Trilobite Eyes-Anything but Primitive

Evolution's "first" known compound eye is far more complicated than the eyes of any vertebrates. How could that be ?

Selections from The Mystery of Trilobite Evolution, by Jerry Bergman

Marko’s summary: Trilobites supposedly evolved half a billion years ago as some of the simplest of creatures.  Yet there eyes are anything but primitive - they are among the most complex eyes known! The "real surprise" for evolutionists is that the "basic lens designs" of trilobite eyes were engineered "with such ingenuity." If you want an answer, don't go Back in Time, go Back to God!

(These selections by Marko Malyj are of the article published in Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal, Volume 47, Number 1, Summer, 2010, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/Abstracts47-1.htm).

The Trilobite Eye

The trilobite eye is the first known eye. Trilobites possessed the first known "compound" (multi-lensed) eye design type (specifically the diopter apparatus) that has been preserved in detail in the fossil record.
Trilobites often lived in the very deep (thus, very dark) sea bottom. The eye lens was designed specifically to function in low-light water environments. To do this, trilobites "possessed the most sophisticated eye lenses ever produced," and their vision may actually have been superior to modern living animals (Shawver, 1974, p. 72).

The trilobite eye is as advanced as many of the most modern eyes known. Marine biologist Richard Ellis called the compound trilobite eye, a system containing hundreds of lenses, "far more complicated than the eyes of any vertebrates" (Ellis, 2001, p. 7). The once misnamed "simple primitive" trilobite eye is now known to be an incredibly well-designed, complex optical-chemical system.

A compound eye is constructed from a large array of separate eye optical elements called ommatidia. Each ommatidia was pointed in a different direction to allow the trilobite to simultaneously see in front, on each side, and behind, giving it a panoramic view of the world (Fortey et al., 2004). A network of neurons then translated the many optical images picked up by the compound eye photoreceptors into a single composite picture. This eye design is found today in insects and crustaceans (Levi-Setti, 1993).

The Three Basic Trilobite Eye Designs


Schizochroal

 A large amount of variety exists in both the body and the eye design of the estimated 5,000 different trilobite genera. Three basic designs exist.

The Holochroal variety was both the most common and the most complex design. It consisted of thousands of small hexagonal-shaped lenses that functioned together as a unit.


Holochroal

The Schizochroal eye had fewer and larger biconvex lenses that were set in a turret-like arrangement, separated by an intrascleral membrane. It is found only in the Phacopida trilobite order. It is a "visual system quite different from any other eye that has ever appeared in the animal kingdom" (Levi-Setti, 1993, p.43, see also Fortey et al., 2004, p.449). This eye appears fully formed in the fossil record during the late Cambrian period.


Abathochroal

The Abathochroal eye resembled the schizochroal, except that it did not have interlensral membranes between individual lenses.


The Trilobite Eye Lens

Trilobote eyes were usually hexagon shaped, but some used square, elongated clear calcite prisms (Fortey et al., 2000). The result was a design that had a huge advantage in low light. The lens used the spherical aplanatic design that largely eliminated the spherical aberration problem, the distortion caused by the lens shape (Fortey et al., 2004). According to Levi-Setti (1993, p.54):

The discovery of this optical doublet comes as somewhat of a shock - that trilobites developed and used such device half a billion years ago makes the shock even greater. And a final discovery - that the refracting interface between the two lens elements in a trilobite's eye was designed in accordance with optical constructions worked out by Descartes and Huygens in the mid-17th century - borders on sheer science fiction. (emphasis added)

Conclusion

Acidiphorus had holochroal eyes

Lack of evidence for trilobite eye evolution is especially problematic for Darwin's theory. After decades of new fossil discoveries by many researchers, no transitional fossils exist for their origins. In short, "trilobites are both complex and diverse when they appear in the lower Cambrian." (Black, 1988, p. 158).

Trilobite eyes, which are among the most complex eyes known, appear abruptly and very early in the fossil record. The trilobite eye optics were anything but primitive and would have required an enormous amount of time to evolve, and there are no documented ancestral precursors. As Levi-Setti (1993, p. 54) concluded, the "real surprise" is that the "basic lens designs" of trilobite eyes were engineered "with such ingenuity."

