matt 25:30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth⁴⁹ (All bold added for emphasis).

 

Black-holes, actually found to exist in the last decades, can clarify many declarations in the Holy Bible. It says in the last days⁵⁰ “knowledge shall increase,” and it surely has; the LORD God said to Daniel, “But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased” (Dan 12:4). God continues describing the times we live in, “Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand” (12:10). In this study we are not delving into the spiritual side of darkness so much, black-holes represent a very physical darkness. We want to pursue a physical understanding of the black-hole. Recall that Solomon called such a pursuit, “the sore travail” that is to exercise the rational mind. Thus, a believer should consider the recently discovered phenomena called the black-hole, and exercise his mind with it.

Black-Holes are Enlightening

The blackness which emanates from a black-hole provides light to the Bible believer. There is a sweet irony in the discovery that a black-hole is, in the latest analysis, found at the center of every one of God’s galaxies. The atheistic evolutionist had hung his hat on the mysterious black-hole, supposing its properties might have caused the initial big bang. The big bang being an explosion of matter which, they supposed, brought the universe into existence with no Supernatural God required. Now, with a black-hole showing up at the center of every galaxy, evolutionists have a billion places to hang their hats. They have, however, invested so much in their big bang hypothesis (all those children’s text books where they refer to it as a bona fide fact) that they cannot, yea they dare not, change it to a multiple of not-so-big-bangs. The atheistic evolutionist is again, stuck with a bunch of empirical evidence, i.e. the existence of the black-hole in each galaxy, evidence that does not readily fit into their big bang hypothesis. The unfortunate side of their derision is that there are so few Christians who comprehend the irony. The remnant of believers which still hold to the inerrancy and infallibility of Holy Scripture can now more emphatically point their finger at the evolutionist’s sorry dilemma. That is a reason for this writing.

Atheistic evolutionists use what we call science-so-called. That terminology, as explained previously, comes from God’s Word that says, “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith” (1Tim 6:20-21). It fits the evolutionist who is unswayed by observational or experimental evidence. They are on a quest to demonstrate that there is no Supernatural God who constructs the universe, no Supernatural involvement in the world’s continuation, and no final judgment where they will answer to their Creator.

Note also that Neil DeGrasse Tyson, their self-proclaimed spokesman and feigned replacement of Carl Sagan (1934-1996), the arch-atheist of the 20^th century, will not use the word “universe.” He refers only to the cosmos. Universe is picturesque of the LORD God speaking this world into existence in a single (uni) phrase (verse). The single phrase is made up of seven Hebrew words and it marks the opening of a Christian’s Holy Bible, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (in Hebrew #rah taw ~ymVh ta ~yhla arB tyvarB⁵¹).

It is not surprising that atheistic evolutionists are now on a quest for the mother of all black-holes. They had more or less settled into the reasoning that a “quantum fluctuation,” i.e. the reversal of a single gargantuan black-hole, started up the universe. The prevalence of black-holes all over puts a quandary in their single explosion hypothesis. A real monster black-hole might, they hope, be found at what they call the “cosmic dawn” of the universe. For the atheistic evolutionists, this mother of all black-holes initiated the big bang and is their all natural creator.

Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, which can and should be readily explored by Bible believing Christians, predicted that gravity can bend a ray of light. In fact, he surmised, a gravitational field might bend light so much that the light might not be able to escape the grasp. Albert Einstein, thus, working with his general theory of relativity, predicted the possibility of black-holes in God’s universe. Of course one could never see such a phenomena, because there is no light emitted. With no evidence, and only mathematical speculation from Einstein’s relativity theories, the phenomena was dubbed the black-hole. Then in 1990 the Hubble Space Telescope launched and one could “see” the black-hole. Again, consider that one cannot “see” a black-hole, all one can do is consider its effects on its surroundings and surmise its presence.

A Bible believer knowledgeable about black-holes will better be able to understand God’s six-day creation account, see stark contrasts in the world views of creationists and evolutionists, and gain a genuine curiosity about Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity. First consider that a knowledge of black-holes can cause one to better discern the concepts in God’s six-days of creation. God created the universe out of nothing, and knowing what a black-hole is teaches us that time, space, and matter can all just as easily disappear back into nothing. This also gives better insight into how all things “consist” or in Greek, sunistaw (sunistao) i.e. to bring or band together, to set one with another, to put together by way of composition or combination, and/or to put together or unite parts into one whole. The Bible says, “For by him (God’s dear Son) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist” (Colossians 1:16-17, bold italics added). The time, space, and matter continuums are able to transform into and out of each other. Things consist in a careful balance that we barely understand.

Understanding black-holes empowers one to see stark differences in two contending world views. Atheistic evolutionists must regard black-holes as a perfectly natural occurrence, with no involvement of a Supernatural Creator. Their charter could effectively be declared as “NO SUPERNATURAL and NO GOD.” As it turns out, these evolutionists try to forge the black-hole into being, literally, the mother of the known universe. It was necessarily present, they suppose, at their cosmic dawn. Consequently, it is necessary that matter disappearing into a black-hole must retain some “intelligence” of its form, else it could not be their creator. Two things then ensue. First the matter must not disappear into nothingness, so it must be that it is just compressed into a tiny dot of matter, with some form. Second, how does this compressed dot retain intelligence about where it came from? A myriad of journal articles like the “Black holes: Attractors for intelligence?”⁵² or the Cornell University Astrophysics Library article, “Cosmic Intelligence and Black Holes,”⁵³ or again “Black Holes: Attractors for Intelligence?”⁵⁴ The wrestling with this dilemma is ongoing.

Those holding the world view that, “In the beginning God created the heaven and earth,” however, need hold to no such poppycock.⁵⁵ The Bible believer is free to let the black-hole and the rest of the heavens, “declare the glory of God; and the firmament [to shew] his handiwork” (Psalm 19:1). For the atheistic evolutionist the black-hole is the “most massive physical objects known,” but that is not necessary for the Bible believer. In the black-hole time, space, and matter morph back into the nothingness that they came from, to the glory of God their Creator. A black-hole is not highly compressed matter, it is totally dissolved matter.

Lastly, knowledge and ample consideration of black-holes can ignite a curiosity about Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity. These theories originated the hypothesis of a black-hole’s existence, and they most credibly explain what is happening inside of a black-hole. Since black-holes have been observed in God’s universe a believer would be wise to pursue an understanding of them. It is, as Solomon put it, our sore travail.⁵⁶ Particular note is made here that Albert Einstein’s research comes from an “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” world view. As a Jewish genius, all of his reasoning had a Creator as a backdrop. His theories of relativity debunk many of the evolutionist’s hypotheses, especially those about millions and billions of years. Consequently a whole chapter of this work is dedicated to better understanding Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity.

I want, therefore, this brief consideration of black-holes to be ennobling to the Bible believer. It can give an insight to the details of God’s creation account. It exposes the differences between two world views, and it can sow seeds of curiosity for Einstein’s theories of relativity.

The Smithsonian published an article in 2008 by Robert Irion with this headline “Homing in on BLACK HOLES to gain insight into the most mysterious objects in the universe, astronomers shines a light at the chaotic core of our own Milky Way.”⁵⁷ Irion’s article is an excellent review of the W.M. Keck Observatory’s new ability to focus on stars near the center of our own Milky Way galaxy. It exposes several noteworthy facts about the black-hole we are striving to better understand.

Recall that one cannot “see” a black-hole, but one can observe its effects. When one pulls the plug from their sink the water swirls around in a spiral. The closer it gets to the center of the spiral, where the drain hole opened, the faster it moves. One cannot see the center of our Milky Way galaxy from our tiny solar system.⁵⁸ The center is blocked from our view by the constellation Sagittarius, but in the same way that water accelerates as it spirals to the drain-hole, stars are spiraling into a black-hole and accelerating as they go. Andrea Ghez, of UCLA, the lead astronomer at the Keck Observatory observes, “It was clear there were a few stars that were just hauling, clearly, they were extremely close to the center.” She continues, “It’s hard to believe black-holes exist, it’s such an exotic state of the universe.”⁵⁹ The article then continues:

For the next decade, Keck astronomers will track thousands of stars caught in the gravity of the Milky Way’s black-holes. They will try to figure out how stars are born close to the black-hole and how it distorts the fabric of space itself. “I find it amazing that we can see stars whipping around our galaxy’s black-hole,” says Taft Armandroff, director of the Keck Observatory. “If you had told me as a graduate student that I’d see that during my career, I’d have said it was science fiction.”⁶⁰

Black-holes do exist and are found at the heart of each of God’s galaxies.

The pinwheel shape of galaxies is readily observed with a good telescope. One cannot observe the pinwheel shape of our own Milky Way galaxy because we are part of it. The tremendous discovery of our decade is that the bright light at a galaxy’s center is not a huge star, as supposed previously, but thousands of stars spiraling into a black-hole, which is at the center of every galaxy. The spiraling stars are just like the spiraling water going down a drain hole, as we alluded to earlier. Black-holes in other galaxies are too far away for astronomers to study, but now we know that there is one close at hand, right here in our own galaxy.

Every day, in my lifetime, new and exciting discoveries are being made in this arena where Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity predicted black-holes before they were discovered. The Bible believer dare not ignore such a wealth of unfolding knowledge. Every discovery exalts the truth but only for those believing the truth that, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Every discovery exasperates the hypothesizer’s of the big bang model. It was God who said, “He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision” (Psalm 2:4).

In the beginning God….

In that God has distinctly revealed to mankind, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” and in that he has written down for our learning that “The heavens declare the glory of God: and the firmament sheweth his handiwork,” what does a Bible believer make of this new discovery of black-holes? God created the universe out of nothing and when one examines a black-hole that is just what they find. Is it possible that massive amounts of matter and inconceivable amounts of energy, and even portions of space itself might warp, unite, and disappear into nothing? The creationist understands that that is where it all came from anyhow, and if a Supernatural all powerful God wants to consume some of his universe and place it back into nothing, that is his prerogative. By him all things consist… or not. Could it thus be that God is just showing off?

Moreover, black-holes can lend special insight to some of God’s creation accounting. On the first day of creation, when the universe was created from nothing, the Holy Bible says, “And the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” Consider that the earth here is only matter, not yet formed into any planet as we know it, i.e. earth is not necessarily planet Earth in this context, but more like dirt (earth). Also “the face of the deep” should not to be confused with deep in the heart of such a newly formed planet. The Bible continues “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Once more we tend to picture a deep ocean of water but that is because of our perspective and not required in the consistency and context of God’s account here. There need not be a planet, as we know it, in existence until the 3^rd day, see Gen 1:9-10. This face of the deep, with no light present is very imaginable as what we call a black-hole, a deviation of that picture is that it had a face that is addressed as water, i.e H₂O, with two hydrogen atoms clumped onto an oxygen atom forming an actual molecule, but catch the picture just the same. The next phrase of God’s Word could thrust a black-hole into reverse, “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.”

Consider a black-hole. It might be described, with God’s wording, as “darkness upon the face of the deep.” It omits no light. Some would correctly argue that God’s “darkness upon the face of the deep” was dark because light had not been created. They would correctly go on to suppose that black-holes were likely created on the forth day when God created the stars. But this illustration and the typology of the black-hole remains valid. Consider that a black-hole, kicked into reverse by an omnipotent power, might emit light when that power of the Creator commands, “Let there be light.” Indeed, for the Bible believer, the discovery of the black-hole might make God’s accounting of how he did what he did all the more understandable. Something (time, space, and matter) from nothing is pretty remarkable, and a black-hole is something (time, space, and matter) disappearing into nothing. The Bible believer can stand amazed and say, with God, “The heavens declare the glory of God: and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.” Glory to his name for the discovery of the black-hole. There is no inconsistency for the Bible believer here, and none is expected when one is holding His truth.

Black Holes Expose World Views

Knowing just a little about black-holes enables us to see significant differences between creationists and evolutionist. Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity allowed him to predict the existence of the black-hole. Black-holes were considered a mathematical curiosity until they were actually found to exist. Albert Einstein believed that the universe was created out of nothing, and so, when he rattled that concept around with his general theory of relativity, out popped his concept of a black-hole. It was a profound mathematical analysis that predicted if mass and energy were to disappear back into nothing, a huge gravitational field would result. That huge gravitational field would draw in more mass and energy, and become a self-propagating black-hole. Such a simple generalization would certainly disappoint Albert Einstein and anger his German protégé Karl Schwarzschild, but it must suffice for this effort. The important thing to capture is that everything could theoretically disappear into nothing as an opposite to what God describes in his creation account.

Evolutionists, who discard the Supernatural, cannot settle on such a simple explanation. Matter appearing from nothing and disappearing into nothing is not natural. Since there must not be any Supernatural involvement in their depictions of the black-hole, there must be a continuance of matter. There must be a compression of known matter into a miniscule tiny dot which has remarkable, yea even unbelievable, density. Why is there such a great care to hold on to the existence of matter, as altered as it may be? God and Albert and I concede that matter might disappear into nothingness from whence it came. Atheists, evolutionist, and science-so-called, insist that it must remain in existence and that it must, somehow, retain some knowledge of what it once was. This difference is more than subtle. Evolutionists are on a quest for a cosmic dawn. They must hold on to the birth and/or rebirth of a star in that dawn of the universe. Ergo, they demean Albert Einstein, the mathematical genius who first proposed the existence of the black-hole. Writing for National Geographic Magazine Michael Finkel says, “Albert Einstein thought a black-hole – a collapsed star so dense that even light could not escape its thrall – was too preposterous a notion to be real. Einstein was wrong.”⁶¹ Albert was not wrong. Albert Einstein believed that in a black-hole matter disappeared into the nothingness from which it came. Science-so-called, National Geographic Magazine, and Michael Finkel believe that a black-hole is naturally caused when “a collapsed star is so dense that even light can not escape.” One opinion is dense, the other is enlightened. Such density comes from a staunch insistence on the big bang model. Such enlightenment comes from the revelations of a Creator who insists “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” For an evolutionist the impersonal, unknowable Big-Bang is the only Creator that they know, and they must keep their Mother-Nature all natural, with no Supernatural whatsoever. Thus, for them, a black-hole is a compressed star; for the creationist it is space, energy, and matter disappearing into nothing from whence it came.

The California Institute of Technology released a succinct article defending what the big bang theory is all about (One must continually contend with their use of the word “theory;” in the real “scientific method” it is a hypothesis – not a theory). A portion of the article is shown below:

According to the big bang theory, the universe began by expanding from an infinitesimal volume with extremely high density and temperature. The universe was initially significantly smaller than even a pore on your skin. With the big bang, the fabric of space itself began expanding like the surface of an inflating balloon – matter simply rode along the stretching space like dust on the balloon’s surface. The big bang is not like an explosion of matter in otherwise empty space; rather, space itself began with the big bang and carried matter with it as it expanded. Physicists think that even time began with the big bang. Today, just about every scientist believes in the big bang model. The evidence is overwhelming enough that in 1951, the Catholic Church officially pronounced the big bang model to be in accordance with the Bible⁶² (bold added for emphasis).

Notice how Yuki Takahashi implies that everybody believes the big bang model. Even the Bible, he says, is in accord with an atheist’s big bang model; the Catholic Church officially accepted it for all Christendom. If you cannot see the Emperor’s fine clothing you are irrational and uneducated, because you are going against the vast majority of all scientists. A diligent Bible believer must be against atheistic evolution, against the vast majority of scientists who defend it, and against the Roman Catholic Church which now promotes it (diligent Bible believers have been against the Roman Catholic Church since its inception, when they killed the Donatists in the 4^th century AD). The big bang is as ludicrous as a Cambrian explosion in a fossil record, and as far-fetched as the crossbred lizards turning into bald eagles. All three concepts are similarly accepted by the atheistic evolutionist. Takahashi continues:

Until the early 1900s, most people had assumed that the universe was fixed in size. New possibilities opened up in 1915, when Einstein formulated his famous general relativity theory that describes the nature of space, time, and gravity. This theory allows for expansion or contraction of the fabric of space. In 1917, astronomer Willem de Sitter applied this theory to the entire universe and boldly went on to show that the universe could be expanding. Aleksandr Friedmann, a mathematician, reached the same conclusion in a more general way in 1922, as did Georges Lemaître, a cosmologist and a Jesuit, in 1927. This step was revolutionary since the accepted view at the time was that the universe was static in size. Tracing back this expanding universe, Lemaître imagined all matter initially contained in a tiny universe and then exploding. These thoughts introduced amazing new possibilities for the universe, but were independent of observation at that time⁶³ (bold added for emphasis).

The creationist can recognize the tip-toeing and tap-dancing that Dr. Takahashi is doing here. Albert Einstein believed in a Creator, not in a big bang hypothesis. Dr. Tokahashi characterizes the general relativity theory correctly, and correctly discerned the wild imaginations of Lemaitre, but he led people to believe that his big bang hypothesis has observable evidence today. The big bang hypothesis is and forever must be without any observational data.

The creationists can comfortably concede that in a black-hole things disappear into nothing, from which they came. The evolutionist, as an atheist clinging to only natural explanations, must use science-so-called to establish that a black-hole is a natural collapse of an exhausted star, and it somehow, magically…but by perfectly natural means, produces the birthing of new stars. It is not natural that matter could just disappear into nothing, such beliefs must be left to Bible believers. “Choose you this day whom ye will serve.”⁶⁴ I’d sooner hold with the mathematical founder of the black-hole, he believed in the actual Creator of the black-hole.

Hungry for Relativity

Our third outcome for those who explore a little bit of understanding concerning black-holes, is a developed curiosity about Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity. To get through all the abstract reasoning necessary to comprehend the general theory of relativity a going-in curiosity is going to be very helpful. Allow me to spur on that curiosity by saying, in the final result, knowing roughly how these theories fit into God’s universe allows the Bible believer to see that a light coming from a star 150 thousand light years away did not necessarily take 150 thousand years to get here.

This has long been a quandary for the Bible believer. Steven Hawking publishes his “History of Time” book to substantiate that the universe is billions of years old, but God has published his “Holy Bible” of 66 books written by 40 authors over a period of 1,592 years to assure us that the world is just over 6,000 years old.⁶⁵ The Bible believer knows the mass deception that propagates the millions of years mentality. Atheistic evolutionists need the billions of years to propagate that lizards turned into bald eagles, and apes turned into humans with PhDs. They use the speed of light in deep space as their clock in order to bolster this concept of a billion year old universe. Knowing the basics of Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity emboldens the Bible believer in his denial of Stephen Hawking’s and Tyson DeGrasse’s billions of years. A Bible believer must deny the evolutionists millions of year tirades and stick with God’s Word; being familiar with the theories of relativity makes the denial more palatable.

The other value in understanding the theories of relativity is that they give a more thorough comprehension of God’s universe and just how he created it from nothing. Consider that time, matter and even three-dimensional space are all warped by velocity, acceleration, rotation, and gravity; it is ennobling. It is well worth the effort it will take to get familiar with Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity.

Gravity is the great unknown in God’s universe. It fuels the black-hole, indeed, it is the black-hole. Albert Einstein illustrates it like this: Just as a bowling ball rolled onto a trampoline causes the fabric to dimple and sag, so planets and stars warp space and time. He goes on, the planets orbiting the Sun are not being pulled by the Sun, they are following this warped space and time deformation. If our Sun warps the fabric of space and changes the ticking of our clocks, what might each black-hole centered in each galaxy of God’s universe do? There are millions of them, and each is hundreds of times more powerful than our Sun. Makes one think… I hope.

5: Algebra’s Imaginary Dimension

A short analysis of an ancient craft called Algebra can give important insight about the boundary conditions that produce time warps in God’s Universe. It is important to explore the existence of time warps because science-so-called⁶⁶ is operating under the delusion the it took 168 thousand years for the light of the 1987a supernova to get to planet Earth. The most studied supernova in the universe, is used here as a talking point because the time that light travels through deep space is the only nail holding the age of the universe to the millions mark, yea, now they say billions of years! Understanding boundary conditions, and steps off into other dimensions, is important to those who would understand relativity and warps in the time, space, and matter continuums.

Science-so-called supposes that light entering gargantuan telescopes and coming from the edges of the universe (which they still suppose is infinite and unbounded) took four billion years to get here. They completely disregard the time, space, and matter warps of our focus. The aged craft of Algebra does indeed throw another wrench into their evolutionary machinery; it helps us understand the boundary conditions and multiple dimensions present on the edge of deep space, and in every one of the millions of black-holes in God’s unfathomable universe.

Just after God confounded man’s language, as recorded in Genesis 11, and just before a son of Eber, named Abram, was called by God to leave Ur of the Chaldees, the Persians began perfecting Algebra. Thus Algebra was up and coming at the same time that Abram was called by God and had his name changed to Abraham. Incidentally, Abram, being a descendant of Eber, generated the nation called Hebrews. Thus Abraham and Algebra were around two thousand years before Christ, and then, almost a thousand years after Christ, the Persians published “The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing” in AD 830. This title, from Baghdad, can be effectively captured in one Arabic word, Algebra. Intelligent man has been striving to balance equations now for 4,000 years, and a key challenge in that balancing effort is called the quadratic equation.

Algebra’s Lines and Curves

There are only two pivotal concepts to grapple with in using Algebra to comprehend multidimensional space. They are lines and curves. When one adds two lines together they get another line, but when one multiplies two lines together they get a parabolic curve. That seems simple enough, and it can be aptly illustrated without a lot of mathematical complexity. The meat of this analysis occurs when the parabolic curve is factored back into the two lines which formed it. Some of the curves will factor into lines that are outside of the real world. The real world, for this analysis will be a two-dimensional black board. The boundary where one crosses out of these dimensions and enters into a third dimension will be the heart of this illustration. When one comes off of the blackboard, into the room they enter into the imaginary dimension. When one passes into the wall behind the blackboard they are in that same imaginary dimension. The third dimension, which we can visualize, is not real on our two-dimensional blackboard, and it is thus, called the imaginary dimension.

Figure 1 shows that a parabolic curve is in actuality a three-dimensional object, i.e. a cone, that gets captured in a two-dimensional world, i.e. our blackboard. Note that as the cone moves towards or away from the blackboard the shape of the parabolic curve changes. What needs to be applied in this exercise is the ability to visualize that there are similar shapes existing outside of our little three-dimensional world, that bump into us and produce effects that only vaguely get represented in our real world. Beautiful shapes with near-perfect symmetry in an imaginary world produce the warping, curving, and rotations of space and time in our real world. That is abstract and profound.

 

Figure 1: A cone forms a parabola

Two lines multiplying together to form a curve does involve some exotic language, but that language can be helpful in understanding the whole analysis. First consider that this analysis will be done on a two-dimensional plane via our blackboard and chalk. The curve formed from two lines on the blackboard, two lines that multiply

together, is called a “parabola” because it is actually a cone shape which is sliced by the parallel plane of the blackboard. Just like there is an invisible third dimension in our blackboard reality, a dimension that does not fit well in our two-dimensional blackboard’s world, so there is a fourth, fifth and sixth dimension to our 3D world. These are the dimensions that do not fit well in our three-dimensional reality. Ergo, this whole analysis is intended to get one used to thinking “outside of the box.” In fact the equation which defines a parabolic curve is called “quadratic” because it is solved (actually “resolved,” or in Algebra of antiquity “balanced”) by the use of the “quadrate,” a word from antiquity meaning square (or box). Armed with this insightful etymology of Algebra let us examine the formation of the parabolic curve.

Linear Algebra consists of lines. Lines on a two-dimensional blackboard can be represented in two variables forever called x and y. The line where Y1 = X + 1 is portrayed in the snapshot of a TI-83⁶⁷ graphing calculator used throughout this analysis. A second line, where Y2 = X + 7 is similarly shown.

Figure 2: Graph of lines x + 1 and x + 7

When these two lines are multiplied together the result is the quadratic equation as follows:

Y3 = Y1 * Y2 = (X + 1) * (X + 7)

= X * (X + 1) + 7 * (X + 1)

= X^2 + 1 X + 7 X + 7

= X^{^2} + 8 X + 7

The resulting parabolic curve from this quadratic equation is shown below:

Figure 3: Graph of x + 1 and x + 7 and their resulting parabola

The parabolic curve is actually a cut away two-dimensional view of a conic section, as shown in Figure 1. Picture what happens when stepping the blackboard a bit further away from this cone. This gives another parabolic curve created by multiplying lines Y1 = X + 2 and Y2 = X + 6, where:

Y3 = Y1 * Y2 = (X+2)*(X+6) = X^{^2} + 8X + 12

Figure 4: Graph of x + 2 and x + 6 and their resulting parabola

Those graphs are shown below:

Stepping the blackboard even a bit further away from this cone gives another parabolic curve created by multiplying lines Y1 = X + 3 and Y2 = X + 5, where:

Y3 = Y1 * Y2 = (X+3)*(X+5) = X^{^2} + 8X + 15

Figure 5: Graph of x + 3 and x + 5 and their resulting parabola

Those graphs are shown below:

Taking the blackboard another step away from this cone, bear with me, this will now get interesting, gives yet another parabolic curve created by multiplying lines Y1 = X + 4 and Y2 = X + 4. These lines are identical and the multiplying them makes a square as shown below:

Y3 = Y1 * Y2 = (X+4)*(X+4) = (X + 4)^{^2} = X^{^2} + 8X + 16

Figure 6: Graph of x + 4 squared and the resulting parabola

Those graphs are shown below:

Notice now, at this crucial point of transition, that stepping the blackboard another step away from the cone will show a parabolic curve, however the lines that multiply to form it must transition into the imaginary world. They are still real, they just disappear into an imaginary plane that is not on this two-dimensional blackboard. From their imaginary plane, out of our view, they still multiply together to give a real parabolic curve: a curve that is in our plane and on our blackboard. Two such graphs are shown below:

Figure 7: Graph of parabolas from multiplied imaginary lines.

Since the TI-83 cannot display all these parabolas on one screen in color the following chart may be helpful:

Figure 8: Graphs of the six various parabolas

The graph of the pairs of lines which multiply together to form these parabolas (less the last two, of course, which are off in an imaginary plane) are show in the graph below:

Figure 9: Graphs of the pairs of lines multiplied to form various parabolas

The imaginary lines which multiply together to give the last two parabolic curves are as follows:

Y3 = X^{^2} + 8X + 17 = (X + 4 + √-1 )*(X + 4 – √-1 ) and

Y3 = X^{^2} + 8X + 20 = (X + 4 + 2√-1 )*(X + 4 – 2√-1 )

Figure 10: Graphic of a plane orthogonal to the blackboard.

 

These lines, (X + 4 ± √-1 ) and (X + 4 ± 2√-1 ), are calculated from a completion of squares method for solving quadratic equations (the method is formalized in Algebra’s famous Quadratic Equation,⁶⁸ which solves for the roots of a quadratic equation). The term, √-1 , is what makes these lines imaginary. It is normally designated, i, and called imaginary because there is no such value in the real world, i.e. there is no square root of a negative number because there is no number multiplied by itself which could result in a negative number. And yet there you have it, such a term is necessary for the solution of this quadratic equation. Indeed such an imaginary term, in an imaginary dimension, is required in many mathematical applications. And this imaginary dimension, outside of our three-dimensional world, is a mainstay of Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity.

Explore this imaginary dimension through the consideration of the imaginary pair of lines which multiply together and come back into our real world as a quadratic equation. First consider the two lines Y = X + 4 ± √-1 = X + 4 ± i . They may be rationalized as existing in two parallel planes, one just in front of, and one just behind, the blackboard which contains the real parabola, Y = X^{^2} + 8X + 17. The next parabola, Y = X^{^2} + 8X + 20 can be factored into the two lines, Y = X + 4 ± 2i which may be rationalized as existing in two parallel planes, one just a little further in front, and one just a little further behind, the blackboard.

Figure 11: Graphic of the imaginary planes relative to the blackboard

One can now visualize the pattern with this sequence of parabolic curves; as they move upward the lines which form them move closer together The lines touch their parabola where it crosses the x axis and y equals zero. When the parabola only touches the x axis at a single point the two lines collide into one. And when the parabola does not touch the x axis, i.e. reaching a point where y equals zero, then the lines move off into an imaginary dimension. The further the vertex of the parabola is from the x axis, the further the two imaginary planes are from the plane of the blackboard.

Analytic Geometry Goes Even Further

Investigating the two-dimensional figures that are formed when a right circular cone is intersected by a plane is called Analytical Geometry. Three-hundred years before Christ the Greek mathematician Menaechmus (380 – 320 BC) discovered “depending how he tilted the plane when it intersected the cone, he formed different shapes at the intersection – beautiful shapes with near-perfect symmetry.”⁶⁹ The heart of Analytic Geometry is the development of defining equations for all these shapes, but here an overview of their formation will suffice.

In Figure 12 below the concept of a plane cutting a conic section and forming a curve in two-dimensional space is illustrated. In the next figure the types of curves that can be formed is more fully captured. Notice again that the shape that causes the curve is outside of its dimensions, and is thus in an imaginary dimension.

Figure 12 Planes Cutting Conic Sections (OpenStax Precalculus)

The four basic two-dimensional curves which are attributed to such conic sections are shown in Figure 13. Conic sections outside of the two-dimensional plane interact to produce effects in the two-dimensional plane.

Figure 13 Curves Produced by Conic Sections (OpenStax Precalculus)

It should be noted that even simple straight lines and points can be generated by conic sections interacting with a two-dimensional plane. These are called degenerate conic sections because they degenerate form a complex form into a very simple two-dimensional form. These are shown in Figure 14.

Figure 14 Degenerate Conic Sections, Lines and Points (OpenStax Precalculus)

 

We need not go any deeper into Analytic Geometry to comprehend that imaginary dimensions outside of our perceived three-dimensional world produce effects within our three-dimensional world. The same way that the dimensions outside of the two-dimensional blackboard produce linear and symmetric geometries on the blackboard, dimensions outside of our three-dimensional world produce relativity effects in our real world. Thus time, space, and matter warping and curving in our world can be conceived and mathematically described by stepping out into imaginary dimensions.

Even More Dimensions

Following this sequence off into the imaginary dimensions, especially comprehending its boundary conditions, empowers an understanding of the other dimensions in the universe. These imaginary dimensions are sometimes fathomed as an imaginary universe, or a parallel universe. The abstract reasoning needed to comprehend time warps and theories of relativity necessitates this journey.

Such a parallel universe occupying imaginary mathematical dimensions is essential for the comprehension and application of Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity. In the solution of a simple quadratic equation it is necessary to jump from a two-dimensional plane into a third, albeit imaginary, plane. In a similar manner, operating in a three-dimensional space it will be necessary to jump into an imaginary fourth dimension in order to find solution to our relative reality.

Once one is comfortable with a jump into a fourth dimension of space, it is reasonable to comprehend a fifth. In actuality each of our three dimensions has an orthogonal (at right angles or 90 degrees offset) but mathematically imaginary dimension. And so now there are six dimensions of space. Visualizing these imaginary orthogonal dimensions constructs a parallel universe, where one has, in total, six dimensions, three real and three imaginary. Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity operates in ten dimensions.⁷⁰ One may have talked with people who were off in another dimension. Albert Einstein had the profound ability to step back into our 3-D real world and teach university students where he had been.

Consider again the solutions to the quadratic equations which were just examined. As the parabola in this view moves up the blackboard, the lines which multiply together to form it move together, until they unite into a single line. At this point the multiplied lines form what is called a square solution. This square solution is what is resolved to find all quadratic solutions, i.e. quadratics use a completion of squares method for this solution.⁷¹ When a parabola moves up and above this completed square, the lines move out into an imaginary dimension. They exist out there, they are real out there, and when they multiply together they form a phenomena in our real 3-D world, a phenomena known as a parabola. That is remarkable.

The lines which exist in the imaginary world of mathematics multiply together and produce a phenomena actualized in the real, 3-D, visible, sure-enough, there-it-is, world, the world that one knows and explores. That is almost worth repeating several times.

Once one gets a hold of such a truth, they can enter a realm where everything does not have to be just as it seems. Some “science” must enter into a universe of a greater dimension. Allow, again, Albert Einstein to go there in one of his more basic solutions.

It was Albert Einstein, not Steven Hawking, that originated a concept called “The Theory of Everything.” It began as an effort to understand why gravity and inertia were directly related, i.e. mass responds to gravity with the same set of equations with which it responds to inertia. To comprehend this relationship Albert Einstein had to venture into the imaginary dimension of which I now speak. Upon his return from this parallel universe he gave a simple and yet genius description. It has enlightened many about the need of other dimensions for a more thorough understanding of God’s universe.

Gravity might be modeled with a two-dimensional concept existing in a three-dimensional world. Stretch the skin of a balloon over the mouth of a bucket. This elastic will be our two-dimensional world. Now place a large marble in its center, this will cause the elastic to sink in the middle. Take a second, much smaller marble and roll it on the elastic surface around the rim of the bucket. Observe what happens. The rolling ball does not roll in a straight line like inertia would require. Instead it curves and circles around the larger mass in the center of the elastic plane. That is what gravity would require.

Further, as friction decelerates the rolling marble, its inertia decreases and it spirals toward the central marble, just like gravity would draw it in. The genius of this explanation rests on the concept that a two-dimensional problem can be extended into a third dimension for our better understanding. In like manner, understanding the science about our three-dimensional world, can be enhanced when extend into additional dimensions. Understanding that a two-dimensional parabolic curve is in reality a three-dimensional conic section is empowering. And so it goes for expanding from our three dimensions into fourth, fifth and sixth dimensions. One cannot fully comprehend the theories of relativity without this multidimensional perspective.

