Ancient Babylon to Mystery Babylon: Article One

Roots of Abiogenesis (a.k.a. “chemical evolution” of life) & Macroevolution Theories, From Ancient Babylon to Greece
.
BY LEVI  (unfinished, in editing)
.
In evolutionists’ wartime armory of propaganda tools, in promoting the materialism worldview, is the popularly-touted empirical strengths of their favored theories- the presupposed “facts of evolution”- with the fact that their beliefs fit neatly into mainstream scientific thought of godless materialism, as opposed to our mythical creation story of irrational and outdated Scriptures. Evolutionists would have us all believe that tangible evidences exist that allow for a completely unguided, material origin of life or “chemical evolution,” but clearly there are not, nor is it true that the Theory of Evolution is founded upon empirical facts. No matter how many times these kind of claims are asserted, nonconformists can but cringe at hearing their blatant falsities, at least after weighing the evidences and studying the unscientific history that actually propelled their favored theories. The Law of Biogenesis has never been broken, which states that life never emerges but only comes from life, and the fossil record continues to defy- and pose critical problems for- animal transformism and every Tree of Life that materialists come up with.
.   
In previous articles of this work, several teleological theories were offered readers for two, primary purposes. The first purpose was to exemplify the fact that Scripture is more than capable of keeping up with modern discoveries of science while revealing additional truths of the ancient and future world, which can be further explored under the ATLAS Theory and the Moedim Paradigm. The second purpose was to arrest popular myths of secular academia and popular media culture- myths claiming that creationists can bring nothing new to the theoretical table for positive arguments, and that we can offer only a false dichotomy with claims of scientific relevance because of the current failings of the evolutionary mechanism and their theory’s void of evidence for an abiogenesis event.
.   
In this article, we will reveal the true roots of evolutionary theories and present an argument that naturalists of the scientific orthodoxy have offered the world a superficial unipolarity based upon their ideology for material determinism. This means that their preemptive denials of an intelligent Creator and purposed organic creations- despite mathematical improbabilities of random mutations accomplishing feats of obvious engineering- have allowed them only one overarching paradigm for the origin and diversification of life.
.
This persistent façade of completely factual science supporting their superior worldview has long been sustained by popular propaganda against us “ignorant” creationists with a delusion of material determinism as a theory resulting from data and discoveries of modern scientific investigations rather than ancient myths. Thus, in this article and future ones, we will tear down those faulty walls and bring charges against evolution activists for their deceptions. And, in the process, we will destroy the myths of modern science being founded upon the works of secular naturalists, and their allegations of Bible believers as obscurantists who have sought throughout science history to hold back the tide of their empirical facts supporting materialism. The facts are, the patriarchs and matriarchs of modern science disciplines were overwhelmingly devout, Bible believing Christians.
.
What few devotees of the neo-Darwinian ideology are aware of via revealed history- those making the “empirical argument” for abiogenesis and macroevolution- is that the popular cosmology that they enthusiastically embrace under the banner of scientific authority was first inherited by early evolutionists from speculating, ancient Grecian philosophers, who in turn inherited their ideas of nature from deeper roots of polytheistic beliefs in a divine nature, which was the socially-accepted paradigm of mystical beliefs millennia ago. Greek thinkers incorporated the popular cosmology of spontaneous generations of life and animal transformism from Eastern, Near Eastern, and Middle Eastern cultures that existed long before its was embraced in Western thought. Again, Greeks built their scientific beliefs in nature’s power to create on a paradigm of polytheistic nature animism that was popular among various cultures long before their schools were established.  
.
Abiogenesis and macroevolution (spontaneous generations of life and animal transformism) lack the commonly-asserted corporeal evidences of experimental research, or empiricism. The inspirational roots of their favored theories are truly found elsewhere, in ancestral animism (living-nature beliefs). When researching the historical roots of macroevolution and abiogenesis, we do not arrive at some grand scientific experiment yielding empirical absolutes, on a certain date sometime in medieval Europe, or even in more recent times. What we find is a very long trail that can be traced back almost to the beginning of city-state civilization in Sumer, from cultures of southwest Asia to northeast Africa. Before the Greeks, we find widespread folklore in the powers of a living earth and living elements that can sprout simple lifeforms from primordial waters and animals that can be transformed and enhanced on the whims of mother nature. This is the reality of the origin of material determinism and the evolutionary worldview, but few students in the West are explained these things for obvious reasons.
