Approaching Omniscience

Approaching Omniscience – #14: Connections Between the Brain and the Heart

vtudor — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 03:24:11 +0000

In a very well documented 2007 article by Professor Mohamed Omar Salem, titled “The Heart, Mind and Spirit,” Professor Salem describes the physiological mechanism by which the heart communicates with the brain. This affects a person’s information processing, health and emotions. He sites a scientific basis for the heart affecting mental clarity, emotional balance and creativity.

Heart/Brain Connections

Several years of research has determined that how a person perceives and reacts to the world and the immediate surroundings is affected by how the heart communicates with the brain. The heart actually appears to have its own unique logic, as it directs a person’s nervous system. It sends meaningful messages to the brain, where they are received, understood and even obeyed. Neurophysiologists later discovered actual neural pathways for signals from the heart to the brain, which may control the brain’s electrical activity.

Extensive research in 1994 by Amour discovered a complex network of different types of neurons in the heart that were similar to those found in the brain, but which work independently of the cranial brain. These are capable of learning, remembering, feeling and sensing. The pathways for signals from the heart enter the brain at the medulla and then proceed to the brain center where perception, cognitive processes and decision making take place. Such learning and cognitive processes is what allows heart transplants to be possible; the heart’s “intact, intrinsic nervous system” allows it to function in its new host.

Heart Synchronization

The heart communicates information to the brain through extensive electromagnetic field interactions, the most powerful of which are generated by the heart in extensive rhythmic fluctuations. The heart’s magnetic field is 500 times stronger than the brain’s magnetic field, according to a 2004 study by McCraty, Bradley and Tomasino. This magnetic field can be detected several feet away from the body. Consistently, Professor Salem also reports that oxytocin is produced by the heart; it is a “love or bonding hormone” which is involved in cognition, tolerance and adaptation, as well as complex sexual and maternal behaviors and establishing enduring pair bonds. In 1986, Cantin and Genest found that concentrations of oxytocin are the same as those in the brain.

Interestingly, pendulum clocks purposely set to swing at different rates and at different starting times in the proximity of the same clock shop will, over time, all begin to swing together. This has been proven in numerous studies. Is there a similar connection between humans with “hearts in love with each other.” There is much anecdotal evidence to support this theory. This includes an elderly couple, who were married for 72 years. Following a car serious accident, they held hands in ICU, as the man’s brain waves stopped. However, his heart kept beating with signals from the woman’s brain and heart. The case was carefully documented by the hospital’s ICU staff, RNs and doctors. (See this author’s article entitled “Education After 60 – The Heart (An active brain can mean a healthy body!)“)

Conclusions

Professor Salem’s concluding discussion emphasizes that the heart is much more than a pump for circulating blood. He describes the heart as a very highly complex information processing center capable of self organization using its own “functional brain,” which communicates and influences the brain as well as the nervous system. The Professor also cites research indicating that the heart may also have the ability to communicate with the cosmic universe, possibly related to the spirit – “the non-physical element, or the field, of the mind that can communicate with the cosmos outside the constraints of space and time.”

Thank you for reading!

Approaching Omniscience – #13: Current Brain Research

vtudor — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 17:19:04 +0000

Belief Learning and Strategic Learning

Science Daily, in their “Mind and Brain” pages, reports (February 2012) that several researchers and doctoral students from the University of Illinois and the University of California at Berkeley have conducted research on “belief learning.” This is learning happening as a result of the actions of other people, as opposed to learning happening as a result of the outcome of our own actions. Using “functional magnetic resonance imaging” (fMRI), brain activity was tracked while participants played a competitive game. In the game each participant was asked to invest more than one’s opponent to win a prize, but simultaneously minimize their own losses – the amount wagered in each trial.

By studying where in the brain specific types of learning, such a belief learning and strategic thinking, researchers hope to gain additional insights to help diagnose and treat neurological diseases and mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression and Parkinson’s disease; all of these affect the frontal and striatal brain areas. Belief learning spurred activity in the part of the brain known as the ventral striatum, which traditionally is involved with reinforcement learning; but researchers were surprised that belief learning also occurred in this area. Part of their conclusions were: “To the degree that we can better understand these ubiquitous social functions in strategic settings, it may help us understand how to characterize and, eventually, treat the social deficits that are symptoms of these diseases.”

