"Jesus loves those who represent the Father, and John could talk of the Father’s love as no other of the disciples could. He revealed to his fellow men that which he felt in his own soul, representing in his character the attributes of God. The glory of the Lord was expressed in his face. The beauty of holiness which had transformed him shone with a Christlike radiance from his countenance. In adoration and love he beheld the Saviour until likeness to Christ and fellowship with Him became his one desire, and in his character was reflected the character of his Master."11
“That’s what I hear,” Blanch
Fonteneau excitedly spoke into the receiver while vigorously waving
her hand in the air to emphasize her outrage. “Their planning
a march on city hall Monday if the checks are delayed. We’ll
give them two more days to deliver, then us welfare mothers march
and let them politicians know we won’t put up with any funny
business. Are you going to join us?”
Her friend wasn’t sure if she wanted
to become politically active.
“We gotta do something,” Blanch
replied as she shoved a spoonful of chocolate ripple ice cream
into her capacious mouth. “School’s goin’ begin
in another two weeks, Celeste needs new clothes and textbooks,
and I need my prescription refilled. Ya, that infection is getting
worse. I have headaches all the time, and my urine is bloody,
the doctor says the bladder is badly infected and could get worse
if left untreated. I need my medicine and I can’t wait for
those politicians to find the money. They got lots of money and
we need it,” she said indignantly, stamping her foot for
emphasis.
Having abandoned her shorts for long pants
with the advent of cooler weather, Blanch still sported her trademark
red bandanna that confined her disheveled hair. Flamboyant as
ever, wearing a purple long sleeve blouse and forest green pants,
amply cut to accommodate her bulging stomach which she often used
to enforce her will upon Celeste, Blanch glared at her friend
through the phone. Taking a sip of chocolate milk, she wiped the
foam off her lips with the sleeve of her blouse as she paced back
and fourth in animation, restrained by the leash of the telephone
cord from exploding in a frenzy of action. She resembled nothing
so much as a caged lioness who senses a juicy antelope steak on
the other side of the bars of her cage.
“How many people you suppose will march,”
her friend inquired through the receiver?
“I hear hundreds are going to join
us. Going to be a regular march on city hall, the homeless and
displaced demanding their rights.”
“Who’s organizing this march,”
she questioned?
“This is purely local,” Blanch
replied, not knowing the true facts. “Only local people marchin’
for our rights. None of them big organizers involved here, just
a bunch of homeless and welfare mothers with small children, going
to city hall and demanding our rights.”
Her friend agreed to join if she could catch
a bus Monday morning, after her night shift at the phone company.
Blanch was pleased with her efforts. Thus
far, this afternoon, she had enlisted seven friends and neighbors
to join her Monday. She had learned, through the grapevine, that
the blacks and Hispanics would lend their support also. A bigger
crowd, she reasoned, meant more news coverage.
This called for a celebration, Blanch thought,
rummaging through Celeste’s dresser drawer where she knew
her daughter kept some small amount of change, just enough to
buy a half galleon of Chocolate ripple ice cream.
* * *
“I don’t understand how you can
extrapolate X from Y by using the coefficient of R over Z and
the radius of K, if K is a function of R-Tu, especially is this
true if K is the orbit of a known body while Z is the assumed
orbit of an unknown body which is influenced by the coefficient
of the diameter of Z plus or minus the value of K?”
Professor Baily smiled encouragement at
his graduate student in astronomy. “Lets break for coffee,”
he suggested. “Sometimes the human brain needs time to assimilate
these formulas, and besides, I could use a doughnut about now.
Care for one of those nutty types or are you a chocolate man.
I like the glazed raspberry filled ones, myself.”
The two men walked to the faculty lounge
where they refilled their plastic cups with fresh coffee and each
selected a favorite doughnut. Depositing the required contribution
in a coffee cup, they leisurely walked back to the professor’s
office.
“Did you hear about that earthquake
in Chili, yesterday,” Richard inquired, as he politely held
the door for the distinguished professor in astronomy.