This evidence contradicts Darwin's (1859) prediction that the earliest eyes should be primitive and that a large number of transitional forms proving eye evolution from simple to complex would be found in the fossil record.

References (selected)
 
Black, R. 1988. The Elements of Palaeontology. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
 
Darwin, C. 1859. The Origin of Species. John Murray, London, UK.
 
Ellis, R. 2001. Aquagenesis: The Origin and Evolution of Life in the Sea. Viking. New York, NY.
 
Fortey, R.A, R.M. Owens, D.E.G. Briggs and M.A. Wills. 2000. Trilobite! Eyewitness to Evolution. Knopf, New York, NY.
 
Fortey, R.A, R.M. Owens, D.E.G. Briggs and M.A. Wills. 2004. The lifestyles of the trilobites: these denizens of the Paleozoic Era seas were surprisingly diverse. American Scientist 92:446-453.

Levi-Setti, R. 1993. Trilobites. University of Chicago Press, Chicago IL.
 
Shawver, L.J. 1974. Trilobite eyes: an impressive feat of early evolution. Science News 105:72-73.

The Anchor Holds, by Ray Boltz, sung by Marko

Hello friends!

I sang "The Anchor Holds" by Ray Boltz, on Aug 15, 2010 at my home church, Fellowship Bible Church of Philadelphia.



If you don't see the DivShare control above, you can listen at
http://www.divshare.com/download/12659926-b02.

Thank you for listening!

How did Hibernating Siberian Beetles evolve?

They couldn't have! Amazing antifreeze lets them survive minus 37 degrees, not possible to have developed this trait in stages...

"Frozen Alive? All by Design, by Jonathan C. O'Quinn, D.P.M, M.S. (Abbreviated version)

(This article digest is by Marko Malyj, of the article published in Creation Matters, Volume 15, Number 4, July/August 2010, a publication of the Creation Research Society, to appear 2011 at http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2010/CM15%2004%20low%20res.pdf).

Siberia is one of the coldest places on earth, yet the Timberman Beetle Acanthocinus aedilis thrives there. During the winter months, these insects accumulate high concentrations of polyol, approximately 1,500 mmolal [millimolal]. Polyols depress the supercooling point of these insects.

Timberman beetle larvae also have glycerol concentrations of 2,600 mM [millimolar], providing the more fragile larvae with extra protection against freezing. These insects are able to tolerate cooling as low as -37 °C or colder. Timberman larvae also have extremely low cuticular water permeability, allowing them to stay supercooled for long periods without great water loss. 

These specializations for dealing with extreme cold had to work properly from day one in order for these insects to survive. They could not have developed in stages through evolution!

This argues strongly in favor of the biblical account of creation. The Lord created all things according to their kinds. Even the Timberman beetle shows us the mighty power of our Almighty Creator.

Bibliography

E. Kristiansen, N. G. Li, A. I. Averensky, A. E. Laugsand and K. E. Zachariassen, 2009. The Siberian timberman Acanthocinus aedilis: a freeze-tolerant beetle with low supercooling points. J. Comp. Physiol. B 179:563-68.

Noah's Global Flood: Enough Water for 40 Days of Rain?

Yes! Enough for 23 inches a day worldwide for 40 days, from water trapped in volcanic magmas from Earth's LIPs (Large Igneous Provinces).

Volcanism, "Fountains of the Great Deep," and Forty Days of Rain, by Hamilton Duncan

Marko’s summary: A common criticism of the Biblical Flood account is that it would be impossible for rain to occur 40 days and nights over the surface of the entire earth without stopping.

If you believe in the Almighty Creator God who created the entire Universe miraculously in six days, it would be no great difficulty for him to supply that much water. He could have done it miraculously, of course. Or he could have done it by using what was already available on Earth and the Solar System.