Facial Recognition

Science Daily has also reported that Birkbeck College in the University of London is studying what is happening in the brain when one person looks at another. Researchers are trying to understand what happens with people who have prosopagnosia, an inability to recognize faces. Studies have shown that people with this condition can recognize voices, meaning it may be strictly a visual problem. In other “pure cases,” subjects studied can recognize different cars and houses, yet still have trouble with faces. There are people who have good jobs, are intelligent and simply cannot recognize faces; thus, other parts of their brains are functioning normally.

Researchers have preliminarily concluded that there may be different types of prosopagnosia, with some subjects recognizing famous faces, from among many others, in 250 ms (milliseconds), while still others took 600 ms to recognize the faces. Subjects with brain damage have also been studied and determined to have demonstrated covert facial recognition. Approaching Omniscience will continue to follow these developments.

The Brain and Education

In an article in Science Master, a website subtitled “Featuring The Best In Science and Technology,” Kenneth A. Wesson points out that any discussion about learning must be centered on the human brain and its development, functions and processing strategies. Wesson is an education consultant in neuroscience for pre-school up through university level institutions and organizations. He has published 13 different “brain facts” ranging from brain development in the fetus to the benefits of an “educated brain” as protection against Alzheimer’s disease. These will be explored in the next edition of Approaching Omniscience at EduConsulting.Com.

See you next week. And thank you for reading!

Approaching Omniscience – #12: Is It Possible For Man?

vtudor — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 04:34:01 +0000

Perhaps this is the most important question. Just suppose person A worked hard and gained all knowledge about a given subject. For example, let’s arbitrarily take “airplanes.” This writer has some knowledge about airplanes having flown or instructed in them for 5,000 hours and taught in the College of Aviation at a renown aeronautical university for over a quarter century. But even if I knew everything about airplanes, what useful purpose could be accomplished?

Provide A Ready Reference

This may be the most useful present day purpose. If anyone was required to know how an airplane’s wing creates lift, pilot requirements to fly, the skills needed to fly an airplane or any number of other airplane-related topics, it would indeed be useful. However, some and perhaps most of the remaining information would still go unused, maybe for years, decades, centuries or longer.

And all that information would essentially be wasted, since it was never used.

Dispense Limited Knowledge

As pointed out in earlier articles, even at the top online colleges, researchers really have no idea about the maximum capacity or capability of the human brain. However, logical reasoning says there is a limit, just as computer memory has a limit. Therefore, no person is ever going to approach omniscience, which is probably what God intended. He is a jealous God. (Exodus 34:14) And since He alone is omniscient, and He made us, why would He create beings that rivaled Himself? He clearly would not! Man will always have both limited knowledge of any given subject and a limit to his ability to increase that knowledge, which man today is far from attaining.

Again, all that unused information would essentially be wasted, since it was never used.

Posterity

Could future generations use the knowledge? Will man someday learn to use all of his brain? I believe that day will come. However logically, man has no way or methodology of knowing, or knowing when; he can only speculate.

Is speculation knowledge? No, not according to the definition “a fact or state of knowing.” (See Dictionary.Com.) Speculation clearly is not knowledge.

Still again, we are left with unused information.

Limits of Inclusion?

Finally, if person A knows everything about airplanes, where is the cut-off to related subjects? People, computers, materials, physics, chemistry, electricity and many other subjects are all related to airplanes. Therefore, should the “all knowledge” about airplanes exclude these subjects or a portion of those subjects? No, logically it could not.

Conclusion

Man will never be God or even like God; indeed God says, “There is none like Me in all the earth.” (Exodus 9:14; also See Isaiah 46:9) Thus, man can never be or become omniscient. However, man is capable of increasing knowledge, well beyond that demonstrated today. As that knowledge increases, neurologists learn more and brain research continues, Approaching Omniscience will keep you advised and informed.

Thank you for reading!

Approaching Omniscience – #11: Young Impressionable Minds

vtudor — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 17:57:40 +0000

Consider parents, brothers, sisters, grandparents and teachers, plus friends and acquaintances. Which ones have the most pronounced influence on young children? Can lasting negative self images be transferred to a young child? Or, are they transient? What events might trigger such self images, whether they be lasting or transient? At what age should verbalized negative self image statements such as “I am dumb.” or “I never want to get married.” or “I don’t want a family.” be taken seriously?

These were recently uttered by a seven year old girl. Parents are asking themselves, “Where did these thoughts come from?” and “How can we reverse these thoughts and comments?”