.
At first thought the two ideas- one of godless materialism and the other of polytheistic mysticism- are contrary and incompatible, at least from our modern perspective of a complete divide between religions and material sciences. But when we take a closer look at the polytheistic nature religion of ancient Greece and the cultures that surrounded them, and compare the early scientific ideas of their famous philosophers with more primitive cultures, we find that the development of philosophical naturalism in ancient Greece was not so much strengthened by investigations into nature and philosophers’ rejection of nature deities- as often claimed by materialists- as it was by ancient thinkers’ personification of nature because of inherited ancient beliefs and influences of beliefs in a deified nature- one granted unlimited power and wisdom to create. 
.
Early academies of philosophical materialism were a rational extension of existing cultural beliefs in a divine nature with intelligence to create all lifeforms and all worldly systems, as well as nature’s power to progressively transform them. The philosophers of early sciences did not truly divorce the underlying beliefs of nature polytheism or animism, but only their deistic names as they sought to rationally explain religious ideas that they inherited from the world. Cultural animism carried on through Greek philosophy and is today manifest in the scientific claims of the creative powers of nature. And these beliefs were taught for millenniums in Western schools among clerics, philosophers, and scholars before abject materialism entered the modern intellectual fray in attempts to justify their yet-unwarranted conclusions as corporeal science. 
.
“When I began the search for anticipations of the evolutionary theory…I was led back to the Greek natural philosophers and I was astonished to find how many of the pronounced and basic features of the Darwinian theory were anticipated even as far back as the seventh century B.C.” – Anthropologist Henry Fairchild Osborn, former Director of American Museum of Natural History, From Greeks to Darwin, p. 11
.
Some readers may be wondering what this has to do with Babylon riding the Beast of various animal parts, so I ask that you just stay with me as we get to the roots of ancient Babylonian beliefs and how it correlates with Roman Catholicism embracing evolutionism and abiogenesis.
.
Darwinism was not something that was “anticipated” by ancient philosophers, but it is indeed the result of those who sought to make the ancient beliefs in nature tenable in science, particularly as a counterclaim against arguments for creationism. To claim that it was merely “anticipated” is a denial of the historical fact that early naturalists embraced Greek philosophy and their cosmological beliefs. What evolutionists have inherited most from ancient cultures are colorful imaginations that they had in explaining the mysterious world around them. Animal transformism and beliefs in spontaneous generations of life from some primordial sea, or chemical slime, were favorite pastime storylines from millennia ago. Greek philosophers and ancients before them imagined peculiar animal collages (like the Beast in Revelation), transforming monsters, and even human-animal hybrids. There were no allusions of an ancient cosmology that happened to fit the so-called “facts” of more modern material determinism, but direct study of the ancient myths for centuries in the West. It is now legitimized under the façade of factual/corporeal science, and this after their many debunked claims of spontaneous generations of life and animal transformism.
.
Evolutionists today are robbed of some of the accompanying storylines that were told around primitive campfires, but they share in the ancient fun in artistic drawings of imagined transitional (intermediate) creatures, posited in distant epochs. Greeks and Romans of old enjoyed not only the philosophers’ stories of life’s origin, with all its hopeful monsters, but also their singers and poets (e.g., Ovid, c. 43 BC to 17 AD) who made divine-nature fun (see Metamorphoses). It can reasoned that the two favorite theories of naturalism today have more in common with ancient myths and polytheistic nature animism than any empirical discovery. 
.   