Hamilton Duncan shows that there is at least enough water trapped in molten rock (magmas) beneath the surface of the earth to supply 23 inches a day for 40 days everywhere on the planet! But how could all that water suddenly shoot into the atmosphere? A simultaneous bombardment of comets and meteors worldwide would be enough to cause the upper layer (mantle) of the Earth’s surface to lead to sudden decompression of the upper mantle, which would cause the trapped water to vaporize and erupt spectacularly into the earth’s atmosphere, shooting many miles up into the sky. Duncan concludes: “A world where 40,000 volcanoes simultaneously erupt would be extremely dreadful and may very well be the world referred to in Genesis 7 and 8.”

Of course, the miraculous hand of God is involved at some point! He is the one that warned Noah that the Flood was coming, and told him exactly how to build the Ark to take refuge. He is the one that sent the rains at their appointed time, and caused them to stop on the 40th day. May we recognize the awesome majesty, splendor and strength of our Creator (1st Chronicles 16:26-27).

(This review and article digest is by Marko Malyj, of the article published in Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal, Volume 47, Number 1, Summer, 2010, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/Abstracts47-1.htm).

Abstract

Water is the primary gas released during virtually all volcanic eruptions. Gravimetric analysis of large igneous provinces indicates the liberation of water from their magmas could have contributed at least 58 cm of rain worldwide every day for forty days. Under the scenario of global decompression from bolide impacts, the forty days of rain came from four potential sources: (1) liberation from volcanism, (2) destruction of vapor canopy, (3) vaporization of existing liquid water upon bolide [comet, meteor, etc.] impact, and (4) vaporization of bolides.

Introduction

The phrase "fountains of the great deep" in the Bible appears three times: Genesis 7:11, Genesis 8:2, and Proverbs 8:28. Genesis associates the fountains of the great deep with rain. 

These fountains may be the eruption of crustal and subcrustal magmas, which would have "caused" the Global Flood of Noah's day. (Dickens and Snelling, 2008; Dillow, 1981; Hunter, 1996; Rehwinkel, 1951; Whitcomb and Morris, 1961). The "effect" would have been large releases of lava and volatiles into the atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide, sulfur, chlorine, and fluorine are common, but water vapor is the most abundant volatile (Johnson et al., 1994). If water vapor released during an eruption is forced high into the atmosphere, it will cool and condense. The liquid water can precipitate or revaporize (Fetter, 1988). Therefore, rainfall can be sustained indefinitely by sufficient volcanism.

Volcanism and the Flood Waters

Presently there is approximately 1.27 x 10¹⁹ grams of water in the atmosphere (Trenberth and Smith, 2005), which is enough to provide approximately 2.5 cm (1.0 inch) of rain simultaneously across the entire Earth's surface (Dillow, 1981; Fox, 1952; Whitcomb and Morris, 1961). This modest amount of water would be insufficient to generate a global flood. Therefore, magmas would have had to liberate considerably more than the 10¹⁹ grams of water in order to sustain forty days of rain.

Snelling (2008) quoted previous investigators who determined granites could disolve 24 weight percent water at 100 km depth. Rhyolite melts can contain up to 21 wt % H₂O at 10 kbars pressure (Sood, 1981) which is equivalent to 36 km depth (22 miles, Blatt et al., 2006). Andesitic melts can dissolve 10 wt % H₂O, and basaltic melts can disolve 14 wt % H₂O under similar conditions (Middlemost, 1985; Annen et al., 2006). Mitchell (1986) discusses how kimberlites could have contained 40% H₂O at a depth of 200 km.

Magmas degassing these large amounts of water vapor at Earth's surface could have contributed significant amounts of precipitation for the Flood.

Rainfall during the Flood

Determine the precise amount of precipitation during the Flood could begin with a quantification of water liberated from erupted magmas. The largest known volcanic emplacements on Earth consist almost exclusively of basalt and are called large igneous provinces (LIPs) (Figure 1), as defined by Coffin and Eldholm (1994).


Figure 1. Distribution of known large igneous provinces (in black, after Reviews of Geophysics, by Coffin and Eldholm, 1994)

Before the acronym "LIP" was coined, Schubert and Sandwell (1989) published a paper estimating the volumes of continental submarine plateaus, oceanic plateaus, and thermal swells, much of what is now known as LIPs. The total volue is 605,603,000 km³. Kovalenko et al. (2007) reported H₂O values for corresponding volcanic settings.