Why Do We Have To Learn This?

The forever repeated question in Algebra class is, “Why do we have to learn this?” It is often backed with the insight, “My dad said he never used “X”s and “Y”s again in his life.” Arithmetic teaches one to balance their checkbook, Mathematics teaches one to think with abstraction, and Algebra marks ones first step into mathematics. The lazy mind does not deal with abstraction; don’t be lazy minded. God wants to renew our diligent minds.

Is it necessary to comprehend a parallel universe to understand the Bible? Unequivocally, no! Understanding the Bible, Genesis to Revelation, requires only comprehension that 1) man is fallen, destitute and unable to repair his fallen estate wherein he is destined to eternal death. 2) “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” And 3) “Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord, shall be saved, … he that hath the son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life” (Rom 10:13, 1John 5:12).

When one is saved from eternal death and given God’s eternal life, they are quickened, or made alive in a Godly dimension. One is then given eyes to see, and ears to hear. It is no longer “Seeing is believing,” that is only a physical dimension. Now it is “Believing is seeing,” because born-again believers now have God’s spiritual dimension born into us. This comprehending of additional dimensions, the exploring of a parallel universe can cause, for those who have eyes to see, a greater depth to God’s revelation, and a greater trust that God says what he means and means what he says.

In the same sense, going to Seminary and learning Greek and Hebrew is not necessary for understanding the Bible. Learning the original languages of the Bible does not give one a greater comprehension of what the Bible says, it is the quickening of the Holy Spirit of God that brings any comprehension. So again, learning the original languages does not enable one to believe the Bible or understand the Bible, but it brings a greater depth to God’s revelation, and a greater trust in the very words which God used in that revelation. Likewise, understanding the mathematical concepts that make every word of the creation account conceivable brings a greater depth to God’s revelation and a greater trust that God says what he means, and means what he says.

Aside from this important spiritual dimension, however, there is still a comprehension of the physical universe which requires the realization of imaginary dimensions and a parallel universe phenomena. Without the comprehension of these dimensions one might simply expect that mass and energy situated out at the edges of the universe behave exactly as they do here in our tiny corner of it all. With such a limitation one will not comprehend any theories of relativity, nor consider that light might project through space without respect of Newtonian physics.

Ignoring all this might lead one to think that a super nova which occurred 168,000 light years away occurred 168,000 years ago. They might emphatically argue that this is just straight science, and those who deny it are brainwashed religionists. They, in ignoring this reality of imaginary dimensions, a parallel universe, and theories of relativity, never have to grapple with the idea that the speed of light might control the tick of the clock, or the tick of a clock might control the speed of light. When they are thus in lock step sync with our Newtonian and Gaussian laws in our local Cartesian coordinate system, they insist that they are the true scientists and any Bible believers are charlatans and liars. Despite their plight, or perhaps because of it, it behooves Christians to step out into the imaginary dimensions, and to comprehend some aspects of Einstein’s theories of relativity. It can enhance one’s faith, and empower arguments to the general masses deceived by “science-so-called.”

Einstein’s Use of Multidimensional Analysis

And so, where have we now come in preparing some basics for Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity? Where are we at, knowing Algebra’s exposure of an imaginary world of mathematics? Our thesis was that exploring these introductions would open avenues for a very careful belief of every word the LORD gave in his Genesis account. Science-so-called has been exposed as an enemy of believing every word of God. Many atheistic evolutionists may not be purposely, or even consciously pitted against God’s revelation. PhDs pursuing their scientific methods have explored the universe with a sincere integrity, but they are restricted from God’s truth by barriers of political correctness and Bible ignorance.

Atheistic evolutionists are armed with an a priori refusal to acknowledge our Creator; they refuse to acknowledge the LORD God’s revelation of himself in Holy Scripture, supposing instead that the Bible is a man made book. Those contentions are battled on other fronts, here we pursue the theories of relativity, and the reality of deeper dimensions in God’s universe. In his youth, as a student of physics, Albert Einstein began attacking the rigidness of scientific law.⁷² The rigid laws of science were deemed to be omniscient and omnipotent, and Einstein’s defiance of such rigidity opened up vistas for his theories of relativity.

Newton’s laws of motion and his theory of gravitation were published in his Principia Mathematics in 1687. “Einstein described the Newtonian basis of physics at the end of the nineteenth century as ’eminently fruitful’ and ‘regarded as final.”⁷³ Albert, the physics student, then wrote much more on Newtonian findings:

It not only gave results for the movements of the heavenly bodies, down to the most minute details, but also furnished a theory of the mechanics of discrete and continuous masses, a simple explanation of the principle of the conservation of energy and a complete and brilliant theory of heat. The explanation of the facts of electrodynamics [the physics of moving electrical charges] within the Newtonian systems was more forced; the least convincing of all, from the very beginning, was the theory of light.”⁷⁴

As a physicist, Einstein began a retraction of Newton’s “Laws,” laws which many regarded as “final.” First in exploring light and its ambiguities, and then exploring gravity and its perfect mystery, Einstein concluded that what Newton regarded as “Scientific Law” was really only “Relative Law.”

At the turn of the nineteenth century the scientific method began to be considered omnipotent and infallible. For the atheistic evolutionist it “evolved” into the omniscient revealer of all truth. In this transition the scientific method underwent a metamorphosis, whereby anybody questioning its veracity was a heretic and worthy of exile or worse. With the scientific method in this infallible, inerrant, exalted position, Albert Einstein, with his theories of relativity, was a particular embarrassment. He rather enjoyed bringing up facts which embarrassed those who thought their laws of science were omnipotent. Although this author also enjoys poking fun at atheistic evolutionists, even as Elijah enjoyed mocking the prophets of Baal (1Kings 18:27), the purpose here is to expose their error so that the Bible believer might not take the false gods to seriously.

The twisted nature of man is revealed when the more obvious the corporate blunder, the more lock step and defiant the corporation becomes. Hans Christian Anderson ingeniously captured that in a short story 190 years ago. In parallel to his story, the finely crafted clothing, fit for the emperor, is woven together by atheistic evolutionists who intertwine an infinite universe, with a Random Chance Creator, all lased into an unbounded cosmos. Indeed the Emperor has no clothes, but if one stands up and says that out loud, all the scientists-so-called point them out and call them fools. They insist that “Random Chance” is their sole creator. Albert Einstein pointed to their omniscient Newtonian laws and said, “There are some things that they do not know!”

The Bible believer can coexist with Einstein and algebra, in a bounded universe. God’s Word is in perfect harmony with math and science, and blessed is the man who puts his trust therein. God says what he means, and means what he says. The existence of the black-hole, the general theory of relativity, and the bounded universe, these three profound concepts merge and enlighten God’s declaration about his Only Begotten Son, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men” (John 1:1-4), and again “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created” (Rev 4:11).

Some readers may have just taken their first step deep into the world of abstract reasoning. Comprehending that there are unknown, imaginary dimensions to God’s universe is a big step for our finite minds. Such abstraction is normally accompanied by years of training in the higher mathematics that substantiates multidimensional analysis. Such a condensed version was herein attempted because understanding where Albert Einstein went to develop his theories of relativity is helpful in seeing, or at least glimpsing into, the very complex world where time, space, and matter might envelope each other and warp what is otherwise a uniform continuum. Mathematically then, the three dimensions of space and one dimension of time must needs expand into ten dimensions of the universe. Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity transitions the mathematician into that expansion. Before pursuing a leap into Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity, however, consider how the added dimension might improve our own cognizance of God’s creation.

A Christians use of Multidimensional Analysis

The believer who knows that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works” (2Tim 3:16-17), that, “The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2Pet 1:21), and that, “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times” (Psalm 12:6), knows also that God says what he means, and means what he says.

God, in his Word, gives us his steps in the creation of the universe. He says it was once without form and void and darkness was on the face of the deep. A believer trusts God’s words, and can believe without complex abstraction or Albert Einstein’s theories. But comprehending the harmony of it all helps one grasp the exactness of God’s wordings. An appreciation of that exactness might hinder the tendency to read things between the lines. One thereby strengthens the truth that God says what he means, and leaves no spaces between his words, his words are clear, his days are days, and his thousand years are thousand years. Such clarity comes into better focus when one comprehends that things are not always as they seem in our little three-dimensional world.

When one understands that there are more dimensions to the God’s universe than our three little dimensions of space and one continuous dimension of time there is more room for angels moving about, for spiritual insights, and our own transformation in the twinkling of an eye. Things said by an infinite God become more conceivable to the finite mind because of the added dimensions that we can comprehend, but not really understand. The unbelievable, some how becomes a little more believable when we do not restrict God to our world. There are dimensions which we cannot see and they effect the dimensions that we live in. Thus a Red Sea dividing does not take a mighty wind, manna and quail from heaven does not require grain and birds of “natural” means.

One need not be a mathematician to marvel in the multidimensional truths nor explore other dimensions. The believer of God’s perfect revelation of all things under heaven can, all the more, marvel in the depths and exactness of his Holy Bible. Romans 11:33 says, “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” The unregenerate, living in a random chance universe that is evolving into a higher order by some sort of survival of the fittest myth, must shrink into the corner of his library and hide a math book away amongst all his buried “scientific” journals, while he insists that the Emperor is wearing fine clothes. Random chance cannot account for all this wonder in a billion years.

But the believer who understands that there are more dimensions to the universe than what we see knows that, “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen,” and that “through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear” (Heb 11:1,3). That believer is better equipped to believe every word of God.

6: Relativity

Some did not pay close attention in their high school Euclidean Geometry course. Indeed some avoided it all together. The purpose of this section is to overcome that and explore some foundational reasoning for comprehending Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity. The believer in our Lord Jesus Christ wants to comprehend these theories for two reasons. As stated previously, one is challenged to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven; “this is the travail, which God hath given to the sons of men to be exercised in it.” (Ecclesiastes 1:13, 3:10) When asked, “Why climb Mount Everest?” the most common answer is, “Because it is there!” Why learn Einstein’s theories of relativity? Because they are here, and one is tasked to travail and exercise in them.⁷⁵

Now if that reason does not sufficiently ward off someone’s dread of mathematics and abstract thought consider this: the rebellious heart of man has contrived a notion that he has no Supernatural Creator. He thinks he has arrived on the scene after millions of years of natural selection and natural survival of the fittest. In their natural thinking light left the sun this morning and in eight minutes traveled the 92.96 million miles to get here. So too, they surmise with their logic, light left a supernova, traveled for 168,000 years and arrived at earths telescopes in February of 1987. One can test and explore their first hypothesis and show it a good theory, but their second hypothesis makes our God a deceiver. Our Creator, our Lord Jesus Christ, revealed that he created all things in six-days and rested on the seventh. His revelation shows this creation act occurred in 4,000 BC. Trust Christ. The Bible says, “For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged” (Romans 3:3-4). Blind faith is perfectly adequate for a true believer. Blind faith, however, does not give a logical answer to the naysayers who surround us. In this instance the theories of relativity can be of great help. One need not understand Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity to gain solace. But just comprehending them will improve one’s stance on God’s sure foundation. That more sure stance will certainly frustrate any naysayers that one might contend with. Contend for the faith, give an answer for the hope that is in you. Exhort and convince the gainsayers. (Jude 1:3, I Peter 3:15, Titus 1:9) Comprehending these theories of relativity can help.

Albert Einstein wrote the book on Relativity. It is titled “Relativity.”⁷⁶ Rather than send one off to the library, or to Amazon.com, this work is a re-write of his excellent explanation. He wrote so that university students would comprehend, and so they could understand. He wrote to Bachelor of Science students; this author, in this effort, writes to the high school graduate. He wrote with exacting depth and clarity about the theories he spent his life exploring; this author, writes with less clarity, but much less math, and if one bear with me in this effort the goal can be obtained.

Relative Laws of Euclidean Geometry

Some simple concepts can introduce relativity to the rational thinker. If one recalls anything about Euclidean Geometry, they recall that it dealt with formal proofs and the building of a staircase of knowledge, one step at a time. A first exercise involved the axiom that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. That axiom, assumed as always true, is now known as only relative. It depends on the coordinate system in use. Going from my home to Dundee, New York, is conceivably shorter as the crow flies. They don’t have to go around the lake and two mountains. Going from my home to London, England, however, leaves the simplified plane geometry, a simplified plane where axioms are conceived to always be true, and enters into a spherical geometry where the simple axiom fails. As the crow flies on a straight line, is no longer the shortest distance to London, England.

Notice further in this spherical coordinate system that if I walk due east until I get to the other side of the globe I am still walking due east. If I walk due north until I get to the other side of the globe, however, I have changed my reference (not my direction) and I am walking due south. So too, if I walk due north until I hit the pole, then turn right I am going south. If I continue to the equator and then turn right, I am going west, and if I continue on I can eventually turn right to end where I started. It is thus possible, in a spherical coordinate system, to pace out a triangle that contains three 90 degree turns. One cannot do that in plane geometry, there are laws of Euclidean Geometry which forbid it. Those laws are relative, here, relative to one’s coordinate system. Space is not the final frontier, but space is surely found in some sort of a spherical coordinate system. Space is therefore, removed from the laws that one contrives in a simple planar coordinate system.

Relative Laws of Motion

Albert Einstein loves the following type of illustration, bear with me if I do too. A man is in a car of a speeding train, he tosses a ball up in the air, he perceives it going straight up, stopping, and falling straight back down where he catches it. On a platform watching the train go by, a man perceives the same ball arching up in a circle, then arching back down. It follows an arching pattern. One can conceive that straight line motions are relative to the relative motions between two simple plane coordinate systems. If one of these moving coordinate systems was a spherical coordinate system, or if one coordinate system was rotating in reference to the ball, even more profound dimensions of relativity would be added to the rise and fall of the ball. Conceiving all this relativity is profound, and this analysis has, thus far, been kept profoundly simple. Take yet another step into relativity.

Relative Laws of Velocity

What has been examined so far, the relativity our reference system, has been conceivable with only a little strain on our understanding. In considering velocity, and particularly the velocity of light, that strain might increase, so bear with this next illustration. One cannot improve on Albert Einstein’s explanations and illustrations in this arena. To follow them, however, we need to grapple with the Lorentz Transformation.⁷⁷ I want to make this understandable to those who do not have four years of college math in their background, but I want to keep Einstein’s exactness intact. The Lorentz Transformation transforms from a fixed frame to a moving frame. That transformation, shown below, details how a moving frame, designated with prime signs ( ‘ ), moves with velocity v, in the x direction. Notice that the x dimension and the time dimension both warp because of this velocity.

Figure 12 Fixed Frame to Moving Frame of the Lorentz Transformation

The Lorentz Transform equations help those who follow them, but Einstein’s illustration will help all of us. Imagine a mile long train hurtling down a straight section of track at a breakneck speed, a man in the caboose, positioned so he can see the engine is just now hurtling past a man on the bank who can also view the engine. At that instant a bolt of lightning strikes a tree right beside the engine. Get this scenario firmly implanted in the brain. The engine and the lightning bolt are exactly one mile from both men. The train and the man in the train’s caboose are moving at breakneck speed relative to the man on the bank. Analyze the next few microseconds very carefully.

The flash of light emitted from the lightning bolt begins a one mile trek towards the man on the bank. As it speeds towards him the man on the train is speeding towards the flash of light and gets closer to it. I have the train traveling at breakneck speed so one can easily concede that when the flash of light intercepts the man on the train, he is significantly closer to the lightning struck tree than is the stationary man on the bank. One would then rationalize that the man on the train would see the flash of light an instant or two before the man on the bank sees the flash of light. Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity says, no, no, that is not so. The speed of light is finite and constant at a speed we call c. It is not at all relative to the velocity of the reference sending it or receiving it. It is forever constant at speed c.

This will not make rational sense. The illustrations just given, Albert Einstein’s illustration without all the mathematics, is about to show some things that truly boggle the mind. The whole concept hangs on two principles. First, that light does have a finite velocity. My older brother said he could click off the light and be under the bed covers before it got dark in the room. I was young, so I believed him. I have never had trouble with the fact that light takes time to propagate through space.

I was told in high school that the first rays of Sun light that hit me in the morning, left that burning ball of helium and took eight minutes to get to Earth before I could see them. For me this is perfectly conceivable, but since I have run into Christians who did not believe it as quickly, I have included a later chapter on how one discovers and measures the speed of light. It is fascinating. Understand here that it does take a measurable amount of time for light to propagate through open space; it does have a measurable velocity. The second principle is a little more profound.

Light travels through open space at a constant rate c, no matter how fast you might be traveling in that open space. Let me illustrate this truth with a story. When I was a teen I had two best friends, Chucky and Jimmy. Chucky not only had a driver’s license, he also had a Chevy. Steuben County had put brand new stop signs on every rural dirt road in our township. We, as teens, found it entertaining to hit them with a rock as Chucky drove by at 50 mph. I am not a pitcher, but say I can chuck a rock out of a car window at 20 mph.

One night it was Jimmy’s shot. He flung the rock from the back window of the Chevy. The rock hit the sign at 70 mph. That makes sense since the car was going 50 mph, and Jimmy’s rock was thrown at 20 mph. The rock, thrown from the car, is going 70 mph when it hits the sign. The sign catches the rock on its very edge and wings it back at us at 70 mph, but we are still going 50 mph. The rock goes by my ear at 120 mph, that’s its velocity going south plus our velocity going north. When it hit Jimmy in the back seat of the Chevy and broke his jaw and two molars, it was going very, very fast. Normal relative velocities add, but light is not at all like that.

When the beam from Chucky’s headlight hits a stop sign, the light waves hit at speed c. If he is going 300 mph, or 2 mph, the light propagates from his high beams at speed c, and hits the sign at speed c. One would think that it would hit the stop sign at speed c + 300 mph. It does not, it only goes at its top speed c, and the 300 mph cannot add to that speed. Thus the light leaves his high beam and hits the stop sign at speed c, even if he drives by at 300 mph. If this headlight were attached to a spacecraft traveling at an inconceivable speed, the light waves leave the lens at speed c and they intercept any incoming meteorite at speed c. If the spacecraft had taillights, light waves travel off to the rear at speed c.

The speed of light in space is forever a constant, and c = 300,000,000 m/sec. Whether it is leaving an object or bumping an object its speed is c. This is not intuitive. One can get a running head start and throw a javelin faster and farther. When one gets a running head start with a flash light, however, the beam of light does not go any faster. Relative velocity does not add or subtract from the speed of light. Okay, let’s go back to Einstein’s lightning flash and the speeding train.

The speed of light is constant no matter the relative speed of any other object. The flash of light leaves the burning tree at speed c, then a microsecond later, it intercepts the man on the bank at speed c. But at the exact same time it travels the shorter distance to the man in the caboose. The distance is shorter because the train moved towards the strike for that microsecond. At the same instant that the man on the bank sees the flash, the man in the caboose sees the flash. For the man in the caboose, the light traveled the 1 mile from the engine to the caboose. For the man on the bank the light traveled the 1 mile from the tree to his position. You and I know that the distance from the tree to the caboose was less than 1 mile because of its relative motion. The light traveled less distance at the constant velocity, and thus it took more time. Time and distance are relative while the speed of light is forever constant. Thus time warped and distance warped to accommodate the constant speed of light.

Without laboring through all the proofs and all the math, let us understand the two things that happen when things start moving very, very fast. First, the relative distance for a moving object begins to shrink. At conceivable speeds it is an imperceptible shrinkage, but that 100 mph fastball is actually smaller than that official hardball held by the umpire. Some batter might swear to that, but it is, as we say, imperceptible at our minute velocities.

Probably the most conceivable example of this truth is found in Bohr’s model of the atom. Protons and neutrons are particles in the nucleus, and the electrons are moving very very fast in a synchronized orbit. Let’s propose that the proton and the electron are the same size but the electron is moving around the nucleus at such breakneck speed that it appears to be imperceptibly small. A nuclear physics example might not intrigue everyone, but it is an exciting illustration for some of us. Also consider that the seconds of time must tick by slower for the moving object. Again, this is not intuitively obvious, nor is it naturally conceivable. The shrinking distance and the slowing time clock are both understood by abstract reasoning. We have no concrete example where this might be observed.

When God said, “Let there be light,” he created light with some powerful and astounding attributes. Recall that he said, “It was good.” The naturalist who pretends that God’s creation came into existence by simple natural causes is befuddled by some of these more complex considerations. The bombardier beetle might embarrass their biological survival of the fittest hypothesis, but Einstein’s theory of relativity can confound everything they stand on; especially their supposition that it took 13 billion years for some light rays to reach our Hubble Telescope. This is some real profound stuff.

Okay, at this point if one can comprehend the Lorentz Transformation equations, go read Einstein’s Book, “Relativity.” The rest will struggle through another illustration that might make a purist of purer mathematicians angry, but it clarifies the concept well.

The lightning flash leaves the burning tree and speeding train engine at speed c. It travels the one mile to the fellow on the embankment in time t. When he sees the flash it hits him at speed c. It also travels the one mile to the fellow in the caboose in time t. A mile is 5,280 feet. Let us imagine that the fellow on the train moved that 280 feet in time t. No matter what his relative velocity might be, the light hits him at speed c, and traveled one mile to do it. For the moving man the mile is shorter, and the time clicks by slower. Herein is the profound point, it takes time t to get to him. The only way that this is possible is if the one mile distance for the moving man is shorter by the 280 feet. But the speed is still constant, so the distance, to him is still one mile. Also consider that the flash of light arrives at both men at the same instant. We reason that it should have reached the moving man sooner, or in less time. The only way that this could be, is if time ticks at a slower rate in the moving train.

This imperative is not intuitive. It is not perceptible in any natural phenomena that man can observe. It is unnatural, but very real, and in God’s creation, very good. Let us say it again, when one man is moving towards the coming flash of light, relative to the other man, the moving man’s clock ticks slower than the stationary man’s clock, and the moving man’s mile is shorter than the stationary man’s mile. The greater the relative velocity, the slower the moving man’s clock ticks, and the shorter is his mile. That is profound. Now let’s approach the speed of light; it is a boundary condition where distance disappears, and time stops. That is more profound. It is the subject of a myriad of science fiction stories. It is not, however, a subject treated at all by an atheistic evolutionist and it throws a wrench in their mandate for billions of years.

When there is relative motion and a constant speed of light, distance is relative and warps, and time becomes relative and clicks by differently, i.e. time is warped. Since the speed of light c, is the distance divided by time, one would expect this inverse relationship. The ratio of the changes can be more exactly found with the Lorentz Transformation equations. In this setting, without all the mathematics, a Christian can see that light emitted by a star hurtling through space at an unimaginable speed, does not necessarily reach our little planet on anyone’s artificially simplified time schedule. Our little planet is also hurtling through space, and in a solar system which is hurtling through space. Be assured that with all this relative motion there is little scientific basis to presume that a super nova, occurred 168,000 years ago just because it may have been 168,000 light years away. Just Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity assure us that the atheist’s argument about time has questionable scientific basis. The warping of space and time is terminology introduced in this analysis of the special theory of relativity, but the full blown warping of the time-space-matter continuums receives its full application in the general theory of relativity when the affects of gravity are included. Atheistic evolutionists only measure things with Newtonian minds, in their limited Gaussian coordinates where the speed of light times time gives us exact distances. Such is not necessarily the case in the outer regions of God’s universe.

We do not, however, have the basis to refute all their thinking based on only the special theory of relativity. We must take a step or two into Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity in order to comprehend the enormity of God’s creation and the exaggerated, over simplified atheist’s reasoning about time and space.

A Constant Speed of Light “in Vacuo”

God created light with this attribute, it travels “in vacuo”⁷⁸ at a constant speed, and when it intercepts an object, no matter the relative velocity of that object, the light is intercepted at that constant speed. The speed of light being roughly 186,000 miles per second (300,000,000 m/sec) is not the amazing thing in this attribute. The stunning discovery is that it intercepts each object at that speed, regardless of any relative motion between objects. That is so profound that I would ask the Bible believers to rehearse the previous illustration again, and then say out loud again, “As one approaches the speed of light distance disappears, and time stands still.” That is just the special theory of relativity.

The man on a speeding train and the man setting at the railroad crossing sees the flash of the lightning at the exact same instant. Let’s say the flash traveled the mile to the crossing and the half mile to speeding passengers at a constant speed and hit each eye after 0.186 micro seconds. Such a thing is only possible if the relative motion of the train caused the measure of distance and the tick of the clock to be shortened. If one has comprehended that, one comprehends Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity. And we did it without all the mathematics involved for understanding the Lorentz Transform equations. Motion makes distance shrink and time stretch. Go figure (or in Hebrew Selah). Let me say it once more, slowly. Motion makes distance shrink and time stretch. That is profound.

Armed with this knowledge one might try racing all the faster to their next late appointment. The more relative speed one has, the shorter the distance and the slower their watch ticks. One could shave micro inches off their distance and nano seconds off of their tardiness. Please do not try this at home, leave it for your next space voyage. Likely at the Rapture.

Gravity in the More General Theory

Comprehending the more general theory of relativity without all the math, Galilean reference domains, and Gaussian coordinate systems was never attempted by Albert Einstein. It is attempted here because the author is a systems engineer and not a genius. Einstein’s special theory is called special, because it only answers for the special, or most simple, situation. Even so, it has brought all the classical laws of mechanical motions under great suspicion. It has shown that such rules do not likely apply in the outer regions of the expanding space. It is becoming obvious that there are some “fundamental difficulties attending classical celestial mechanics.” Albert Einstein documents these in his Chapter 30 “Cosmological Difficulties of Newton’s Theory.”⁷⁹ Indeed, all the general laws of mechanics and motions are now more like Jello nailed to crumbling walls than like firmed up laws applicable throughout God’s universe.

To take a step closer to the more general theory of relativity one must deal with gravity and its very complex relationship to speed and light. Einstein does this with two remarkable illustrations that will be utilized without all of his mathematics.

Consider first that one’s velocity in space, interacting with the constant speed of light, has revealed some profound principles about time and distance. These principles take hold when traveling through God’s vast universe. Ergo, all of our Newtonian and Galilean laws need to be revisited. They are “Law” for only the most simplistic coordinates in our own little solar system, which is likely hurtling through space, all while undergoing great acceleration. Now consider that acceleration, as we understand it, causes a change in a bodies velocity. It was shown previous that a relative velocity changes both time and distance. Note the dynamics we are about to encounter. A velocity changes space and time as we understand them, acceleration is a changing velocity, and thus it changes the changes of both the space and the time continuums. Go figure.

Gravity makes acceleration. The units for an acceleration are distance per time squared. The gravity, here on God’s Earth, causes an acceleration on a falling rock equivalent to 32 feet per second squared. Put a pin in two thoughts here, #1 Gravity produces acceleration and #2 acceleration has units containing time squared. Recall from a previous chapter that squaring an imaginary number produces a real component and that God’s universe has ample applications for imaginary numbers in both time and space. Hold that thought for a later more in depth consideration. Let’s now explore some concepts about gravity.

O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches. So is this great and wide sea, wherein are things creeping innumerable, both small and great beasts. There go the ships: there is that leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein. These wait all upon thee; that thou mayest give them their meat in due season. That thou givest them they gather: thou openest thine hand, they are filled with good. Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled: thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust. Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

The glory of the LORD shall endure for ever: the LORD shall rejoice in his works. He looketh on the earth, and it trembleth: he toucheth the hills, and they smoke. I will sing unto the LORD as long as I live: I will sing praise to my God while I have my being. My meditation of him shall be sweet: I will be glad in the LORD. Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more. Bless thou the LORD, O my soul. Praise ye the LORD (Psalm 104:24-35).

Gravity produces acceleration and acceleration produce gravity. Albert Einstein spent much of his genius focused on the phenomena of gravity. Ponder with him that the inertial mass of a body is identical to the gravitational mass of a body and begin to see his fascination. In his circle every rational mind that is worth its salt must ask the question, “Why is this so?” In other circles there are rational minds who never pondered gravity at all. I would like to welcome some readers to Albert’s world for these next few pages of this work.

Albert pictures a room placed in the outer reaches of space. A man and the room furnishings float about in weightlessness until a rope is attached to a hook on the top of the room. Albert Einstein colorfully states it as, “To the middle of the lid of the (room) is fixed externally a hook with rope attached, and now a ‘being’ (what kind of being is immaterial to us) begins pulling at this with a constant force. The (room) together with the observer (and its contents) then begins to move ‘upwards’ with a uniformly accelerated motion.”⁸⁰

Picture now what happens inside the room. The man and room furnishings, which were previously weightless, “fall” to the “floor” of the room. The man stands, straightens up the chair, table and lamp, and perceives that he has been placed in some sort of gravitational field. He reaches into his pocket, pulls out a quarter and tosses it lightly in the air to assess its “weight.” He holds it at eye level, releases it and watches it “fall” to the floor and bounce under the table. Indeed, this is a gravitational field just like I knew on planet earth. He looks outside to see what is holding up his room and sees the hook and rope. His room is hanging by this rope in a gravitational field. It is all so obvious.

As an observer, outside of the room, one knows that the man is wrong. There is no gravitational field. There is only a constant force producing continual acceleration. One must sympathize with his blunder however. Every thing that the man observes in his room is identical to what we might observe while hanging in a room here in Earth’s gravitational field. Inertial mass and gravitational mass are indeed identical properties. Ergo, gravity is forever directly connected to an acceleration of mass.

Consider now the far reaching consequences of this relationship. If a relative velocity causes space to shrink and time to slow down, what might a relative acceleration do? With his illustration Albert Einstein forever links acceleration with gravity. Given the special theory of relativity, consider that acceleration, being an increase in a relative velocity, would bring about both an increasing shrinkage in space and an increasing lagging in time. Without walking through all his math and complex transformations we have conceptually gone from the special theory to a more general consideration that includes gravity. Stated again, a gravitational field (acting as would an invisible acceleration) causes a change in time and a change in distance. The greater the gravitational field, the greater the changes. In this effort I cannot communicate all the complexity of the relationships between the tick of a clock, the size of a measuring rod, a relative motion, the speed of light, and now the effects of a gravitational field. I only wish to convey that God created, out of nothing, a very complex relationship. When he transformed a tiny spec of his energy into a time, space, and matter continuum, he left a relativity between each continuum. Mere humans can only begin to comprehend the interrelations that are unfolding around us every day. Indeed, the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handwork!⁸¹

When mere man wholly denies the revelation of the LORD God, and sets his heart on proving that God’s universe came into being by nothing but natural processes, then “He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.”⁸² Christians, I mean the true believers, not the Roman religionist, can lighten up, and laugh a little. God does hold the Ph.D.s in derision. The professed atheists with their natural models, promoting natural selection and random chances taking billions of years, are all in derision. Government sponsored space probes are sent out to find the origins of life, and the cause of the big bang. These constitute their foolishness and their derision. They have not allowed for a single aspect of these theories of relativity and the effects on their long imagined history of time. Warp drives in Star Trek, Luke Skywalker’s time dilation, and Interstellar’s worm holes, expose more true science than Darwinian evolutionist portraying billions of years in fictitious time. Look at the detailed research because of the fictitious Luke and Leah twins:

According to calculations in a paper from the Journal of Interdisciplinary Science Topics — published by geeky physics students at the University of Leicester — time dilation means that the Skywalker twins cannot possibly be the same age anymore.

The paper gives an example from The Empire Strikes Back:

“Consider the separate journeys that both twins make to Cloud City. Leia travels from the neighbouring system of Anoat, while Luke travels from the much more distant planet Dagobah. Luke’s journey was ~7 days travel in his own reference frame, which was estimated to be 25 times longer than Leia’s, making her journey 0.28 days (6.72 hours) in her own reference frame.”

If Leia, in the Millennium Falcon, is traveling at 99.999% the speed of light* and Luke is traveling in an X-wing at 99.995% (the small difference matters a lot), then during Leia’s 7-hour trip the galaxy ages 62.6 days, and during Luke’s 7-day trip outside observers age 701 days (nearly 2 years). This means that when the twins first see each other on Lando’s floating palace, Luke is now 638 days younger than his twin. Oh, and that also means Darth Vader was waiting at that dinner table for a long, long time.⁸³

Sci-fi shows more credibility than the atheistic evolutionist and God holds the evolutionist in derision, i.e. contemptuous jeering laughter. Now the atheistic evolutionists have found that God has placed a black-hole in the middle of every galaxy he created. What stifles outright laughter is the depraved tenacity which causes them to hold to their flawed Godless hypothesis. The deception they have pumped into society is also troubling. They have so invested in their fraud that they can only save face because they started their lies in our public kindergartens. But there is more bad news for them in this arena.

Rotation Produces Gravity and Gravity Produces Rotation

Psalm 9:1 I will praise thee, O LORD, with my whole heart; I will shew forth all thy marvelous works.

It has already been established that going from a plane coordinate system, where laws of Euclidean Geometry are built and comprehended, into a spherical coordinate system, allows for the bending and warping of some rigid laws which, in their place, have been held as unbreakable. The special theory of relativity works via the Lorentz Transform, in a rigid planer coordinate system that contains no rotational motions. Since stars and planets play out in a spherical coordinate system, rotating on an axis, and orbiting around a rotating, and orbiting sun or black hole, let’s rotate things a little. The special theory of relativity warps time and distance in the rigid planer coordinate system, it goes much further when rotations are included.