All of these questions are legitimate. The parents and nearly all the relatives know the Lord. The child has an excellent home environment. However, the child was recently scolded by teachers for talking to boys in class.

As Christians, we often have more questions than answers. But the Bible clearly says to train up a child in the way he should go, and he or she will not depart from it. (Proverbs 22:6) Thus, even a child has to make decisions for himself or herself, especially the decision to accept the training. Therefore, the most important decision is whether or not to obey authority, starting with parents.

Parents set the example and set the rules and boundaries; or, they do not set the example and set few or no rules, while boundaries are equally vague. Parents indeed have great responsibilities in nurturing and disciplining their children. If a child is not taught to obey at home, is the child going to obey at school? Is the child going to obey other authorities, such as school principles, police officers or judges? These too are decisions – decisions which have to be made by each child, but strongly influenced at early ages by parents and others.

As the human brain develops, it creates specific impressions about the environment. What is good or bad, right or wrong, true or false? What is best for me? What is best for others? Should I be concerned about both or just me?

The bottom line is that both as parents and as a child, we do not know all the answers to such questions. Each person is a unique individual and has to make choices for themselves. But the biggest choice is whether or not to submit to the ultimate authority about these questions and many more, and indeed about all of life, the Lord Jesus Christ. As a Christian, it is comforting to parents and children alike that He does have the answers. The question is whether or not to obey and accept His guidelines and rules or not to obey and accept His guidelines and rules. However, the former is very difficult to do without first submitting to Him as Lord and Savior. How to do this is simple. (See “Stability and Reference for College Students – The Way, The Truth and The Life.”) But the most difficult challenges involve maintaining one’s walk with the Lord, amid many tests, trials, tribulations and temptations as we go through life. To the extent that the child, or the adult, learns to depend upon the Lord, and not upon their own understanding (Proverbs 3:5), the child or the adult will meet these most difficult challenges.

All questions and comments are most welcome. Thank you for reading!

Approaching Omniscience – #10: The Human Brain’s Capacity

vtudor — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 23:15:16 +0000

Some Known and Unknown Estimates and Theories

Psychologists really do not know the capacity of the human brain. But there are estimates of the number of neurons (a specialized impulse-conducting cell), which is 100 billion, and the number of synapses (a point at which electrical impulses are transmitted between neurons), which is one quadrillion (a one followed by 15 zeros).

To complicate matters more, scientists do not know how to measure the size of memory; certain memories take up more space than others; and when memories are forgotten, more space is available for new memories. Psychologists appear even more confused when they state that some memories are not even worth remembering; so should they even be counted?

One psychologist, writing for the Scientific American, stated that because of the size of the human memory and the transient nature of memory, our brains have the ability to keep up with new experiences as we go through life. But whether the human brain would become full if our lifetime was extended is not known.

It is believed that about 76 percent of the neurons reside in the cerebellum of the human brain and only about 20 percent reside in the cerebral cortex, where “fact memory” is stored and where there are different types of neurons. Additionally, there are many neurons that do not support fact memory at all, some of which support learning skills but cannot be used to remember facts.

Also, the number of neurons required to support a single memory cannot be estimated; thus, the capacity of the brain in numbers of memories is very difficult to determine. However, researchers believe that the limiting factor on brain capacity is not the amount of memories, but rather the learning rate, which is considered synonymous with “bandwidth” as used in computer science.

Other Conjectures About The Brain

It is not known how the brain stores information, i.e. what format is used. Is it digital information stored in a format such as binary octal, hex encoded or 7-bit ASCII? Possibly, information is stored using an unknown analog format. As one response to the referenced Scientific American article mused regarding the numerical estimates of the brain’s memory capacity, “The question is nonsensical!”

Another responder to the article commented on a final lecture at Harvard University by John von Neumann. He speculated that today’s computer may be very different without von Neumann’s insights of 50 or 60 years ago. Von Neumann postulated that the point at which the brain is stimulated to function can be raised (i.e., the brain is less apt to function or function fully) if used infrequently; and conversely, it can be lowered if used often. It was also determined that the brain can do calculations, especially repeated calculations, faster if it accepts a lower level of accuracy.

Conclusions

It is clear that there is much more we do not know about the human brain than we do know. Thus, scientists and psychologists have much additional research to accomplish to move from speculation and postulation to known facts about the human brain’s capacity. Thus, if you are a student of neurology at one of the best online colleges or traditional college campuses, there is still much for you to learn and discover!

Thank you for reading!