When gravimetric analysis is applid to the information supplied by both Schubert and Kovalenko, a volume of 605,603,000 km³ of basaltic magma would have yielded a total of 1.174 x 10²³ grams H₂O. This estimate gives a "rough idea" for a minimum value of global precipitation during the Flood. Continental LIPs and other forms of volcanism are underrepresented in this study.

High Velocity Volcanism

Basaltic magma is capable of spectacular eruptions. An example of rapidly ascending, degassing basaltic magma are kimberlites, famous for their association with diamonds. (Evans, 1987; Heinrich, 1966; Milashev, 1984; Mitchell, 1986; Morgan et al., 2004; Smith, 1999c). McGretchen and Ullrich (1973) have modeled ascent rates ranging from 25 meters/sec at 90 km deep to 334 m/s at the surface.

These launch velocities would have sent volatiles several kilometers high into the atmosphere. The suborbital presence of volatiles would have collapsed any existing vapor canopy and contributed additional precipitation to the Flood (Dillow, 1981; Hunter, 1996; Jorgensen, 1990; Whitcomb and Morris, 1961).

Cause of Concentrated, Global Volcanism

Although the Bible tells us "why" God flooded Earth, it does not provide many details about "how". One vital clue appears in Genesis 7:11: "The same day were all the fountains of th great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." What could cause concentrated, global volcanic eruptions on the same day?

Decompression melting is considered the most common form of melting in the crust and mantle. Hunter (2000) has proposed that rocks were decompressed globally by a miraculous change in the gravitational constant. Another alternative is that bolide impacts could have created areas of concentrated decompression worldwide and intiated the Flood.

Bolides are meteors, meteorites, or comets (Jackson, 1997; Smith, 1999d). Many investigators believe Earth was bombarded by bolides in the past (Gilmour and Koeberl, 2000; Glikson, 2001; Norman et al. 1977; Oard, 2009; Spencer, 1998a; Unfred, 1984; Whitcomb and Morris, 1961).

A rapid, global bombardment could have led to extensive fracturing, segmental upper mantle decompression, LIP emplacement (Jones, 2005; Jones et. al, 2002), and diatreme emplacement (Oard, 2009). The modeled ascent speeds of kimberlite and basaltic magmas attest to the accuracy of the Bible's recording how the fountains of the great deep were "broken up" on the same day.

Bolides may have contributed to the Flood in other ways. If they struck water, the impact would have vaporized water near the impact area (Ingle and Coffin, 2004; Spencer, 1998b). Additionally, comets are comprised mainly of water (Campins et al., 2004; Dasch, 1996b; Hartmann, 1989), and if comets struck Earth, they would have been vaporized upon impact.

Therefore, under the scenario of global decompression from bolide impacts, the forty days of rain came from four potential sources:

1. liberation from volcanism,
2. destruction of vapor canopy
3. vaporization of existing liquid water upon bolide impact
4. vaporization of bolides

Conclusion

The conjunction of the "fountains of the great deep" and "windows of heaven" at the beginning of the Flood suggests a causal relationship. Voluminous magmatic emplacements with water contents measured today could have provided at least 58 cm (23 inches) of rain worldwide everyday for forty days.

An abrupt catastrophic event must have triggered these phenomena. A global bolide impact event could have triggered tremendous crustal volcanism through decompression of the mantle and fracturing of the lithosphere. Moreover, bolide impacts may have initiated LIP emplacements and the launching of volatiles including water vapor through diatremes.

There are over 40,000 volcanoes on Earth, with 1,500 of them active (Dasch, 1996b). A world where 40,000 volcanoes simultaneously erupt would be extremely dreadful and may very well be the world referred to in Genesis 7 and 8.

References (selected)

Annen, C., J.D. Blundy, and R.S.J. Sparks. 2006. The genesis of intermediate and silicic magmas in deep crustal hot zones. Journal of Petrology 47(3):526.