Before rotating allow me to express a word about what I expect this analysis to do for us. In locked horn disagreement we have two world views. The one says, “In the beginning God created,” the other says, “There was no real beginning, and everything is here by simple natural processes.” There are a myriad of mixed multitudes wandering around between these two views, and they say something like, “Can’t we all get along?” and “Don’t we all worship the same god anyway?” Placating to this mixed multitude moves a Bible believer away from the truth. There is only a precious remnant still staunchly standing on the truth, and this effort is promoting that those standing there have nothing to be embarrassed about.

Only Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity has put some natural laws, laws that big bang evolutionists use in their “all natural – no Supernatural” hypothesizing, on unstable ground. Add to all that some analysis of what happens when rotation is added and the naturalist’s unstable ground begins a sort of twisted shaking. Rotation is related to gravity; consequentially it is a major consideration in the general theory of relativity. Their whole house of cards might go tumbling when the atheistic, all-naturalistic, evolutionists experience relative twisting and shaking of their ground rules. It will not, of course, actually fall. They will steady it with care. It is held together by diabolical hands that they cannot see. For the believer, however, I would provide the more assurance that when one is standing on God’s Word as truth, they dare not lean on, or stand close to this house of cards. In God’s final chapter it will all fall.

What’s more, it is not the believer’s job to knock down the atheists’ house of cards nor to put them in derision. God will do that in his own time. The believer is commissioned to preach the gospel to every creature. It behooves the believer to be wise about the world’s rebellion and deceit, and to expose it, and even refute it soundly when it comes to preaching the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. In that vein there is nothing in God’s universe that is not caught up in some sort of rotation, so consider this important aspect in Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity.

Consider again Albert Einstein’s little room in the outer reaches of space. Again a very long rope is attached to the hook at the top, but this time instead of applying a force, there is a “being” (what kind of being is still immaterial to us) who begins to swing the room around in a giant circle. The man and the room furnishings, which were previously floating about in weightlessness, “fall” to the “floor” of the room. The man stands, straightens up the chair, table, and lamp, and perceives that he has been placed in some sort of gravitational field. He reaches into his pocket, pulls out a nickel and tosses it lightly into the air to assess its “weight”. He holds it at chin level, releases it and watches it “fall” to the floor, and bounce under the chair. Indeed it is a gravitational field just like he knew on the planet Earth. He looks outside to see what is holding up his room and sees the hook and rope. His room is hanging by this rope in this mysterious gravitational field. It is all so obvious.

As an observer outside the room, one knows that the man is wrong. There is no gravitational field. There is only a constant rotation producing a centrifugal force, and this force is perceived as gravity. Everything that the man observes inside this room is identical to what one might observe while standing in a room here in Earth’s gravitational field. Not only are inertial mass and gravitational mass identical, but now gravity, acceleration of a mass, and somehow the rotation of a mass around a center point are all profoundly interrelated in some kind of interconnection. In this profound relationship one produces, or mimics, the other, and the other mimics, or produces, the one.

Take pause for a moment here for the Bible believing audience to ponder the profoundness in what was just developed. Gravity, acceleration and rotation are interconnected in a complex triune relationship. In this triune relationship they cannot be separated from each other in effect, but they are separate and distinguishable entities. Such triune relationships are everywhere in the exploration of God’s created universe. They are completely and forever wasted on the secular genius like Stephen Hawking who may lack the diabolical gumption to completely deny the existence of God, but is not student enough of God’s holy inflatable, inerrant Word to capture the connection to his trinity. We are considering the complex interrelationships between God’s three-dimensional space continuums, God’s three states of matter in continuums, and God’s three tenses of time in continuums. The serious student of the LORD God, who comprehends his own likeness in body, soul, and spirit, collects these triune relationships in the back corners of his mind. Mass, space and time are able to disappear into gravity in a transformation barely comprehended. Such profound trinity relationships are not coincidence for the Bible student. An incomplete, but awesome compilation of such trinity relationships is given by Dr. Grady in his book, “Given by Inspiration.”⁸⁴ But here, take particular note that mass, space, and time interrelate with gravity via this barely comprehensible theory of relativity.

Consider where all this theorizing about relativity leaves the sincere student of the Bible. We have surmised that changing relative velocity changes our time and space reference; acceleration even more so changes our time and space reference, and it produces gravity effects; rotation produces gravity effects as well, and it changes our time and space reference. Lastly gravity itself, because of its direct relationship with mass and acceleration, changes our time and space reference. Time, mass, space, and energy are all relative. When one is squeezed it gushes out into another. Relativity declares that the relationships between these entities is very complex and not nearly understood by the normal finite mind.

The fact that time itself is tangled into every consideration of these relativity equations brings us tremendous insight. God said, “Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (2 Pet 3:8).⁸⁵ When man takes one small step outside of our own solar system, what he fathoms about distance and what he assumes about time is nothing more than speculation. When he steps outside of our own Milky Way galaxy and his wandering telescope explores distant galaxies, evolutionists do not consider God’s words, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night” (Ps 90:4).

These theories of relativity wherein space and time, mass and energy intersect intrinsically, are not given the least consideration by science-so-called. For a Bible believer it is ennobling to make these observations about black-holes and relativity. Science-so-called cannot accept that God created the world out of nothing, nor will they grapple with Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity. They make observations inside God’s amazing universe, but do not consider relativity of space and time at all. Consequently, the black-holes that God created as the centerpiece of each of his galaxies, have them in derision. The best explanation that they can muster for these black-holes, is that an anomaly of gravity is compressing vast quantities of mass into a dot smaller than the period at the end of this sentence. They go on to suppose this over compressed hyper gravitized spec is somehow setting itself up for a big bang of its own. Perhaps it will spawn into its own randomly created universe someday, they say. Their wild hypothesizing (please don’t call it theorizing) about these newly discovered black-holes (only discovered as centerpieces in each galaxy in 1992⁸⁶) demonstrates the depth of their derision.

Consider what the Bible believer armed with Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity can theorize about black-holes. God spoke the universe into existence and created it out of nothing, and God said so. By him all things consist and he said so. If he should take some of the matter he created, unravel it, turn it into nothing, and allow some of its energy to escape as an unparalleled gravitational field, one might observe a black-hole. And one might hear the LORD and his anointed sitting in the heavens with a laugh aimed at the atheistic evolutionist.

Since the day in 1960 when this author was quickened (Eph 2) and had my blinded eyes open to see (John 9), I have had no problem conceiving and believing this scenario. Since I understood Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity, I have been able to add considerable reason and logic to that faith. Out of nothing, God created time, space, and matter. They are all interrelated and he can display them or dismantle them in any fashion he chooses, for “by him all things consist” (Col 1:17). Further, consider what science-so-called speculates about time and space. Every time they build a bigger telescope, which can see into a more distant galaxy, they speculate that their hypothesized big bang must have happened a million or more years earlier than they thought previously. They speculate so, because they have no regard for Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity. They suppose light, in the outer regions of the universe, follows the same linear laws that it follows here on Earth. That sort of reckoning has led them to believe that the universe is more than a billion years old! They insist, that since their estimation puts a sited galaxy a billion light years away, then it took a billion years for that light to get here. Further, they reckon that when they stare at the galaxy, they are looking back in time, and eventually in so doing, they might discover how the big bang started all this. They are in derision.

Time and space, matter and energy are not simple linear relationships as evolutionists suppose. They are complex, interrelated, relative relationships. When one is squeezed it gushes out into another. When one uses the Creators time formula on the science-so-called’s linear time estimation, a billion years is only a million days, and it only took 2,700 years for that light to get here. I’m just saying, the Bible believer has nothing to apologize for when he tenaciously holds to God’s word. It says that the LORD God created the world in 6 days, and he did it 6,019⁸⁷ years ago.

Most scholars despise Ussher, this author loves him. Scholars scoffed Ussher’s genius and discarded all his work because he projected the precise date of creation. His exuberant and exhaustive 17^th century calculations of planet positions and his modulus seven math is still undisputed. It caused Ussher to believe God began his creation on an autumnal equinox on Sunday, October 23^rd of 4004 BC. Do not dismiss Ussher’s meticulous investigations because he was enthusiastic about his profound mathematics. He understood Bible dates and calendars far better than most, and he believed more Bible than any of those scoffing modernist scholars. If one does not want to hold to Ussher’s logic that all the planets would have been neatly aligned at creation then let them come up with their own reasoning, but his chronology of years is still impeccable.

In side note, modernist opinion points out that “Ussher’s precise reckoning is an illusion, because of known gaps in the genealogies and translation errors. For example, the birthdate of many patriarchs was changed by 100 years by the scribes that produced the Septuagint. Other chronologists have estimated the age of creation to be in a range of 6-10,000 years.” This author can contend fluently that the Septuagint is a farce, and a farce is “A comedy characterized by broad satire and improbable situations,” or, “A mixture of ground raw chicken and mushrooms with pistachios and truffles and onions and parsley and lots of butter and bound with eggs!”⁸⁸ The Septuagint is of the world, produced by Egypt in Alexandria. Anything produced by the world, in Egypt, God’s portrayal of the world, should not be trusted by the believer.⁸⁹ Allow me to reiterate Ussher’s two strong points, he understood Bible dates and calendars, and he believed his Bible. That is to say, he believed his Hebrew Old Testament and his Greek New Testament without any criticism, lower or higher, source or redaction, textual or form! None, notta, zip. ALL Bible criticisms attack the veracity of the inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Holy Word of God. There is no cause whatsoever to trust anything from Alexandria Egypt especially what is called the Septuagint. Anything recovered from Egypt is tainted with worldliness, to include every copyright modernist English bible version derived from Wescott-Hort and Septuagint. When young Earth enthusiasts extend their scholarly opinions beyond God’s 6,000 year old record they do so because of modernist opinions and Bible criticisms.

When one comprehends Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity, a 6,019 year old universe has more compelling evidence than does any multi-billion year estimate. Trust God’s word. Nay sayers will naysay. Blessed are all they that put their trust in God’s Son (cf. Psalm 2:12). “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes” (Matt 11:25). God is specific and exact, “He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing” (Job 26:7).

Gravity Effects Time

Because gravity causes acceleration, and acceleration increases relative velocity, gravity changes the rate of a clock and the size of an object. Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity advances that relative velocity, because the speed of light is constant, and because of the Lorentz transform, causes both the ticks of a clock and the distance of measure to vary. This is a profound discovery, and now a proven truth. One of the more obscure tentacles of this truth is that gravity itself must change the ticking rate of a clock, and the distances we perceive as real.

The non genius will not generally get as enamored with gravity as Albert Einstein was, but it is well worth some consideration. Albert Einstein was enthralled with discovering the intricacies of gravity. God created the universe and then glued it together with gravity. One speaks of a gravitational field as if they understand it like one does an electrical field or magnetic field, but they cannot steer or control gravity like they do electric and magnetic fields. The most enthralling thing about gravity is that it is in perfect union with a mass’s inertia. Why? How? What is the law which connects them?

In the 1830’s Michael Faraday assembled some of Gods laws of electro-magnetic induction. In the 1860’s James Maxwell discovered the equations which united God’s electricity and magnetism. They are still called Maxwell’s Equations, known and loved by every electrical engineer. In the1880’s Heinrich Hertz confirmed that light itself followed Maxwell’s equations and most often behaved itself like an electro-magnetic wave. Hertz and Maxwell presumed that light always followed their laws and equations.

It was not until Albert Einstein reformulated Max Planck’s early twentieth century quantum mechanics into a more robust quantum theory that they were shown wrong. That theory explained the photo electric effect wherein previous laws were found somewhat inadequate. Sorta like, what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, Albert Einstein accounted for with the theory of quantum physics (Please excuse the theological parallel in that analogy, it seemed appropriate).

But the German genius of the 20^th century, when he pondered gravity, was unable to quantify in law or in equations or in principle, anything similar to Maxwell’s tremendous breakthrough for electromagnetic phenomena. As much as electronic forces were directly connected to magnetic forces, so to should gravity and inertia connect into what one might call Einstein’s Equations. But alas, we have no such understanding. Gravity, the glue that God uses to hold his universe together, and inertia, the law that God uses to keep bodies in motion… or not, is a mystery to finite man. All the genius of Albert Einstein could not quantify the field effect of gravity. He could not explain the propagation of gravity. He could not measure the speed of gravity. The best that the genius could do was slip gravity into his theory of relativity and conclude that gravity warps time and space, light and distance, in a way that man might never comprehend.

Gravity changes time and distance and somehow the whole continuum of time, of space and of matter, the three continuums God created out of nothing with the first seven words of the Holy Bible. The three created continuums are all connected to gravity with an uncertain relativity. When Stephen Hawking publishes, “A Brief History of Time, from the Big Bang to Black Holes,” it is based on the perspective that light travels through the outer regions of space following the same laws that light obeys in Earth’s laboratories. That satisfies the evolutionist, the atheist and the agnostic, but God, Albert Einstein and I contend that somewhere out there, on the borders of a finite universe, a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a single day. Gravity, the unquantified force in God’s universe changes the tick on a time clock, just as a relative velocity, and relative acceleration does. It turns out, “the heavens declare the glory of Gods; and the firmament showeth his handwork” (Ps 19). The atheist who ignores the theories of relativity cannot begin to account for the wonder that is out there.

7: Relativity and the Age of Rocks

Diligent Bible believers insist that the world is only about 6,019 years old, that is 4004 BC date of creation, according to the works of James Ussher, added to AD 2016 and less the year for leaving out zero BC on our Julian Calendar. Evolutionists insist that it must have taken millions of years for dogs to evolve into Clydesdale horses, and lizards to evolve into bald eagles, i.e. since one cannot see such evolution occurring in our tiny little time frame, it surely must have taken millions of years of random chance. Atheistic evolutionists also KNOW that since it takes a million years for light to travel a million light years from the outer regions of space, then rocks must be millions of years old. This chapter is intended to add evidential trace to the creationists assertion that evolutionists are deceived, self deceivers, and some times outright liars. The primary purpose here is to provide additional insight as to how the evolutionists numbers can be so very wrong. Radioisotope dating methods are not the end-all authority that they are made out to be. For the Bible believer, the LORD God is our end-all authority, and he distinctively revealed that rocks are only 6,019 years old.

An article titled “Doesn’t Radioisotope Dating Prove Rocks Are Millions of Years Old?” by Brian Thomas and John Morris, opens with this informative declaration:

Geologists do not directly measure the age of a rock. They choose rocks containing radioactive “parent” isotopes that emit particles and radiation to become a different “daughter” element and measure ratios of elements to their isotopes. Attempts to transform these ratios into dates are where this becomes problematic. Assigning a date requires that the rate at which the parent decays into the daughter element has been the same throughout the rock’s history. It is similar to assuming that the constriction in an hourglass has always been the same diameter, and the same number of sand grains passes every minute.

Radioisotope decay rates are renowned for constancy under normal conditions, so this assumption appears reasonable. But two observations and two clues omitted from physics textbook discussions of radio dating show that these radioisotope “clocks” are broken.⁹⁰

The cloud of doubt about the radioactive dating of rocks is further exposed by consideration of relativity and its effects on radioactive dating methods.

RATE casts doubt on three radiometric assumptions

The acronym RATE is short for Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth. The eight year RATE project, supported by Answers in Genesis, The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and The Creation Research Society (CRS), demonstrated that conventional radioisotope dates are suspect and manipulated by atheistic evolutionists with an agenda. Excellent documentation of the work of these eight doctors is readily available in two volumes, “Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth – (Results of) A Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative”⁹¹ both available from ICR and CRS who hold its 2000 and 2005 copyrights. There is also an excellent condensed version for non technical readers, “Thousands Not Billions, Challenging an Icon of Evolution Questioning the Age of the Earth”⁹² by Dr. Don DeYoung.

In the RATE work there is an initial assumption that on the microscopic level, God’s creation of the Earth did not include an appearance of age. There has been a common explanation among creationists that since Adam was created with obvious age, rocks were likely created with an appearance of age. This argument was simple and forthright, but it was so vague that it left some inconsistency in the world of radioisotopes.

The RATE team instead cast doubt on three assumptions made for accurate radioisotope dating methods.⁹³ First, the initial conditions of rocks are assumed to be known accurately. This assumption may be closely tied to the old argument about the appearance of age, but it is more precise. One cannot know the initial microscopic levels of isotopes when God spoke things into existence, but because of the RATE work it is in evidence that one cannot even know those levels when volcanic rocks are presently formed. In the study radioisotope dating often assigned ancient dates for volcanic rocks known to be very recent in origin.

The second assumption about radioisotope dating had to do with movement of isotopes through rocks. While the dating method assumes that samples closed off from the outside have not gained or lost any isotopes, RATE showed that rocks and minerals can undergo hydrothermal transport which effects the isotope levels. These changes directly effect the accuracy of the dating method.

The third assumption made for accurate radioisotope dating methods involves the constancy of nuclear half-lives. The idea that everything has always continued as it now does is called uniformitarianism and it has been preached by atheistic evolutionists since Charles Lyell (1797-1875) first outlined it for them in the 19^th century. Lyell, a British geologist, opposed the idea that the universe has experienced cataclysmic changes, especially opposing those changes recorded by the LORD God in his Holy Bible. Radioisotope dating methods, to maintain any accuracy at all, relay on no changes in the nuclear half-lives of radioisotopes. It is a goal of this dissertation to use relativity considerations to expose a malady in this third assumption. Time, on the atomic level, and on any level, has proven to be relative, not displaying Lyell’s required constancy. This effort wishes to explore more fully the RATE Volume 2 chapter of the report, “Accelerated Decay: Theoretical Considerations” by Eugene F. Chaffin, Ph.D.

Radioisotope Dating Methods

The radioisotope dating method relies on measuring how much of a radioactive material remains after it has undergone radioactive decay. Stories of nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants melting down to leave our planet a radioactive wasteland, need not come to mind when we consider radioisotopes. Radioactive materials are quite natural and all around us. Dr. DeYoung gives a brief history and overview of radioisotope dating,⁹⁴ but here suffice it to say that radioactive materials decay and change from one element to another. The measure how much of the unstable element decayed into the stable element gives a measure of time like sand passing through an hourglass.

Radioactive decay is a pretty well understood activity in this 21^st century. Most Americans have unwittingly acquainted themselves with it at the dentist when a technician dons a lead apron and instructs, “Don’t move this will only take a second.” She then darts out of the room to turn on an X-ray machine. The dictionary describes the radon we were thus exposed to as, “noun, Symbol Rn, a colorless, radioactive, inert gaseous element formed by the radioactive decay of radium. It is used as a radiation source in radiotherapy and to produce neutrons for research. Its most stable isotope is Rn 222 with a half-life of 3.82 days. Atomic number 86; melting point –71°C; boiling point –61.8°C; specific gravity (solid) 4.”⁹⁵ Radioactive decay is happening all around us, and is thought to be pretty well understood, but we are talking about things happening inside of the nucleus of an atom; an atom which was only demonstrated to truly exist by Neil Bohr in 1915. This effort will primarily concern itself with a radioactive isotopes half-life, and how it is used to date the age of rocks.

Potassium-40 is a common radioactive element used in radioisotope dating of rocks. In the nucleus of a Potassium-40 atom, there are 19 protons (via its atomic number), and 21 neutrons, to give it an atomic mass of 40; it is abnormal, and actually called an isotope, because Potassium normally has an atomic mass of 39. If one of the protons in its nucleus somehow absorbs an electron and changes to a neutron, it turns into a noble gas called Argon-40. Argon normally has this atomic mass of 40, and has an atomic number of 18, which is the number of protons in this newly created nucleus. That proton turning to into a neutron bursts out a blast of gamma radiation. That proton mysteriously turning into a neutron is also a very poorly understood aspect of God’s creation and God’s hand in the matter continuum’s consisting.

If one has a measure of this Potassium-40, an isotope of Potassium, half of it miraculously changes to Argon-40 over a period of time called its half-life. The half-life for Potassium-40 is 1.25 billion years. If one watched our measure of Potassium-40 for 1.25 billion years they would find that exactly half of it changed to Argon-40. If they then watched it for another 1.25 billion years the remaining half measure would be halved again and there would be a quarter measure of Potassium-40 left, and three quarter measure of Argon-40 produced. That is a very simple explanation without all the consideration of gamma radiation, alpha particles and beta particles flying around.

Why only half of the parent element is transformed into the daughter element in any half-life period of time, is quite a mystery. It does not matter the measure that you start with, a pound, an ounce, a ton or a microgram, precisely half of it miraculously changes into the daughter element. As Georgia State University states it:

The radioactive half-life for a given radioisotope is a measure of the tendency of the nucleus to “decay” or “disintegrate” and as such is based purely upon that probability. The tiny nuclear size compared to the atom and the enormity of the forces which act within it make it almost totally impervious to the outside world. The half-life is independent of the physical state (solid, liquid, gas), temperature, pressure, the chemical compound in which the nucleus finds itself, and essentially any other outside influence. It is independent of the chemistry of the atomic surface, and independent of the ordinary physical factors of the outside world.⁹⁶

That is some of the miracle of God’s creation of matter where his hand causes all things to consist. It is thus His hand that is on the hourglass of time for all radioisotope dating. Suffice it to say that numerous samples of radioactive decay have been observed, particularly those with much smaller half-lives than Potassium-40, and the mysterious half-life time period is uniformly expected for all radioactive decay.

Consider again the three huge assumptions which the RATE study maligned. One does not actually know the initial Potassium-40 and Argon-40 percentages. It could be that some Argon-40 was initially present which did not come from degrading Potassium-40. One must ASSUME the initial levels were all Potassium-40 and no Argon-40. Also, one does not actually know if the some parent element (Potassium-40) or of the daughter element (Argon-40) came into, or expelled out of the sample by some sort of thermal transport. Lastly, we are ASSUMING that a half life is constant and could not somehow be accelerated. There are several things which might account for this change of time in an isotopes half-life, not the least of which is the topic exposed in this dissertation, time is relative.

Relativity Changes Atomic Clocks

The atomic clock is so accurate that it is now the standard for all. In 1967 the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado set the oscillatory frequency of the atomic transition of the cesium, C-133 atom as the perfect standard of the second. From now on 1 second = 9,192, 631,770 cycles of the standard Cs-133 transition. Prior to this the second was based on the orbital period of the Earth, “but the cesium clock period was found to be much more stable than the Earth’s orbit!”⁹⁷

This atomic clock standard is so accurate in measuring the Earth’s orbit that the “leap second” was devised to make up for the decay and slow down of the Earth. According to the BBC news, the leap second is added to the last minute of June, but the Earth’s orbit is so irregular, compared to the atomic clock, that the leap second is announced at quite irregular intervals.⁹⁸ Adding this leap second at such irregular intervals causes all kinds of consternation in networked computer systems. I suppose this might be futile ground for conspirator conspiratorists who love to predict the end of the world with Y2K⁹⁹ type concerns.

Consider here, that if the atomic clock is sensitive to Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, and its ever changing of clock tics, then so to is the radio active decay that happens at the atomic level of God’s creation. Indeed the cesium clock, and all atomic clocks, change their clicks according to Einstein’s theories.

Cesium Clock Measures Relativity Time Changes

The atomic clock works because of the quantum energy jumps of electrons in the outer orbital shell of the atom. These outer shell electrons are called valence electrons. Cesium in a crystal has valence electrons that resonate at a very consistent frequency. It can thus be used as a very accurate oscillator to measure time very very accurately.

One can imagine that two extremely accurate atomic clocks might be synchronized together, sent off on vehicles with differing relative motions, and then brought back together to see if there was a variance in time on either clock. A dilation of time which followed Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, could demonstrate the validity of his theory. Just such an experiment was set up in 1971. It was undertaken by the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington DC.

Georgia State University¹⁰⁰ reported the results of this Hafele and Keating Experiment as follows:

During October, 1971, four cesium atomic beam clocks were flown on regularly scheduled commercial jet flights around the world twice, once eastward and once westward, to test Einstein’s theory of relativity with macroscopic clocks. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the theory predicted that the flying clocks, compared with reference clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 40+/-23 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and should have gained 275+/-21 nanoseconds during the westward trip … Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations. These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution of the famous clock “paradox” with macroscopic clocks.¹⁰¹

This was profound; it demonstrates Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity in a conceivable fashion. It also seizes on the fact that these theories of relativity operate on the atomic level. Time dilation, from relativity, operates on the atomic level and alters what is going on inside of a cesium atom. There is no reason to doubt that it also alters what is going on in the radioactive decay of the Potassium-40 atom. Radioisotopes which undergo various relative velocities, experience accelerations, rotations, or changes in gravity have their clock rates adjusted by the theories of relativity.

Radioactivity, Relativity, The Flood and the Age of Rocks

The radiometric dating methods used to estimate the age of rocks has a notable singularity around the time of the flood, and the dilation of time due to relativity multiplies the uncertainty of these dating methods. The RATE work used radiohalos to highlight the singularity.¹⁰² A singularity is a trait marking one singular, as distinct from others. It points out a peculiarity, signifying something uncommon or unusual. The RATE work also eluded to the dangerous assumptions in relying on radiometric dating methods to suppose millions of years of uniformitarianism.¹⁰³ Relativity, and its dilation of time, was not factored into the RATE team’s excellent prognosis, but it certainly casts substantially more doubt onto the atheistic evolutionist’s ability to date the age of rocks with any accuracy.

Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him (Psalm 2:10-12).

To be certain it is best to put trust in the Son of God, and heed what he has said about the age of the Earth. No matter what the atheistic evolutionists theorize about the age of the universe or the age of rocks, their suppositions are clouded in doubt. The Bible believer’s suppositions are grounded in the truth of an inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Bible, trust the Creator, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son, on these things.

The singularity concerning the age of rocks around the time of the flood has not, heretofore been fully exposed. The geological changes that happened just prior to, all during, and immediately after God’s miraculous and human damning flood, cannot be fully known; nor can the meteorology, the astrology, or the radiology. There have been noteworthy hypotheses presented, but the flood had a notable effect on all of God’s universe. The RATE studies clearly showed this singularity in Dr. DeYoung’s Table 5-1.¹⁰⁴ That data comes alive more profoundly in the figures below.

Figure 7-1 DeYoung’s Table 5-1 Data in a Bar Chart

Figure 7-2 DeYoung’s Table 5-1 Data in a Stacked Bar Chart

There is little hope of denying that God’s flood had a profound effect on every aspect of his universe. Here changes in radioactive decay are in the limelight and time dilation caused by relativity are certainly part of these changes. Rocks undergoing massive accelerations as the fountains of the great deep were broken up (Gen 7:11, Prov 8:28), might activate relativity changes that we cannot know. We are just now beginning to fathom the time warps caused by relativity. An accelerated radioactive decay that RATE research has exposed may certainly be part of an operating relativity time dilation.

The age of rocks can be supposed by atheistic evolutionists using their principle of uniformatarianism and radiometric dating of rocks. Their results are convoluted at best. All of their findings are based on a belief system, not on the practice of a rigorous science. Any of their findings need not shake the faith, stir the reproach, nor reduce the compassion of the Bible believer who has a hold on God’s truth. Jesus said “I am the truth” (John 14)

There is a myriad of creation research available to the believer and it shows overwhelming evidence of this convoluted reasoning of the atheistic evolutionist. Marvin Lubenow displays their uncertainty through their failings in the fossil record. In his article “The Dating Gap” he states:

Human evolution demands precise dating of the relevant fossils. Evolutionists now admit that the dates for the human fossils in the significant Middle Stone Age period and elsewhere are uncertain. It means that there is no such thing as a legitimate evolutionary fossil sequence leading to modern humans. It also means that evolutionists cannot make accurate statements regarding the origin of modern humans based on fossils discovered thus far. Their continuing to do so reveals that their statements are based on a belief system, not on the practice of a rigorous science.¹⁰⁵

Some exceptional Institute for Creation Research articles for further study in this area are shown below.

The Dating Gap by Marvin L. Lubenow, M.S., Th.M. http://www.icr.org/article/dating-gap/ (accessed Nov 2015).

Rethinking Carbon-14 Dating: What Does It Really Tell Us about the Age of the Earth? by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. * http://www.icr.org/article/7311/ (accessed Nov 2015).

Why Do Scientists Trust Flawed Methods? by Brian Thomas, M.S. * http://www.icr.org/article/7265/ (accessed Nov 2015).

Doesn’t Radioisotope Dating Prove Rocks Are Millions of Years Old? by Brian Thomas, M.S., and John Morris, Ph.D. * http://www.icr.org/article/7242/ (accessed Nov 2015).

Both Argon and Helium Diffusion Rates Indicate a Young Earth by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D. * http://www.icr.org/article/6229/ (accessed Nov 2015)

Fluctuations Show Radioisotope Decay Is Unreliable by Brian Thomas, M.S. * http://www.icr.org/article/6246/ (accessed Nov 2015)

The dilemma that Bible believers are faced with, in light of all this evidence, is that science-so-called will not back away from their unbelief. In 1974 Dr. Morris published overwhelming evidence of their malady in his book “Scientific Creationism.”¹⁰⁶ His effort publicly and emphatically declared that “Their Emperor has no clothes!” It is well attested in the 1985 forward to the second edition that, in their specific areas, many scientists admitted to the malady in their little corner of the evolutionary kingdom. But the construction of the kingdom went on unabated, and today, it is formidable. The purest logic of the argument does not change minds or lives, God does.

A Bible believer can be versed in the truth, but always remembering that it is God’s verse that changes lives. A ready apologetic is essential in this battle, but it is the foolishness of preaching that will sway the individual. The Apostle Paul puts this perspective in a paragraph:

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men (1Cor 1:17-25).

The Institute for Creation Research has repeatedly tried to persuade men without clubbing them over the head with the Bible, as they say. They have presented the very best of research, logic, and argument. Unfortunately when they do pick up a Bible, it is a compromised, ecumenical, modernist, copyright one. Hitting one over the head with that is like using a Nerf¹⁰⁷ Bat. The Bible believer is herein encouraged to pursue the very best research, logic, and argument, but never lay down their sword or use its two edges as a club. “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Heb 4:12).

Why Bother About the Age of Rocks

Creationists have much researched and documented the incredulous claims made by atheistic evolutionists concerning the age of rocks. Their writings are emphatic, evolutionists are deceived and very deceiving when it comes to the age of rocks being millions and billions of years. It is reported via the Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship, “The most convincing data in the RATE book is the discordance between dating methods (same rock, different isotopes), and the fact that rocks of known age give isochrone ages with discrepancies of millions of years.” Works by these accomplished creationists, are only highlighted in this effort, however, they are substantial. Again, giving the remarks of Bill Browning of Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship:

Before you leave radioisotope dating, you would be remiss if not covering the flip-side of rock dating, called the “helium” age, which was the quintessential RATE finding. A Billion years worth of alpha particles (which become He atoms) generated by Uranium-to-lead decay was discovered in zircons mined from granitic biotite. The diffusion rate of the Helium was measured, and showed that the zircon crystals would not retain much Helium: In fact, the measured diffusivity agrees with a 6,000 year-old age for the host granite. From this data, the RATE scientists concluded there had to have been a rapid decay event which released the He in a short period of time. Thus, the assumption of constant decay rate postulated for radioisotope dating methods is false.

It is asserted here, as in the aforementioned works of creationists, that atheistic evolutionists have fudged all their dating methods by millions of years. This mass produced fudge is necessary to sustain their ongoing belief that natural forces evolved life with no Supernatural involvement. That is not to say they are all conspiring to change the facts, but to recognize “we all filter data through a grid of prior assumptions.”¹⁰⁸ So too, the Bible believing creationist has a-prior assumption, it is just that we are upfront and honest about ours. Atheistic evolutionists have taught children from their youth that bald eagles evolved from lizards, and that rocks are billions of years old. These children are now adult scientists taking rock samples and doing the radiometric dating. One dares to presume that they have a strong bias and a “grid of prior assumptions.” These also must needs reject God’s world flood which happened only 4,563 year ago.¹⁰⁹ Rejection of these Bible discerned facts has been trained into atheistic evolutionists since their youth. It also resonates well with man’s depravity. God says:

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes (Rom 3:10-18).

That sounds, pretty harsh on the atheistic evolutionist. Always remember that it is a description of the Bible believer’s sorry caucus as well, “but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God” (1Cor 6:11).

There does not, however, seem to be a pending collapse of the house of cards built by atheistic evolutionist. The world has gone after their deceit and found it more comfortable than a Creator who will one day be their judge. Religion, also, is more comfortable with the lie than with God’s truth. The 2015 visit of the Roman Pope sought to endorse evolution with its big bang, socialism with its war on poverty, and global warming efforts attempting to shut down fossil fuel industries to reduce a carbon footprint. Pope or Protestant, they lead a path straight down the progressive liberal’s evolutionary highway.

Some creationists have become optimistic about the soon coming collapse of evolutionary theory. They realize that all the evidence is on the creationists side, but it was our Lord Jesus Christ who said, “As it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man” (Lu 17:26). The depravity of man will not allow the collapse of the atheistic evolutionary rebellion against the Creator. We labor, then for individual souls. Souls who have been taught evolution from their youth. They need to get a glimpse of the great lie they have been told before they can hear the glorious gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

In 1Cor 5 the Apostle Paul gives three reason why we labor (vr. 9): 1) “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad” (5:10), 2) “Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men” (5:11), 3) “For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead” (5:14). “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation” (5:17-18). Labor over theories of relativity, over radioisotopes, and over the truth of the six-day creation because sincere Bible believers are to be reconcilers, not compromisers, but reconcilers.