Exploring the roots of early naturalism, that lead to today’ scientific beliefs in nature’s power to create brilliant systems, is a long journey, from Sumerian culture to influences in Babylonian, Egyptian, Assyrian, Persian, Grecian, Roman, and other empires that are joined in the Revelation Beast. Indeed beliefs in material determinism is a long road from the past. Yet we should start at the beginning of city-state civilizations in the land of Shinar, which is known by various names depending upon the periods of time at question (e.g., Sumer, Chaldea, Assyria, Babylon). Most writers call the region of the earliest city civilizations, located along the southern coast of Iraq, “southern Mesopotamia,” which means “land between two rivers” (i.e., Tigris and Euphrates). I prefer using the all-inclusive name Babylon, particularly for the convenience of explaining biblical prophecy and the Book of Revelation.
.
Nature personification is the inherited theme that modern science has yet to divorce for its lack of facts, for it is as pervasive in today’s world of scientific storytelling as it was when storytellers huddled around village campfires convincing their listeners in the ancient world. It is a “strong delusion” that will not be defeated until the Messiah comes. Messianic Jews and Christians, however, can benefit by comprehending the roots of material determinism, since it helps us develop our eschatological understanding of Babylon and the coming Apocalypse.  If it were possible, even the elect would be deceived, Christ inform us of the Antichrist, but it is not possible for those who love Truth; learning of it will only strengthen our conviction that science has gone terribly astray with denying a Divine origin of life.
.   
For two millenniums prophecy enthusiasts have reasoned over plausible connections between the Roman Church and “Mystery Babylon” in the Book of Revelation, which meant they had to investigate the religion of humankind’s earliest city-state civilization. Some theorists connect the Babylonian goddess Ishtar (“Queen of Heaven” or “Isis” of fertility and war) to its Easter (Eostre, spring and fertility goddess in pagan Europe) counterpart in the Roman Church- the epithetical “Queen of Heaven” and “Christ-Bride” on Earth. Such theories about the Roman religion’s paganizing of the Messiah’s Passover (Brit Chadasha Pesach) oftentimes incorporate Nimrod and other links of Babylonian heroes and deities. I suppose I have read much more about them than I could hope to retain. During the Gulf War some prophecy enthusiasts envisioned a literal return of regional Babylonian power and glory by Saddam Hussein’s boast in Iraq- potential fulfillment of the prophecies- while other exegetes debunked such claims (e.g. Pate-Hays, Iraq: Babylon of the End-times?) 
.
In this article, we correlate the “Mystery Babylon” city (and religion) of Revelation with Greco-Roman philosophical naturalism and the anti-creation evolutionary worldview of today’s progressive materialists, which was officially embraced by the Roman Catholic Church in 1996. The links we find most relevant are their personifications of nature in its creative abilities. The other connections are not considered irrelevant, but from Babylon came the earliest beliefs of nature’s elemental ability to create all life from primordial monsters to men, formed from the chaotic seas. This animism (personification of nature), battled in the Book of Revelation, is an alternative claim on the world, an antichrist system. The beliefs spawned in ancient Babylon metastasized others over the centuries, infecting many cultures and nations.
..
For many revelators, this connection will probably not be sensational enough for apocalyptic times, lacking pizzazz and pitted on a piteous puzzle, but from a panoramic perspective, in zeal for God’s works, what is more damnable than denying God His creation and personifying the created in a peculiar mix of nature and religion? I feel no great need to defend my eschatology here, or to venture too far into excessive details about these ancient cultures. I only feel the need to expose the roots of natural philosophy and begin a study of its spread from southwest Asia to medieval Europe, where it gradually became the all-inclusive Theory of Evolution that much of the world embraces today. As I asserted in an earlier article, the Beast that emerged from the Great Sea, in Revelation, is an creature of various animal parts, and the Dragon evolved from a serpent. Thus, the Bible already shows us the power of the Antichrist system, from ancient animism to today’s materialism beliefs.
.