Blatt, H., R.C. Tracy, and B.E. Owens. 2006. Petrology: Igneous, Sedimentary, and Metamorphic. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, NY.

Campins, H., T.D. Swindle, and D.A. Kring. 2004. Evaluating comets as a source of Earth's water. In Seckbach, J. (editor), Origins, Evolution, and Biodiversity and Microbial Life in the Universe, pp. 569-591. Klower Academic Publishers, Dortrecht, the Netherlands.

Coffin, M.F., and O. Eldholm. 1994. Large igneous provinces: crustal structure, dimensions, and external consequences. Reviews of Geophysics 32(1):1-36.

Dasch, E.J. (editor). 1996b. Volcanic eruptions, volcanism. In MacMillan Encyclopedia of Earth Science, volume 1, pp. 1139, 1144. Simon & Schuster Macmillan, New York, NY.

Dickens, H., and A.A. Snelling. 2008. Precambrian geology and the Bible: a harmony. JOC 22(1):65-72.

Dillow, J.C. 1981. The Waters Above: Earth's Pre-Flood Vapor Canopy. Moody Press, Chicago, IL.

Evans, A.M. 1987. An Introduction to Ore Geology, 2nd Edition. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK.

Fetter, C.W. 1988. Applied Hydrogeology, 2nd Edition. Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus OH.

Fox, C.S. 1952. Water. The Philosophical Library, Inc., New York, NY.

Gilmour, I., and C. Koeberl. 2000. Impacts and the early Earth. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.

Glikson, A.Y. 2001. The astronomical connection of terristrial evolution: crustal effects of post-3.8 Ga mega-impact clusters and evidence for major 3.2±0.1 Ga bombardment of the Earth-Moon System. Journal of Geodynamics 32:205-229.

Hartmann, W.H. 1989. Astronomy: The Cosmic Journey, 4th Edition. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, CA.

Heinrich, E.W. 1966. The Geology of Carbonatites. Rand McNally & Company, Chicago, IL.

Hunter, M.J. 1996. Is the pre-Flood/Flood boundary in the earth's mantle? CENTJ 10(3):344-357.

Hunter, M.J. 2000. The pre-Flood/Flood boundary at the base of the earth's transition zone. CENTJ 14(1):344-357.

Ingle, S., and M.F. Coffin. 2004. Impact origin for the greater Ontong Java Plateau? EPSL 218:123-134.

Jackson, J.A. (editor). 1997. Glossary of Geology, 4th Edition. American Geological Institute, Alexandria, VA.

Johnson, M.C., A.T. Anderson, Jr., and M.J. Rutherford. 1994. Pre-eruptive volatile content of magmas. In Carroll, M.R., and J.R. Holloway (editors), Reviews in Minerology. Volume 30: Volatiles in Magmas, p. 321. Mineralogical Society of America, Washington, DC.

Jones, A.P. 2005. Meteorite impacts as triggers to large igneous provinces. Elements 1:277-281.

Jones, A.P., D.G. Price, J. Neville, P.S. DeCarli, R.A. Glegg. 2002. Impact induced melting and the development of Large Igneous Provinces. EPSL 202:551-561.

Jorgensen, G.S. 1990. A computer model of the pre-Flood atmosphere. In Walsh, R.E. (editor), Proceedings of Third International Conference on Creationism, pp. 185-197. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA.

Kovalenko, V.I., V.B. Naumov, A.V. Girnis, V.A. Dorofeeva, and V.V. Yarmolyuk. 2007. Average compositions of magmas and mantle sources of mid-oceanic ridges and intraplate oceanic and continental settings estimated from the data on melt inclusions and quenched glasses of basalt. Petrology 15(4): 361-396.

McGretchen, T.R., and G.W. Ullrich. 1973. Xenoliths in maars and diatremes with inferences for the Moon, Mars, and Venus. Journal of Geophysical Research 78(11):1844.

Middlemost, E.A.K. 1985. Magmas and Magmatic Rocks. Longman Group Ltd, New York, NY.

Milashev, V.A. 1984. Explosion Pipes. Springer-Verlag. Berlin, Germany.