8: The Six-Days

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Exodus 20:11

The fact that God created the whole of our universe in six literal days is irrefutable for the Bible believer. It is important in the proper exegesis of Genesis but essential in the interpretations of the whole Bible.”It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed” ( Exodus 31:17). The fact of our seven day week rests on this creation fact. “Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest” (Exodus 34:21). The six day creation is a kingpin in holding to God’s inerrant, infallible, inspired Word.

The president of Creation Truth Foundation, G. Thomas Sharp, clarifies the importance of this argument in the August 2016 CTF newsletter:

The one valuable lesson that I have learned… is that the primary point of conflict between Biblical Creation and naturalistic evolution resides in two salient differences: (1.) the age of the universe, or the literal, historical legitimacy of Genesis 1; and (2.) the historical reality that a worldwide deluge occurred about 4400 years ago, or a divinely sent global judgment against sin. All other aspects of this debate are moot, and are simply an outgrowth from these two main points….

It is not about science (and never has been), but science has been prostituted over the past 150 years to vindicate and qualify a deliberate anti-Biblical worldview for the primary purpose of defeating the intent of the Biblical God. And the most influential and effective method Satan saw at his disposal was to obliterate the authority of the Bible by attacking the Genesis record….

So to remove supernaturalism from the discussion, the devil first attacked Biblical chronology, and this seems so reasonable because evolutionary arguments from starlight and the earth’s stratigraphical record, just to name two of the seemingly irrefutable naturalistic positions, appear to demolish the Biblical position.¹¹⁰

The importance of carefully examining the Words of God in his account of his six day creation is therefore crucial. Paying careful attention to those inerrant, infallible, inspired Words is what this section is all about.

Sunday The First Day of Creation.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep (Gen 1:1-2a)

The first three sentences of the inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Bible are written on a fifth grade reading level and need no allegorical interpretation. There is no secret hidden meaning, there is no secret hidden gap of time or information, and there is no plural heaven. The allegorical method was developed by the Roman Empire when it attempted a hostile takeover of Christianity. The gap theory was developed by well meaning students of the Bible who wanted to accommodate science-so-called and their supposed age of rocks. The plural on heaven is contrived by the modernist ecumenical scholars who, in their new improved publication, want their copyright bibles to reveal what they think God meant to say.

In reality the first three sentences of the Holy Bible reveal that the time continuum had a beginning, the three-dimensional space continuum was a creation and the matter continuum had a Creator who carried the title “God.” God says what he means, and means what he says. The matter continuum, called earth, was without form and void. There is no reason to suppose it was a sphere with a molten core; it was without form and it was void. The two created entities are heaven and earth, i.e. space and matter. The earth (matter) is without form and void, and the heaven is described as having darkness upon the face of the deep.

One can take great care in reading God’s words, i.e. “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2Tim 2:15). Here one can study to keep it simple, because it is simple. Darkness implies no light and deep implies vast depth. God says what he means and means what he says.

Anyone might check the reading levels of their Bible. The first ten sentences of the Holy Bible are indeed written on a 5^th grade reading level. Below is the analysis of the first five verses of the Holy Bible, Authorized King James English translation. “A grade level (based on the USA education system) is equivalent to the number of years of education a person has had. A score of around 10-12 is roughly the reading level on completion of high school. Text to be read by the general public should aim for a grade level of around 8.”¹¹¹

Reading Ease

A higher score indicates easier readability; scores usually range between 0 and 100.

Readability Formula Score Flesch-Kincaid Ease 93.3 Readability Formula Grade Flesch-Kincaid Grade Lvl 3.6 Gunning-Fog Score 6.7 Coleman-Liau Index 5.8 SMOG Index 4.2 Auto Readability Index 2.7 Average Grade Level 4.6

Text Statistics Character Count 352 Syllable Count 113 Word Count 96 Sentence Count 7 Characters per Word 3.7 Syllables per Word 1.2 Words per Sentence 13.7112

God’s next three sentences add form to his created entities. “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light” (Gen 1:2b-3). The earth, that was without form and void, now has a face and some sort of structure; the structure is in all likelihood a massive sphere and consists of, at the least, the H₂O molecule on its surface and possibly other molecular structures in its depth. It is certainly not a planet or solar system structure, they are not created yet. Remember, God says what he means. The face of the deep, that had darkness, now has a face of water and the presence of light. Note that the Creator and author of this Bible, has taken two distinct actions: the spirit of God moved upon, and the voice of God spoke. In turn, there are two results, the face of the deep became the face of the water, and the darkness was pierced by light. Dare we repeat it? When one studies to keep God’s revelation simple and plain, it is clear that God means what he says, and says what he means.

In 2012 a big deal was made when physicists discovered the Higgs boson. The Standard Model of particle physics knew of 16 particles, particles found inside of protons and neutrons. The Higgs boson (particle) was supposed the seventeenth. It was thought to be a key to understanding what mass was all about. The connection between matter and mass was theorized as existing in a Higgs field. All this was named after Peter Higgs, the British theorist. The ideas were in the air when Higgs had written a brief two-page paper in 1964.¹¹³ When God says that matter was without form and void, it might very well have been scattered around in these sixteen, possibly seventeen, particles, and not even crushed into protons and neutrons at this point. The statement, “The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters,” could very well be the structuring of protons, neutrons and electrons into atoms, and atoms into H₂O molecules; untold billions of them. Just the same calling the Higgs boson the God-Particle is a significant misnomer.

The third of three sentences describing God’s creative process for this universe begins in Genesis 1:4. “And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day (Hebrew ~wy , yome), and the darkness he called Night (Hebrew lyl , layi)” (Gen 1:4-5a).

When God says that this light was good, the physicist who comprehends all that we learned about light in the past hundred years has a special insight as to just how good. I trust that anyone reading this report has gained an appreciable comprehension to that physicist’s insight. It behooves the believer to be a student of light. Jesus is the Light of the world. He was likely the source of light before the physical creation of the sun and stars. He will be the sun in the new Jerusalem described in the Revelation of Jesus Christ (Rev 21:23). The physical creation of light which divided the darkness reflects attributes of God’s glory, yeah, even his eternal power and Godhead (Rom 1:20)! Creation of physical light most certainly lends itself to understanding the spiritual light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world (John 1:9). Consider the mystery of light.

Sometimes light behaves like an electromagnetic wave propagating through nothing and piercing through some things. Other times light behaves as a photon which has attained a tip top maximum speed, a boundary wherein no higher speed is attainable in all of God’s disclosed universe. Consider that, approaching the speed of light, set as some sort of boundary condition for God’s created universe, causes time, space, and matter to warp and morph into each other.

Or sometimes that speeding photon might collide with an orbiting electron and dislodge it to produce electron flow that we call electricity. Or that speeding light might be slowed and reflected in a prism to reveal a composition of red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet, seven bands of individual lights, a spectrum of colors hidden in that white package. Note that God put seven bands of visible color into the light he created on the first of seven days in his creation account. The sevens, twelves and triplets that repeatedly show up in God’s creation account are not coincidence. When God says of light, “It was good,” only a few people capture all that he meant.

As an electromagnetic wave, light is rationed out into bands of frequencies. Even as God divides his creation week into seven days, it is amazing to see how many divisions of seven show up in all of his creation. Just as music to our ears has seven distinct notes, the bands of visible light divide into seven distinct and visible colors. God gave rational man an ability to distinguish these seven bands with the eye, but we know that there are light waves longer than red, which we call infrared, and shorter than violet, which we call ultra violet. Micro waves, radio waves, gamma rays, God created it all and it was good. The seven colors can be mixed and blended to create 256 colors, and that number, from our laptop computer is only so limited because the binary two raised to the eighth power stops there. Marvel more to realize that three primary colors of the seven visible bands, can be used to create all other colors. It is just like a triune God to arrange it thus. Also mixing the first and the last of the visible colors is the only way of producing purple, the color found hanging in the Hebrew tabernacle where the First and the Last, the Alpha and Omega dwelt with his people Israel. It is that quality that makes us asscribe purple to royalty.

Kent Hovind has likened God’s revelation of the infinite to the finite as one’s attempt to describe color to a blind man. Kent is always colorful in his descriptions. Consider how would you describe color to a blind man? And then wonder at God’s revelation about the first day of creation. Consider that he wrote it down for us on a fifth grade reading level, and it contains all the foundation stones of an upcoming universe. “And God saw the light, that it was good.”

Did God create darkness? He divided the light from the darkness, but did he create darkness? A student refuted an atheistic university professor who declared that it was your God who created evil. “God did not create evil. Evil is the absence of goodness as much as darkness is the absence of light,” the student spoke up as a statesman. “One cannot measure how dark a place is, only how little light is present. Darkness does not pierce into a lighted room,” the student continued, “but light can pierce into a darkened room.” The elaborate defense of God, godliness, goodness vs evil paralleled to light vs darkness continued for no small speech. It was originally attributed to Albert Einstein, but no credible reference ever connected him to it. Having read hours of Einstein’s lectures, and the whole of this argument to the atheistic professor, this author has no trouble imagining it bubbling from a young student named Albert. The point here is that we have no means of measuring darkness, we can only measure an absence of light. Darkness is not a quantifiable commodity in such a sense, and it was thus not commanded into existence. Nor was evil.

The Bible student needs to be careful here, for God says he did create both darkness, the absence of light, and he did create evil, the absence of righteousness. Perhaps that is a better topic for a philosophy seminar than for a creation seminar, but I did not want to mislead anyone. Examine carefully the profound words of God in Isaiah 45:5-9:

I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it. Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker!

We are not over thinking what God said, we are evaluating it intently. “And God divided the light from the darkness.” Darkness cannot exist in the presence of light and darkness, forever divided from light, never pierced anything. Now once again consider the existence of a black-hole. The binding energy in a black-hole is so intense that even light cannot escape its grasp. God’s description, wherein he divided the light from the darkness, might be like describing color to a blind man. Yet the fifth grade reading level that captures these sentences is able to capture the essentials of what a black-hole is in principle. God creating light was quite like throwing a black-hole into reverse.

“And God called the light Day (Hebrew ~wy , yome), and the darkness he called Night (Hebrew lyl , layi)” (Gen 1:4-5a). The linguistics of the Hebrew word for Day is related to light and heat. The linguistics of the Hebrew word for Night is related to gloom and shadow. At this point in creation there is light, called Day, but there is no Sun. There is darkness called Night, but we are not given enough information to know what is casting a shadow to cause it.

Consider also that there is not yet a Sun or its solar system, and there is no reason to suppose that there is a planet Earth. In fact the word, planet would be a misnomer because it derives from a wandering star. There are no wandering stars without a solar system. There is a glob of matter called earth (commonly called dirt), and technically it is all water at this point. Any form that earth may have had has been described as a face of water, and nothing more. The first creation of matter, protons, neutrons and electrons, is first given the form of H₂O. It is presently understood that every element know to man can be constructed from the simplest of all atoms, hydrogen. Hydrogen is made of only two particles, a proton and an electron, nothing more. God tells us that he actually started with a little more than that, he included an oxygen atom in his original work. Oxygen has eight protons, eight neutrons, and eight electrons. To rest comfortably oxygen wants two more electrons in its outer electron shell, and two hydrogen atoms fills that void very nicely, thus we have H₂O. It is likely God included oxygen in his initial construction for the fifth grader, who can’t see hydrogen but knows for sure what water is. There is no reason to presume at this point that he had assembled any other atoms from his first creation of matter. If he had, he could have told us.

The basic building blocks God used to construct the universe are barely in place when he formally announces, “And the evening and the morning were the first day” (Gen 1:5b). That God would describe an evening and a morning before there was a planet to experience a sunset or a sun to do a sunrise, bothers some people. They imagine that there must be a planet or a ball of mass or some structure to what God has created on the first day. Going from nothing, to without form and void, and then to light shining on the face of water is, in God’s explanation, a day’s work. Don’t let some allegorical interpreter add to what God says. If God says there is light before there is a Sun, he can say there is an evening and a morning before there is a planet. And so he does.

Every day in God’s creation account includes an exclamation, “And it was good.” One day gets two of those declarations, but day one has the exclamation attached to light. There is a cause.

Monday The Second Day of Creation

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 (Gen 1:6-8).

If it is true that God says what he means, then there is only one thing made on the second day of creation. It is a firmament and called Heaven. This day’s work shall capture our full attention for this section. Few have examined this day with an honest straightforward belief in what God said. Let’s be clear, all that is present after the evening and the morning of the first day is water, Day, and Night. There is no planet, no rock, not even dirt. Some have speculated that primordial rocks and minerals, i.e. dirt, must have been somehow present underneath this massive volume of water, speculated that it would rise up and show itself as dry ground on the third day of creation, but God’s written account requires no such speculation. There need be no mass other than the water that God mentions. It is his account, let God be God. Man wants to jump ahead of God, it seems to be a part of his fallen nature. If you must jump ahead of God here, there is no need to jump all the way to the third day and speculate about dirt; on the second day God will separate water from water, settle down and don’t jump clean over the second day so you can imagine rocks that are not even brought up yet.

Many have tried to add to, or take away from God’s simple explanation of how he started the construction of our universe. Some have tried to insert a million year gap between the sentences, and then to add a whole civilization that God, supposedly, destroyed previously. These fiction writers suppose that God wrote an allegorical book, full of secret, hidden meanings. It can be reaffirmed that God says what he means and means what he says. Many of my heroes were/are gaptist, i.e. C.I. Scofield, Clarence Larkin, J. Vernon MacGee, Dr. Peter Ruckman. I want to be clear when I say this, they were wrong, they had compromised and defective exegesis in this instance. They were genius yes, but concerning a gap in God’s word they were wrong just the same.

The late Dr. Peter Ruckman vehemently defended the exactness of the King James Bible, but he also vehemently defended this gaptist rhetoric, and caustically defended that outer space visitors came to Earth. There were thus two ugly flies in his otherwise holy ointment. Take care for the gaptist doctrine it carries with it a subtle twisting and general misrepresentations of God’s inerrant, infallible, inspire Holy Bible.

Gaptists have speculated some wild imaginations squeezed into an artifical gap they wedge in between God’s first couple sentences. They go so far as to imagine a whole civilization that rose up and fell in this tiny gap in God’s vocabulary. Shame on C.I. Scofield for propagating such foolishness. My scholarly hero labels Genesis 1:1 as “God’s original creation,” and then labels Genesis 1:2 as “Earth made waste and empty by judgment.” He then labels God’s forth sentence, “The new beginning – the first day light diffused.” In their over active imagination, “The first creative act (the heaven(s) and the earth) refers to the dateless past, and gives scope to all geological ages.”¹¹⁴

This audacious exegesis gets worse when he (they) try to pull Jeremiah 4:23-26 completely out of its context to support their defective hypothesis. Scofield defends this audacious exegesis, “Jer. 4:23-26, Isa. 24:1, and 45:18, clearly indicate that the earth had undergone a cataclysmic change as the result of a divine judgment. The face of the Earth bears everywhere the marks of such a catastrophe. There are not wanting intimations which connect it with a previous testing and fall of angels.”¹¹⁵ This author has found no argument that dissuades this type of Gaptist thinking once a person is grounded in the error. For the sake of argument here let me emphasize that there are not “heavens” (plural) and there is no planet in God’s first sentence.

For the sake of our small minds and some known science, picture a sphere of water, like a suspended water drop, only gargantuan. Picture the sphere rotating and a point light source causing it to have a night side and a day side. The rotation causes that there is an evening and a morning on the face of the water.

On the opening of all creation God created a time continuum, a space continuum, and a matter continuum. Our gargantuan water drop can have an evening and a morning because of time. It rotates as a sphere because it is in three-dimensional space hung upon nothing. It has mass and gravity because of the matter continuum.

Why would this water be in the shape of a sphere? When the LORD God created the matter continuum, which is called but not formally named “Earth” in his first seven words, it was without form and void. Matter without form and void might be protons, neutrons, and electrons not even formed into atoms and molecules, but these particles¹¹⁶ do have mass with gravity. When the Spirit of God moved they were formed into two atoms that God formed into molecules of water. The water molecules that God created would have mass and cling to one another with gravity. Thus the water molecules, barring any other Supernatural involvement, would naturally form into a giant sphere.

In God’s description of the second day of creation the huge sphere of water is divided into two. One formed a central sphere of solid water and one was a shell of water like the skin of a basketball. The firmament God created separated these two spheres. Be sure to keep the outer sphere immense. Coming up on day four of the six day creation God is going to set lights in this firmament, those lights include all of our immense solar system, but a sphere big enough to contain our solar system is still not large enough. God says he made the stars also, and he set them in this firmament that he created on the second day. Consequently, all of the stars seen in our universe, billions of them, are set inside of this outer sphere, or gargantuan shell, of water. The Bible says it is so. There is a boundary to our universe. It is finite not infinite. Its boundary is this shell of water, and when a gigantic telescope peers at the face of this reflective spherical boundary of water that the Bible records to be out there, well, just a little imagination can account for a lot of the confusion of man as he speculates about billions and billions of years of light travel.

When we understand that God says what he means and means what he says we see that our universe is contained in a giant sphere of water. It is our boundary in a bounded universe. That is a big deal for the mathematician, which makes it a big deal for the physicist. A big deal that is completely ignored by the atheistic evolutionist.

God’s second day of creation starts with a gargantuan sphere of water hung on nothing in God’s newly created light beam. It ends with two spheres of water divided by a firmament. Like egg white separates the shell from the yoke, this firmament separates a shell of water, which bounds the whole universe, from a sphere of water the size of our planet. We expect these are spheres because liquids with mass naturally form into spheres. One cannot blow square or pyramid shaped bubbles. We expect that there is nothing but water because God writes to us on a fifth grade reading level and says what he means. We know that this firmament is impressive because it captures a whole day’s work for the LORD God. We know that it is immense because when God gets to his fourth day of creation he inserts all the bodies of our present solar system into the firmament. It turns to gargantuan when God inserts all the galaxies with billions of stars into the same firmament. God’s description leaves a shell of water around the outside of this universe. Thus God, Albert Einstein, and I believe in a finite bounded universe. Atheistic evolutionists believe in an infinite unbounded one. The differences in these two assumptions are astronomical. One is right, one is wrong, there is no compromise position. Joshua, who lead Israel into the promised land said, “Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve him in sincerity and in truth… And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve” (Josh 24:14-15). The only type of evolution there is, is atheistic evolution. We did not get here by natural processes, we have a Creator. He tells us what he did, why he did it, and what he is about to do. We can trust him on it.

Tuesday The Third Day of Creation

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day (Gen 1:9-13).

It has been speculated in this development that there have been no primordial rocks or minerals created up to this point. That aligns well with the Word of God, but not well with many minds. In the finite mind, uncorrected by God’s word, we visualize the sky that we see, when God says he created heaven, and we visualize the planet Earth when he says he created earth. When the Bible opens with, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” a careful examination of day one requires no such structure, yeah, it even forbids it. The idea that there were no rocks around until the third day is barely comprehensible. The misgiving is so powerful that some creationists, who should know better, hold to an argument that verse nine says let the dry land appear, not let dry land be created. They thus submerge rocks into God’s creation account on day one or two. It is a misgiving.

Indeed day three begins with only water specifically called out as the form of all matter. There is a firmament with water above it and water beneath it when God says “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear.” When God modifies his wording about the creation of dry land one should not suppose that it was created days earlier and is only making its appearance on day three. Neither should one suppose that it was created a billion years earlier and God is just misleading us with this creation account. The appearance of dry land and the division of waters into seas is good, God said so. It is also a bigger deal than believers normally make of it. God created mountains and valleys, minerals and metals, rocks and gems, dirt, clay, and sand. Today some metals, like cobalt and nickel are only found in the Earth’s crust in their chemically combined forms. In later descriptions God tells of this land divided by four rivers and of a place called Havilah (a Hebrew word, hlywx (khav-ee-law’), for circle, twist and whirl), where there is gold, “And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone” (Gen 2:12). Bdellium is from a Hebrew root, ldb (baw-dal’), meaning separated or divided. Imagine that the dry land which was created on day three had metals laying right on the surface; imagine the complexity of elements, molecules and compounds that was herein created. The profound wonder of all this caused even God to utter that he saw that it was good. Day three is the only day of creating that warranted two such declarations.

One could trust a Bible believing botanist to expound verse eleven and twelve of this Tuesday’s work of creation but it is worth pointing out that this is the first creation of things that reproduce and for the sake of those who might think that plants evolve into animals God emphasizes the line “after his kind… after his kind… after his kind.” God makes this emphasis with every reproducing creature that he creates and in passing let me emphasize the utter confusion and folly of any theory of evolution which contends with God’s clear declaration. Man has never witnessed an orchid evolve into a rose, nor a peach tree bearing apples and to suppose that it happened naturally, but accidentally back in eons of time is arrogant folly. If God says something man strives to defeat it, that is not science it is depravity.

The 126 words description of the third day creation account is written on a 9^th grade reading level¹¹⁷ and a triplet type of poetry and symmetry is already emerging. The creation of grass, herb and fruit tree; the seed in itself, the seed after its kind and the seed in itself and after his kind; and, as mentioned previous, the after his kind… after his kind… after his kind, sort of structure, is not uncommon in this eloquent Hebrew language of God. Those understanding that God is a trinity and man a trichotomy pick these out more readily than the unbeliever. For the second time in the Tuesday it is declared, “And God saw that it was good” (1:12).

“And the evening and the morning were the third day” (1:13), closes the creation account for this Tuesday. Still to come, on the marrow, the Wednesday of God’s creation, the sun, moon, and stars which mark out the evenings and mornings will be created.

Wednesday The Fourth Day of Creation

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, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. Genesis 1:14-19

This development focuses on an assurance that in the Genesis account God said exactly what he meant and meant exactly what he said. God’s Wednesday account is central in that emphasis. God’s placement of lights in the firmament renews our emphasis on the characteristics of the firmament. It is a space; some have called it “the vault of heaven.” This firmament is contained within an outside border of water. It is a gargantuan sphere of water above the firmament, and now, on his Wednesday, God places lights in the firmament.

Dr. Kent Hovind has promoted an idea of a pre-flood canopy that some how encapsulated the Earth’s atmosphere in a protective shield of water. Such a canopy hypothesis tried to make it more conceivable that, “And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died” (Gen 5:27). Such longevity allowed that Methuselah died the week before the forty day and forty nights of rain began. I will not weigh in on this canopy hypothesis but must emphasize that it is disruptive when it detracts from the watery boundary of the universe, i.e. the sphere that encapsulates the whole firmament. Say what you will about a canopy over the atmosphere, but the Bible expounds a canopy over the universe. Genesis’ Monday closes with a sphere of water above a firmament and a sphere of water below the firmament; where a canopy hypothesis detracts from that revelation, I am inclined to detract from the canopy idea.

The firmament in the midst of the waters, as created on Monday, is filled with lights on God’s Wednesday. These lights divide the day from the night. They are for signs and for seasons, and for days, and years. They are distinctively placed in the firmament under the outer boundary of water.

This day’s work seems bigger than Mondays. It includes suns (stars), planets (wandering stars), galaxies, meteors, comets, and even black-holes (anti-lights?). It boggles the mind that God’s Wednesday includes ten billion (with a “B”) observable galaxies and thus trillions of stars. We said previously that the firmament created in God’s day’s work on Monday was gargantuan and just the same surrounded by shell of water. On day four we imagine just how gargantuan that firmament really is. That could make God’s day’s work on Monday a little more balanced.

Another thing captured in God’s first Wednesday is that the Earth is central in God’s creation. In the billions of galazies he created, in the trillions of stars, there is only one created that gives seasons, days, and years to the planet in his focus. That planet is now named Earth. Atheistic evolutionists suppose that our planet is just a happenstance of natural processes and this there must be other happenstance occurrences of evolved life. Consequently space exploration is overcome with a drive to dind life in outer space. They are so intent on the necessity of other life forms out there that they lure some Christians into their myth. In God’s immense universe, created as described in Genesis, there are only life forms created on one planet, and all the other bodies in the universe are created to support life right here on Earth. It is substantiated on God’s Wednesday that his focus in the universe is toward one planet, Earth. However, this earthocentric attention does not result in a geocentric Earth.

There are those who deny the working knowledge of how our solar system operates in order to imagine the sun orbiting the Earth, calling in a geocentric world view. The Earth is central to God’s attention in his creation account but is is not physically central to our solar system. Indeed the planet Earth does orbit the sun; it is an observable fact, and those who deny it are text book delusional.¹¹⁸

The wonder of reading God’s Wednesday account is its simplicity. It is written in just under a nineth grade reading level, but it accounts for God’s creation of our whole solar system. Then in a short clause, “He made the stars also,” he tosses in a trillion stars, organized in then billion galaxies that float around in the firmament that he created on Monday. Such an wonder was barely imagined two hundred years ago. Now we have seen it with unimagined telescopes. “The firmament sheweth his handiwork” is indeed an underrated exclamation.

Again the emphasis of this days work is that the lights are set to give light upon the earth, day and night, and to mark out seasons, days and years. The Earth’s tilt on its axis of rotation is what produces the four seasons that we know today. This tilt must bave been present in some measure in God’s original creation before the world flood judgment which changed the whole environment of the Earth. The rotation of the Earth produces our days, and the orbit around the sun produces the seasons the year.

Turns out that some of the created “lights” are actually planets that, like our moon, do not generate light but reflect it. (Again some groups, claiming to be pure literalists in their hermeneutics, suppose that if God said the moon was a light, then the moon is a light, and not just a reflector. They are indeed delusional.) The word planet derives from the idea of a wandering star, versus a fixed star. Such wandering stars (planets), viewed on the backdrop of the fixed stars also mark out our years and our seasons. God’s account also attributes signs as part of these light’s job description. The stars do a remarkable job of clocking out time and seasons. Consequently pagan minds consider that their location at birth may predict a persons personality and fate. Even today their horoscopes are printed in our newspapers to entrap pagans in their misconceptions. Woe to the Christian who is engangled in such paganism, but many are. God warns, “And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them,…” (Deut 4:19), and again “Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee” (Isa 47:13).

The Stars Used for Seasons

The Bible makes much ado about the stars that God created on a Wednesday. The heavens, as discerned in the plural in the Bible, are generally divided into three layers: there is a heaven where the birds fly, a heaven where stars fly, and a heaven where angels fly. The ancients knew more about the stars in the middle layer than the common man does today. The inventions of the light bulb decreased our star gazing, and the invention of the TV pretty much annihilated it. The ancients (before the light bulb) knew that the stars separated into a canopy of wandering stars and a canopy of fixed stars. The fixed stars were labeled in constellations which showed the seasons. The Bible references these constellations. “Seek him that maketh the seven stars and Orion, and turneth the shadow of death into the morning, and maketh the day dark with night: that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth: The LORD is his name” (Amos 5:8), and again, “Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south…. Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?” (Job 9:9, 38:31-32). The constellations were commonly named when Noah got off the Ark, and assuredly even before that. “He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names. Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite” (Psalm 147:4-5).

From the northern hemisphere the appearance of certain constellations aligns with the seasons of the year. It is scary, in our modern time, how many think that the “dog days of summer” has something to do with dogs, not realizing its tie to a constellation. Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, is part of the Canis (dog) Major constellation, and when it rises with the sun during the month of July it has been called the dog days. The Bible says, “And let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years” (Gen 1:14b), and they certainly are.

The Stars Used For Signs

It is obvious that the stars were used for seasons, but where were they used for signs? God used Christ’s “star in the East” to show wise men the time and place of birth of his Only Begotten Son (Matt 2:1-2, 9-10). The stars were also cited as a sign to Abraham. “Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them… So shall thy seed be” (Gen 15:5, cf 22:17, 26:4, Exod 32:13, Deut 1:10, 10:22, 28:62, 1Chron 27:23, Neh 9:23). Of course Joseph was given a sign in a dream where “the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance” (Gen 37:9). Also Hezekiah was given a sign from the stars (our sun at least), “This sign shalt thou have of the LORD, that the LORD will do the thing that he hath spoken: shall the shadow go forward ten degrees, or go back ten degrees?” (2King 20:9). Hezekiah chose the latter, and it was observed (2King 20:11, Isa 38:8).

Of course there was no greater sign in the stars than the one shown as the Only Begotten Son of God, the very Creator of those stars, died on a cross set on a skull shaped hill called Calvary, outside the gates of Jerusalem. “Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt 27:45-46). and again “And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15:33-34). Those who believe in a man made bible, and a natural explanation for everything try to equate this sign to a solar eclipse, but such tom-foolery is not necessary for those who believe that the Creator of the stars died on a cross for the sin of the world on that day.

Then, lastly, the stars created on God’s Wednesday are to be for signs in the last days. Before the return of Christ there is to be a seven year tribulation period where signs in the heavens declare his wrath and the pending doom of mankind. Joel is chronologically the first prophet to expound the Word of God on this wise:

Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand; A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even to the years of many generations…. the sun and the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining… for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision. The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining. The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake: but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel. (Joel 2:1,2,10,3:14-16).

Solomon ponders this day when stars will darken, “Remember now thy Creator … While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened” (Eccl 12:1-2). Isaiah warns of this coming day, “ For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine” (Isa 13:10). The prophet Ezekiel warns, “And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light. All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and set darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord GOD” (Ezek 32:7-8). Daniel too, takes up the warning and may be referencing angels as stars, “And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them” (Dan 8:10). And of course the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which reveals “things that are to come,” clarifies these falling stars and failing lights (Rev 6:13, 8:12, 12:4). The stars and constellations are used for signs.

The Creation of Angels with the Stars

It is altogether likely that God created the angels on this fourth day of creation. It is always dangerous to read things into God’s wording. It is more dangerous to develop a whole theme and interweave it into God’s theme by taking several snippets completely out of their context. That is how gaptists are embedded in a false teaching. That is how anti-Semites (Nethinim mongers) imagine a theme about angels breeding with mankind and producing giants. Always be leery of those who would develop, teach, and propagate such artificial themes. Bible believers must keep God’s main thing the main thing, and not go off on tangents or conspiracy tirades. Allow me, however to address a reasonable question, when were the angels created, and when did one third of them fall?

When the Bible is silent about something it behooves the Bible believer to be as silent. If one breaks the silence it behooves him to avoid being dogmatic. The Bible is clear that angels are created beings (Psalm 148:2,5, Isa 40:26, 45:12), and that everything was created by Jesus Christ (John 1:1-5, Eph 3:9, Col 1:16, Rev 4:11) in six days and God rested on the seventh day (Exod 20:11, 31:17). It is thus logical that the angels were created in one of the six days, and it is most fitting that it go with the phrase “(God) made the stars also” (Gen 1:16). Angels, i.e. heavenly hosts, are occasionally referred to as stars (Job 38:7, Isa 14:12-13, Luke 10:18, Rev 12:3). For the Bible believer and student everything that was created was created in these six days and it was all good (Gen 1:4,10,12,18,21,25). That would make the fall of an angel called Lucifer (Isa 14:12), who was present in Eden (Ezek 28:13) to occur some time between Genesis 1:25 and Gen 3:1.

Again, since the Bible does not clearly indicate a time for the creation or fall of the angels, it need not overly concern the Bible student. They were created, everything that was created was created in six days, and they did fall. When Satan fell he took “a third part of the stars of heaven” with him (Rev 12:3-4). Reading much more into that is to depart from the theme of the revelation of God. Its purpose is not to teach angelology or demonology, it is to teach man about man and his need. “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deut 29:29).

God saw that it was good

We have proposed that when God calls a day a good day’s work, he means what he says. His Wednesday seems, to this author, to be bigger than some other days. He created our whole solar system, planets and all, a million galaxies spiraling throughout the firmament, a billion stars occupying those galaxies, and each galaxy’s center piece, a black-hole, sucking matter back into the nothing from which it came. “And God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day” (Gen 1:18b-19).

Thursday The Fifth Day of Creation

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. Genesis 1:20-23

Thursday Creation Day 5

A physicist might find little to highlight in the fifth day of creation but a Bible believer holding to the infallible, inerrant, verbally inspired Word of God can find several things that need emphasis. I set out, as an engineer, math teacher, and Bible believer, to clarify that the physical construction of the universe is exactly as God describes it. On God’s Thursday of creation God’s exactness might be better clarified by a marine biologist who believes the Bible.

Just the same, there are some obvious details which defeat the evolutionist’s exotic hypothesis. “Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and the fowl.” In accord with the simplest rendering of God’s Holy Word one finds that on Wednesday there was no animal life in the sea, but at the closing of Thursday, because of God’s creation of life, the waters were teaming with all sorts of life, the airways with fowl. Believing the Bible must disembowel the whole hypothesis that life evolved here by natural means, with no Supernatural involvement. Believing the Bible must also disembowel the compromising theistic evolutionist’s hypothesis that a little “g” god used evolution to “evolve life.” Their little “g” god either wrote this account as a liar and deceiver, or allowed man to write it without inspiration, infallibility, and inerrancy. Either way, “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful” (Pslam 1:1). It behooves the Bible believer to meditate in the law of the LORD, trust God’s Word, and mistrust the compromisers.

The gaptists, another group of compromisers, this one led by C.I. Scofield’s notes, suppose that thie is God’s second creative act. They suppose that God createing the heavens (note again the addition of the plural to God’s dictated word which is singular) and the earth was his first creative act, what they call the “original creation.” Then they suppose a gap after God’s first sentence and a few billion years of some previous destitute occupiers of God’s universe. Then they suppose that verses two through nineteen was God’s reformation period, and his second created act only occurred in verse twenty. His third creative act, they suppose, was his creation of humans in verse 26 and 27¹¹⁹

I greatly respect the genius and fundamental stance of C.I. Scofield, but all this supposition makes his God, in this instance, a misleader in the same category as the theistic evolutionists little “g” god. God said what he meant and meant what he said. Gaptists are a mislead lot, be careful that you do not fall in with them.