It is not enough for us to know that the first cities of humankind (e.g., Ur, Sin, Nippur, Lagash, Susa, Eridu, Uruk, Akkad, Kish, and Girsu) arose soon after Adam and Eve’s works in the ancient garden c. 4000 BC, according to the years of scriptural genealogies. God led Abram out of Ur of the Chaldeans because the polytheistic nature animism, in which the Babylonians believed, had so corrupted all truths of His creative works that a separate group of people was needed for restoring His truths. To fully comprehend the biblical relevance of the cradle of civilization, we need but perceive the big picture of God’s works by correlating ancient cultural beliefs to those of modern times, and how the two were prophesied to lead to two opposing worldviews- both with claims on the creation during the coming Apocalypse. Revelation points us back to Babylon for a reason and beckons that the connections be understood for the end of the age. 
.   
The first thing to understand about the “mystery” religion of ancient Babylon is that their gods and goddesses were manifest as nature. When it rained or stormed, Adad was revealing himself and his power; when crops ruined or women were having fewer children, Dumuzi (Tammuz) or Nisaba had removed himself or herself from their seeds; when a harsh wind blew down a structure, it was the Enlil showing his displeasure over some human disservice or perhaps warring with other living elemental forces; when the moon was shining full and bright, Sin was watching carefully or searching for something on the Earth; and when humankind had invented something new and artistic, Ea had guided their hands and entered their minds. Thus much like the latter Grecian gods and titans, the gods of Babylon were present in nature and influencing the works of humanity. If justice was well-served, Shamash had cast his verdict. Their gods were more than in nature; they were the living forces of nature.
.
It is important for Judeo-Christians to perceive that the proper names of the Sumerian deities were actually secondary, sacred terms for natural elements. Nature moved so nature was alive. Anu was not merely a deity of the heavens or sky but was the heavens itself. Ea was wisdom. Their deities were not transcendent controllers of nature but nature divided in personified elements that created and acted as they pleased. Everything was alive in their minds, and all the living elements could intelligently create and act as they pleased. From the earliest civilization of Babylon came the first nature worshippers. For them there was nothing beyond nature or a transcending God above what they worshiped, but a pantheon of natural powers in which humans submitted to. When Abram came out of Babylon, he was separated from those who worshipped the creation rather than the Creator, and that was a foreshadowing sign for our escape from Babylon during the Apocalypse.
.
From the earliest civilizations we find the ideas that influenced Greek natural philosophy and are reflected in much of the science of the West. The Babylonian religion was centered upon human civilization and their attempts at explaining worldly phenomena via personified nature, which was incorporated into the polytheistic beliefs of the Grecian Empire and Greek thought. The Revelation “mystery” of the Babylonian religion is not so mysterious for modern times, not since Austen Henry Layard discovered their creation myths in 1849 A.D. in the ruins of the Library of Ashurbanipal. The ancient Babylonians believed that nature was an animate composition of thinking elements and forces. That determinism of nature became the pinnacle idea of Greek speculation on the origin(s) of life and civilization. And it has in turn shaped naturalism sciences that grew out of their long-cherish works of Greco-Roman schools of philosophy.
.
The Enuma Elis inscriptions and similar cuneiform accounts explain that ancient Babylonian beliefs were carried out particularly during their new years’ reenactment rituals, where chaotic salt/bitter sea waters (the goddess Tiamat) begot both the heavens and Earth through the primeval fresh/sweet waters (god Apsu). Thus, the festival of Babylon, meaning “the home of the gods,” was an imitation of their polytheistic naturalism.
.
Before there were any other elemental deities or animals created from the stirring of the fresh and sweet waters, and “no heavens, no earth, no height, no depth, no name,” first eternally present were the primordial waters of chaos (Tiamat) and sweet orderable waters (Apsu). Apsu, or the fresh primordial waters, represented a universal impregnator of elemental life, and the bitter primordial waters of Tiamat represented raging death. Life and death waters agreed to mix over myriads of time in the void, the universal womb (Mummu), which was where elemental life would also return. Thus, everything came from the void and returns to the void, much as materialists believe today. The first primordial beings were named (which was an important thing for existence in Babylonian thinking) male and female (Lahmu and Lahamu), but before they could grow tall, the sky and the horizon (male Anshar and female Kishar) fell down upon them.