“No, I didn’t. Too busy with the
grandchildren. Fern had them over for several days, been playing
grandpa horsy to the kids. A man needs a break from orbital velocities
and black wholes now and then in order to regain his perspective
on the world and keep his feet firmly planted on the ground.”
Richard chuckled, he couldn’t envision
this august man playing on the floor with young children, but,
then, maybe he couldn’t comprehend that scientists could
also be grand parents.
Richard, young and eager, sporting a crew
cut and neck tie, respected Professor Baily, or, perhaps, feared
him would be a better description. Looking every inch the distinguished
man of letters, gray about the temples, high forehead, denoting
a highly intelligent mind, brown eyes that could bore a whole
right through a bumbling graduate student, he was well tanned
and muscular, for his age, denoting many hours working about his
ranch in the high mountains. Not too old to enjoy chopping wood,
hoarse back riding, and mending fences, the older man still maintained
an austere look about himself, that warned students to be on their
toes when in his presence.
“While my speciality isn’t geology,
I don’t buy the geological explanation of the movement of
tetanic plates as the cause of earthquakes,” Richard ventured,
as they resumed their respective chairs, sipping the hot coffee.
“I don’t either,” the professor
replied, much to Richard’s astonishment.
Dressed in his professor’s suit, as
he referred to it, to the amusement of his colleagues in the astronomy
department, he was virtually indistinguishable from a hundred
other men of letters on campus.
Raising an eyebrow, Richard thoughtfully
chewed on his chocolate doughnut awaiting the professor’s
further elucidation. He wasn’t disappointed.
“Those frauds from geology think the
continents rest on molten magma, like ships upon the sea. They
also suppose these ships or tetanic plates, as they call them,
shift about, from time to time, colliding with each other or over
lapping which they suppose causes earthquakes. They even have
elaborate charts and maps showing the movements of these plates
in former ages and predicting their movements in the future. But
its all bunkum.”
Richard was surprised at his candor regarding
a science other then his own speciality. “If their explanation
isn’t correct, what causes earthquakes.”
Professor Baily leaned back in his brown
leather swivel chair eyeing Richard speculatively. “The nice
thing about academic tenure is that they can’t fire you for
odd ball opinions, especially if you do your job and teach your
science according to the established orthodoxy,” he said.
Richard had heard veiled comments about
this particular professor, how he allowed his religious beliefs
to cloud his scientific judgment, but he also knew, by reputation
and several articles of his authorship in astronomical journals,
that he was a top notch astronomer and well respected in the closed
elite of their profession. He supposed the professor was about
to share some of these peculiar beliefs. Richard relaxed, prepared
to be amused.
“You read about that expedition to
Mt. Ararat in search of Noah’s ark?” Without waiting
for an answer, he continued. “Some day they’ll find
it. I believe it’s up here, just waiting to be discovered
at the right time.”
Richard was vaguely familiar with the flood
legends found in the Bible and other ancient manuscripts but ridiculed
them as preposterous.
Professor Baily continued. “Lets suppose,
my dear young friend, that you observe a car accident on your
way home from the university. The police are summoned to investigate.
They take photographs, all types of evidence is collected, maybe
they even perform scientific calculations concerning the combined
speed of the vehicles at the time of impact. They check the blood
alcohol content of the drivers, the mechanical worthiness of the
vehicles is also take into consideration, the road conditions
and weather at the time of the accident are charted, however,
they do not take your statement, the only observer on the scene.
After making all their observations and calculations, they confidently
conclude the cause of the accident was the stock market crash
of 1929.”
Richard stared at the professor, incomprehension
written large across his face. “That’s absurd,”
he commented. “I saw the accident, and I can testify how
it occurred.”
“Of course you can and you probably
know who was at fault, but your eye witness report is irrelevant
because you are a graduate student in astronomy and every one
knows graduate students are notoriously unreliable with their
observations.”