It has been emphasized and needs mention briefly that for God’s first Thursday, that God’s created creatures only reproduce “after their kind.” God is emphatic in their position and the Darwinian evolutionist who insists that amoebas grew legs and crawled out ot the sea, that dogs lost some toes and turned into Clydesdale horses, and egg laying lizzards incorporated eggshells and turned into bald eagles do not have a leg to stand on.

God’s six day creation account is superbly documented and divinely inspired. This fifth day of creation, God’s first Thursday, is a good days work, God said so. His reation of the billion sea creatures, and a billion fowls might not seem as impressive as a trillion stars, at least not to a physicist, but understanding just a little about the complexity of living thing can more than level the playing field when considering this creative Thursday.

Friday The Sixth Day of Creation

And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Genesis 1:24-31

Again, an engineer, physicist, math teacher might have little to expound on when considering the first Friday of this universe, the sixth day of God’s creative effort, but the Bible believer in me cries out to highlight a few things. First and foremost is an emphasis that God says what he means and means what he says. Believing in verbal inspiration of all scripture requires one to believe in inerrancy and infallibility of all scripture.

Secondly, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind,” is particularly worded to clarify that dogs do not, in enough time, produce horses. Unregenerate man, wishing to rebel against God’s creation account might come up with an idea that all life forms sprang from a single source. They do have similarities and some transformations may seem in the realm of the possible, but the whole scheme of Darwinian evolution is in direct rebellion to God’s revealed word.

We had taken a group of teenagers to the Syracuse zoo and as I wandered through an exhibit I came across a young couple admiring a gorilla. The young lady placed her open hand on the glass and the gorilla responded by putting his spread hand on the other side. As a Baptist youth pastor I was astonished to here her say, “Awe, look at him, I cannot believe there are still people in this world who do not believe in evolution.” There are. Mere similarities cannot substantiate such an outlandish hypothesis that apes are our ancestors.

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion….” Atheistic evolutionists spend a remarkable amount of effort trying to explore the “intelligence” of dolphins, whales, or dogs. I have never had any sign up for a college Algebra class. Humans can do complex, abstract, rational, deductive reasoning and nothing in the animal kingdom can come close. Evolutionists might pretend and imagine that opposing thumbs and cranial cavities evolved to a highest order, but they dare not even suppose how deductive reasoning crept in over their billion year time line. God made man in his image, and after his likeness. The details of the sixth day creation account cannot be compromised. The detail fits into the rest of God’s revelation and gospel message, unchanged.

Saturday The Seventh Day of Creation

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. Genesis 2:1-3

It was principle, not exhaustion, that caused God to rest on the seventh day. All the extravagant conglomerated explanations derived by the atheistic evolutionists cannot disallow our seven day week. It stands as a hallmark of God’s creative act. It reverberates in procreation’s in incubation periods. It resonates in procreation’s gestation periods. Yet it does not mark out our 365 ¼ day year, nor our 30 5/12 day month, nor our 29 ½ day lunar month. It is replete in the Earth’s weather cycles and the Farmers Almanac. It is ingrained in so many cycles of life that animals have been clocking out its cycle for their whole existence. Man’s seven day week is still intact and that is a to little heralded testimony of God’s creative week.

“And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made.” Another parallel in God’s seven day creative week, as called out by many Bible students, is found in the Bible’s dispensational teachings. There, seven clearly distinguished dispensations are marked out. In the seventh God ends the testing which he had made. A beautiful parallel for the Bible student is found when a day is as a thousand years, and this world is in the last days of God’s sixth dispensation. In the millennial kingdom dispensation (Rev 20, Eph 1:10) Christ rules the world from the Throne David (2Sam 7:16) situated in God’s holy hill of Zion (Psalm 2:6). God’s seven day creation account resonates with the other truths of his revelation, compromising Genesis compromises God’s whole message.

9: The World Flood

God’s curse because of Adam’s sin changed the whole environment of the Earth, but God’s curse because of the evil imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart seems to have changed his physical environment even more. The changes because of the first curse are only known because of God’s documentation, but the changes because of God’s world flood are not only well documented, they left scars and evidences that one can see and analyze. The atheistic evolutionist uses science-so-called¹²⁰ to try and imagine a natural cause which would leave such world flood evidence. He sets his Bible aside, with all that it says about a world flood, and determines, with all his might, that there was no judgment of a Supernatural God, no world flood, and that the Earth is billions of years old. When it comes to the flood, the Bible believer has the tremendous advantage that he can trust what God said about it. This allows that the evidence can be evaluated with an insight which is given by the instigator of the flood, the LORD God, the Creator of the universe.

Both of these preconceived, going-in positions cause what is commonly called bias. The evolutionist has the preconceived notion that there is NO Creator and ONLY “Natural Processes.” The creationist has the preconceived notion that God created and said so. Bias, however, implies dismissing evidence or interpretation of evidence because of a preconceived notion. The evolutionist completely dismisses sixty-six books, written by forty different men over a period of 1,592 years, which say over 1,000 times “thus saith the LORD God.” Of coarse the creationist might dismiss that lizards can hatch out bald eagles, or that it takes 168,000 years for light to travel from a supernova in the Large Magellanic Cloud, but these hypotheses are at least evaluated and pondered by the creationist. Some are only pondered briefly, like when they say that breeding dogs might produce a Clydesdale horse… one need not ponder that one to long.

In any event, the diligent Bible believer should be well versed on the evidences for the God-sent world flood, and be well aware of some of the theories of how God did it, why God did it is well documented. Even in analyzing how it came to be, however, one must guard themselves from thinking that it was in any way a natural flood. When a believer is blasted for believing something that is naturally impossible, recall that we have our foundation in the Supernatural, and He told us what he did up front.

God gives ample description of what he did to this Earth when he brought a world flood judgment upon man. Before considering all the geological ramifications of this revelation, consider these three important points: 1) The reality of the flood, 2) The justification of the flood, and 3) The miracle of the Ark.

The reality of the world flood stands on the Holy Word of God. There is ample left over evidences of the world flood. We wish to point out several, but the Bible believer holds to the world flood because God said so. Although we do not believe it just because of all the evidences, all the evidences cause us to give God all glory. Such faith gives the evolutionist headaches.

It also can be understood that the flood was justified because, “GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the Earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the Earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (Gen 6:5-6). God requires that man acknowledge his sin and be accountable for it. King David had grievously sinned, and when he made his confession he said, “For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest” (Psalm 51:3-4). For those who read their Bible without allegorically tinted glasses, there are seven dispensations and the flood brings one of them to a dramatic close. Believers need to be careful here because there is a new sect of protestant reformers who use those tinted allegorical glasses. Some say the flood came to destroy, not man, but giants (in Hebrew, Nephilims). God had to send the flood, they reason, because angelic devils bred with human women and produced Nephilims. Not only so, they speculate, it happened again, and there were devil-human giants in Canaan land. Not only so, they go on in their wild speculations, it has happened again, and the governments of the world are hiding the existence of these super-humans, waiting for the new world order where they will be revealed as the anti-Christ. Protestants are looking for the anti-Christ, they are not looking for the meet-you-in-the-clouds, soon coming Christ. In any event, the flood was not justified to eliminate fictitious devil-humans, it was for the depraved humans which fail in all seven of the Bible’s depicted dispensations.

Further it needs clarified, that Noah was a miracle, the Ark was a miracle, the animals coming to the Ark, two by two, was a miracle, forty days and forty nights of rain was a miracle, living on the Ark for a year was a miracle, and the re-speciation of the world after the flood was a miracle. Don’t get into the gutter with the evolutionist and try for a natural explanation for any of it. If you sleep with the dogs,… if you wallow with the swine,… if you stay with the camels,… I expect you have heard all proverbs about it, so pay attention. A Bible believer doesn’t care that a six masted schooner called the Wyoming, was the largest wooden ship ever built, and it fell apart due to all the vertical, horizontal and torsional twisting in the ocean.¹²¹ Bill Nye the science guy does not understand that Noah had a Supernatural God helping him and the skilled shipwrights he was kin to, did not. The Ark was a miracle, its construction was, its preservation was, its floating was, its staying together was, and its landing in mountains of Ararat was.

Noble attempts to construct models and replicas of Noah’s Ark are,… noble. They are, however plagued with the philosophy that God’s world flood and Noah’s survival on an Ark have a perfectly natural explanation. Modernist liberal Christianity is forever dismissing and excusing miracles with “natural explanations.” It dismisses God with a capital “G” and pursues a god with a small “g,” and it plays into the hand of the atheistic evolutionists. In some instances, so does the modeling and replicating of the Ark. Care should be taken.

With those few thoughts in mind let us consider the geological evidences of God’s world flood. Again, God gives ample description of what he did to this Earth when he brought a world flood judgment upon man. The Bible says:

In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. … 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. … 24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days (Gen 7:11,19,20,24).

The abatement of that world flood was on this wise:

And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged; 2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; 3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated. 4 ¶ And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen (Gen 8:1-5).

God is reasonably clear in his descriptions of the world flood. The fountains of the great deep were broken, water came up and water came down. This went on for forty days and forty nights. Every portion of the Earth’s surface was submerged in water. Unbelievers have unduly concerned themselves with where all the water came from and where it all went to. Exotic answers to these naysayers include grand encounters and near encounters with comets, asteroid collisions and more. It is possible that God swung a comet or its tail into our path. Some have speculated that that might account for the scars on our moon, the tilt on our axis and the wobble in our precession. Staunch Bible believers have stood on the fact that God said what he meant and meant what he said, the water came both out of the Earth, and down through the air. Various speculations about just how that happened abound, but when he is God Almighty there does not need to be an “all natural” explanation for his “Supernatural” events. Creationists often fight like alley cats, over their speculations. I guess that is alright, as long as they reproduce like alley cats as well.

Before Dr. Kent Hovind was incarcerated for his uncompromising stand on Bible truth¹²², VCRs of his creation seminars were being sent to every public school library of our tri-county area. Atheistic evolutionists had great cause for concern.

“The most famous, feared and notable creation speaker, Dr. Kent Hovind spent nearly a decade in federal prison. Charged with up to 100 years for ‘mail fraud’ before release. He was a science teacher for 15 years and began a full-time creation ministry. He was traveling all over the world doing seminars on creation, evolution and dinosaurs. He debated more than 100 scientists concerning evolution versus creation and created the well known 7 part video creation series translated into 32 languages.¹²³

Dr. Dino, as he was fondly called, was well on the way of toppling the atheistic evolutionist’s whole house of cards. Their most powerful resource came against him, the corrupt, atheistic US government. Trumped up charges saw Dr. Kent Hovind wrongfully incarcerated from 2007 to 2015. Those seminars insisted on at least two things. We are in a war, everybody should be doing something, and if God said the water for the world flood came up out of the Earth, then the water for the world flood came up out of the Earth. Dr. Hovind had a profound ability of making the obvious obvious. The atheistic evolutionists had cause to fear him, but the US government had no cause to persecute him.

The Bible states it, “the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up” (Gen 7:11). Kent Hovind taught it, “Deep under the mantle of the Earth’s crust there seems to be a layer of water which God released to flood the whole Earth.” When God’s man was sent to prison in 2007, the atheistic evolutionist was told by the American Geophysics Union, “Scientists scanning the deep interior of Earth have found evidence of a vast water reservoir… The finding… will be detailed in the forth coming monograph to be published…”¹²⁴

Dr. Kent Hovind had taught in his creation seminars that water contained under the mantle of the Earth was blasted to the surface when God broke up the fountains of the great deep. The extreme pressure on this water would cause violent eruptions of water blasting out of the ground with such force and speed that it permeated the world’s atmosphere, and perhaps even blasted all the way through the Earth’s atmosphere. We are, after all, standing on only 20 miles of crust, under 20 miles of air. (That is troposphere, not counting stratosphere, mesosphere, and thermosphere¹²⁵)¹²⁶ (That is crust, which goes around a 1,800 mile thick flexible mantle which is surrounding a 4,000 mile diameter liquid ball of still molten rock).¹²⁷

Based solely on what the Bible declares Dr. Hovind surmised that God tapped into a subcutaneous water source to flood the planet. Man did not know that such a water source existed but for what the Bible said. Bible believers have an advantage over atheistic evolutionists, we have the book written by the Supernatural Creator. Consider some implications of believing what Kent Hovind taught us twenty years ago.

In this decade it was discovered that there is a subcutaneous layer of water under the crust of our Earth. It is a layer so compacted and heated that it is described as being in a plasma like state, and that layer contains so much water that if the fountains of the great deep were to be broken up, i.e. the crust and some of the mantle over that water, this planet could be completely covered with water twice over.¹²⁸

When God brought the condemnation of a world flood, there was a cataclysmic, God caused, miraculous, fracturing of the Earth’s crust. Water burst out of this subcutaneous water reservoir and could easily blast all the way to the upper atmosphere. It then rains for forty days and forty nights. As the world floods, both poles of the Earth freeze, capturing mammoths and tropical vegetation in a depth of ice. Such a scenario accounts for the evidences still found on our planet. Throw in Kent Hovind’s possibility of a comet encounter and we have scars on the moon, instantaneous freezing of those mammoths, and a wobble in the Earth’s precession that is still damping out.

Before the flood the physical characteristics of the Earth were very different than after the flood. God’s Word tells us, “And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years”(Gen 6:3). God caused that man would no longer live for over 500 years, as was common previous to the flood. There is good reason to believe that he used the flood’s cataclysmic changes to reduce man’s life expectancy. A thousand or so years later he reduced it again as the Psalmist reveals, “The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away” (Psalm 90:1). We dare not imply that the reduced life expectancies are caused by nature alone, or just some environmental changes experienced, for God, as a Supernatural force, says that he had a role in its decrease. We can, however, suppose that things were very different before all the cataclysmic changes of his world flood.

Speculations about the physical conditions before the flood abound. From the Bible one can perceive that there was no rainfall, no rainbow, and a rich longevity. Tiny lungs on huge dinosaurs make us speculate about hyperbaric oxygen levels. Dr. Kent Hovind, who has practiced the greatest hermeneutical care (and only used a trusted King James English Bible), speculates that there was a canopy around the planet. Many have slandered his speculation, but none have presented a more thorough hypothesis. In any regards, things greatly changed because of God’s world flood, and we are surrounded by evidence showing that God said what he meant, and meant what he said.

In this dissertation I wish to analyze two of those great changes. The changes in our world’s calendar, and the evidence for continental glaciers and their period on Earth. Before delving into these two interests of mine, consider again the wondrous discovery of subcutaneous water being discovered 3,498 years after God revealed that it was there.

Water for the World Flood

The waters that the Bible naysayers and the world flood deniers could not imagine, have been discovered in the fountains of the great deep, just like God said. The articles below genuinely refute their skepticism; there is indeed water in the mantle of the Earth.

LONDON: A massive reservoir of water three times the size of Earth’s oceans have for the first time been located hundreds of miles underneath the surface of the planet. Researchers from Northwestern University and the University of New Mexico provided the first ever evidence for potentially oceans worth of water deep beneath the United States.

Though not in the familiar liquid form — the ingredients for water are bound up in rock deep in the Earth’s mantle — the discovery may represent the planet’s largest water reservoir.

The presence of liquid water on the surface is what makes our “blue planet” habitable, and scientists have long been trying to figure out just how much water may be cycling between Earth’s surface and interior reservoirs through plate tectonics.

Northwestern University geophysicist Steve Jacobsen and University of New Mexico seismologist Brandon Schmandt have found deep pockets of magma located about 400 miles beneath North America, a likely signature of the presence of water at these depths.

… Northwestern geophysicist Steve Jacobsen and University of New Mexico seismologist Brandon Schmandt have found deep pockets of magma located about 400 miles beneath North America, a likely signature of the presence of water at these depths. The discovery suggests water from the Earth’s surface can be driven to such great depths by plate tectonics, eventually causing partial melting of the rocks found deep in the mantle.

The findings, to be published June 13 in the journal Science, will aid scientists in understanding how the Earth formed, what its current composition and inner workings are and how much water is trapped in mantle rock.

… Scientists have long speculated that water is trapped in a rocky layer of the Earth’s mantle located between the lower mantle and upper mantle, at depths between 250 miles and 410 miles.

Jacobsen and Schmandt are the first to provide direct evidence that there may be water in this area of the mantle, known as the “transition zone,” on a regional scale.¹²⁹

The Aug 22, 2014 Earth Science article rehearses the same information:

Researchers have found evidence of a potential “ocean’s worth” of water deep beneath the United States. Although not present in a familiar form, the building blocks of water are bound up in rock located deep in the Earth’s mantle, and in quantities large enough to represent the largest water reservoir on the planet, according to the research.

For many years, scientists have attempted to establish exactly how much water may be cycling between the Earth’s surface and interior reservoirs through the action of plate tectonics. Northwestern University geophysicist Steve Jacobsen and University of New Mexico seismologist Brandon Schmandt have found deep pockets of magma around 400 miles beneath North America—a strong indicator of the presence of H₂O stored in the crystal structure of high-pressure minerals at these depths.

“The total H₂O content of the planet has long been among the most poorly constrained ‘geochemical parameters’ in Earth science. Our study has found evidence for widespread hydration of the mantle transition zone,” says Jacobsen.

For at least 20 years geologists have known from laboratory experiments that the Earth’s transition zone—a rocky layer of the Earth’s mantle located between the lower mantle and upper mantle, at depths between 250 and 410 miles—can, in theory, hold about 1 percent of its total weight as H₂O, bound up in minerals called wadsleyite and ringwoodite. However, as Schmandt explains, up until now it has been difficult to figure out whether that potential water reservoir is empty, as many have suggested, or not.

If there does turn out to be a substantial amount of H₂O in the transition zone, then recent laboratory experiments conducted by Jacobsen indicate there should be large quantities of what he calls “partial melt” in areas where mantle flows downward out of the zone. This water-rich silicate melt is molten rock that occurs at grain boundaries between solid mineral crystals and may account for about 1 percent of the volume of rocks.¹³⁰

Before it was found Dr. Kent Hovind predicted that there was water in the rock layers deep in the Earth. God said so. In the February 2015 debate with Ken Ham, Bill Nye the science guy went on and on about how his science makes predictions of missing links and then finds them while the creationist’s science makes no predictions whatsoever. Perhaps he was right. Creationists need not make a bunch of predictions about truth, God wrote it down for us to read, and then sent it in the form of his only begotten Son. “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6).

The Flood Caused Cataclysmic Changes in the Calendar

The Bible says that when God created the world it was very good. It also says the lights which he put in the firmament were “for signs, and for seasons, and for days and for years” (Gen 1:14). These lights certainly consisted of the sun, the moon and the planets which mark out the Earth’s seasons. Two verses later God adds that, “He made the stars also” (1:16). This seems to limit these lights which are “for signs and seasons, and for days and for years” to these bodies, and eliminate the fixed stars which make the backdrop of outer space. When one says ‘first star I see tonight’ he is usually looking at a planet (and today he might even be seeing a man made satellite). Thus our sun, moon and planets were created by God as our calendar system, to mark out days, seasons, and years, and they were created ‘very good.’ In this treatise I contend that this well-made calendar system consisted of a very organized year which the moon divided into twelve 30 day months. I then contend that a catastrophic event altered this system into our present condition.

Bible believers will quickly recognize this catastrophic event as the world flood of Genesis chapter 6-10. There are many references to this judgment of God on the Earth which imply changes in the heavens and the earth. In 2Samuel 22:8 David was not referencing the world flood in particular but parallels God’s wrath, “When the waves of death compassed me, the floods of ungodly men made me afraid” (vr. 5); there David says “Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations of heaven moved and shook, because he was wroth.” Everything about God’s wrath at the world flood implies the shaking of Earth and moving of the foundations of heaven. There are some movements and shaking which could easily cause the Earth calendar to change to a 365 and ¼ day year with a 27 day 7 hour 43 minute lunar month. We can use these two supposed changes to our calendar to hypothesize what changes took place in our solar system in God’s wrath of a world flood 4000 years ago.

Immanuel Velikovsky, a Russian-Jewish psychiatrist, documented the idea of a fifteenth century altered Earth orbit which changed the calendar in his 1950s book “Worlds in Collision.” His ten year long interdisciplinary research, and his brilliant and entertaining writing style created revolution and shook the doctrine of uniformity of geology, ergo it shook the pillars of Darwin’s theory of evolution. His physics and theories were overwhelmingly rejected by the scientific community, but his research documented well the fifteenth-century changes, as recorded by numerable cultures, religions, and mythologies around the world. The calendar changes that Velikovsky researched and documented reasonably align with the time of God’s world flood. Ussher dates that Biblical flood at 2448 BC.

When I propose herein that Earth once had a 360 day year I do not wish to lend any credence to Clarence Larkin’s (1850-1924) hypothesis that God got hung up on such a calendar when he wrote out Bible prophecy about upcoming events. Dwight Pentecost (1915-2014), distinguished professor emeritus of Bible exposition of Dallas Theological Seminary, agreed with Larkin that God mislead with this type of deception, a deception that only learned scholars might detect. I recommend that one remain leery of such a hypothesis which is only discernible by the scholars or “clergy.” I contend, again, that God clearly wrote what he meant and absolutely meant what he wrote.

The calendar likely changed from a 360 day year during the Biblical flood, and such a change is quite conceivable. Because of the laws of gravity and centrifugal force there are three ways to bring about an increase in the length of a solar year. A year being the time it takes to circle the sun in an orbit. One way would be to change the orbital mechanics. This could be done without changing any physical laws simply by moving the Earth 1,436,974 km further away from the sun, which would only decrease the sun’s radiant energy on Earth by less than 2%. Or, the time in one year could be increased by 5 ¼ days by a decrease in the mass of the sun, a very unlikely event not herein pursued, but possible mathematically.

Lastly this increase in a year’s length could be accomplished by an increase in the rotation of the Earth. A faster rotation, would make for shorter days, and it would take more of these shortened days to clock out our orbit around the sun. Thus, although such an increase would not change the time it took to circle the sun, it could easily increase the day count from 360 to 365 ¼. The right combination of these two possibilities can be made to account for the aforementioned change in the lunar orbit around the Earth. We can thus balance these into a likely scenario wherein “the earth shook and trembled; the foundations of heaven moved and shook,” and the nicely ordered calendar system that God made in creation altered to the conglomerated one that we see today.

The scenario of the Earth once having a 360 day year and twelve 30 day months is a justifiable hypothesis. It is more justifiable for the Bible believer who understands Noah’s calendar, which became the Jewish 360 day per year, 30 day per month calendar.¹³¹ The Jewish calendar is not alone in this circumstance, many ancient civilizations used a 360 day calendar. A catastrophic change in our orbital mechanics brought about by a comet plunging into our sun is an equally justifiable hypothesis. It is more justifiable for the Bible believer who knows there was a world flood here, and that there was water damage on our moon and nearest neighboring planets: water damage that could have been caused by a passing comet.

Photographs of Mars indicates that water once stood to a considerable depth there and it has, what appears to be, water channels produced from the resulting flood. It is interesting that the modern atheistic evolutionists, who sent expeditions to mars, will believe a “world flood” there, but vehemently deny a world flood on Earth. They certainly want to avoid lending any credence to the Bible that they hate. Earth’s moon has craters with no remaining asteroid debris; craters likely caused by huge ice chunks that quickly dissipated leaving only the crater. It is also plausible that Earth passed through the ice tail of a comet. Unlike Earth’s moon, God has the Earth surrounded in a magnetic field. It is conceivable that the ice from a comet tail would seek out either of Earth’s magnetic poles for its entry. Such an entry of massive amounts of ice could account for the wobble in the Earths tilt (precession), account for the instantly frozen mammoths at the poles, and account for the Biblical revelation that it rained for 40 days and 40 nights on the whole Earth.¹³² It would not, however, account for all the water for a world flood, for God said he broke up the fountains of the great deep for the bulk of that water.

Let us hypothesize then that God caused a comet or comet tail to pass by our Earth and the Sun 4000 years ago. This is not to diminish from the revealed Word of God and suppose a naturalist solution to a Supernatural event, but to understand more completely what God said happened. An atheistic naturalist might even suppose such a hypothesis believable because of the Earth’s upcoming close calls with asteroids and comets. Just the same be sure that he, or the modernist liberal is not allowed to take a Supernatural God out of the world flood.

As a comet, which is a screaming fast ball of ice with a tail of debris¹³³, comes on a hyperbolic orbit toward our Sun, it passes near all nine of our planets. If it were to just pass through our solar system, the orbit of our moon might change because of the force of the collisions and the mass of water added to the Earth. The orbit of our Earth might change because of the force of the collisions and the mass added to our Sun (we previously advocated that any mass added to our Sun would likely be negligible). And the rotation of the Earth could increase or decrease due to rotational energy added or removed. Just adding a mass of water to the Earth, however, would slow its rotation, and thereby lengthen a day and shorten the year (i.e. bringing the water mass up to rotation would drag the Earth energy to a slower rotation. A slower rotation would actually lengthen a day, making fewer of them pass by in one orbit of the Sun, i.e. giving a phenomena of a shortened year, instead of the hypothesized lengthened year).

Dr. Kent Hovind hypothesizes equally well that rock and water expelled from under the crust of the Earth might have left the Earth, cratered the moon, and changed the density balance of the Earth.¹³⁴ Water expelled from the Earth could increase its orbital spin in the same way an ice skater draws in her arms to increase her rotation.

These physical changes can be combined and analyzed to determine a realistic comet collision, or water eruption, that changed the Earth from man’s first observed 360 day year with twelve equally marked out lunar months, to an awkward 365 ¼ day solar calendar. The Hebrews of the Bible now have to add one thirty day month seven times in nineteen years just to keep things lined up. Judaism 101 states it like this:

“A year with 13 months is referred to in Hebrew as Shanah Me’uberet (pronounced shah-NAH meh-oo-BEH-reht), literally: a pregnant year. In English, we commonly call it a leap year. The additional month is known as Adar I, Adar Rishon (first Adar) or Adar Alef…. In the fourth century, Hillel II established a fixed calendar based on mathematical and astronomical calculations. This calendar, still in use, standardized the length of months and the addition of months over the course of a 19 year cycle, so that the lunar calendar realigns with the solar years. Adar I is added in the 3rd, 6th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 17th and 19th years of the cycle. The current cycle began in Jewish year 5758 (the year that began October 2, 1997).”¹³⁵

The scenario in view here is that the year changes from 360 days to 365 ¼ days and the lunar month from 30 days to 29 ½ days. Like all of life’s processes such a likely scenario is easily rational but mathematically very intense.

Consider first that the sun has variations of it’s own and “The total solar irradiance,” (TSI) is the amount of solar radiative energy impinging on the Earth’s upper atmosphere. It is observed to vary in phase with the solar cycle, with yearly averages going from 1365.5 Watt per square meter at solar minimum, up to 1366.6 at solar maximum. There are fluctuations about the means of about +/- 1 Watt per square meter on timescales of a few days. The min-to-max variation, at the 0.1% level, is far too small to affect Earth’s climate directly.” It can be considered that increasing Earth’s orbit to account for more time in a yearly orbit would change the TSD an imperceptible amount.

The Changed Calendar’s Mathematical Analysis

For someone with a high school level of physics the following analysis is mathematically intriguing. It utilizes the simple laws of orbital mechanics to demonstrate the feasibility of a comet collision changing the solar and lunar orbits from a 360 day year and twelve 30 day months to our present conglomerate and far less ordered system.

An analysis of the change in the Earth orbit that would add the 5.25 days to a 360 day year would begin with the basic equation from orbital mechanics for the period of the Earth’s orbit:

t² = 4p² r³ /(G M)

where: t = time period of an orbit

p = 3.141592654

r = radius of the Earth’s orbit

G = gravitational constant currently

M = mass of the central mass (i.e. sun)

For Earth’s orbit period to increase by the necessary 1.45833% would require r to increase by 0.96990% (i.e. (1.01458 t)² = 4p² (1.00987r)³ /(G M)). Thus the radius of the Earth orbit would go from 0.99039 au to our present 1 au. Note that the au is a space measure of Earth’s distance from the sun, 1 au = 149,597,871,464 m. Thus the Earth would move from 148,160,896,900 m away from the sun to our present 149,597,871,464 m distance. Since the radiated energy from the Sun is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, Sun energy would have decreased on Earth by only 1.949% because of this move of 1,436,974,564 m.

Although unlikely, the same equation could increase the Earth’s orbit period by the necessary 1.45833% with a decrease in the mass of the Sun. It’s mass would have to decrease by 2.85408% (i.e. (1.01458 t)² = 4p² r³ /(G (1-0.02854 M)). Thus the mass of the Sun would go from 1.93165e+030 kg to our present 1.9884e+030 kg or decrease by 5.67506e+028 kg which is just over 9,502 planet Earths! There is no accounting for such a decrease in the mass of the Sun so the decreasing Sun mass hypothesis is hereby dismissed.

Who weighed the Sun in the first place? Okay, it was actually backed out of the equation above as follows. Given that the period of an Earth orbit is currently 365.2424 days (31,556,943.36 sec). The equations for the mass of the sun is:

m = 4 pi² r³ /G t²

where: pi = 3.141592654

r = radius of the Earth orbit, currently 1 au = 149,597,870,691 +/- 30 meters

G = gravitational constant currently calculated to be 6.67390 E-011 N m² /Kg ²

t = 31557600 sec = period of orbit

thus m = mass of sun, currently calculated¹³⁶ = 1.9886869190E+030

Also the radius of a lunar orbit can be backed out of this equation given that the period of a lunar orbit is currently 27.321582 days (2,360,584.6848 sec) (A sidereal month is referenced to the stars or constelations; the synodic month, is the period between new moons as seen from Earth and is 29.530588 days (2,551,442.8032 sec)).

The equations for the radius to the moon orbit is:

r³ = G m t² / 4 pi²

where: pi = 3.141592654

G = currently calculated to be 6.67390 E-011 N m² /Kg ²

m = mass of Earth, currently calculated¹³⁷ = 5.97223 (+/- .00008) E+024 kg

t = 2,360,584.6848 sec

thus r = radius of the lunar orbit, calculated to be 383,176,222 meters

Thus it is mathematically feasible that the catastrophic world flood described in the Holy Bible could have altered the characteristics of the Earth’s rotation, orbit, and moon to such an extent that the calendar would alter significantly. Thus a pre-flood 360 day year, with twelve evenly divided 30 day months is a very likely scenario.

An extensive spread sheet analysis of these equations was performed to analyze the balance of changes which would produce these changes in our calendar. My engineering background and my involvement in a USAF R&D effort involving satellite orbits led me to believe that a viable solution would easily fall out of such a multivariate analysis. It did not. There are several viable possibilities whereby adding or removing water from the Earth, combined with passing through the tail of a comet might result in just such a change in the calendar, but the number of variables involved became to burdensome for a final analysis. Now that I am retired, I look forward to opening these spread sheets again, but for the present I am left convinced that God orchestrated just the right scenario. What God did in sending the world flood very likely changed the orbital mechanics of the Earth in such a way that his original 360 day year divided into exactly twelve thirty day months changed to our present messy calendar with a 365 ¼ day year divided into twelve a not exactly 29.530588 day month. Although I am at present certain of this change, the full analysis must follow in another publication. The next chapter deals with another observable scar caused by God’s world flood judgment, waters stored in continental glaciers.

10: Glaciers After The Flood

A continental glacier is a mile thick ice cap reaching from the north pole across 48 degrees of latitude. One stretched all the way to 40 Plat Street, Painted Post, New York, Latitude 42.142981, Longitude 77.118089, where this author grew up. Glaciers are worth mentioning when one considers God’s creation and flood of our planet. At least, it is for this author. Such a glacier, I have been told since my youth, left an indelible impression on my backyard. It likewise left that type of impression on my mind, and so it is examined here.

As this continental ice cap, well over a mile thick, pulled out of my backyard, it dragged its feet and formed ten claw marks which filled with water. They are called the Finger Lakes and were labeled with exotic Indian names. From east to west they are Otisco, Skaneateles, Owasco, Cayuga, Seneca, Keuka, Canandaigua, Honeoye, Hemlock, Conesus (Tourism concerns led to the addition of the tiny little lake called Canadice, making eleven finger lakes, which never made much sense to us locals). Seneca Lake, a few miles north of Painted Post, holds about half the water of all the finger lakes and was called bottomless. The gouged-out 38 mile gorge has an amazing 620 foot depth. These ten lakes, and all the topography around them, being created by a continental glacier dragging its feet, is genuinely imaginable.

My father regularly took us fishing, camping and swimming on Sanford Lake. It was a public lake just north of Van Keuren Lake (private and swamp like), just up from Round Lake (private and shored by cottages), a bit north of Peterson Lake (we called it a pond). I had been taught since my youth that my hometown’s glacier, dragging its feet northward, had water falls falling from tremendous height which drilled out these four lakes. They attribute such lakes to be plunge pools at the base of a waterfall cascading off of the retreating glacier. The lakes indeed have a small surface area and a great depth, as if they were these waterfall plunge pools. I could throw a stone half way across Sanford lake, and my dad’s thirty foot of anchor rope didn’t touch bottom in the middle. My back yard was, no doubt, at one time, the very edge of a continental glacier. It makes one wonder, where did it come from, and, how long ago was that?