.
Myriads of times passed until the sky and horizon gave birth to the empty heavens (Anu), and Anu- the cleared heavens- was born in his father horizon’s “own nature.” The empty heavens (Anu) was the “heir and supplanted” who sired wisdom (Ea). Ea was also intellect and he became famous among them and the most powerful of all his relatives. Without animism, these things seem to suggest that there was an extinction of some kind of mankind by a meteoric bombardment (the sky and horizon falling on male and female), and for a long time afterwards the sky was cleared by wisdom to prepare for new life.
.
But with intellect and wisdom soon grew great discord among the elemental brethren until they were engaged in warfare in the primordial salt waters, which was the belly of Tiamat. The heavens shook like a wild dance, with violent clashing and tumult, which even primordial sweet waters (Apsu) could not calm or silence. Pride stirred the bad behavior of the elemental deities as they boasted their powers to affect one another. Through this course of events the sweet waters of Apsu were slain by wisdom (Ea). But the bitter primordial waters (Tiamat) would avenge her primeval husband’s death. She created 11 monsters and serpents from the chaotic waters of her belly to make war with the elemental gods and revenge the primeval waters. When she had finished the creation of monsters she prepared for a war against her rebellious children.
.
For the writers of the Babylonian epic, this was a great evil sent from Tiamat- the bitter primordial waters (ocean), so much so that wisdom’s contemplation of her plans turned him to rage, and thus he (Ea) made a journey to the horizon (Anshar) to reveal the news: “She loathes us, father; our mother Tiamat has raised against us the Legion; she rages in tumult and everyone has joined her, all those gods whom you had begotten. Together they bustle in ranks to march with Tiamat. Day and night in fury they plot, with a growing roar, readied for battle…” Thus, wisdom complained to horizon that the bitter waters of primordial chaos was roaring and preparing to overtake the elements she had created, and she had birthed new generations of sea beasts in the process. Then, at the council of the elemental gods, Marduk was made the commander to lead the natural war against the raging seas. The transcendent hero, with bow-strung and rod, netted the body of the bitter waters with the help of the four winds holding her in place, which prevented her escape.
.
Notice that God has a bit of humor in showing that He is the only God over nature, as perceived in Revelation when He sends angels to hold the four winds of Heaven (see Rev. 7:1) to seal those who hold true to His Word, even as he prepares to punish the international Beast from the Great Sea and Babylon, which leads to Him reclaiming the world (cf. Rev. 11:15-19). It is no coincidence that the Book of Revelation explicitly reveals God’s power over all aspects of nature, as was done to the gods of ancient Egypt when the Pharaoh hardened his heart.
.
What we find in the Babylonian creation are the ideas they had of a living, chaotic nature that they often found themselves falling victim to. Particularly, the bitter ocean waters (Tiamat) and fresh waters (Apsu) mixing retells the story of the fresh rivers of southern Mesopotamia that oftentimes overran their banks as they mixed with the salt waters of the rising Persian Gulf. The fresh waters were nice and orderly until the storms or chaos caused by the ocean. Babylonians perceived the rivers flowing into the gulf as a calming influence on the chaotic seas, which sometimes failed. But the greatest offence came from the roaring of the ocean that filled the Persian Gulf after the melting waters of the Younger Dryas at the beginning of the Holocene. Thus, Tiamat fought with her children “the gods” for their use of wisdom to slay the fresh waters of the region, which means them using intelligence or wisdom to build irrigation controls in the region, whereas the rivers had for eons prior did as they pleased. Some researchers believe that the Persian Gulf was once filled with early communities before the oceanic encroachment. But even for those who do not believe that, it is known that the Persian Gulf waters once extended further inland, perhaps to the city of Ur. The encroaching ocean at the time was considered an assault by Tiamat on the gods of the land who used their wisdom to tame the fresh rivers- Apsu.
.