Approaching Omniscience – #9: Contemplation About The Space Continuum

vtudor — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:37:18 +0000

I have a picture of the earth as seen from space. It may have been taken from the moon or from one of the manned spacecraft on its way back to earth from the moon. Clearly, the Mediterranean, the Red Sea and the Middle East countries are all visible. And I have often thought, “All that man has become, is and knows has been captured in this one picture!”

The Macro Perspective

Recently, i.e. during the year 2011, there have been several news articles about the discovery of other planets capable of sustaining life. They orbit around a sun about the same size as our sun and in an orbit about the size of ours, 93 million miles. The latest article indicated that one planet was discovered, which was close, but not quite as close as others expected to be found soon.

Planets and asteroids orbit stars (Our sun is but one of countless stars, and a very common one according to scientists.); moons orbit planets; and galaxies contain countless stars, planets and asteroids. Moreover, there are countless galaxies in many different shapes and configurations.

The Micro Perspective

Electron microscopes detect atoms composed of electrons revolving around a nucleus composed of protons and neutrons. In different shapes and configurations, atoms may contain varying numbers of electrons, neutrons and protons and may combine with each other in various shapes and configurations to form molecules, which may be combined to form elements. And the entire physical world around us is composed of various configurations and combinations of these elements.

Our Perspective

Obviously, there is a similarity. But wouldn’t it be some type of ultimate discovery if scientist could someday prove that life exists, maybe even life as we know it, in both the macro perspective and the micro perspective? (That would drive today’s conservationists totally crazy! Every piece of casually discarded waist might contain whole planets and civilizations!) Could we ever communicate with life in either perspective? Probably not, but if it ever is proven, I am equally sure that mankind would contemplate every aspect of the “how,” for both perspectives. But God, being omnisicent, already knew that man would enter such contemplation; therefore, He made the universe both vast and complex – too complex for mankind to ever communicate with other life forms in either perspective, at least not until He, in His infinite wisdom, allowed such a discovery.

As always, thank you for reading! Your comments and questions are most welcome.

Approaching Omniscience – #8: The Critical Concept of Synergy

vtudor — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 18:20:09 +0000

What Is Synergy?

Synergy involves combing two or more systems, which may be mechanical or electronic but usually involve humans. When these entities are carefully, logically and systematically combined, and the output produced is be greater than any one of these entities could produce acting by itself, that is synergy – more accurately described as “positive” synergy. If the output produced is less than any one entity could produce, it is “negative” synergy. (Neutral synergy might be described as the combined efforts producing the same output as produced by any one of the entities; but this phrase is seldom used or referenced.)

The concept is applied to many professional fields, such as aviation, sports, medicine, the military, fire-fighting and law enforcement. One of my specialties as a faculty member at one of the world’s most respected aeronautical universities was applying synergy to the crew in the cockpit, those who communicated with them and the systems and equipment used to fly and to navigate from point A to point B. In general, it may be referred to as teamwork; however, in aviation it is called crew resource management (CRM). However, history records it was first used by crews engaged in fighting forest fires; then it was applied to aviation and later to many other professional fields where teamwork is essential.

All Available Resources

It is very easy to describe the concept of synergy. However, getting humans to work together as a team to produce higher output, or higher quality output, than any one individual could produce can be very challenging. In fact, aviation colleges and universities devote an entire three to five credit upper level (300 or 400 level) course, or more, just on teaching CRM to its students. In fact, the concepts are often (and should be) taught to freshmen as they learn to fly an aircraft; then the concepts should be applied to the use of more complex aircraft and systems as students learn about them and their operation.

Mechanical, electronic and software systems are challenging for engineers to combine to generate positive synergy – certainly a challenge for those studying how to become a computer programmer or mechanical engineer. However, training and admonishing humans to work together as a team to produce greater or higher quality results is also challenging, perhaps even more so. Increased efficiency through synergy may help a business and its financial bottom line. However, in many professional fields it becomes a matter of safety and even life or death. People must learn to work together efficiently as a team in the cockpit, on the playing field, in the surgery room, on the battle field, near a forest fire or when apprehending criminals. These are just a few of the applications of the concept of synergy, concerning the human element.

The Human Element

We are not alone in the universe. And God designed creation that way; and purposed humans to have dominion over this whole earth and everything living in it. (Genesis 1:26) But He also gave man a “free-will.” Thus, God did not mandate how man would take dominion and conduct his affairs. That is something mankind is still struggling with to this day. Yet God did explain “how,” in His Word the Bible. Sadly, few take His Word seriously. And the result is often “negative synergy,” as much of mankind struggles to survive and live life “their way” instead of God’s way.