Glaciers Change Things

Glaciers have left their distinctive marks on the surface of the Earth. New York State was at one time covered in a continental glacier over two miles thick. Continental glaciers flow out in all directions because of their own weight. The weight of a two mile thick ice cap actually stresses and depresses the mantle of the crust of this old Earth. As the continental glacier receded, the crust of the Earth ever so slowly “bounced” back into shape, and the “bounce-back” is actually measurable today. The mantle in the far north is still rising, with the mantle’s depression in the 40 degree latitude, where this author grew up, is all recovered. The northern areas of New York State are still measurably rising, while the southern portions of the state are almost completely recovered. This recovering mantle is creating an interesting phenomena where the Saint Lawrence River, on this still rising table of land, is not draining water from the Great Lakes quite like it used to. The northern shore of New York State’s Ontario lake is still rising, while the southern shore is not. This is causing the lake to get shallower in Canada, while the southern shores are getting deeper. Also the water, which is draining from all five of America’s Great Lakes, begins looking for a less elevated outlet than it finds in the Saint Lawrence River. It is possible that in the next couple hundred years, the drain will eventually break through the middle of the New York State and it might be called the “Syracuse to Albany River.”

When a glacier melts, it reveals that the glacier did move. The glacial floor is riddled with scratches, polished rock and grooves. It is undeniable. One can see Alpine Glacier’s flow down a mountain cutting out great valleys. It does indeed flow, quite like molasses. We can see a glacier’s flow, and carefully measure it. Edges scraping the sides of valleys flow more slowly than does the center of these Alpine glaciers. All kinds of shapes are cut out by these flowing glaciers. Bowl like carvings, called sirks, scraped and polished valley floors, have striations and grooves cut into solid rock. A Lake Erie island above Marblehead Ohio has remarkable glacial grooves cut into bedrock, many are two feet deep.

Two Alpine Glaciers joining in a main valley are called Piedmont Glaciers, and these make particular formations as well. The Matterhorn is a spire of rock which was carved when Alpine Glaciers carved away in three different directions, leaving the remarkable formation. Alpine glaciers teach us what was going on under these gargantuan continental glaciers.

While glacier’s carve wide valleys, water carves ‘V’ shaped valleys. They are generally quite distinguishable. Glaciers also deposit massive mounds of boulders, stones, or other debris it has carried along. These are called a “moraine”, and my backyard in the Southerntier of upstate New York is riddled with them. It is the most common glacial land form created. The end moraines are formed at the edges of a glacier. Alpine glaciers form crescent shaped ridges while Continental glaciers, it is observed, form broad looped ridges which might go on for miles.

Another common glacier land form is called the drumlin. These are long smooth hills 25 to 200 feet in height and ¼ to ½ mile in length, with a blunt nose and long gentle slope which points in the direction of the glacier flow. The whole New England area has many drumlin fields. It is uncertain how, but drumlins seem to form deep inside the plastic flow of a moving glacier. Also Kettle lakes are pitted into an out-wash plain by large blocks of stranded ice that melts away after the stratified materials settled out. Further, torrents of water departing from the melting glacier edge produce many formations. The out-wash into a plain or valley deposits gravel, then sand, then silt and eventually clay as the out-wash flow decreases. The area around Savona NY, where my father was born, is riddled with gravel yards because of our hometown glacier’s out-wash.

Waterfalls off of a glacier edge drill holes in the surface to from round lakes, often very deep. Some of these were introduced previously as in my boyhood we explored and fished on Sanford Lake, Van Keuren Lake, Round Lake, and Peterson Lake. Fayetteville is in the north east corner of the Finger Lakes area and is home to Green Lake, one of the most noted of these waterfall lakes. Green Lake is a 64 acre lake with a 171 foot mean depth, and a 194 foot maximum depth. Fayetteville’s Green Lake was the first lake in North America identified as meromictic,¹³⁸ and is the best studied meromictic lake in the world with records dating back to 1839.¹³⁹ Because of its sulfur and its great depth, i.e. speculated, back then, to reach to the depths of the Bible’s Dead Sea, Green Lake was referred to as Lake Sodom by Lardner Vanuxem, who was the first to study Green Lake in 1839. The presence of sulfide in the deeper waters of the lake was known by 1849.

Green Lake formed as a plunge pool during the retreat of the continental glacier. It was at the base of a waterfall formed by the retreating glaciers, which is the reason for its extreme depth relative to a small surface area. Fayettville’s Green Lake is located in Green Lakes State Park, and since 1933 large quantities of sand have been dumped on the shore of the north end to create a swimming area.

All this adds up to show ample evidence of continental glaciers. In upstate New York, I grew up with these evidences all around. The erosion evidence, the Carbon 14 dating of post-glacier trees, ravines cut by receding glacier (and flood) waters, the canyon ravine gouged by the retreating Niagara Falls, and the measurable bounce-back of the Earth’s crust, which sagged under a continental glacier’s tremendous weight,… all tell the same story. The continental glacier appeared about 4,000 years ago and retreated off of my home town area over the next few hundred years. Atheistic evolutionists, who must hold on to their millions of years speculations sing from a different song book. They speculate about an ice age occurring at the start of their Pleistocene age, like, 2.6 million years ago. There is, however, ample evidence about when these glaciers formed; the diligent Bible believer should ask the question, how did these continental glaciers form?

The Real Ice Age

The north and south poles of the Earth were once lush growths of vegetation which was fed on by exotic animals. Many were frozen in place instantaneously. It is hypothesized that ice blasting into our atmosphere would be ionized and rush in more dramatically at the magnetic poles of our planet. Water blasting out of the mantle of the Earth when God broke up the fountains of the great deep would have shot into the outer atmosphere and circled to either magnetic pole of the planet. If, perchance, ice from a passing comet came crashing into our planet, it too would be ionized and then sucked to either magnetic pole. Either scenario (or both together) would have caused both poles of our planet to freeze fast and solid. And so we have a formation of continental glaciers hypothesized.

What one believes about plate tectonics determine which continent was where when these continental glaciers settle in. The creationist does not allow millions of years of natural continental drift, and understands that these continents are not floating around like toy boats in a child’s bathtub. When God broke up the fountains of the great deep the crust over the Earth’s core obviously fractured like an eggshell. And God then caused the waters to recede. He used three things to disperse the waters,

And God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged; The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated (Gen 8:1b-3).

There was a wind, there was a stopping of the fountains of the great deep and of the windows of heaven, and there was a return of the waters. The latter implies that some of the water went back into the mantle from whence it came. God can do that, it does not need a “natural” explanation, we have a supernatural God. It is also apparent that God sunk the crust lower in some places and buckled the crust higher in other places. I would sooner believe that God placed the continents where they are through this method than believe plate tectonic speculations about drifting continents over billions of years. A creationist does not have billions of years to play with, and the atheistic evolutionists only think they do. Continents do not “drift.”

Thus an ice-age hypothesis in a Bible believing creationist’s understanding consists of continental glaciers left over when God’s flood waters receded by his supernatural intervention. These continental glaciers then slowly receded over the next couple hundred years making room and environment for God’s supernatural repopulating of his kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus and species. Such a hypothesis fits all the evidence and dating variations very nicely, but does not align with a singly hypothesis of the atheistic evolutionists.

The atheistic evolutionist allows for no Supernatural interventions; he must settle on a perfectly natural explanation of an ice age that began at the start of the Pleistocene epoch, 2.6 million years ago. It must also corroborate what National Geographic reports as absolute fact, that “Sixty-five million years ago the last of the non-avian dinosaurs went extinct. So too did the giant mosasaurs and plesiosaurs in the seas and the pterosaurs in the skies.” ¹⁴⁰ The atheistic evolutionist’s time clock is unwavering, “The “Age of Dinosaurs” is the Mesozoic Era, which is divided into three periods: the Triassic (245-208 million years ago), Jurassic (208-145 million years ago), and Cretaceous (145-66 million years ago).”¹⁴¹ Any dates that do not align with their absolutes must be discarded as faulty. The studies and documentaries which showed the 4,000 BC dates for the continental glacier disappearing from the Upstate New York Finger Lakes area have been removed from all public record. A PBS documentary of the continental glacier over New York State aired about five years ago. It cited the mantle bounce-back, the gouging of Niagara Falls and fossilized trees in the Great Lakes all dating the glacier not more than 6,000 years ago. I recall watching this, but have not been able to find any reference citing any form of it. Curious.

The atheistic evolutionist story of an ice age cannot include the possibility of God’s world flood. They must conform to “known history” which, for them, reports an ice-age as follows:

An ice age is a period of colder global temperatures and recurring glacial expansion capable of lasting hundreds of millions of years. Thanks to the efforts of geologist Louis Agassiz and mathematician Milutin Milankovitch, scientists have determined that variations in the Earth’s orbit and shifting plate tectonics spur the waxing and waning of these periods. There have been at least five significant ice ages in Earth’s history, with approximately a dozen epochs of glacial expansion occurring in the past 1 million years. Humans developed significantly during the most recent glaciation period, emerging as the dominant land animal afterward as megafauna such as the wooly mammoth went extinct.”¹⁴²

That “history” goes on to educate our children with their “facts” as follows:

Scientists have recorded five significant ice ages throughout the Earth’s history: the Huronian (2.4-2.1 billion years ago), Cryogenian (850-635 million years ago), Andean-Saharan (460-430 mya), Karoo (360-260 mya) and Quaternary (2.6 mya-present). Approximately a dozen major glaciations have occurred over the past 1 million years, the largest of which peaked 650,000 years ago and lasted for 50,000 years. The most recent glaciation period, often known simply as the “Ice Age,” reached peak conditions some 18,000 years ago before giving way to the interglacial Holocene epoch 11,700 years ago. ”¹⁴³

The Bible believing Christian is a creationists and a remnant. The vast majority of our society has been educated and pressured to conform to the world view of the atheistic evolutionist. If the Bible is true, and our Lord Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of Jehovah God, and Saviour to this world, then he said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14). We have the truth on our side, we have the evidence on our side, and we have just cause to defy the atheistic scientist. Every believer should be an ambassador for the truth, but every Bible student knows that the majority do not have ears to hear the truth. Be encouraged in this endeavor, we have overcome the world.

Proverbs 16:25 There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death…. Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:… 1John 4:2-6 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

11: An Apology for Creation

An apology¹⁴⁴ can be made for creation. Not an asking of pardon for a fault or offense, but a formal justification or defense, more often called an apologetic. Such a formal defense was spearheaded in a Feb 2015 debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye held at the Creation Museum in northern Kentucky. The question debated was, “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?” There is much to be learned when it comes to making a formal justification and defense, an apology, if you would, for creation. This effort is focused on exploring the knowledge which might enhance such a defense. It is thus altogether fitting that a critique of this debate be highlighted in this effort. It is in our nature to set back in hind sight and say, “What I should have said was…” It is more so our nature to watch someone else and respond, “What he should have said was…” This sort of “armchair quarterbacking” is found in this analysis. It is not meant as a criticism of Ken Ham personally. We hold him in very high regard. However, there are some things that were not said well in this debate, things that went off track to show a lack in strategy, and critical examination of them is meant to be a help. Soul winners contend with the product of atheistic evolutionists everyday, and need to rehearse a good strategy in breaking up wayside soil.

The Ken Ham Debate and Apologetic Purpose

The Ken Ham vs. Bill Nye, Creation vs. Evolution debate cries out for an analysis of its apologetic purpose. At first glance the purpose might seem obvious. Atheists have promoted evolution as scientifically proven fact and scoff and mock anyone who believes in the Bible’s creation account. But there is a wide gate and broad path and atheistic evolutionists are stamping out a third path, a path of what Jesus called wayside soil.¹⁴⁵ We will analyze the strategy of Ken Ham, the co-founder of Answers in Genesis, in this debate and hopefully refine the purpose of a good apologetic.

The question considered in this debate was, “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?” All parties agreed to the wording of the debate’s central question, but in considering it as an apologetic purpose, it does not capture the larger picture.

The purpose of this apologetic can be clarified so that it might capture the broadness of the dilemma. Ken Ham’s five minute opening statement does capture the source of the dilemma. He declares that true science has been hijacked and made out to be something it is not. He also frames several unique colloquialisms to illustrate the hijacking; not the least is the evolutionists use of science to support a “molecules to man” origin, a theory they purport as “scientific fact.”

In the close of the 19^th century the scientific method was formalized and considered the infallible model for determining all truth. The scientific method was a systematic means of taking man’s hypothesis through to a worded theory and then on to a scientific law. A most notable example of its use is found in Kepler’s development¹⁴⁶ of the laws of planetary motion. Keplar made observations, pondered the pattern, formulated hypotheses, developed testable predictions, gathered data and tested his hypothesis, and, finally developed his general theories. After independent corroboration and wide acceptance of scientists within the discipline they became Kepler’s laws of planetary motion.

In the midst of the twentieth century there was an inordinate expectation placed upon the scientific method. Kepler’s laws of planetary motion showed that the “wandering stars” had no mysticism in their motions, they only followed natural courses. The expectation placed on the new formalized scientific method was that all Supernatural considerations could be dismissed with a perfectly natural explanation.

“Mainstream Scientists” attempt to encapsulated into their scientific method, the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, inerrant and infallible. These characteristics, of course, are Biblically credited to the Most-High-God (Hebrew El-Elyon). Lines were drawn. On one side were atheists declaring Nature and natural processes as their creator and god. On the other side were Creationists acknowledging a Most-High-God, who revealed himself and does the super-natural.

Standing in the middle, straddling the line, are a majority of people saying, “Can’t we all get along?”, and “Can’t both sides be right?” Their solutions which try to include some of each side are so nonsensical that the line has gotten blurred and smeared. The line is so trampled by this mixed multitude that the majority cannot even distinguish the two sides. A good apologetic highlights the line.

These “traditional scientists,” or “mainstream scientists,” which are herein called “science-so-called”¹⁴⁷ scientists, have a tactic they use for blurring the line. Ken Ham discloses their tactic. In his opening five minutes he exposes, 1) their modification of the meaning of words, 2) their bait and switch tactics, and 3) their insistence that “true science supports the ‘molecules to man’ origin of the Universe”, and that “no true scientist believes in the Bible’s creation account.” These three tactics are employed by the science-so-called community. The tactics employed by Ken Ham to expose their deceptions are worthy of additional analysis to completely understand the apologetic which is advanced in the debate. However, in this initial examination it is expedient to word the core deception and thus expose the underlying purpose of this apologetic.

Aside from the tactics used in this debate, the line which divides the sides is this, “Is there a Supernatural power involved in the Universe we inhabit?” Bill Nye the science guy stands with his “mainstream science” crowd and would respond, “No, everything has a natural explanation with NO Supernatural involvement whatsoever.” Ken Ham the co-founder of Answers in Genesis, stands with his Bible believing crowd and would respond, “Yes, and the Supernatural Creator of the Universe has revealed himself to expose how and why he created us.”

That is the line that divides. That is the line that gets blurred by the mixed multitude tromping around in the valley of indecision. And that is the line which should be exposed before an artful apologetic can be developed. The line produces two distinct world views, but it is not the world views which divides, it is the line. The line produces three ardent, vehemently defended positions, one from mainstream science, called here science-so-called, one from Biblical Creationists, distinguished here by those who believe in the inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Holy Scriptures, and a third ardent position held by those who try to compromise a little of both sides and recite the line, “Can’t we all just get along?” The later of these ardent positions are busy blurring the lines and muddying the waters. The line is still very real and must be defined if an effective apologetic is to be produced.

The line, again, divides two sides. On the left is the declaration “The cosmos came into existence and continues in existence by nothing more than natural processes which true science may discover.” On the right is the declaration that, “The Universe came into existence by the creative power of the Most-High-God, and it continues in existence by the natural laws he created AND by his Supernatural involvement in the affairs of man.” These two declarations are large enough to capture the whole of the divisions. The apologetic proposed has a purpose to clarify this line and defend the position on the right of that line.

The Ken Ham vs Bill Nye Debate and Apologetic Strategies

The strategy in a public formal debate is not only documented, it is formally graded. Although this author is not versed on formal debate strategies and rules, it seems obvious that Ken Ham did not stay on track in this debate. One can all learn some things about apologetics from this debate; learn about the deception, the deceivers, and in hindsight declare what should have been said. The observations below show how Ken Ham had trouble keeping the main thing the main thing, and are insightful considerations of a strategy against evolutionists.

Recall that the purpose in this apologetic is to enhance the dividing line. The two declarations above capture the whole dilemma of this great division. The apologetic’s purpose is to clarify this line, and defend the position on the right.

What, if anything, would change your mind?

In the 2015 Ken Ham vs Bill Nye debate the question was asked, “What, if anything, would change your mind?” Ken Ham gave the classic Christian answer, “Once you meet the Lord, the King of Glory, there is nothing that can change your mind.” This is altogether true for a born again believer, there is no going back. There is no changing allowed or possible from the quickening that took place when one is justified in Christ and indwelt by the Holy Spirit of God. That quickening gives us (present tense) eternal life and God has promised that it cannot and shall not ever be taken away. That is a marvelous truth; there is no going back or changing of the mind allowed for a true born-again Christian. However, that is the wrong truth to present in a creation vs evolution debate with Bill Nye the science guy.

In a confrontation with an unbeliever, particularly when they are scoffers of any and all spiritual truth, it is important to meet them where they “are at,” to go to the ground where they are standing, and deal with the stumbling blocks that they are currently confronted by. In a formal debate one is given points and “adaboys” for how well they remain on topic throughout the confrontation. But such a formal grading structure is in place because reaching out to the position and the understanding of the opponent is a wise and prudent thing to do.

Talking about meeting Christ, about a life that is changed forever, and about eternal security might draw a hearty “Amen,” and applause from the born again crowd, but it does nothing to forward the debate about creation vs evolution, nor does it have any particular effect on Bill Nye the science guy. Remember the stumbling block where Bill Nye is standing is clear, he rejects the statement, “There is a God who does the Supernatural.” He cannot, and will not surmount that obstacle in his mind. He has entered into this debate because he “knows” there is a natural explanation for everything. One who believes in a Supernatural involvement is not, in Bill Nye’s opinion, scientific. He is defiant of Ken Ham’s promotion of a Supernatural involvement in creation. Ken’s saying he has personally met this Creator will not bode well in this debate. Understanding where an adversary is coming from is essential for a good defense of Christian truth. Never loose site of the purpose.

An answer that would have delivered a one-two punch to Bill Nye and the topic at hand would have been ideal for the question, “What would change your mind?” I am not in the “hot seat” and I often step back, as an arm-chair quarterback does, and say, “What I should have said,.” or in this instance, “What Ken Ham should have said….” But just the same, consider this.

I raise beagles, and we are all familiar with dog shows and the many many dog breeds that they parade across the showroom. Incidentally, Miss P, the beagle, won first place at the 139^th Annual Westminster Dog Show this past February 2015. But if one could keep working with these dog breeds until one of them produced a Clydesdale horse, then I would step back and say, “Whoa, maybe I was wrong about this hypothesis of evolution.” Anything less than that will not persuade me. Darwinians hypothesize that by accident and random chance beagles turn into Clydesdale horses, lizards accidentally turn into bald eagles, and completely by random chance, molecules turn into man! Go to now, get down to those laboratories, practice some real science, count the chromosomes, tweak the DNA, and change a beagle’s genes to a Clydesdale horse’s genes. Then true scientists will grant the right to change such a wild hypothesis as evolution into a bona-fide theory. One might call it, “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,” or perhaps “The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life,” one of those titles might fit that theory. In the mean-time, get serious! A theory must be producible and repeatable in a laboratory. God said beagles will reproduce after their kind; Bill Nye, the science guy, says beagles will produce Clydesdale horses. Let’s do some experiments and see which is the truth. I need to see some real evidence and some real science before I’d even consider that God got this one wrong.

But because Bill Nye, the science guy, accuses that creationists make no predictions, allow two very formidable predictions with this observation. First, no matter how many dog breeds one brings together, there will never be a horse or hoof of any sort produced from that pool of genes. Second, no matter how obvious and outlandish their unmitigated broach on true science is, no matter how mute their DNA analysis, no matter how silent their cloning laboratories, the “main stream scientists,” that earn and deserve their title “scientist-so-called”, will still insist that dogs accidentally breeding into horses, that lizards accidentally hatching out eagles, and that molecules evolving into humans is still, in their opinion, a valid “theory.” In reality, there is not a shred of laboratory evidence! What they say happened “naturally” in eons of time, they cannot reproduce in the most sophisticated laboratory. It is all an unsubstantiated, inconceivable hypothesis forced on us by main-stream science-so-called. No rational mind could change from a creation account to such a hypothesis without some kind of meaningful evidence, and they have none.

Now, the blunder that Ken Ham made in refuting Bill Nye’s hypothesis in this debate is that he failed to consider the basis of Bill’s reasoning. Every ounce of the evolutionist’s brain rests on an assumption that everything is natural, and there is no Supernatural existence or involvement in the Universe. Ken’s argument that he has personally met the Supernatural LORD God and would never change his mind will eventually reduce to a “Have not!”, “Have to!”, “Have not!”, “Have to!”, kind of argument which has no place in a formal debate. So to, in a Christian’s defense of truth, such an approach will have little value. In defending against the evolutionist, always keep their major contention foremost in the argument. One wants to break up the wayside soil not pack it in harder. They hypothesize that there is no Supernatural involvement in the Universe, and every observed phenomena must have a natural explanation. When they hypothesize a natural explanation that accounts for the species seen today, they must construct an inconceivable molecules to man evolutionary scheme. Ken Ham had an opportunity to confront this total lack of evidence, but he let Bill Nye, his contender, walk away unscathed. It is essential to keep the main thing the main thing in these situations.

Well what about Noah’s Ark?

Another instance where the main thing got set aside, while Bill Nye mocked on and on, dealt with the impossibility of Noah’s Ark. Ken Ham missed this profound opportunity on two fronts. First Noah built an Ark, not a ship. The unsuccessful five masted schooner ship, which Bill Nye used to illustrate his mockery, could have been sunk by pointing out that Noah was not a ship builder, he was God’s Ark builder. God’s Ark had no masts. None. Notta. Zip. But his second blunder should capture our full attention for a moment. The “main thing” that is to be pursued here is this: the Christian believes staunchly in the Supernatural God who involves himself in the affairs of man. Mainstream science, that Bill Nye the science guy is representing, contends that there is NO Supernatural, and that EVERYTHING has a purely natural explanation. In this instance Ken Ham completely departed from the main thing. He tried his best to explain the Ark and the Flood, and then the multitudes of species produced after the flood, with ALL NATURAL explanations. What a shame! What a missed opportunity to point out the main thing that Bill Nye is purposefully missing. Every conversation, with an unbeliever, every dialogue, every contest, must go back to the main thing. There is a God in Heaven, and He miraculously orchestrated the Ark, the Flood, and the re-speciation of this world. Trying to explain any Supernatural event with only natural sciences… well… that is the essence of the unbelievers dilemma isn’t it? Ken Ham tried to play on their “natural” turf and detail a natural explanation for building an Ark, fitting in two of every kind, and repopulating the world with a modified and replaced Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus and Species! (Ken Plays Chess On Friday Getting Suspended).

Re-speciation is a miracle. It cannot have a natural explanation. Consider that the Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus and Species post-flood classification, or taxonomy, of living things has been our practice since the turn of the 18^th century AD. Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708), a French botanist, is considered “the founder of the modern concept of genera, and Carl Linnaeus (1707 – 1778), (also known after his ennoblement as Carl von Linné) a Swedish botanist, physician, and zoologist, is known as the father of modern taxonomy. For example, Canis is a Genus of dogs, in the Family of Caridae. It includes dogs, wolves, coyotes and jackals. The important thing about a Genus is that they can all interbreed, and thus they can align with the distinction that God gave them in Genesis 1:25, “And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.” It is demonstrable that interbreeding a dog, a coyote, and a gray wolf can produce a golden jackal or an Ethiopian wolf. They are all of the same “Kind.” In God’s order, and in biology’s taxonomy, or ordered system, they are in the same Genus and Family.

Contrast that with a Genus Felis, of the Family Felidae, containing lions, tigers and … cats (Dorothy was also concerned with bears, but that is yet another Kind, ordered into the Genus Ursus in the Family Ursidae; indeed they are all in the Order Carnivora, but it is only the whole Family, Canidae, that are interbreeding to produce black, grisly, cinnamon, brown and polar bears). Now this Genus and Family, the Felis, can interbreed and make all kinds of feline creatures, but woe to the man who breeds a Canidae with a Felidae. They would get… well… nothing. One cannot breed cats and dogs because they are of different Kind. Everybody knows that. The genes and chromosomes and DNA are completely different in Kind. And yet, mainstream science, i.e. science-so-called, wants to completely ignore this truth and pretend, for the sake of their hypothesis, that these various Kind came from common ancestors. And not only that, they did it by natural selection and survival of the fittest! The magnanimity of this deception is staggering. If evolution were a real science, it would be required that their scientists get down to the laboratory and crossbreed cats, dogs and bears, and re-produce a common ancestral, Order Canidae, which connects them. But the only place that is even possible is in a fictional ancestral tree, printed in our children’s “science” text books!

Dog	Cat	Bear
Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Carnivora Family: Canidae Subfamily: Caninae Genus: Canis Linnaeus, 1758	Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Carnivora Family: Felidae Subfamily: Felinae Genus: Felis Linnaeus, 1758	Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Carnivora Family: Ursidae Subfamily: ?? Genus: Ursus Linnaeus, 1758

Further, the evolutionists have brain washed our society into thinking that if cats , dogs, and horses have a common ancestor then so do mammals, birds, lizards and insects! Their hypothesis includes the unbelievable presumption that two rocks rubbed together in a primeval sea and produced some amino acids which, by pure happenstance, flicked off into accidental life forms. These life forms used natural selection and survival of the fittest to produce a Stanford Ph.D.! Shame on Charles Darwin, he was no scientist!

Gecko Lizard	Ostrich	Bald Eagle
Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Reptilia Order: Squamata Suborder: Scleroglossa Infraorder: Gekkota Species ?? Cuvier, 1817	Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Aves Order: Struthioniformes Family: Struthionidae Genus: Struthio Species: S. camelus	Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Aves Order: Accipitriformes Family: Accipitridae Genus: Haliaeetus Species: H. leucocephalus Linnaeus, 1758

God established that his creatures reproduced after their own Kind. When he miraculously directed them to get on an Ark (not a ship) he said “Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive” (Gen 6:20). He reiterated this Supernatural miracle in case some might doubt what he did:

In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah’s wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort. And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life. And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the LORD shut him in. (Gen 7:13-16)

Bill Nye the science guy, and his mainstream scientists standing behind him, have insinuated that all creatures great and small have arrived at their present Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family Genus and Species, by a natural process starting with two rocks in a primeval sea and driven by a survival of the fittest. They allow no Supernatural involvement whatsoever, and they provide no repeatable laboratory evidence to support this wild hypothesis. Although the vast majority will recite in unison, how beautiful and auspicious are the Emperor’s new clothes,¹⁴⁸ there will always be a few Bible believing Christians who yell out from the sidelines, “The Emperor has no clothes, the Emperor is stark raving naked.” There is a God in heaven, and he created creatures which reproduce after their own kind.

I said all that to say this, in Ken Ham’s debate with Bill Nye, Ken did not keep the main thing the main thing. Bill Nye is solidly persuaded and most firmly believes that every thing in this Universe arrived here, and continues here, by nothing but perfectly natural and logically understandable processes. He is totally against the inclusion of a single Supernatural event. He purports only Natural Science as his Creator and Sustainer. The main thing in any Christian defense here, is to point out the absurdities in that hypothesis. Always keep a focus. Ken Ham did not.

Ken’s attempt to refute Bill Nye’s hypothesis by testament, that he personally met the Supernatural Creator is ineffectual, i.e. a “Have not!”, “Have to!” kind of argument. But his attempted use of the natural sciences to explain an Ark, a Flood, and a re-population of God’s creation, was absolutely deplorable. He was completely off target and Bill Nye the science guy knew it. If Ken Ham’s strategy had kept the main thing the main thing, this debate could have asserted that Creation is not only a “viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era”, but it is the ONLY viable model in any era!

When developing an apologetic, a defense of Christian doctrine, always know the main thing, the grounds of the detractors, and the strategy which will refute them. If one cannot, it might be better to not answer at all. The Bible says “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou be like unto him.” The next verse says “Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit” (Proverbs 26:4,5).

The untouched “Cambrian Explosion”

Another observation on the evolutionist’s wild hypothesis that all Creation has a common ancestor (somewhat and somehow removed from the amino acids of a rock) is their hypothesis of a Cambrian Explosion. It is unfortunate that Ken Ham spent all his time trying to differentiate “historical science” from “evidential science,” and none of his time rubbing a Cambrian Explosion into Bill Nye’s face.

Twenty five years ago Stephen Jay Gould exploded a twenty-megaton bomb in the very heart and soul of the Darwinian evolutionists laboratory. Their fossils, theories, and wild hypotheses should have been vaporized and blown to kingdom-come, but there was not a single impact on the beast with seven heads.¹⁴⁹ If it were possible that mere wisdom and logic of man could destroy the living beast called Evolution, Gould’s book, “Wonderful Life”¹⁵⁰ would have seen “one of his heads as it were wounded to death” (cf Rev 13). The Cambrian explosion so eloquently documented by one of their own in that 1989 book focused all of its dismantling effect on the atheistic evolutionists upward-and-onward, survival of the fittest, billions of years of progressive climbing up the evolutionary ladder. Yet it did not interrupt a single rung of their ladder. Is it possible that a debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye the Science Guy could have ripped a few rungs out of their ladder?

If the February 2015 debate relied on the Spirit of the Living God, the eternal truth of His inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Word and the power of our resurrected Lord Jesus Christ, that Ken Ham vs Bill Nye debate could have easily wounded a head of the beast as unto death. But, alas, it relied on logic and the modernist’s hyper-critical, and grossly compromised Good News to Modern Man type bible. A Christian without a double edged Sword, able to divide between the thoughts and intents of the heart, to divide between the bone and marrow, to divide between the soul and spirit, is ill equip to make an impact on the souls of men, and the beast scoffs at their logical efforts. If mere logic and rational thinking would prevail, Gould’s Cambrian explosion would have surely prevailed.

Only a modest evaluation of the Cambrian explosion debacle is herein undertaken. As a systems engineer I only want to step back and look at the atheistic evolutionist’s dilemma in the broadest of terms. Such a broad knowledge of their plight is helpful and encouraging to a Bible believer, and it has already been stated that a through knowledge of all the detail might enhance a logical argument, but a purely logical argument is not an effective weapon against this enemy.

The Cambrian explosion refers to the sudden appearance of a multitude of new animal body forms in the middle of the Cambrian era, which atheistic evolutionists suppose was half a billion years ago. In the Darwinian evolutionist’s mind, which has no book of Genesis, no Creator, and no account of his creation, this occurred with a “monophyletic” origin – from a single common ancestor in which the basic arthropod structure slowly developed by some tree-type structure. Darwin labeled this tree diagram a “tree-of-life” from something he read previously from the book of Genesis. Gould’s book takes an ax to Darwin’s tree. Monophyletic origins are the mainstay of Darwinian survival of the fittest, onward and upward evolution. The orthodox view of evolution has “a cone of evolutionary diversity (which) must expand through time”¹⁵¹ Stephen Jay Gould’s book, “Wonderful Life,” thoroughly debunked this myth of progressive improvements in a tree-of-life. He depicts a “polyphyletic” development which is random.

There was no ‘Arthropod Eve,’ no single ancestor from which all modern arthropods are descended. The chelicerate (spiders and scorpions), crustaceans (crabs and prawns), uniramians (insects and myriapods) and the extinct trilobites had each independently evolved the characteristic arthropod structure. On such a model it would not be surprising that some other equally independent, arthropod types might have appeared in the Cambrian and then become extinct.¹⁵²

This polyphyletic interpretation making the Cambrian explosion allows Gould to revisit the whole evolutionary theory and toss in a completely random paradigm. That random paradigm throws an insurmountable wrench into orthodox Darwinian evolution. Orthodox evolution must have a direction, a purpose, and onward-and-upward. The intended outcome is a higher ordered being, even one capable of rational thought, abstract reasoning and spiritual being,… us. The direction and purpose, however, cannot go so far as admitting “intelligent design.” Thus, Peter Bowler’s book review, just sited, takes a precarious middle of the road position. He refers to “The Crucible of Creation” by Simon Conway Morris to refute Gould’s rebuke which endangered them of the sacred monophyletic paradigm, but he abhors the word “Creation” in Morris’ argument. The word “Creation” not only boasts an intelligent design, it might even call for a designer, and some might call him their Creator!

One does not need to go into any further detail about the Cambrian explosion to see the straight that the atheistic Darwinian evolutionists is caught in. If Stephen Jay Gould has the last say, the “evolution” is so random that the onward-and-upward “living-tree” model is defunct and no longer progressive; in fact it is in danger of extinction. If Conway Morris has the last say there is a Creator involved, and atheistic Darwinian evolution cannot tolerate that. The plight is priceless.