In Scripture, God’s Sprit hovered over the seas like the wind and He created life in the seas. And during the flood of Noah, God calmed the winds after the storm for him and his family. In the New Testament, the Messiah arose to calm the winds of the storm, lest the Sea of Galilee overcome them- or so thought the fishermen. In the Babylonian creation storm, Marduk is commissioned to tame chaotic bitter waters, calling upon the four winds. What we find in the ancient Babylonian religion is civilization’s claim over creation by the ancients submitting personified nature (their gods), and this came with the history of the region as they understood it. It was an elemental substitution of the Creator, and the worshipers of nature submitted it (or them) to their own will. This kind of thinking sounds ridiculous, but it is indeed the same mentality that we find in materialism today- with nature personified via its ability to create, then mankind enhancing it through their intelligence and wisdom. 
.
The Babylonian epic of creation goes on to glorify Tiamat’s death in gory detail, whereby her blood drained and filled the seas and was blown in the northern winds to the very ends of the world. Together, the gods celebrated and laughed boisterously over her body, for she no longer made war and raged with her company. Then Marduk sat pondering what he could do with the body of bitter waters. After much contemplation, he decided to divide her body and set the borders on the seas, from the arc of the sky to coastal sandbars, setting a watch on the waters so that they could never escape their bounds. So traumatic must have been the ancient account of the trespassing Persian Gulf waters that the Babylonians actually had guards or watchmen posted at their shorelines to warn the cities, if she ever again escaped her natural boundaries and flowed inland. The bloodied waters of the Persian Gulf were probably not the body of the primordial waters being slain (or ceasing after the storm) but of people tossed about and eaten by the ocean “monsters” that she had created (in their minds) to war with the gods.
.
Marduk went on with wisdom to organize the chaos of the heavens- stars, planets, etc., just as Father Time did for the Greeks. After all the chaos of the heavens was set in order, Marduk, with the assistance of wisdom (Ea), created humankind from blood mixed in the primordial waters of slain Tiamat. For Marduk, humans were a work of art in contrast with the serpents and monsters created by the sea. Thus is expressed the humanistic spirit ancient Babylonians had for taming nature by intellect and wisdom- the new gods of Babylon in humankind. Notice below that the nature deities had fallen in their view and needed human help to set nature right and give the elemental gods rest (or Sabbath):
.
“Blood to blood I join, blood to bone I form an original thing, its name is MAN, aboriginal man is mine in making. All his occupations are faithful service; the gods who fell have rest. I will subtly alter their operations, divided companies equally blest.” – Marduk- The Babylonian Creation; emp. mine
.   
God created a paradise along the Tigris, Euphrates, Pison, and Tigris rivers in the very same region and rested on the seventh day, with Adam and Eve expelled for eating the fruit of knowledge. But here we find that the gods were elemental forces that their wisdom gave rest to. Mankind, created from the blood of a slain goddess in the bitter gulf waters, would alter nature, irrigating rivers and taking control of the earth.
.   
Notice also in wisdom’s answer that the Babylonian religion had a means of reconciliation by trespass offering of sacrifice. Only one was needed take on the sins of the people for peace to ensue. Rather than Christ, it was using wisdom to tame nature that saved humankind. And be sure to notice that they considered their life in southern Mesopotamia a “new creation,” which correlates with the devastation of the Younger Dryas, which appears to have been their apocalyptic story tied into the creation story:
.
Ea answered with carefully chosen words, completing the plan for the gods’ comfort. He said to Marduk, “Let one of the kindred be taken; only one need die for the new creation. Bring the gods together in the Great Assembly; there let the guilty die, so the rest may live.”  – The Babylonian Creation
.   
Like other origin accounts of ancient cultures, the primordial waters existed before gods, wisdom, animals, monsters, and humans. Everything came out of chaos in the womb of the void over long epochs of time. But humankind, created progressively last, was needed to subtly help the elemental gods in regulating nature, to give them rest. Chaotic nature deities created all life, but humans eventually learned wisdom to help it. The humans became the new gods over nature, and only though them could their ancient view of utopia be achieved. Nature first created its hopeful monsters but human were eventually created over myriads of time from the blood mixed with the primordial waters. Then the gods were put to rest as civilization blossomed.  