Mitchell, R.H. 1986. Kimberlites. Plenum Press, New York, NY.

Morgan, J.P., T.J. Reston, and C.R. Ranero. 2004. Contemporaneous mass extinctions, continental flood basalts, and impact signals: are mantle plume-induced lithospheric gas explosions the casual link? EPSL 217:263-284.

Norman, J., N. Price, and M. Chukwu-Lke. 1977. Astrons - the earth's oldest scars? New Scientist 73:689-692.

Oard, M.J. 2009. How many impact craters should there be on Earth? JOC 23(3):61-69.

Rehwinkel, A.M. 1951. The Flood. Concordia Publishing House, Saint Louis, MO.

Schubert, G., and D. Sandwell. 1989. Crustal volumes of the continents and of oceanic and continental submarine plateaus. EPSL 92:234-246.

Smith, R. (editor). 1999c. Ultramafic rocks and glossary. Encyclopedia of Geology, pp. 450, 492. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, Chicago, IL.

Smith, R. (editor). 1999d. Ultramafic rocks and glossary. Encyclopedia of Geology, p. 488. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, Chicago, IL.


Sood, M.K. 1981. Modern Igneous Petrology. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.

Snelling, A.A. 2008. Catastrophic granite formation: rapid melting of source rocks, and rapid magma intrusion and cooling. Answers Research Journal 1:11:25.

Spencer, W.R. 1998a. Catastrophic impact bombardment surrounding the Genesis Flood. In Walsh, R.E. (editor), Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Creationism, pp. 553-566. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA.

Spencer, W.R. 1998b. Geophysical effects of impacts during the Genesis Flood. In Walsh, R.E. (editor), Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Creationism, pp. 567-579. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA.

Trenberth, K.E. and L. Smith. 2005. The mass in the atmosphere: a constraint on global analysis. Journal of Climate 18(6):864-875.

Unfred, D.W. 1984. Asteroidal impacts and the Flood-Judgment. CRSQ 21:82-87.

Whitcomb, J.C., Jr., and H.M. Morris. 1961. The Genesis Flood. The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company. Phillipsburg, NJ.

His Kingdom Coming to Afghanistan?

“Have you ever had a dream about a man in white?” is a way that some Christian workers open a conversation with Afghans. Stories abound in Afghanistan about meeting the Lord in a dream or vision. A young man in Eastern Afghanistan, Najib, tells this story: “I had a copy of the Injil (New Testament) and had read parts of it. One morning I awoke early and went to the forest for a walk in the cool part of the day. On my walk I was met by Isa Masi (Jesus). I was so amazed! The next day I got up early to see if we could meet again. Yes, He was there! I was afraid to tell anyone because I thought He might not come back. Every day for three months I walked with Him in this forest.”

Why Are Afghans Turning to Christ? “The gospel of the Kingdom is first and foremost attractive,” says my good friend Joseph. This is true everywhere and especially in Afghanistan. One Pushtun tribal leader said last year, “These Taliban are not good Muslims; they do not obey the Q’uran; they do not care about the Afghan people; they are cruel people.” Increasingly Afghans are meeting others who follow Jesus. What Afghans are finding is that it is possible to live in real freedom!

(from the article "His Kingdom Coming to Afghanistan?" by Peter Bruce, Mission Frontiers, September 2010. Click here for the full article.)

F.A.I.T.H.

= Forsaking All I Trust Him !

(Dr. Robert A. Cook, "Walk with the King today, and be a blessing!")

Shari'a Law in Finland?

"Efforts to impose Islamic Shari'a law have become increasingly common in Muslim communities in Finland. Fights recently erupted at an amusement park in Helsinki when Islamists upbraided Kurdish women for not wearing headscarves.

"In a Finnish language course, Somali Muslims refused to allow others to listen to music, saying all music is banned under Shari'a.

"Pray that secular Muslims and authorities will effectively resist such coercion."