Stephen C. Meyer, Director of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture developed very well that the neo-Darwinian does not have a leg to stand on here. “The sources of new form and structure must proceed the action of natural selection – that selection must act on what already exists….. yet population genetics, and thus evolutionary biology, has not identified a specifically causal explanation for the origin of true morphological novelty during the history of life.”¹⁵³

Meyers continues, “As it happens, Muller and Newman are not alone in this judgment. In the last decade or so, a host of scientific essays and books have questioned the efficacy of selection and mutation as a mechanism for generating morphological novelty, as even a brief literature survey will establish.”¹⁵⁴

The Cambrian explosion pitches the atheistic Darwinian evolutionist into an insurmountable quandary. His onward-and-upward, progressive, survival of the fittest paradigm does not fit into the fossil record, and it cannot come up with the “morphological novelty.” The alternative, some kind of “intelligent design” leaves the door open to their worst nightmare, an “Intelligent Designer.” It is unfortunate that so few Christians see or know about the uncomfortable, unexplained, straight the neo-Darwinian is locked up in. Ken Ham should have bludgeoned Bill Nye with the Cambrian Explosion. Bill Nye was ignorant of it, and so are most Christians still struggling for a good apologetic.

A good offense is better than any kind of defense.

What’s more, there was an incorrigible amount of debate time used up introducing creationists who made scientific contributions of late. This was also completely off topic. Bible believers will win nothing by appealing to what the majority are saying or doing. The true believer’s lot is that of a minority in this world. Indeed “there is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Prov 16:25). And again, “Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat” (Matt 7:13). It is only the Roman Religion which thought that (and still thinks that) the Catholic Church would usher in a new world where “the wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid… They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea” (Isa 11:6). No, true believers will always be the minorities in this debate and in the end, one dare not use any majority arguments. Further, it was defensive posturing even before an offense was mounted. It was ineffective. In an opening statement, when one gets to go first, an offensive jab is far more effective than a defensive posture.

An ideal opening offensive should have been aimed at the evolutionist’s time clock. They insist that it takes 168,000 years for light to travel 168,000 light years. Their whole world view hangs on this fallacy. It does not take much development to throw a wrench into that thinking and fracture that foundation. The theories of relativity have established that time and distance are interrelated, and somehow “relative” to one’s current coordinate system. That is why so many sci-fi ideas concern themselves with time travel, time warps, worm holes, etc. which sci-fi geeks assert as present in the outer reaches of space. There is some basis of truth behind most sci-fi imaginations and evolutionists completely ignore this truth. Einstein established that light traveling through firmament outside of our immediate coordinate system “is not relative” to our tiny little coordinate system. This all unfolds inside Albert Einstein’s Theories of Relativity, theories of which evolutionists purposefully remain balefully ignorant.

The only reason that mainstream scientists believe and preach that the world is thirteen billion years old, is because the edges of the Universe which they can presently “see” is likely, in their estimation, thirteen billion light years away. They contradict their own logic when they assert that the Universe is also unbounded and infinite, but that needs to be another investigation. For now, for this present argument, be it known that the ONLY basis for their three and a half billion year old universe is that they saw a glimmer of light from a star that, for their best guess, is three and a half billion light years away! Notice that as they got greater telescopes they raised all their estimates, and they have done that for all my 50 years of listening to them. They will surely soon get to thirty-two, or three-hundred and two billion! They used to believe and preach that the Universe was an astronomical two million years old, but then they kept building bigger telescopes and revising their “known facts” and their outlandish hypothesis. They always preach their hypothesis as “irrefutable fact,” and get more and more offended at Christians who will not line up with what they are preaching.

The stark reality is this, diligent Bible believers see that God has revealed a Universe that he created only 6,019 years ago, in 4004 BC (If one is not offended by the genius of James Ussher (1581-1656), who determined when all the planets aligned, and supposed God’s first day after creation was Sunday, 23 October 4004 BC; please do not be quick to sit in the seat with his scorners just because of his zeal). If the observed supernova in the Large Magellanic Cloud occurred 168,000 year ago, because it took 168,000 years for the light to get here, then God has deceived us in his revelation. The

remnant of Bible believers who are going to hold to the inerrancy and infallibility of God’s Word are going to herein reject the preaching of mainstream science. One can contend that this ever changing Godless hypothesizing is still gross error, and thus expect that a more thorough comprehension of Albert Einstein’s theories, and even the law of entropy itself will carry the day. It will not. God, not logic, can change the heart and mind. Let God be true, but every man a liar (Romans 3:4). Let the remnant be busy breaking up wayside soil so the seed can find some good soil.

Further, when the atheistic evolutionists drill a hole through a large tree and find it older than God’s Earth, diligent Bible believers will contend that they are mistaken; when they dig down through layers of ice and hypothesize that it is older than God’s Universe, sincere Bible believers will sympathize with their ignorance, but will not reject God’s revealed Word. When they hypothesize about continents drifting at a forever constant rate, about the moon slipping away from the Earth while collecting NO cosmic dust, or about planets solidifying at an exponentially slower rate than is NATURAL, Christians have a “going in” position, and it is, “God does not lie.” Evolutionists have a “going in” position as well, it is that they have no creator and there is no Supernatural God involved in the affairs of this Universe. One is right, one is wrong. Truth, i.e. our Lord Jesus Christ, is on our side. Don’t back down. Don’t look to their false god of Natural Science. When Bible believers know the LORD God who created the universe, they cannot compromise with an evolutionary atheist.

A careful strategy against evolutionists- the Main Thing.

Bible believing Christians hold to God’s Word which declares that just over 6,000 years ago the LORD God created the heaven and the earth. Evolutionists hold to (and forever modify) Charles Darwin’s hypothesis that molecules turned into man in thirteen billion years of random happenstance. For the Bible believing Christian the big bang and lizards evolving into eagles is not a viable model for the creation of the Universe. Bill Nye the science guy, has declared his intention to wipe the belief in Biblical creation out of existence. In utube video he states “When you have a portion of the population that does not believe in (the general understanding of science) it holds everyone else back. Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science,… their world view is crazy, it is untenable and inconsistent… and I say to the grownups if you want to deny evolution and live in your world that is inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that’s fine, but don’t make your kids do it because we need them, we need scientifically literate voters and tax payers, we need engineers that can build stuff and solve problems… in another couple centuries that world view will just not exist, there is no evidence for it.” His “world view” goes on to suppose teaching children the Bible or creation is akin to child abuse! Dr. Kent Hovind reminds us “We are in a war here, and you need to get in the battle.”

A word about an apologetics strategy which comes from this analysis is in order. We found the purpose in this apologetic crafted into two declarations. On the left is the declaration “The cosmos came into existence and continues in existence by nothing more than natural processes which true science may discover.” On the right is the declaration that, “The Universe came into existence by the creative power of the Most-High-God, and it continues in existence by the natural laws which he created AND by his Supernatural involvement in the affairs of man.” Granted there is a mixed multitude (cf Exodus 12:38 and Nehemiah13:3) running around in between these two lines, but a diligent Bible believer should never cross certain lines. Stand with the clear winner in this purpose, “that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand” (Eph 6) Recall his promise:

“Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness. Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish. Thou shalt seek them, and shalt not find them, even them that contended with thee: they that war against thee shall be as nothing, and as a thing of nought. For I the LORD thy God will hold thy right hand, saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee” (Isa 41:10-13).

Now, a strategy which would pursue this purpose might be to resign oneself to being the underdog. Just be brazenly obvious that the majority of “scientists”, the majority of “religions” and even the majority of “Christendom” is not going to hold emphatically to dictates of God’s inerrant, infallible, verbally inspired Word. But let Bill Nye the science guy, or any of his cohorts, know that he just crossed a Bible believer who is emphatic. Aggressively pursuing the notion that God’s creation model is the ONLY viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era is far better than some defensive posture, or some pretense that there are a great number of us holding and defending such a position. Remember the victory which Gideon saw; remember the loneliness which Elijah felt; remember how much they hated God’s Only Begotten Son, and then keep the main thing the main thing.

I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.

Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?

Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.(Isaiah 45:5-12)

Considering the Audience.

Consider the audience for Ken Ham’s apologetic. The debate was held on home turf, in the Creation Science Museum auditorium. Of course a formal debate cannot be structured to give Christians instruction on how to approach a skeptical “scientist” type, but it does give a “watch this” performance for Christians. The idea that a majority is siding with “science-so-called,” and rejecting the Creation account of God can be intimidating. Seeing Ken Ham face-off against Goliath is encouraging. Seeing the world’s most educated trying to defend the Emperor’s fine wardrobe was certainly enlightening, and often entertaining. Be assured that few of the world’s most educated are aware of their involvement in “The Emperor’s New clothes” scenario. Again the greatest value of the debate was what it does for the Christian soldier who is about his Father’s business, preaching the gospel to every creature. Others found it interesting. Some found it moving. Soldiers of the cross found some new tactics. The target audience, for an apologetic, should be the Christian soldier on the front lines.

12: Defiance of Science – Flat-Earth, Geocentric, and Conspiracy Conspirators

There is a tendency in man to react in kind, and since science-so-called is absolutely defiant of Biblical accuracy, some have become absolutely defiant of all science. Those that compromise the Bible’s accuracy in order to accommodate science-so-called¹⁵⁵ are a dangerous lot. They try to insert huge time gaps into the Genesis account in order to accommodate science-so-called’s geological age of rocks, or they suppose that God used the science-so-called’s model of evolution. Compromising Biblical accuracy is a slippery slope leading to a dangerous fall. But there are also those who go to the other extreme and completely defy all science; they think of themselves as “literalists” and hold their defiance of science as a badge of sincerity and truth. These “literalists” are equally dangerous.

There are “Flat Earthers” who believe the world is not spherical but flat, like a coin. This falsehood, widely taught by Muslims, has become accepted by some Christians who want to show their absolute defiance of science. True science, and careful observation show that our world, our moon, the other planets that one can readily view with telescopes are all obviously spherical in shape; so are bubbles and BBs, i.e. it is a perfectly natural shape for any fluid mass. The Flat-Earthers insist that they are the true Bible believers, i.e. literalists, and that you and I have been deceived by the master deceiver. The worldly demonic government has deceived us, they insist, and no matter what evidence one gives them, they defy all science. They are convinced that the world is flat and the government, led by Satan, has deceived the whole world about the Earth’s spherical shape. The government deceit, they insist, is an ongoing conspiracy.

There are “Geocentrics” who believe that the Earth is the center of God’s universe and it does not move. The Sun, they insist, and all of its planets, and all the stars of heaven, must orbit around the unmovable Earth. These geocentricists (geo Greek for “Earth”, centric English for “center of”) defy the science, and the obvious observable facts, which prove that the Earth is one of nine planets in orbit around the Sun (Mary’s Velvet Eyes Make John Stay Up Nights Proposing, i.e Mercury, Venice, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto; of late some think John was not really Proposing and Pluto is not big enough to be called a real planet). It is one thing to defy science-so-called when it supposes billions of years after a supposed big bang, or that dogs evolved into horses, and lizards into eagles. It is quite another thing to defy what is obviously observable phenomena in the universe which God created. The Geocentrics insist that they are the true Bible believers, i.e. literalists, and that you and I have been deceived by the master deceiver. The worldly demonic government has deceived us, they insist, and no matter what evidence one gives them, they defy all science. They are convinced that the Earth is unmovable and that the government, led by Satan, has deceived the whole world about the Earth’s orbit around the Sun. The government deceit, they insist, is an ongoing conspiracy.

There are conspiracy conspirators who believe that the United States of America never did launch to the moon, nor did Apollo 11 land Americans Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on its surface on that July 20^th of 1969. This, they insist, was all an elaborate hoax, pulled off by our lying, cheating, stealing government officials. It never happened, they say, and Neil Armstrong, a professed born-again believer in our Lord Jesus Christ, an aerospace engineer, naval aviator, test pilot and university professor, was lying and deceiving in every interview and lecture that he made. Lying all the way up to his death in 2012! Those who hold this persuasion are sincere, and are motivated by a massive mistrust of all things government. They have no list of Scripture per-se, to hang this government conspiracy on, but they often hang out with geocentrics and are in sympathy with “TheFlatEarthSociety.org.” They are convinced that all government is the tool of Satan, and that our government deceived the whole world about the Apollo 11’s mission. The government deceit, they insist, is an ongoing conspiracy.

There are a myriad of cult-like offshoots claiming to be Bible believers and spreading their deceit throughout Christendom. These three, however, depend on a staunch defiance of science, ergo they need to be moderately addressed in this dissertation. Science is not the enemy. There is an enemy, but he does not use science in his deceit, he uses science-so-called, as explained earlier.

Defying The Flat-Earthers

Flat-Earth deceivers insist that when the Bible says, in Daniel 4, that a tree grew, “the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth,” then, they insist, this recorded dream must be taken exactly physical and exactly literal. Ergo, in their mind, the Earth has to be flat. They will not let any amount of evidence dissuade them, they insist that the Bible says the world is flat and they are going to believe the Bible and reject everything else. “I don’t care what science ‘proves’ about the earth’s spherical shape,” they emphatically reason, “if the Bible says it is flat, then it is flat” (cf. Dan 4:10-11). They apply this misguided and illogical reasoning to another Scripture in Matthew.

Again, Flat-Earthers insist, that if the Devil can take Jesus to an exceeding high mountain, and show him all the kingdoms of the world, then it must be that the world is flat. They insist that the Bible says so (cf. Matt 4:8, Luke 4:5)! The only way that Flat-Earthers can reconcile these Scriptures, in a very literal way, is by imagining that the Earth is flat. They insist dogmatically, even fanatically, that anyone disagreeing on this point, is deceived and a puppet of the worldly diabolical government.

Be very careful of Flat-Earthers. They are a cultist radical fringe group who bring mockery to Christianity. They are very defiant of real science because of their very faulty Biblical interpretations. Recall that the disciples of Christ were casting off in a ship, “And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod” (Mark 8:15, cf Matt 16:6). They, displaying tendencies of literalists, “reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have no bread” (vr. 16). Jesus rebukes them. One can be too literal in understanding God’s words. Recall when Jesus taught, “I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world… Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you” (John 6:51, 53). The literalists all left Jesus (6:66), and his rebuke said, “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (vr.63). Exotic cults are born when misinterpretations of God’s words are concreted into finite minds. So to, flat earthers are born, and replicate.

Without using a fish-bowl lens from the government, I observed, with my naked eye, on September the 27^th and 28^th, 2015, between the hours of 9 PM and 1:30 AM, from my home in upstate New York, the shadow that a spherical planet, Earth, cast upon the moon during a lunar eclipse. I took pictures. Aristotle (384 – 322 BC) did the same in his day. I don’t believe, however, that he took pictures. The Earth is a planet and a sphere just like all the other ones that one sees in space. Flat-earthers are defying the blatantly obvious and insisting on an unmitigated conspiracy on the part of world governments.

Today, orbiting around a spherical planet Earth, satellites beam television signals, radio signals, internet connections, and telephone communications right into our homes. A satellite cannot orbit a coin shaped, flat Earth. Flat-earthers are very sincere, but obviously very misled. Their defiance of science, taken with a vengeance, has made them beside themselves and double minded. In my experience, one will have more effect praying for them than arguing with them.

Anyone can take this hyper-physical hyper-literal interpretation method or hermeneutic, and develop their own little cult. Solomon states in Ecclesiastes, “A wise man’s heart is at his right hand; but a fool’s heart at his left.” Physically right handed people put their hand over their heart on their left hand side. That is where their heart is physically located. Consequently, here is Scripture that says only left handed people are wise, and all right handed people are fools. Of course ambidextrous people will need an MRI to find which side their heart is on before it can be determine whether they are wise or fool. If one asks right handed people about this interpretation they will say it is just wrong! But, then too, they are the fools in this context and they are likely entangled in a mass deception about a proper literal hermeneutic for this verse. I speak as a fool; don’t miss the sarcasm, and don’t be a hyper literalist.

Defying The Geocentrics

The Geocentrics, like the Flat-Earthers, insist on a very literal and very physical interpretation of a couple Bible verses. They then allow their literal misinterpretations to defy all other observations and scientific data. For example, the Bible says that “the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day” (Josh 10:12). Obviously, the Geocentrics reason, the Sun had to be orbiting the Earth and God caused it, in this Scripture, to stand still. What Geocentrics miss here is that the Bible gives information in our human context. This describing things as they appear is called phenomenological. The Sun does not truly set in the west, but that is how man observes it and describes it. When a phenomena is described, it is presented as it is observed by man setting on the planet Earth. God often speaks phenomenologically. When Geocentics dismiss this truth, they insist that the Bible says, “the sun orbits the earth.” It does not, but they insist that the Bible says so. They believe that you and I are deceived and that they, the Geocentrics, are the true Bible believers.

Again, they see in the Bible, “The world shall be stable, that it be not moved and the sun has its circuit unto the ends of it” (1Chron 16:30, Psalm 96:10, 104:4, and Psalm 19:6). They insist on a strictly nonphenomenological and obsessively literal interpretation of these Scriptures. In their mind, with no phenomenological allowances, the Sun is orbiting the Earth. Like the Flat-Earthers, the Geocentrics insist that the logical thinkers here, have all been deceived by the master deceiver and his government. They insist that all of our orbital mechanics are flawed because their Bible interpretation tells them that the Sun orbits the Earth.

They so radically dismiss all phenomenological interpretations that Geocentrics even insist that Ecclesiastes 1:5 describes a sun orbiting the Earth. “The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose” (Ecclesiastes 1:5). The obvious observations of a rotating Earth, the four seasons caused by our orbit around the sun, and the systematic sightings of the other orbiting planets, are completely dismissed by Geocentrics. Their dogmatic misinterpretation of these Scriptures blinds them to the obvious. They continue down a cultist path to defy all science and insist that all other professed believers are being deceived.

If groups of Christians want to follow this obscure line of thinking, and suppose that Earth is not a planet, what is that to me? Isn’t it more important what they believe about our Lord Jesus Christ? Can’t we just sort out who has been orbiting what after we get to heaven? In actuality there is a true science, and a science-so-called. A true science supports every truth of God’s inerrant, infallible, inspired Word. Science-so-called mocks the same. Christians rejecting all science, because of conspiracy theories are hindering the cause more than helping. In this effort true science, “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena,”¹⁵⁶ is used to highlight the exactness of God’s Word. In the mean-time, this contingency of Geocentrics, are blatantly defiant of the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanations of phenomena. The world mocks all christendom when these do such treason against true science. Let us therefore dissuade the Geocentrics, and other fringe groups who reject the truth and preach such foolishness.

God has given us seven objects which move with varying speed across the backdrop of a multitude of fixed stars. The Sun, which marks out our days, rises in the east, follows a track across our sky and sets in the west. The track that it takes moves up (north) and down (south) during the four seasons which we observe from our northern hemisphere.¹⁵⁷ The moon, which marks out our months, follows a similar, but not identical daily track across our sky. Those who spend more time observing the night sky than the Night Show, know that Venus, the brightest wandering “star,” Jupiter and Saturn, less bright wandering “stars,” and Mercury and Mars, the least bright, but readily visible wandering “stars” all wander across the night sky on a very similar track but at very varying speeds. These five “stars” were called “planets,” which comes from the Greek and means “wanderers.”

The celestial highway traveled by these principle planets, the moon and the sun was called the zodiac. It was eight degrees wide and marked off into twelve equal regions bearing the name of the constellations which they originally occupied. Things have significantly changed because of the precession¹⁵⁸ of the equinoxes, but some still hold the twelve signs of the zodiac to be mysterious and worshiped for fortune telling. As these stars wandered on this celestial highway they would change speed and sometimes change directions. A planet might pass another, then slow down, and let the other pass, then speed up and pass again. People actually thought that personalities might be determined by what the stars were doing at their birth. This false god worship is still printed in daily newspapers.

In the second century AD Ptolemy, also known as Claudius Ptolemaeus, an Egyptian astronomer of Greek descent, put together the mathematics which would calculate planet positions of the Greek geocentric system.¹⁵⁹ He used complex combinations of uniform circular motions for this model. It was not until Johannes Kepler (1571 – 1630) discovered three major laws of planetary motion that the motions of these “wandering stars” was accurately determined. Kepler was the first to successfully model planetary orbits to a high degree of accuracy. He publishing his laws in 1605.¹⁶⁰ Isaac Newton published more general laws of celestial motion in his 1687 book, “Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica.”¹⁶¹ It is important to note that although Ptolemy’s system of mathematics predicted where the planets would be, Kepler with Newton’s applications of angular momentum united rudimentary laws of physics with the preliminary considerations of gravity to show why the planets do what they do.

Kepler and Newton had captured all the physics involved in orbital mechanics. Their mathematical model of how a smaller planet orbits a larger gravitational source was genius. Their laws of planetary motion exactly detail all the planets motions around the sun, the moon’s orbit around the Earth, and all the moons that were found in orbit around all known, and yet unknown planets. Their discovered laws calculate the orbits of every satellite we have ever launched into Earth orbit. Their laws are used to move astronauts into and out of Earth’s orbits. They are not theories but proven laws.Ptolemy’s math could do no orbital mechanics whatsoever.

Ptolemy matched up some tricky math to a flawed hypothesis; Kepler discovered the laws of all planetary motion. There is a significant difference here. When a hypothesis does not meet all the known conditions, it is replaced by the one that does. The hypothesis that replaced the geocentric model, went on to become a theory, and was tested extensively to become Kepler’s laws of planetary motion, and Newton’s laws of orbital mechanics. That’s how true science works; hypothesis, test, modify, test, modify, validate, advance to a theory, test, modify, test, modify, prove, validate, and tentatively call it the law.

A few Muslims holding onto a flawed hypothesis and a geocentric model of the universe is understandable. That is what their prophet believed, he said he got it straight from Allah, and they will not let it go. Christians, however, have no misguided prophet as their founder. Our founder is the Only begotten Son of God (Psalm 2, John 3), the creator of the universe (Gen 1, John 1), the Lamb of God (Exod 12, Isa 53, John 1, Rev 5), and the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Gen 49:9, Rev 5:5). There is no conceivable reason for a genuine Christian to hold on to a hypothesis that did not prove to be accurate or truth.

There are a few Geocentrics trying to make the Holy Bible fit a long ago discarded hypothesis. Their primary motive seems to be a raw defiance of science. Their outspokenness brings a justified mockery to Christianity. There are things a Bible believer can do to help squelch this disturbance. God said, “For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (1Cor 1:21). Those undertaking “the sore travail” of seeking and searching out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven (Eccl 1:13, 3:10) should know the difference between the foolishness of preaching and the preaching of foolishness. Flat-Earthers and Geocentrics are found to be dangerously doing the latter.

Defying The Conspiracy Conspirators

This author worked for the government for over twenty-five years as a USAF electrical engineer, military officer, and R&D program engineer. After working for ten years in “black,” very sensitive areas, I have given several testimonies that our government is so laden with incompetence that it could never pull off a major conspiracy. I have found that those who believe that Roswell hosted “alien beings” in 1947, that Area-51 houses saucers and UFOs, and that Neil Armstrong never put his foot on the moon, will not be dissuaded by any mere eyewitness! Let us be very careful about an open defiance of the obvious. Like the Flat-Earthers and Geocentrics the small group of conspiracy conspirators insist that they are the only ones who are not deceived. They not only have a defiance of science, they are willing to defy the blatantly obvious.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines a conspiracy as “An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.” Two unfortunate things about conspiracy conspirators is that they carry an air that says, “my mind is made up, don’t confuse me with the facts,” and they bring a mockery of Christianity. I have found no argument that would sway them, so let me tell three stories that might keep a believer from becoming one of them.

The USAF has “black” research and development programs. So do other branches of our government. It is labeled “black” because no one is to know about the capability being developed. Often the developers themselves only know their small portion. When a black program is in danger of some compromise any cover story that will take the lime-light off of the situation is plausible cover.

When developing some of our supersonic capabilities things happened. One development glowed with ominous colors as it streaked through the night sky. It was commonly reported as a UFO and when the USAF was asked about it they gave the well trained answer, “We can neither confirm nor deny.” The conspiracy conspirators took it from there. Black test aircraft have crashed. When asked about crash sites which were shrouded in secrecy the answer was, “We can neither confirm nor deny,” and the conspiracy conspirators took it from there. Plausible cover included UFOs, recovered aliens, abductions et al.. Some “inside intelligence” about these cover ups would often come from one who, perhaps, had a piece of the truth and a charismatic flare for the drama. They were not allowed to reveal the truth, but wild speculations would often be winked at with the clause, “I can neither confirm nor deny.” The conspiracy conspirators had an even greater charismatic flare for such drama.

When developing some of our stealth technology things happened. Every conceivable shape and configuration was radar tested while mounted upside down on a pole in the now famed and unclassified Area 51. If technicians left a saucer shape on the pole during a known surveillance satellite overflight, the answer, “We can neither confirm nor deny,” exuded an unbelievable tirade of Popular Science articles. There are still conspiracy conspirators who “know for certain” that the USAF developed flying saucers. In actuality the USAF bolted two huge wings on that saucer and designated it the B-2 bomber.

Never doubt the sincerity of conspiracy conspirator. They are certain that the government has things out there that they are not being told about. Note three things here. No deterrence comes from a high stealth weapon system like the F-117, if the enemy never finds out that we have it. All government secrets are eventually leaked, period. Second, never underestimate the flare for the public to create, develop and sustain an ongoing, never-ending conspiracy theory. Thirdly, there are no alien beings, there is no secret hollowed out mountain where the elite will dwell in luxury after they kill all our pigs and chickens with the a swine/bird flu, and on July 20^th of 1969 Neil Armstrong did step out of Apollo 11 and step on the surface of our moon.

Why defy the defiance of science?

There is an ugly irony in the realization that I must pause this exciting development to address flat-earthers, geocentrics and conspiracy conspirators. I am developing that, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork,” that black-holes present in every galaxy confound the atheistic evolutionist, and that theories of relativity disquiet their wild speculations about time. Yet we must pause in order to show that the Earth is indeed a planet, and that it is indeed spherical and man, through true science, has learned some things about God’s universe and stepped on Earth’s moon. There is a rogue group of conspirators who are so defiant of all science that they are like a dead fly in the apothecary. Solomon put it, “Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour” (Eccl 10:1).

Carl Sagan (1934-1996) the arch-atheist of the 20^th century, said, “If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us, that we are the reason there is a Universe, does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?” Atheists mock at Christian foolishness. There is a difference between the foolishness of preaching and the preaching of foolishness. Christians need to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves, Jesus said so (Matt 10:16).

I bring up these three groups which have an overt defiance of science because they present a clear and present danger to the advancement of God’s truth. They defy the efforts of those who would emphatically hold to the true inerrancy and infallibility of God’s verbally inspired word. Their extravagant overreach into the absurd makes an ugly mark on those who would truly hold to the accuracy of the Holy Bible.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines a fanatic as a person marked or motivated by an extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm, for a cause. Denying the spherical shape of our planet is unreasonable. Denying the Earth’s orbit and the laws of orbital mechanics is unreasonable. Calling Neil Armstrong and an unprecedented team of 3,000 engineers, dirty rotten liars is unreasonable. I do not oppose the defiance of science-so-called but there must be a reasonable limit to our defiance when it starts attacking true science.

There are obvious observations which refute the flat Earth, the geocentric, and the conspiracy conspirator’s ideologies. It is important that a believer be well grounded in truth: “That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (Eph 4:14). Another wording of that verse might include the word gullible, and Christians, especially those taught from their youth that the Bible is an allegorical book, are too often quite gullible.

That Scripture continues, “But (we) speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things, which is the head, even Christ” (Eph 4:15). If one has been swayed into the camp that teaches that the world is flat, the Bible says so, or if one has been persuaded that the Sun orbits the Earth, because the Bible says so, or if you are entangled in conspiracy theories, this is meant to be a reproof, in love. If one knows someone who has been persuaded into this sort of defiance of science, do not just write them off as screwballs. They have been lead down a garden path by cunning craftiness and need to be reproved in love. If one has never met someone so deceived, they will. These are a fast growing sect in our paranoid “Christian” society. Remember, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works” (2Tim 3:16-17). Use it to defy atheistic evolutionists, to reprove flat-earthers, geocentrics and conspiracy conspirators. Be careful of those who defy true science, and strive for the limelight, they are a dangerous lot.

13: Measuring The Speed Of Light And Distance to Stars

A couple of essays that have been used to document how we know the speed of light and the distance to stars will be useful in this effort.

Essays in Science – Speed of Light

Five hundred years ago man supposed that light had a measurable speed. The speed of light cannot be seen nor measured by clicking a light switch on, because the speed of light is imperceptibly fast. Today, the speed of light is very accurately measurable. Ole Romer (1644-1710), a Danish astronomer was studying the periodic cycle of one of Jupiter’s moons when he calculated the speed of light. Sixty five years earlier, in 1610 Galileo, armed with a 20 power telescope, noticed that Jupiter had 4 moons. Ole Romer was calculating the time it took for one large moon to emerged from Jupiter’s shadow. His measurements showed a 40.5 hour period for this moon. As winter set in Ole noticed that the expected rising of Jupiter’s moon was getting later and later, gradually changed by 20 minutes. As spring came the rising moon started getting earlier and earlier until it was restored to its original schedule.

Obviously the orbit of Jupiter’s moon did not change because the Earth moved further away from Jupiter. It was the speed of light that was taking the extra time to reach the Earth as it traveled from the moon rise on Jupiter. Ole correctly concluded that this time difference was due to the extra distance that the light had to travel to reach Earth. With this information Ole Romer, in 1676, remarkably, calculated the speed of light at 225,000 kilometers per second. Even though he had only rough numbers for the Earth’s orbit and Jupiter’s orbit, he was only 25% low in his calculations. Today we measure it at 299, 792 kilometers per second. Ole Romer was the first person to demonstrate that the speed of light is measurable. With more accurate instruments and many more observations we can now accurately calculate the speed of light in free space; that is accurate for our little galaxy, without the effect of black holes, relative velocities, rotational dynamics or other limiting errors caused by theories of relativity. The speed of light is thus finite and measurable.

Notice in this treatise the emphasis that the speed of light is measurable in this galaxy and with our current units of time and distance understood without relativity. The genius of Albert Einstein has allowed us to recognize that the speed of light and the time clock that measures it, are not necessarily constants but very flexible and even relative, warped by gravitational forces in space and time. Most of us have heard some of this theory of relativity in the sci-fy stories about intergalactic travel where a person does not age when approaching the speed of light. Einstein’s theories of relativity can alter time and distance, the speed of light and even the speed of gravity, which is not yet measured.

Theories about intergalactic travel of light, time dilation or relativity can readily support an idea that out there on the edge of our universe a single day could be as a thousand years, and here in our ‘time zone’ a thousand years could be as a single day out there. Marvelous possibilities exist for a mere 6000 year old Earth, even with the speed of light ‘fixed’ at 300,000 kilometers per second and Supernova 87a measured at 168,000 light years away. How did they measure that distance? That’s the subject of another essay.

Essays in Science – Measure of Space Distance

“It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter “ (Prov 25:2). Let’s do just that concerning how far away Andromeda or Supernova 87a might actually be. Since it seems immutable that light travels at a finite, albeit very very fast speed, and we view the Andromeda galaxy from a young Earth,¹⁶² perhaps the scientists have exaggerated the distances in inter-galactic space. How can you tell how far away a star is anyway?

A distance measure for space can be likened to a ride on a twenty five foot diameter merry-go-round. Board the merry-go-round at night while three birthday candles are placed 50, 500 and 5,000 feet away. Of course the brightness of the candles can first be used to estimate their distance. This brightness measure has been a mainstay of distance determination. A star’s absolute luminosity was found to tie directly to a very measurable Cepheid cycle¹⁶³ and its distance could then be measured via r^{^2} attenuation of its absolute luminosity. But consider also that as one rotates through revolutions on the merry-go-round and watches the nearest light, they will have to pivot their line of sight back and forth 27 degrees (tan^-1 (25/50) degrees); for the second light one will pivot their head only 3 degrees (tan^-1 (25/500) degrees); and for the farthest light one will pivot their head only 0.3 degrees (tan^-1 (25/5000) degrees). With some precise instruments one could measure these angles and then determine the distance to each flickering candle. Indeed your brain does this sort of calculation every day; your two eyes are spaced roughly 3 inches apart, and their vision crosses at a measured angle which determines the distance you are focused at.

Now consider that from June to December or March to September the merry-go-round that the Earth is riding moves quite a distance in space. By definition we are 1 a.u. (astronomical unit) from the sun, that is 8.317 light minutes or 0.00001581 light-years (1.581e-05 light-years). Just like the distance to the birthday candles can be approximated or carefully measured from the merry-go-round, so too the distance to stars can be approximated or carefully measured from the Earth’s orbit.

In 1987 we watched a supernova that was supposedly 10.12 billion a.u. away. So between Dec and June the line of sight to the supernova changed by 0.0004 mili-arc-seconds (mas) or .006 billionths of a degree (tan^-1 1/10,120,000,000 degrees). The W.M. Keck II 400 inch telescope in Hawaii can achieve an amazing five mili-arc-seconds spacial resolution.¹⁶⁴ Here, however, we needed to measure .0004 mili-arc-seconds, significantly smaller than 5 mas. Obviously we cannot measure these great space distances with these means. The 1989 European Hipparcos space observatory measured this ‘parallax’ distance for 120,000 stars, but it is only effective for stars within two to three thousand light years.

Going back to our merry-go-round example for birthday candles greater than a mile away one could still perceive various distances by the size and brightness of the flames. We do this based on what we know and observe about the nearer birthday candles at known distances. Some birthday candles may be larger than others and cause slight error in this means of gauging this distance, but this error would be relatively small. In like manner astronomers measure a star’s size, emissions, Cepheid variable, and pulsations and can come up with a reasonably accurate distance estimate for deep space stars.