Both men laughed at this private joke for
astronomers make their living through the reliability of their
observations of celestial phenomena.
“You see, my boy, in my somewhat imperfect
illustration, the police ignore the one eye witness to the accident
because of their preconceived opinions of your unworthiness, favoring,
instead, their preconceived opinions of the reliability of scientific
observation.”
Unable to comprehend the professor’s
meaning, Richard blurted out, “it is true that eye witness
accounts often vary and that evidence often carries a greater
weight, especially in criminal investigations.”
“Granted,” the professor replied,
“but you can see some slight bias toward science over the
human element in my little illustration.”
Richard supposed he might have a point.
“Human observations may be imperfect,
but they are always better then blind scientific calculations.
For example, we, that is America, sent numerous unmanned missions
to the moon before we sent astronauts there. While these unmanned
expeditions were valuable, nothing compares with human observations
of men who actually walk on the surface of the moon.”
“I suppose your right,” Richard
replied, “but we can’t send manned expeditions into
the magma to observe the shift of tetanic plates, therefore, we
rely on scientific calculations and experimentation to substantiate
our findings.”
“Now suppose, my dear boy,” the
professor continued, “it was possible to send a manned expedition
into the magma and make first hand observations. Now, also, suppose
these observations contradicted the learned academic theories
of geological drift? Which would you suppose would carry the greater
weight, direct, personal human observation or scientific theory,
based on hypothetical models or suppositions.”
Richard hesitated before answering. He could
discern the cleverly laid trap opening before his unwary feet.
“Allowing for my knowledge of human nature and science, I
would suppose many scientists would reject personal observations,
preferring their theories, instead.”
“Good answer,” Professor Baily
replied, laughing pleasantly. “There is something about human
nature that exalts the scientific mind over common sense. When
confronted with a choice between direct observation of a phenomena,
especially if performed by a layman unskilled or untutored in
the scientific method and so called scientific observations, scientists
prefer their theories rather then observable facts.”
Again Richard granted the validity of the
Professor’s arguments. “But what does this have to do
with earthquakes?”
“Much, my dear boy,” was his immediate
response. “The problem, confronting us here, is the lack
of reliable first hand observations of the magma phenomena. Lacking
such reliable, authentic observation, scientific theory and speculation
fills the vacuum.”
“Well, there isn’t any reliable,
authentic way of physically observing magma drift,” Richard
responded.
“There your wrong, my dear boy,”
Professor Baily shot back with a twinkle in his eye. “There
is reliable, authentic, eye witness accounts of magma drift we
can use to compare with scientific calculations.”
Richard looked skeptical. “All right,”
he said, “where is it and who made these observation.”
“The Creator recorded his observations
in the Bible.”
Richard was stunned by the simple, direct
answer.
“You mean,” he stammered, “you
mean, God?” He spoke the word as if he were handling a dirty
cloth.
“Certainly,” the professor answered.
“The Bible says that God created the world. Certainly He
would qualify as an eye witness and He would be in the best possible
position to answer the questions about magma drift, wouldn’t
He,” the professor said with a self-satisfied smile?
Richard fidgeted in his chair, not knowing
what to say but keenly regretting his earlier enthusiasm over
the professor’s strange ideas. “You believe in God,”
he finally asked incredulously?
“I didn’t say that,” Professor
Baily countered, “I just postulated the existence of God
who claims to be the Creator and suggested that, since He claims
to have created the world then He would be in the best position
to judge this matter from its true perspective.”
“So, your postulating or hypothesizing
the existence of a Creator, rather then affirming a belief in
him?”
“Lets just say that if such a God existed,
he would be the best Judge of His creation.”
Richard supposed he was right in his assessment.
“All right,” Professor Baily replied,
“now we have a starting place for further exploration of
this subject. Supposing, therefore, that God exists and indeed
is the Creator of this world, wouldn’t it follow, therefore,
that He would leave a record of His acts for us to read?”