(from a Christian prayer bulletin, September 2010)

Secret Police learn the secret of Jesus

"Upon learning of a recent Christian prayer and praise vigil, officials in an Asian country sent secret police for around-the-clock surveillance. The officers appeared to enjoy the worship music and were delighted when the believers served them tea. One was given a New Testament. A believer afterward reported, 'They want to know more about our God.' Pray that the good seed of His word will take root in their hearts."

(from a Christian prayer bulletin, September 2010)

Christian Prayers are Very Different

"... from those generally offered by Muslims. In Islam, prayer is rigorous, monotonous, and oppressive. In Mohammed's religion, ritual prayers are required five times a day and must be preceded by the cleansing of one's hands, mouth, nostrils, face, arms, and feet with water (or sand when water is not available). Each of these actions is done three times in succession. Without this, a prayer is considered to be of no effect.

"A Muslim must repeat specific prayers memorized in Arabic. No other language is said to be acceptable to God, even if the person doesn't speak or understand Arabic -- which the majority of Muslims do not. These memorized prayers are regarded as 'good works' that will be placed on a person's account for the Day of Judgment if carried out properly. However, a prayer is considered to be of no worth if incorrectly recited or at a time not prescribed by Muslim authorities. Muslims are forbidden to pray in a bathroom or any other place considered unclean.

"Islam requires that its followers pray in the direction of a black stone encased in the Ka'bah, a rectangular shrine in the city of Mecca. They must also perform extremely intricate movements in prayer. They bow, kneel, stand, turn their heads a certain way, place their hands to the front, and so on. Men and women are not allowed to pray together. In fact, a woman is forbidden to even raise her voice in ritual prayer if her husband or another man is present.

"How wonderful it is that followers of Christ are not limited in the place, time or posture of prayers. We have immediate access to God's Throne wherever we are and in whatever circumstances. Pray that multitudes of Muslim men and women will come to know this blessing."

(from a Christian prayer bulletin, September 2010)

ProtoAvis - "We try harder?"

"The problem with Protoavis is that it appears in the fossil record around the same time as the earliest dinosaurs. If it's a bird, then it seems highly unlikely that birds are descended from dinosaurs. In fact, in such a case it wouldn't be clear what birds are descended from."

In 1961, Avis Rent-A-Car started its well known "We Try Harder" advertising campaign.

Well, now there's Protoavis. This is one of the "earliest" birds found by evolutionists. But it seems that to evolve into Protoavis, dinosaurs tried so hard that they grew feathers ahead of schedule! See Casey Luskin's article "Inconsistent Reasoning Governs Evolutionary Interpretations of Feathered Dinosaurs" at the Discovery Institute.

So what's next for Evolutionists? Instead of birds evolving from dinosaurs, maybe it's the other way around! "We're going to have to conceive of dinosaurs as being more like birds." Fasten your seat belts! Maybe they'll find Proto-Rent-A-Wreck next...

Disciples of Jesus Die Differently

Word is spreading in Southeast Asia that people who believe in Isa Al Masih (Jesus, the Messiah) die differently than everyone else. They don't fear death. Often, before dying, they confess, "He is here to pick me up." People are, for the first time in their family history, forsaking the occult when they feel oppressed. Instead they are relying on Isa to answer the prayers that they lift to Him when they are struggling.

"Our people have always gone to witchdoctors whenever they have proglems. Islam forbids it, but we didn't know what to do with our problems, so we continued to go to the witchdoctors. They always gave us a quick 'solution.' But now we are discovering that Isa is much more powerful at taking care of our fears. Sometimes He takes a long time answering our prayer, stretching our faith and patience. But sometimes He answers very fast and really shows us what He can do."

(from CrossWorld Today prayer bulletin, Summer 2010)

Book Review: Redeeming Science, by Vern Poythress

Vern Poythress is one of the most conservative graduate-level seminary professors of Biblical interpretation. However, he calls into doubt such fundamental Biblical doctrines such as death before the fall and the flood being a global event. It is troubling that he does not recognize the excellent work done by young earth creation scientists in these areas.

(Book Review. Redeeming Science, by Vern Poythress, Crossway Books, Wheaton, IL, 2006, 381 pages, $20.00.)