Again in our illustration, if the birthday candles were all set in motion we could judge the distance to any candle by its perceived motion. This is especially true when it is discerned in relation to some known closer birthday candles. Lights clustered together with this perceived motion may be more accurately discerned. A rotation, will likewise more accurately differentiate these distances. This is basically how the calculations of astronomical distances to stars, clusters, and galaxies are accomplished. It is indeed an art in the world of science. Each measurement leans on observations from all three methods. The art does have its sources of error, but over all, the errors will not be orders of magnitude. The 1987 supernova observed within the large Magellanic Cloud is measured (estimated) at 168,000 light years away. Throwing in a plus or minus 10,000 light year error still leaves it a very long distance away. Thus it still begs the question, “Just when did that star explode?” Suffice it to say that time and space warp in the outer regions of God’s universe. It does not take light 168,000 years to travel from the large Magellanic Cloud.

It is shown elsewhere in this effort that God can bow the heavens and dilate time as he pleases, just trust him. “He bowed (bowed, streached out, extended, spread … ) the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under his feet” (Ps 18:9).

13: James Ussher’s Calendar and Dating Methods

James Ussher (1581-1656) was the Anglican Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of all Ireland between 1625 and 1656, but two factors make him pertinent in this day. First is his staunch belief in the verbal plenary inspiration of the infallible inerrant Scriptures. James Ussher preceded by 300 years the diabolical deceptions of Brook Foss Westcott (1825-1903) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892), two Anglican ministers fully steeped in the Alexandrian philosophy that “there is no perfect Bible”¹⁶⁵ Westcott and Hort brought Biblical criticism into vogue for ‘scholars’-so called and their critical works have not considered the Holy Bible inerrant since. The tremendous strides made by James Ussher are, thus, all the more noteworthy. It is also noteworthy that Ussher was contemporary with the 57 linguistic giants that labored for 7 years (1604-1611)¹⁶⁶ to translate the Greek Received Text (T.R.) and the Ben Chayyim Masoretic Text (M.T.)¹⁶⁷ into the English language. Biblical Scholars of that day readily believed in the verbal plenary inspiration of the infallible, inerrant Scriptures. That is so not true after Westcott and Hort’s critical efforts induced Bible critics to fix all the perceived errors in God’s Holy Scriptures; a myriad of copyright “fixes” now flood the markets. It is also worth mentioning that the Septuagint is an Alexandrian corrupted Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, and all the chronology corrections it produces are not viable. Anything from Egypt, i.e. the Septuagint, Sinaiticus, and Vaticanus is of the world and therefore corrupt.

Secondly James Ussher was contemporary with Jesuit astronomer Christopher Clavius (1537-1612) who was recruited by Rome to fix the Julian Calendar which had allowed the solar equinox to drift from March 21^st to almost April fools day. The Roman popes, who thought themselves infallible, were tired of dating Easter on a very fallible Julian Calendar.¹⁶⁸ Julius Caesar needed a reformed calendar for his world empire and following his conquest of Egypt in 709 a.u.c. (i.e. From founding of the city of Rome) (which is what one now calls 46 BC ) he adopted the Alexandrian Aristarchus calendar, which recognized a solar year of 365 ¼ days, likely taken from the Babylonians in 239 BC This Julian Calendar, as it became called, was 11.23 minutes per year to long, accumulating a whole day every 130 years. In James Ussher’s lifetime it was resolved to make a leap year only when the year was divisible by 4 but not by 100 or if it was divisible by 400, because a year has 365.2422 days, not 365.25 days. This intriguing mathematical solution allowed Ussher a zeal to roll back a calendar through all eons of time, even back to the six-day creation! The extraordinary detail found in the Bible and the extraordinary exactness found in this new calendar mathematics made James Ussher the extraordinary explorer of past chronologies. His extensive investigative work is still trustworthy today. The modernist scholars scoff at James Ussher’s extensive research for two reasons. He believed in every word of the Holy Bible as inspired, inerrant and infallible, they do not. He thus believed in a six-day creation which according to that inerrant infallible Biblical record occurred in 4004 BC, they did not. He did not use secular sources to correct his Holy Bible, they regularly do.

An intriguing insight about Ussher’s exactness comes from his zeal in affixing the creation date to October 23rd, 4004 BC. It is amazing that one can sit in a study with an internet connection and access all 1200 pages of his work in “The Annuls of the World”. Do not miss the free purview of the public domain document and Ussher’s tremendous detailing of Biblical History. Without the aid of calculators or computers James Ussher determined that in that year, all the planets were lined up and the Sunday nearest to the autumnal equinox occurred on October the 23rd, 4004 BC.¹⁶⁹ That zeal has lead to some of the grossest criticism of his genius. Colin Groves, a Professor of Bioanthropology at Australian National University published an article with some of the most open slander and unmitigated guile against Ussher. Grove’s sarcastic, mocking and demeaning style, originally published in 1996 and titled “From Ussher to Slusher, from Archbish to Gish: or, not in a million years.”¹⁷⁰ It attacks all creation scientists and openly scoffs God and his Holy Bible. I cite it here because it evidences Groves’ open hatred toward James Ussher’s genius, and because it is a representative reaction of atheistic evolutionists in general.

The list of references blatantly attacked and slandered in Groves’ article include:

Gish. D.T. 1979. Evolution ? The fossils say no! San Diego: Creation-Life Books.

Gish, D.T. I 9~5. Evolution: the Challenge Of the Fossil Record. San Diego: Creation-Life Books.

Ham, K. 1983. The origin of the races. Ex Nihilo, 6, 4:6-l2.

Humphreys, D.R. nd. Evidence for a young world. Creation Science Foundation, P.O.Box 302, Sunnybank, Qld., 4109.

Lubenow. M.L. 1992. Bones of Contention: a Creationist Assessment of Human Fossils. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

Morris, H.M. 1970. Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

Morris, H.M. 1972. The Remarkable Birth of the Planet Earth. Minneapolis: Dimension Books.

Morris, H.M. 1974. The Troubled Waters of Evolution. San Diego: Creation-Life Books.

Morris, H.M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. 2nd.ed. El Cajon, CA: Master Books.

Price, B. I 990. The Creation Science Controversy. Sydney: Millenium Books.

Setterfield, B. 1981, 1983. The velocity of light and the age of the universe. Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, 4, 1 :38-8 and 3:56-81.

Slusher, H.C. 1979. Age of the Cosmos. San Diego: Creation-Life Books.

Snelling, A.A. 1990. Koongarra Uranium Deposits. In RE. Hughes (ed.) Geology of the Mineral Deposits of Australia and Paptia New Guinea, pp.807-812.

Taylor, C. 1983. What happened at Babel? Ex Nihilo, 6, 2:20-23.

Whitcomb, J.C. 1959. Darius the Mede: the Historical Chronology of Daniel. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.

Whitcomb, J.C. & H.M.Morris 1961. The Genesis Flood. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House.

In all honesty I have not read all these works, but it seems that if C. Groves is against them, I can in general recommend them.

One should not overlook the genius of James Ussher and his diligent research in setting chronological dates to every event in the Bible. Modern scholars, and more so the modernist scholars, use secular resources to try to correct Ussher’s methods. After all, they contend, James Ussher had nothing but a Holy Bible to use in his research. They think they have “evolved” to a much higher state of understanding with all their archeological discoveries. It is wise for a Bible student to keep Ussher’s dates and discard the modernist works, in the same way that they keep older Roman Catholic bibles, which came from Alexandria Egypt, and discard the T.R. and Masoretic text.

Epilogue

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. (2Pet3:3-10).

Scoffers believe the universe is here by random chance and that millions of years ago natural processes in a primeval sea spontaneously generated life which started an evolutionary process whereby molecules turned into man. I have grandchildren that are not scoffers, but that is all they have heard taught in their public schooling, that is all they have read in any “science” books they have read, that is all they have heard on our nations news reports, that is all they have heard from our nation’s entertainment medias, and that is all they have heard and seen developed in zoo’s and museums where they have ventured. Who will teach them truth? Why should they believe a solitary preacher they call grandpa?

I have an uncle who taught in public school until his retirement. He is a scoffer. He believes every line of the atheistic evolutionists and supports every trend of the progressive liberal who strives to evolve mankind into a new world order. They believe they are leading us to a world where no one is poor, no one is armed, and no fossil fuels are ever burned. When the vast majority believe the lie, who will tell him the truth? Why should he believe a solitary preacher he considers a misleading nephew?

And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke.

Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts. Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged. Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?

Then said I, Here am I; send me.

And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.

Then said I, Lord, how long?

And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, And the LORD have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof (Isiah 6:3-13).

We are going to lose the battle, but he is going to win the war. These things I have written that you may more fully know that God says what he means and means what he says. These things have I written that you might earnestly contend for the faith. My prayer is that some will hear.

Appendix 1: God’s Simple Plan of Salvation

Copyright: Robert Ford Porter, 1991, Repeated here by permission.

My Friend: I am asking you the most important question of life. Your joy or your sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good you are, nor if you are a church member, but are you saved? Are you sure you will go to Heaven when you die?

God says in order to go to Heaven, you must be born again. In John 3:7, Jesus said to Nicodemus, “Ye must be born again.”

In the Bible God gives us the plan of how to be born again which means to be saved. His plan is simple! You can be saved today. How?

First, my friend, you must realize you are a sinner. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

Because you are a sinner, you are condemned to death. “For the wages [payment] of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). This includes eternal separation from God in Hell.

“ . . . it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27).

But God loved you so much He gave His only begotten Son, Jesus, to bear your sin and die in your place. “ . . . He hath made Him [Jesus, Who knew no sin] to be sin for us . . . that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Jesus had to shed His blood and die. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lev. 17:11). “ . . . without shedding of blood is no remission [pardon]” (Hebrews 9:22).

“ . . . God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8).

Although we cannot understand how, God said my sins and your sins were laid upon Jesus and He died in our place. He became our substitute. It is true. God cannot lie.

My friend, “God . . . commandeth all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). This repentance is a change of mind that agrees with God that one is a sinner, and also agrees with what Jesus did for us on the Cross.

In Acts 16:30-31, the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas: “ . . . ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ And they said, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved . . . .’ ”

Simply believe on Him as the one who bore your sin, died in your place, was buried, and whom God resurrected. His resurrection powerfully assures that the believer can claim everlasting life when Jesus is received as Savior.

“But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name” (John 1:12).

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Romans 10:13).

Whosoever includes you. Shall be saved means not maybe, nor can, but shall be saved.

Surely, you realize you are a sinner. Right now, wherever you are, repenting, lift your heart to God in prayer.

In Luke 18:13, the sinner prayed: “God be merciful to me a sinner.” Just pray: “Oh God, I know I am a sinner. I believe Jesus was my substitute when He died on the Cross. I believe His shed blood, death, burial, and resurrection were for me. I now receive Him as my Savior. I thank You for the forgiveness of my sins, the gift of salvation and everlasting life, because of Your merciful grace. Amen.”

Just take God at His word and claim His salvation by faith. Believe, and you will be saved. No church, no lodge, no good works can save you. Remember, God does the saving. All of it!

God’s simple plan of salvation is: You are a sinner. Therefore, unless you believe on Jesus Who died in your place, you will spend eternity in Hell. If you believe on Him as your crucified, buried, and risen Savior, you receive forgiveness for all of your sins and His gift of eternal salvation by faith.

You say, “Surely, it cannot be that simple.” Yes, that simple! It is scriptural. It is God’s plan. My friend, believe on Jesus and receive Him as Savior today.

If His plan is not perfectly clear, read this tract over and over, without laying it down, until you understand it. Your soul is worth more than all the world.

“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world and his own soul?” (Mark 8:36).

Be sure you are saved. If you lose your soul, you miss Heaven and lose all. Please! Let God save you this very moment.

God’s power will save you, keep you saved, and enable you to live a victorious Christian life. “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, Who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13).

Do not trust your feelings. They change. Stand on God’s promises. They never change. After you are saved, there are three things to practice daily for spiritual growth:

• Pray — you talk to God.

• Read your Bible — God talks to you.

• Witness — you talk for God.

You should be baptized in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ as a public testimony of your salvation, and then unite with a Bible-believing church without delay. “Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord . . . .” (2 Timothy 1:8)

“Whosoever therefore shall confess [testify of] Me before men, him will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 10:32).

Copyright: Robert Ford Porter, 1991, Repeated here by permission.

Appendix 2: The Emperor’s new Clothes by Hans Christian Anderson, 1837

The Emperor’s new Clothes

by Danish author and poet, Hans Christian Andersen (AD 1805-1875 )

First published in 1837, presently public domain

Once upon a time there lived a vain Emperor whose only worry in life was to dress in elegant clothes. He changed clothes almost every hour and loved to show them off to his people.

Word of the Emperor’s refined habits spread over his kingdom and beyond. Two scoundrels who had heard of the Emperor’s vanity decided to take advantage of it. They introduced themselves at the gates of the palace with a scheme in mind.

“We are two very good tailors and after many years of research we have invented an extraordinary method to weave a cloth so light and fine that it looks invisible. As a matter of fact it is invisible to anyone who is too stupid and incompetent to appreciate its quality.”

The chief of the guards heard the scoundrel’s strange story and sent for the court chamberlain. The chamberlain notified the prime minister, who ran to the Emperor and disclosed the incredible news. The Emperor’s curiosity got the better of him and he decided to see the two scoundrels.

“Besides being invisible, your Highness, this cloth will be woven in colors and patterns created especially for you.” The emperor gave the two men a bag of gold coins in exchange for their promise to begin working on the fabric immediately.

“Just tell us what you need to get started and we’ll give it to you.” The two scoundrels asked for a loom, silk, gold thread and then pretended to begin working. The Emperor thought he had spent his money quite well: in addition to getting a new extraordinary suit, he would discover which of his subjects were ignorant and incompetent. A few days later, he called the old and wise prime minister, who was considered by everyone as a man with common sense.

“Go and see how the work is proceeding,” the Emperor told him, “and come back to let me know.”

The prime minister was welcomed by the two scoundrels.

“We’re almost finished, but we need a lot more gold thread. Here, Excellency! Admire the colors, feel the softness!” The old man bent over the loom and tried to see the fabric that was not there. He felt cold sweat on his forehead.

“I can’t see anything,” he thought. “If I see nothing, that means I’m stupid! Or, worse, incompetent!” If the prime minister admitted that he didn’t see anything, he would be discharged from his office.

“What a marvelous fabric, he said then. “I’ll certainly tell the Emperor.” The two scoundrels rubbed their hands gleefully. They had almost made it. More thread was requested to finish the work.

Finally, the Emperor received the announcement that the two tailors had come to take all the measurements needed to sew his new suit.

“Come in,” the Emperor ordered. Even as they bowed, the two scoundrels pretended to be holding large roll of fabric.

“Here it is your Highness, the result of our labour,” the scoundrels said. “We have worked night and day but, at last, the most beautiful fabric in the world is ready for you. Look at the colors and feel how fine it is.” Of course the Emperor did not see any colors and could not feel any cloth between his fingers. He panicked and felt like fainting. But luckily the throne was right behind him and he sat down. But when he realized that no one could know that he did not see the fabric, he felt better. Nobody could find out he was stupid and incompetent. And the Emperor didn’t know that everybody else around him thought and did the very same thing.

The farce continued as the two scoundrels had foreseen it. Once they had taken the measurements, the two began cutting the air with scissors while sewing with their needles an invisible cloth.

“Your Highness, you’ll have to take off your clothes to try on your new ones.” The two scoundrels draped the new clothes on him and then held up a mirror. The Emperor was embarrassed but since none of his bystanders were, he felt relieved.

“Yes, this is a beautiful suit and it looks very good on me,” the Emperor said trying to look comfortable. “You’ve done a fine job.”

“Your Majesty,” the prime minister said, “we have a request for you. The people have found out about this extraordinary fabric and they are anxious to see you in your new suit.” The Emperor was doubtful showing himself naked to the people, but then he abandoned his fears. After all, no one would know about it except the ignorant and the incompetent.

“All right,” he said. “I will grant the people this privilege.” He summoned his carriage and the ceremonial parade was formed. A group of dignitaries walked at the very front of the procession and anxiously scrutinized the faces of the people in the street. All the people had gathered in the main square, pushing and shoving to get a better look. An applause welcomed the regal procession. Everyone wanted to know how stupid or incompetent his or her neighbor was but, as the Emperor passed, a strange murmur rose from the crowd.

Everyone said, loud enough for the others to hear: “Look at the Emperor’s new clothes. They’re beautiful!”

“What a marvelous train!”

“And the colors! The colors of that beautiful fabric! I have never seen anything like it in my life!” They all tried to conceal their disappointment at not being able to see the clothes, and since nobody was willing to admit his own stupidity and incompetence, they all behaved as the two scoundrels had predicted.

A child, however, who had no important job and could only see things as his eyes showed them to him, went up to the carriage.

“The Emperor is naked,” he said.

“Fool!” his father reprimanded, running after him. “Don’t talk nonsense!” He grabbed his child and took him away. But the boy’s remark, which had been heard by the bystanders, was repeated over and over again until everyone cried:

“The boy is right! The Emperor is naked! It’s true!”

The Emperor realized that the people were right but could not admit to that. He though it better to continue the procession under the illusion that anyone who couldn’t see his clothes was either stupid or incompetent. And he stood stiffly on his carriage, while behind him a page held his imaginary mantle.

by Danish author and poet, Hans Christian Andersen (AD 1805-1875 )

First published in 1837, presently public domain

Appendix 3: Theory of Relativity and Atomic Clocks

Georgia State University’s web page opens with the declaration “Black holes could decide the future of life on Earth – Think of the Earth as a flat sheet stretched out and held at the corners, now put a bowling ball in the middle.” (www.gsu.edu Nov 2015) They also published this short educational article on the Hafele and Keating Experiment repeated below in its entirety.

From http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html#c3 accessed 10 Nov 2015

Hafele and Keating Experiment

“During October, 1971, four cesium atomic beam clocks were flown on regularly scheduled commercial jet flights around the world twice, once eastward and once westward, to test Einstein’s theory of relativity with macroscopic clocks. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the theory predicted that the flying clocks, compared with reference clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 40+/-23 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and should have gained 275+/-21 nanoseconds during the westward trip … Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations. These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution of the famous clock “paradox” with macroscopic clocks.”

J.C. Hafele and R. E. Keating, Science 177, 166 (1972)

Around the World

In 1971, experimenters from the U.S. Naval Observatory undertook an experiment to test time dilation . They made airline flights around the world in both directions, each circuit taking about three days. They carried with them four cesium beam atomic clocks. When they returned and compared their clocks with the clock of the Observatory in Washington, D.C., they had gained about 0.15 microseconds compared to the ground based clock.

Eastward Journey Westward Journey

Predicted -40 +/- 23 ns + 275 +/- 21 ns

Measured -59 +/- 10 ns + 273 +/- 7 ns

Around-the-World Atomic Clocks

In October 1971, Hafele and Keating flew cesium beam atomic clocks around the world twice on regularly scheduled commercial airline flights, once to the East and once to the West. In this experiment, both gravitational time dilation and kinematic time dilation are significant – and are in fact of comparable magnitude. Their predicted and measured time dilation effects were as follows:

Predicted: Time difference in ns

Eastward Westward

Gravitational 144 +/- 14 179 +/- 18

Kinematic -184 +/- 18 96 +/- 10

Net effect -40 +/- 23 275 +/- 21

Observed: -59 +/- 10 273 +/- 21

Gravitational Time Shifts

For small changes in gravitational field associated with changes in altitude above the Earth, the approximate time dilation expression is

if a comparison is made between a clock on the Earth’s surface (TE) and one at height h above the surface (T). Hafele and Keating predicted a time difference of 144 ns on an eastward flight around the world for which the flight time was 41.2 hours. This corresponds to an average height of 8900 m, a reasonable flight altitude for a commercial airline. The time shift is positive (aging faster) for both eastward and westward flights. The predicted value of 179 ns for the westward flight of 48.6 hours duration corresponds to an average altitude of about 9400 meters.

Kinematic Time Shift Calculation

If the kinematic time dilation expression

is expanded in a binomial expansion, then for small velocities it becomes

This expression can be used to compute the time dilation in the Hafele-Keating experiment in which an atomic clock was taken aboard an aircraft and compared to a ground-based clock. The problem encountered with measuring the difference between a surface clock and one on an aircraft is that neither location is really an inertial frame. If we take the center of the earth as an approximation to an inertial frame, then we can compute the difference between a surface clock and the aircraft clock. Taking a “proper time” at the earth’s center as if the master clock were there, the time measured by a clock on the surface would be larger

and that for the airborne clock would be approximately

since to the level of the approximations used, the height of the aircraft does not significantly change the radius R. The difference in the times compared to our hypothetical master clock would then be

Now this relationship is just the reverse of the actual experiment, since we have assumed that the clock is at the center of the earth, whereas the actual clocks are in the frames which are moving with respect to the center. The time difference expression should be valid, but in comparing the aircraft clock to the surface clock, we should find that it has fallen behind, so we can model that time difference by

Application

Note that the “earth center” time has been replaced by the surface time in this expression. This is a valid approximation in this case since the time difference is many orders of magnitude smaller than the time itself, and this allows us to model the difference between two measurable times.

Aircraft Time Dilation

For an aircraft flying over the equator, its clocks will show a time shift relative to a fixed surface clock which can be approximately modeled by the expression

where the subscripts A and S refer to the aircraft and surface clocks. For travel eastward, v has a positive sign and the shift will be negative (aging more slowly). But for a westward flight the time shift is positive (aging faster) for the aircraft speeds involved. Hafele and Keating predicted time shifts of -184 ns for an eastward flight around the world and a shift of +96 for a westward flight.

If you plug in numbers for a 48 hour round trip flight at constant speed at the equator, you get -260 ns and 156 ns for the eastbound and westbound flights respectively. The predicted values obtained by Hafele and Keating presumably were based upon detailed measurements of the speeds, etc.

Hafele and Keating are credited with an experimental measurement which confirms time dilation and matches predictions with an accuracy of about 10%. It gives an experimental answer to the twin paradox.

Twin Paradox

The story is that one of a pair of twins leaves on a high speed space journey during which he travels at a large fraction of the speed of light while the other remains on the Earth. Because of time dilation, time is running more slowly in the spacecraft as seen by the earthbound twin and the traveling twin will find that the earthbound twin will be older upon return from the journey. The common question: Is this real? Would one twin really be younger?

The basic question about whether time dilation is real is settled by the muon experiment. The clear implication is that the traveling twin would indeed be younger, but the scenario is complicated by the fact that the traveling twin must be accelerated up to traveling speed, turned around, and decelerated again upon return to Earth. Accelerations are outside the realm of special relativity and require general relativity.

Despite the experimental difficulties, an experiment on a commercial airline confirms the existence of a time difference between ground observers and a reference frame moving with respect to them.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

The Holy Bible

Abramson, Jay, Precalculus, Houston: OpenStax College, Rice University, 2015 https://openstax.org/subjects/math (accessed 09/27/2016).

Anderson, Hans Christian, “The Emperor’s new Clothes” First published in 1837, currently Public Domain. [By Danish author and poet, Hans Christian Andersen (AD 1805-1875), this timeless short story is repeated in entirety in the appendix of this work.]

Asimov, Isaac (1959), “Free Christian Teaching TV,” Science Digest, Jan., 1959, http://www.fct.ee-web.co.uk (accessed 5 Oct 2015).

BBC News, “’Leap second’ added for first time in three years” http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33313347 (accessed 10 Nov 2015).

Bowler, Peter, “Cambrian Conflict: Crucible an Assault on Gould’s Burgess Shale Interpretation”, American Scientist Book Review September-October 1998, http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/cambrian-conflict-crucible-an-assault-on-goulds-burgess-shale-interpretation (accessed 06/13/2016).

Brewster, Signer, “Physicists Are Desperate to Be Wrong About the Higgs Boson,” Signe Brewster Science, Date of Publication: 11.24.15, Time of Publication: 12:00 pm, http://www.wired.com/2015/11/physicists-are-desperate-to-be-wrong-about-the-higgs-boson/ (accessed 01/09/2016).

California Institute of Technology, “Welcome to Palomar Observatory,” http://www.astro.caltech.edu/palomar/homepage.html (accessed Nov 2015)

“Edwin Hubble,” www.astro.caltech.edu/palomar/history.html (accessed 10/11/2008).

Creation Research Society, https://www.creationresearch.org/ (accessed 10/13/2016).

DeYoung, Don, Thousands Not Billions: Challenging the Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth, Master Books Inc., 2005, ISBN:0-89051-441-0.

Dino Database, “The Age of Dinosaurs – The Mesozoic Era,” DinoDatabase – Combing Art and Science in Jurassic Art, http://www.dinodatabase.com/dinoage.asp (accessed 12 Aug 2016).

Duff, Michael J, “The Theory Formerly Known as Strings”, Scientific American, February 1998, http://www.scientificamerican.com (accessed 04/23/2014).

Edgeworth, Arv, “The Truth and Science Institute,” http://www.truthandscience.net/ (accessed 10/13/2016).

Einstein, Albert, Relativity, The Special and the General Theory, Three Rivers Press, NY, NY, 1961.

Fellman, Megan, “New evidence for oceans of water deep in the Earth: Water bound in mantle rock alters our view of the Earth’s composition,” Northwestern Now, 20 June 2014, https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2014/06/new-evidence-for-oceans-of-water-deep-in-the-earth?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_campaign=hootsuite (accessed 10/13/2016).

Fields, Weston, Unformed and Unfilled, A Critique of The Gap Theory, 1976, Master Books, Greenforest, AR

Filkin, David, Steven Hawking’s Universe, The Cosmos Explained, 1997, Basic Books

Florida State University, “Spring 1998 Course Catalog: AST 3033,” http://www.physics.fsu.edu/courses/spring98/ast3033/relativity/generalrelativity.htm (accessed July 2014).

Garner, Paul, The New Creationism: Building Scientific Theory on a Biblical Foundation, 2009, Amazon.com

Gaussen, L. Theopneustia – The plenary Inspiration of The Holy Scriptures deduced from Internal Evidence, and the Testimonies of Nature, History and Science. David Scott’s translation, Chicago, The Bible Institute Colportage ASS’N., 1840.

Georgia State University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, “Supernova,” http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu (accessed 11/05/2014).

“Atomic Clocks” http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/acloc.html (accessed 10 Nov 2015).

“Hyperphysics – delta Cephei,” http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/cepheid.html (Accessed 06/29/16).

Gipp, Samuel C., The Answer Book, http://samgipp.com/answerbook/ (accessed 10/13/2016).

Gould, Stephen Jay, Wonderful Life, The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, W. W. Norton & Company, 1989.

Grady, William, Given by Inspiration, (Grady Publications Inc., Swartz Creek, MI, 2010).

Groves, C., “From Ussher to Slusher, from Archbish to Gish: or, not in a million years,” 1996, Archeology in Oceania 31 (1996).

Hafele, J.C., and Keating, R. E., “Hafele and Keating Experiment ”, Georgia State University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, 1972, Science 177, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html#c3 (accessed Nov 2015).

Hansen, Paul, “The Biggest Story in America is Illegal Persecution and Imprisonment of our Brother in Christ, Kent Hovind,” Free Kent Hovind, http://freekenthovind.com (accessed 12/27/2015).

Hawking, Stephen, The Beginning of Time: Public Lectures, www.hawking.org.uk/lectures.html (accessed 04/14/2014).

A Brief History of Time, 1976, Bantum Book.

The Universe in a Nutshell, 2001, Bantum Book.

Henry, Jonathan, “The Moon’s Recession and Age,” Journal of Creation 20(2):65–70 (August 2006), http://creation.com/the-moons-recession-and-age (accessed 6/4/2016).

Hill, Kyle,“Why the Skywalker Twins Aren’t the Same Age Anymore,” Nerdist by Chris Hardwick, November 29, 2014, http://nerdist.com/why-the-skywalker-twins-arent-the-same-age-anymore/ (accessed 1Jan 2016).

History, “Ice Age,” Histor.com, http://www.history.com/topics/ice-age (accessed 12 Aug 2016).

Hovind, Kent, Creations Seminar, Evidence of the Flood, http://www.truthingenesis.com/creation-seminar-by-dr-kent-hovind (accessed 02/02/2016).

Humphreys, D. Russell, “Starlight and Time, Solving the Puzzle of Distant Starlight in a Young Universe”, Master Books, Inc., 1994. [Dr. Humphreys’ work is an excellent introduction to this effort. His insightfull explanations of the theories of relativity and their bearing on starlight and time are only slightly expanded in this effort.]

Indiana University Bloomington, “Geothermal Resources, Indiana Geological Survey”, https://igs.indiana.edu (accessed 27 Dec 2015).

International Astronautical Federation, The, “Black holes: Attractors for intelligence?”, 2013, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287271360_Black_holes_Attractors_for_intelligence (accessed 15 Aug 2016).

Irion, Robert, “Homing in on BLACK HOLES”, Smithsonian, Vol 39, #1, (April 2008).

Judaism 101, “Jewish Calande,” Judaism 101, http://www.jewfaq.org/calendar.htm (Accessed 6/3/2016).

Kavli Royal Society International Centre, “Towards a scientific and societal agenda on extra-terrestrial life, Black Holes: Attractors of Intelligence?”, 2010, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1104/1104.4362.pdf (Accessed 15 Aug 2016).

Lefebvre, Vladimir A., and Efremov, Yuri N., “Cosmic Intelligence and Black Holes”, 2000 http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0005546 (Accessed 15 Aug 2016).

Lubenow, Marvin L., “The Dating Gap”, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/dating-gap/ (accessed Nov 2015).

Markandeya, Virat, “Physicists Detect New Heavy Particle,” Inside Science News Service, Originally published: Jul 4 2012 – 3:30pm, https://www.insidescience.org (accessed 09 Jan 2016).

Meyer, Peter, “The Julian Gregorian Calendar,” Hermetic Systems, www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/cal_art.html (accessed Mar 2010).

Meyer, Stephen C., “Intelligent Design: The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories,” Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, August 4, 2004, http://www.discovery.org/a/2177, (accessed 06/30/2016).

Morris, Henry M., Scientific Creationism, Master Books Inc., Arizon, ISBN 0-89051-003-2, 1974, 1985.

The Genesis Record, Baker Books, 1976.

The Beginning of the World, Institute for Creation Research.

NASA, “Discover the Cosmos”, http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap021021.html (accessed Oct 2008).

National Geographic Science and Space, “Dinosaur Extinction,” http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/prehistoric-world/dinosaur-extinction/ (accessed 12 Aug 2016).

Rice, Edward G., Essays in Science, A Christian Perspective of the Universe, www.GSBaptistChurch.com/science/science_essay.html (accessed 10/13/2016).

Robinson, Andrew, Einstein: A Hundred Years of Relativity (Prinston University Press, 2015).

Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship, “The Feb 2015 Ken Ham vs Bill Nye debates- A transcript of that debate,” RMCF, http://www.youngearth.org/ (accessed Nov 2015).

Ruckman, Peter S., The Book of Genesis, BB Bookstore, Pensacola FL, 1969.

The Ruckman Study Bible, BB Bookstore, Pensacola FL, 2009.

Schofield, C. I.. Prophecy Made Plain. Photolithoprinted by Grand Rapids Book Manufacturers, Grand Rapids, MI, 1967.

The Scofield Reference Bible,1909, Oxford University Press, Inc.

Schwarz, Patricia, The Official String Theory Web Site, http://www.superstringtheory.com (accessed 4 July, 2014).

Snelling, Andrew, Earth’s Catostrophic Past, Institute for Creation Research AnswersinGenesis.org.

Thompson, J. B., Ferris, F. G., Smith, D. A. (1990). “Geomicrobiology and Sedimentology of the Mixolimnion and Chemocline in Fayetteville Green Lake, New York,” Palaios, Vol. 5, No. 1, (Feb 1990).

Takahashi, Yuki D., California Institute of Technology , Undergraduate Computer Science Cluster, “Big Bang: How Did the Universe Begin?: What is the Big Bang?” Spring 2000, http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/BigBang/BigBang.htm (accessed 17 Oct 2015).

Than, Ker, “Huge ‘Ocean’ Discovered Inside Earth”, Live Science, February 28, 2007, 08:28am ET, http://www.livescience.com/1312-huge-ocean-discovered-earth.html (accessed 04/23/2014).

Thomas, Brian, and Morris, John, “Radiometric Dating Q&A: Doesn’t Radioisotope Dating Prove Rocks Are Millions of Years Old?”, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/7242/ (accessed Nov 2015).

University of California, Berkeley, “Layers of the Atmosphere”, ds9.ssl.berkeley.edu/LWS_GEMS/3/Layers.htm, (accessed 27 Dec 2015).

Ussher, James, The Annals of the World Paperback, Master Books Inc., 2007.

Waite, D.A.. Defending the King James Bible. The Bible For Today Press, 2002.

Williams, Andrew, “Scientists detect evidence of ‘oceans worth’ of water in Earth’s mantle,” Earth Sciences, Aug 22, 2014, http://phys.org/search/?search=Jacobsen+and+Schmandt (accessed 12/28/2015).

Younger, Donald, Astronomy and the Bible, Master Books, 2005.

 

End Notes

1 The Holy Bible, Genesis 7:24