.   
ROMA SITTING ON HER SEVEN HILLS
ROMA SITTING ON HER SEVEN HILLS

The world’s first city-state civilization was a theocratic monarchy, where a haughty priest-king sat on an exalted throne as a benevolent dictator. Engraved on the stele of King Hammurabi’s Code c. 2000 BC, which was a legal code for the empire’s peoples, we can see the priest-king of ancient Babylon sitting on top of the worlds’ mountains- indicated by inscriptions beneath his feet- much like the depiction of Babylon sitting on her seven hills in Revelation. The legal stele offers other interesting things about the king and high priest of Babylon: his divine decrees. King Hammurabi claimed to 1) have increased in great abundance; 2) to be a shepherd of the people; 3) to be renamed by Enlil, the Babylonian god of earth and wind; 4) to be the offspring of ancient royalty; 5) to be a powerful king; 6) to be an illuminating light over Babylonian lands; 7) to be the favorite or elect of Ishtar, the “Queen of Heaven” and goddess of fertility, love, and war; 8) to be sent by Marduk, the Babylonian creator of humanity, to rule the people and help the region; and 9) to have established law, justice, and welfare in the language of the land.

Is there any empire, nation, or kingdom in the world which will exist during “end-times” of the age that can mirror these claims other than the Roman papacy, whose popes have historically used similar rhetoric in the theocratic monarchy of Roman Catholicism? Have they not embraced evolution and naturalists’ personification of nature? Have they not kept with the language of the land- Latin? Have they not claimed to sit as the “Vicar of Christ” and in the ancient “Seat of Peter,” ascended from Roman emperors? Have they not claimed to be God’s “Shepherd” on Earth, and commissioned by Him? Are their names not changed when they are elected to supposedly reign for the Lord? Do we not have Easter because they honored the pagan goddess and changed the Passover (Pesach) from what we had originally received? Do they not claim to be the favored son of the “Queen of Heaven” (i.e., Isis, Ashtarte), which is a title that they have made synonymous with both Mariam (bitter) and the Roman Church? Have they not claimed that their words enlighten the people? Have they not tried to help God in subtly altering His creation account and His Sabbath days of rest with evolution and amillennialism? Have they not claimed wisdom, which is philosophy, in choosing their words? In the Catholic religion, God is still at rest as the popes rule for Him in the millennium, ruling in their divine wisdom and submitting the world.  
.
Which is more difficult: finding non-Catholic parallels that are few and only imagined to fit, or finding something in the ancient Babylonian religion that does not parallel known papal history? In the centuries of feudal system Christendom, the popes sat as kings over kings and lords over lords. The ancient religion of Babylon reinterpreted biblically-recorded events for their epic heroes; there is doubt here that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a complete perversion of Noah’s Ark, set in a mythical and ridiculous framework. And the Roman Catholic Church has done the same thing with Divine Scripture- butchering the passages as they desire to the glorify their religion.
.
Perhaps we should take a brief look at King Hammurabi’s legal code and see how well it also correlates with the long history of feudal system Christendom and papal justice. But I will resist, simply because readers will be led too far away from the roots of naturalism. Anyone who wants can take the personal time and read the clauses to find that Babylonian justice was based upon one’s financial standing and social rank, where the murder of slaves required a small fine (cf. 198, 218, 219). But just to leave an idea of the justice decreed by the Babylonian priest-king, consider that according to it: If a man strikes a woman and causes a miscarriage, ten shekels of silver is the fine (cf. 209). But if the woman loses her life when he strikes her, the striking man’s daughter would have to be slain rather than the man pay with his own life.
.