Richard agreed. “Your referring to
the Bible,” he replied, “but I don’t think it says
anything about magma drift.”
“I think it does,” Professor Baily
replied. “Consider the nature and duration of the geological
explanation of magma or continental drift. For this phenomena
to explain earthquakes and the drift of the continents, fabulously
long periods of time are required. Thus the theory of evolution
supplies the time to support this hypothesis. But God, through
the Bible, says that the world is approximately 6000 years old.
If this is true, then the continents can’t possibly drift,
for there isn’t enough time for them to begin to budge. Hence,
the geologists theory of magma drift is false.”
“That’s a lot of suppositions,”
Richard countered.
“Is it any greater supposition then
those of the geologists?”
Richard had to concede the Professor’s
point after a few moments of reflection.
“Are you familiar with the formation
of coal,” Professor Baily inquired?
“Coal is formed out of fossilized trees
or other plant vegetation, placed under enormous pressure for
long periods of time,” the graduate student replied.
“That’s a good explanation. Now,
let me ask you another question, where did these trees come from
to form the extensive coal beds found around the world?”
Richard shrugged. “Trees have always
grown on the earth.”
“But how did they get buried, especially
if, as the Bible seems to imply, the earth has been in existence
for only 6.000 years. Further more, if you study these matters
carefully, as I have, you come away with the conclusion that the
forests that form the known reserves of coal must have been unimaginably
huge to account for such large deposits. In other words, never
in recorded history have there been enough trees on the earth
to account for these deposits.”
Richard was now truly perplexed.
“We must assume that such vast forest
existed,” the Professor continued, “otherwise we would
not have the amount of coal that is currently available.”
Again Richard agreed with the logic.
“Leaving the question of the origin
of these vast forests, we are still left with the question as
to how they become buried. Here, the Biblical account of the universal
flood supplies the logical answer.”
Richard knew enough about geology and evolution
to venture a comment. “I have often wondered at the presence
of fossil evidence in the high mountains. A flood, as implausible
as it seems, would certainly account for their presence far above
the levels of the known oceans.”
The Professor smiled his congratulations.
“Well done, my boy. You are beginning to reason from common
sense rather then scientific bias. Lay aside your prejudices against
the existence of God, and consider the Biblical evidence.”
Richard shrugged. “All right.”
“Reasoning backward from observation
to cause, we know coal is derived from vegetable sources, thus,
large coal beds presuppose even larger amounts of vegetable matter.”
“This is reasonable,” Richard
said.
“According to the Bible, God created
the world, therefore, he must have also created these vast sources
of vegetable matter, primarily huge forests, in order to account
for the coal beds we have today. Now, here is my final conclusion,
what happens when coal burns?”
Richard reacted promptly, “you get
fire, smoke, noxious fumes, and steam, if the fire encounters
water.”
“Now suppose this steam is under pressure.
What happens if it isn’t vented.”
“You get an explosion,” Richard
replied promptly.
“Geologists tell us that the earth’s
crust is formed of molten magma and our own senses confirm this
observation when it erupts in volcanoes. We can see it in living
color, no supposition there. Now, suppose that vast forests were
submerged beneath the surface of the earth by the flood, and that
this vegetable matter fossilized into coal, and we know that coal
is an excellent source of fuel. When it burns it creates steam,
and unrented steam can build up enormous pressures until it explodes.
Additionally, we have volcanic outburst of molten magma. Is there,
do you suppose, a direct relationship or connection between these
burning coal beds and volcanoes?”
Richard shrugged. “It sounds reasonable.”
“Sounds reasonable,” Professor
Baily fairly exploded, “is there any other possible explanation.
If you accept the Bible as the authentic word of God, then there
are no other reasonable explanation for seismic activity, for
volcanoes and earthquakes are but the natural result of pressures
built up in the earth’s crust from the burning of vast amounts
of fossil fuel that find their release through volcanoes and earthquakes.”