As always, thank you for reading! Your comments and questions are most welcome!

Approaching Omniscience – #7: The Future of The Internet and The Digital Universe

vtudor — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 04:51:13 +0000

The Digital Universe

Ian Peter is an Internet expert and historian from Australia who was involved with the genesis of the Internet. In April of 2008, he wrote an article entitled “Too Much Information.” He described the “digital universe,” as of 2007, as comprised of 2.25 x 1021 bits of information; and that was 10 percent larger than was estimated. He further stated that by this year, 2011, the digital universe would be ten times what it was in 2006. (Why he did not reference the 2007 size is not clear.) Additionally, he estimated that by 2011 about half of the digital universe will “not have a permanent home.”

The article also described estimates of the composition of the digital universe. The finance industry is estimated to account for 6 percent; and the portion created by individuals is put at 70 percent. Other specific percentages were not specified.

Recent Past Projections

However, Peter did list three main imperatives for IT organizations as they managing the huge volume of data. First, they must “transform” how businesses deal with the creation, storage and management of information within any given enterprise. Second, IT must take the lead in determining policies for information governance, which references information security, retention and access as well as policy compliance. Third, new tools and standards must be supplied to enterprises to optimize storage, conduct unstructured data searches, analyze databases and make use of the latest advances in virtualization, management and security tools, which will be required to create an infrastructure as ” flexible, adaptable, and scalable as possible.”

Today's Projections

The second European Summit addressing the future of the Internet was held on June 6th 2011. It focused on the exchange and sharing of information and lessons learned and included discussion of development of “smart cities” – … It was followed by two workshops addressing the latest Internet protocols (transitioning from Ipv4 to Ipv6), e-government and the future of the Internet, specifically addressing problems, approaches and actions.

One presentation entitled “Generative Internet, The future of the Web Between Social and Informational Phenomena” (by Michele Piunti, Eduardo Rispoli and Eugenio Schininà) quoted Herbert Simon (1971) who said that the “digital universe” actually creates a “poverty of attention,” which must be allocated efficiently among the many sources of that information; and those information sources “might consume it.” Simon appears to be philosophizing in circles, but may have a valid point. The presentation also quoted Clay Shirky (2008) who said, “It’s not information overload. It’s filter failure.” This writer too may have a valid point. Some group or organization or conglomerate of organizations may have to be designated to “filter” much of the digital universe to reduce it to manageable proportions. This is consistent with the presentation content, which referenced a “new user oriented notion of relevance.”

As reported on the website “The Samos 2011Summit Declaration,” the closing presentation listed the summit’s scope and activities, which included 84 invited participants, 40 presentations, 200 person-hours of collaborative workshops, 630 online viewers, 1000 visitors from 27 countries, 300 tweets, 1000 photos and over 10 video statements. As these become available and analyzed further by the best online universities, IT experts, scientist and researchers, Approaching Omniscience will report on how mankind is planning on managing the ever expanding digital universe.

Thank you for reading!

Approaching Omniscience – #6: What We Know and Don’t Know About The Brain

vtudor — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 20:14:05 +0000

About 1999 at a faculty retreat in Gold Coast, Florida, I listened to Dr. John Medina of the University of Washington. It was fascinating to listen to his lectures; and we also got to ask him questions individually, which I did along with numerous other faculty members. One piece of information, which I still vividly remember, is his comment that there is much more that we do not know about the human brain than we do know. Also, the past speculation that the human brain has the capability of an IQ of 2000 and a person we call a genius has an IQ of 160 to 200, is totally false. Medical science researchers, even at the top online colleges and traditional universities, actually have no idea of the limits or capabilities of the human brain.


Other Brain Experts

Dr. William R. Long, M. Div., Ph.D., J.D., is a legal scholar, writer, consultant and self-professed theological expert who wrote a rather critical article in 2008 about Dr. Medina and his work – many books, articles and even YouTube videos. He agrees with Dr. Medina that we are “just in the infancy of this [brain] research.” Dr. Long states, “We really know very little about the brain and the way that the chemistry of a particular person’s brain works.” However, even after reading Dr. Medina’s books and viewing his videos, Dr. Long states he is still lacking an explanation of how brain research has evolved over the past 40 years and why Dr. Medina believes such research has so much potential. There also appears to be some differences among experts about whether we learn better visually or by reading words. Dr. Medina favors visual and Dr. Long favors words, which themselves create our own mental pictures. Dr. Long concludes his critique with the comment that he is still searching for some good images of the brain and an understanding of “what actually happens when a thought comes into my mind.”


