The Truth About The Creation 
God's Glory, God's Handiwork, God's Word, The Genesis Account
A Dissertation by Pastor Ed Rice January 2017
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,1 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"2. 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.”3 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.4 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”5 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).6 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."7 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, throughly8 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.9 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. Bohr10 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 (boson11) 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 4th 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.12

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.13

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.14 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 5th 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.
1 The American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd ed., 1992 Houghton Mifflin Company, s.v. “Continuum” n., pl. con·tin·u·a or con·tin·u·ums. 1. A continuous extent, succession, or whole, no part of which can be distinguished from neighboring parts except by arbitrary division. 2. Mathematics. A set having the same number of points as all the real numbers in an interval. [Latin, neuter of continuus, continuous. See CONTINUE.]
2 Ibid., s.v. "create" tr.v. cre·at·ed, cre·at·ing, cre·ates. To cause to exist; bring into being. James Strong, Strong's Concordance, 1890, Hebrew- arb (baw-raw) to create, shape, or form, a Qal pattern verb (simple action in the active voice).
3 www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary s.v. “allegorical,” Form of biblical interpretation where an actual accomplished fact is understood to be a figure of something else. The literal meaning is expressed in a sustained metaphor (with a hidden, symbolic, parallel meaning only to be discerned by priests or Protestant clergy). Commonly applied to giving a mystical explanation to any part of the Bible.
4 It is conceded that the overpowering gravity of a black-hole might not exist when matter was still without form and void. Gravity is an energy which was likely added with “Let there be light.”
5 This title is derived from 1Timothy 6:20 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:"
6 Modernists contend that if anything was inspired it was only the original wet ink of the original authors and that all copies and especially copies of copies are errant, fallible, and lacking inspiration. They suppose that their modernist critical scholars may be able to piece together most of what God meant to say with some exotic copies recovered from Alexandria Egypt. Shame on every Baptist that supports or condones this outlandish claim of modernism, to include the renowned Henry Clarence Thiessen, author of “Lectures in Systematic Theology,” 1949.
7 Louis Gaussen, Theopneustia: The plenary Inspiration of The Holy Scriptures deduced from
Internal Evidence, and the Testimonies of Nature, History and Science, trans. David
Scott (Chicago, The Bible Institute Colportage ASS'N., 1840).
8 Using the old English spelling of throughly may be called an error by modern spell checkers, but be assured that it does not constitute an error in the Holy Bible. Textual critics not withstanding.
9 In string theory, the different types of observed elementary particles arise from the different quantum states of these strings… It was realized that the very properties that made string theory unsuitable as a theory of nuclear physics made it an outstanding candidate for a quantum theory of gravity. Five consistent versions of string theory were developed before it was realized in the mid-1990s that these theories could be obtained as different limits of a conjectured eleven-dimensional theory called M-theory… Many theoretical physicists (among them Stephen Hawking, Edward Witten, and Juan Maldacena) believe that string theory is a step towards the correct fundamental description of nature. This is because string theory 1) allows for the consistent combination of quantum field theory and general relativity, 2) agrees with general insights in quantum gravity such as the holographic principle and black-hole thermodynamics, and 3) because it has passed many non-trivial checks of its internal consistency. See Michael J. Duff, “The Theory Formerly Known as Strings”, Scientific American, February 1998, http://www.scientificamerican.com (accessed 04/23/2014).
10 American Heritage Dictionary, s.v. “Bohr, Niels Henrik David”, 1885-1962. Danish physicist. He won a 1922 Nobel Prize for investigating atomic structure and radiations. His son Aage Niels Bohr (born 1922), also a physicist, shared a 1975 Nobel Prize for discovering the asymmetry of atomic nuclei.
11 American Heritage Dictionary s.v. “boson” - n. Any of a class of particles, such as the photon, pion, or alpha particle, that have zero or integral spin and obey statistical rules permitting any number of identical particles to occupy the same quantum state. [After Satyendra Nath Bose (1894-1974), Indian physicist.]
12 Signe Brewster, “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)
13 Ibid.
14 Patricia Schwarz, “The Official String Theory Web Site,” http://www.superstringtheory.com (accessed 4 July, 2014).


To Continue in this series click the link below:
2: The Age of the Earth. . . 31www.truthaboutthechrist.com/thetruthaboutthecreation/2age_earth.html
. . . A Time Warp Needs Due Consideration.. . . 32
. . . A Time Warp Substantiates The Age of Planets . . . 37
. . . A Time Warp Is In Evidence. . . 44

God's Glory, God's Handiwork, God's Word, The Genesis Account
Series Complete Table of Contents