“Coal beds are more extensive then
volcanic activity,” Richard objected. “If your theory
is correct, then we should expect to find burning coal everywhere.”
“Not necessarily,” the professor
responded. “Coal and oil deposits are wide spread, but the
absence of universal burn doesn’t negate the Biblical account.”
“How does your theory account for the
so called ring of fire around the Pacific ocean?”
“I don’t know,” the professor
answered honestly. “I can’t explain everything to my
satisfaction.”
“If what you say is true,” Richard
allowed, “then there remains a question. How did these coal
beds catch fire in the first place.”
“There are a lot of volatile fuels
under ground. Coal is the most prominent, but there is also oil,
which comes from vegetable sources, lime, which can also burn,
and carbon, which is another combustible fuel. If you store all
of these fuels together above ground, the eventuality, that they
will catch fire, is a forgone conclusion. Many possible sources,
my boy, not the least of which are the enormous pressures under
which these fuels are stored, can result in temperatures at or
above the combustion point. Perhaps we may never know the initial
spark that ignited these fuel beds, but once ignited, they may
perpetuate themselves indefinitely.”
“So your suggesting, then,” Richard
observed, “that the Biblical account of the flood supplies
all the information needed to understand geological phenomena.”
“Precisely, my boy. Due to the lack
of observable data in geology, we either begin with faith in God
or faith in human speculation. Personally, faith in God is the
more plausible and reasonable explanation for all natural phenomena.”
“Do you have a religious faith,”
Richard inquired.
“No,” Professor Baily replied.
“How then can you believe in the Biblical
explanation of geology?”
“Because its the most reasonable explanation,
one that fits the known facts and also the unknown phenomena.
Its logical, certainly as logical as the geological theories of
magma drift.”
When Richard did not reply, Professor Baily
continued. “By starting with God, the original witness, all
natural phenomena can be explained satisfactorily through reasoning
from cause to effect. By starting with the absence of an original
source, hence no eye witness, all types of theories and suppositions
abound unto absurdity. There isn’t any coherent explanation
of the universe that doesn’t change over time. All scientific
theory, since the beginning of recorded history, has been revised
with each new discovery and each successive generation of scientists
bent upon making a name for themselves. Why do you suppose that
two hundred years from now, with improved scientific techniques,
further revisions, in our knowledge of the origins of the cosmos,
won’t be necessary. The one constant in science is that there
is no constant.”
“But the one constant in the Bible
is the Creator,” Richard finished the professor’s logic.
Professor Baily smiled. “When you place
God at the center of all science, then the purpose for science
becomes the observation of the Creator’s handiwork. While
we cannot know God through His creation, only the Bible supplies
sufficient information concerning His character, we can discern
enough of His attributes through His creation to postulate His
existence, to use scientific terminology. My dear young friend,
all human endeavor is but a search for a knowledge of God. Much
of this endeavor is but a waste of time, for without first obtaining
a knowledge of His existence, through a study of the Bible, such
searching is but a futile expenditure of resources.”
“Your saying, by starting with faith,
and placing God at the center of all human endeavor, including
science, we can arrive at ultimate truth.”
“As much of it as God allows us to
know.”
“Within this philosophy, where then
is there room for the astronomer,” Richard inquired, seeing
his career vanishing before his eyes.
“We, as astronomers and scientists,
have our place in God’s great plan of creation as chroniclers
of His creative acts. Through our observations, His creation is
confirmed, thus lending credence to the Biblical account of creation
and defusing the arguments of the skeptic and atheists. All science,
therefore, is intended, by God, to serve as an adjunct to the
worship of the Creator. This is why I believe this expedition
to Mt. Ararat may succeed in finding Noah’s ark. Such a discovery
is incontrovertible evidence for the existence of God and confirmation
of the validity of his moral code of conduct and His plan of salvation.
When the time is right, and I believe that time has finally arrived,
God will vindicate Himself through this ancient artifact and all
science, including much in astronomy, will fall flat on its pompous....”