Vern Poythress, professor of New Testament interpretation at Westminster Theological Seminary in Glenside, Pennsylvania, authored Redeeming Science, A God-Centered Approach, in 2006. Recently, a copy was sent to all the alumni of the seminary, of which I am one.

It is a long book of 381 pages (including appendices, bibliography and index). In it he gives a detailed theological and scientific interpretation of Genesis chapter 1, Creation, Science, and Intelligent Design. His academic background is evident in his handling of the material - besides a Th.D. in New Testament from the University of Stellenbosch (South Africa), Dr. Poythress also holds a Ph.D. in Mathematics from Harvard University.

The book is very readable and persuasive. Toward the end it even has a discussion of quantum equations and the wave operator. However, its erudition is marred by some very questionable assumptions of Biblical interpretation which strongly colors the thought of Poythress and many other seminary professsors of our time. For example, on p. 121, Poythress asks,

"What do we say about animal death? The later scriptural statements are talking about human death. God created man to have fellowship with him and to enjoy life in the presence of God forever.... The animals and plants, however, did not enjoy the same exalted status as man. In fact, later on God explicitly gives to man the authority to kill animals for food, but not to kill a fellow human being (Gen. 9:3, 6).... Psalm 104, a psalm that repeatedly alludes to the creation in Genesis 1, includes details that imply animal death: .... 'These all [all sea creatures, and probably all land creatures as well] look to you, to give them their food in due season [Ps. 104:27] ["food" here must include large fish eating small fish; this verse describes God's continuing providential control over the present order, not a vegetarian past]." (brackets are in the original)

"I conclude that we do not have any firm basis for saying that animal death started only after the fall of man." (p. 122)

This is his conclusion, despite the fact that just a couple of pages earlier, Poythress notes that:

"The presence of death seems in disharmony with the pronouncement that the creation was 'very good' (Gen. 1:31), and with the later scriptural statements that death came through one man, Adam (Rom. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:12; Gen. 3:19)."

Poythress goes on to immunize himself from criticism on this topic with this statement on p. 122:

"Again, we must beware of presuming to dictate to God what kind of world he had to create. It had to be 'very good' in his sight; but that is not the same as saying that it must match what some of us may think ideal". (italics in the original)

In his outwardly balanced approach, it is interesting that Poythress notices the clear meaning of these words from the Fourth Commandment "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day" (Ex. 20:11). He uses this verse to strike down the Day-Age Theory for creation (p. 112), and also the Analogical Day Theory (p. 131ff), however, he chooses to overlook the theological implications of this verse in his discussion of animal death above.

Yet again, Poythress is non-commital in his theological discussion of Noah's Flood (p.129):

"I conclude therefore that Genesis 6-9 by itself does not clearly indicate exactly how extensive the flood was. It covered an extensive area - the ordinary 'world' of the ordinary person in the ancient Near East. Possibly it covered the entire globe, but Genesis does not turn this possibility into a certainty. Consequently, we must go out and look at other parts of the world, alert to what further information may appear there."

One would think from this last sentence that Poythress would go on to the scientific work of young earth creationists who indeed are actively "going out and looking at other parts of the world". However, in his bibliography of over 200 sources, Poythress only includes the pioneering book The Genesis Flood (1961) by John Whitcomb and Henry Morris, The Young Earth (1994) by John Morris, and Starlight and Time (1994) by Russell Humphreys (which Poythress dismisses as having a flaw in its physical reasoning). Unfortunately, these are the only young-earth creationist works listed. In fairness, there are a dozen or so books listed from the Intelligent Design movement, including those of William Dembski, Phillip Johnson, and Michael Behe.

Relatively speaking, Vern Poythress is one of the most conservative scholars today who are teaching Biblical interpretation at seminaries which offer graduate theological degrees. However, it is troublesome that this brand of "nuanced" interpretation is raising up yet another generation of pastors and teachers, without providing them the solid Biblical foundation with which they could help believers to strengthen their faith in the Creator God, and thus truly "redeem science".

Marko Malyj
M.S. Physics Drexel University
M.Div. Pastoral Ministry Westminster Theological Seminary