Addressing What Actually Happens

Sources cited by Wikipedia state that it is difficult to know the relationship between the brain and the mind. How mental entities (probably not knowing a better word) such as thoughts and emotions are realized or implemented by physical entities such as neurons and synapses is very difficult to describe or even imagine. In fact, Dr. Gottfried Leibniz, an 18th century German philosopher and mathematician, says it is inexplicable using mechanical principles using figures and motions. However, today there is much empirical evidence that there is a close relationship between brain activity and mind activity, which is leading neuroscientists to believe that mental phenomena can actually be reduced to physical phenomena. However, “what actually happens” is still unknown!


Comparisons to Other Human Organs

As a percentage of total energy used by our bodies, the human brain consumes 20 percent, which is more than any other organ. The energy source for the brain is completely dependent upon blood glucose; fatty acids do not cross the blood/brain barrier. However, the brain comprises only two percent of our body weight; yet 15 percent of our heart’s output goes to the brain. The brain also consumes 20 percent of the body’s oxygen and 25 percent of our body’s glucose. The energy consumption of the brain does not vary as we get older.


There is so much more...

As emphasized above, more research is ongoing and necessary to learn more about the functioning and capabilities of the human brain. Different researchers come to different conclusions, but that is normal, especially when researching unknown quantities such as the potential for human thought, productivity and understanding what is actually happenings when an idea comes to mind. More will be written in future articles as more research is done and more results are published.


Thank you for reading!

Approaching Omniscience – #5: The Source of Intellect

vtudor — Sun, 18 Dec 2011 05:49:53 +0000

Whether we choose to be a software developer, a paralegal or anything else in life, God is our source, for intellect and everything else in life. But why did He give us a brain and intellect? The Bible says we are “wonderfully made” and we are made in His image. It could be said that God does not need us. But I believe that is false. God needs us to commune with Him and He with us. He should be and wants to be our friend.

What is Intellect?

The dictionary says intellect is the ability or faculty to think and acquire knowledge, especially at a high or complex level and at great capacity, which is often acquired collectively or synergistically through a number of people. Therefore, if “two heads are better than one,” and higher quality decisions in life can be made in concert and in collaboration with others, then someone with omniscience must be able to create life itself. And we have just described God Himself! He is intellect!

Who Are We?

However, we are not intellect, at least not in anything approaching omniscience. God made man in His image. But He did not give us anything approaching His power in intellect. However, He did command us to go into the world and demonstrate His power, in drawing men and women to Him, in healing, in engaging the supernatural to do what is impossible for man.

In God’s infinite wisdom (There’s another definition of intellect.), He made man a little lower than His angels, but capable of possessing dominion over the entire earth and every creature upon it; if this were not so He would not have said, “Let them (men and women collectively) have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” (Genesis 1:26 and repeated in 1:28) However, “dominion” does not mean omniscience.

Who is God?

God and God alone is omniscient and possesses complete or infinite intellect. Mankind does not, even collectively. It is clear that God is a jealous God (Exodus 20:5); thus, He would never have created a being capable of seriously challenging His power; that would be contradictory. However, He did create an angel of beauty; so beautiful that the angel came to believe he could challenge and rebel against God and survive. Like man, he too was given a free will. Therefore, Satan did decide to rise up and rebel against God and His creation, including mankind. And the present result is what you see around you – a world filled with sin, turmoil, rebellion and discontent. It is a world in need of God; and that is what He intended. God intended his angels and mankind to commune with Him, yet have free will – free will to do and think according to individual (angel, man or woman) intellect and desires. But whether angel, man or woman, each creature is responsible to God for their decisions and their conduct.

It is most amazing that the God of creation can, does and wants to commune with individual men and women. But we must never challenge His intellect or question His decisions or commands. He will not tolerate rebellion; for in the end He wins, so the rebellious lose. I believe that as man increases in intellect, i.e. uses more and more of his brain, he will realize that opposing God and His will is futile. Why contend with a truly “good” God and a God that always has our best interest at heart? He loves us. We desperately need to love Him!

As always, your comments and questions are most welcome. Thank you for reading!