In the Babylonian sense of justice we find that the poor classes were treated much as they were in feudal system Europe, where 5/6 of serfs in some countries were slaves sold with the land- people who had to wear iron collars or iron clamps to identify them as properties of their lords’ estates. The idea of the ancient Babylonian religion is that some people, men in particular, were elected by the elemental gods to be unquestionable nobles, and the priest-king sat in substitution of the gods to give his great enlightenment of justice, but the poor of the land were basically slave trash that was tolerated to carry-out the menial duties of a great society. And this is strikingly similar to times past in papal Europe.
.
The last thing I want to correlate before moving on is the annual reenactment of the Babylonian creation story, ritualistically performed every New Year. I do not know the month for ancient Sumer, but Nisan is the name of the Babylonian month that was adopted by Hebrews during their captivity c. 586-538 BC. Before, it was the Hebrew month of Aviv. God commanded Israelites to make this month (secular 7th) the beginning of the sacred New Year. Aviv (Nisan) was reenacted to commemorate the Israelites escape from bondage in dynastic Egypt (see Ex. Ch. 12). 
.
If these two New Year celebrations actually occurred on the same day, a peculiar thing is revealed: While Hebrews were selecting their lambs and reliving their escape from bondage, Babylonians were acting out their animism myth of creation. In Revelation God calls His people to escape Babylon’s plagues during the Apocalypse (see Rev. 18:4-10) and, interestingly, the plagues in Revelation mirror those sent on Egypt during the exodus of Israel. Egypt had hardened their hearts to the truths of God- that He was in control of nature- and for a long time believed that their nature deities were in control, superior to the Hebrew God. If a parallel can be justly made between the Babylonian New Year and the sacred New Year of Israel, it is that one people trusted God’s Word and prepared for an apocalyptic escape, even as the other trusted their own wisdom and religiously-altered myths of creation, of a personified nature.
.
This is a good place to move on to briefly discuss the animism of ancient Egyptian culture, which also influenced Grecian naturalism and their personification of nature- powers to spontaneously generate and transform life. Like Babylon, Egypt’s creation accounts also placed the creation before deities. Pharaohs were supposedly the sons of Ra (the head deity) and his representatives on Earth who watched over the sacred land and people. Ra was the product of chaos and primordial matter, and then he- the sun-god- brought life from the seas:
.
“I came into being from primordial matter…I made all the forms under which I appeared by means of (or out of) the god-soul which I raised up out of Nu (i.e., the primeval abyss of water).” – Henry Morris, The Long War Against God, p. 243
.   
In ancient Egypt’s polytheistic cosmology, the Nile River emptying into the Great Sea, rather than the mixing of bitter and sweet waters in southern Mesopotamia, was the original source of created life. A silt mound or deposited mountain formed from the river, from which the sun-deity Ra first arose. Earth was a disk in the primordial waters. The sun deity was the seed giver, and the pharaohs were his deific sons. Like the Babylonian kings, the pharaohs were appointed to rule over the land by divine commission, as representatives on Earth. The “two lands” of Upper and Lower Egypt was their blessed domain, much like the “land between two rivers” in the Babylonian religion.
.
It is difficult to determine which creation story came first; they share a common theme of relating creation to their history and regional view of nature. Both had animal collages and both personified nature. Both have creation occurring where sacred rivers join bitter ocean waters.
.
The sun-deity Ra was not only present in the blessed sunlight, but was present in the more intimate acts of nature: “You have placed seed in women and have made sperm into man, who feeds the son of the womb of his mother, who quiets him with something to stop his crying; you are the nurse in the womb, giving breath to nourish all that has been begotten.” Ra was sometimes replaced with the sun-deity Amon, the falcon out of the primordial that was also considered the creator of Heaven and Earth. Perhaps they were the same. Perhaps they were both present in the wombs instead of the Spirit of God, and Marduk could have been there wetting the towels for the first delivery of man.
.   
Lower down the pantheon line, in no particular order, were nature deities that were animals, collages of animals, and animal-human hybrids (excluding Hapi of the living Nile). Some of these entities were: a lion-headed dwarf god (Bes), a donkey god (Set), a cow goddess (Hathor), a bull god (Hapi), falcon god (Horus), and the familiar human-headed lion (Pharaoh Sphinx). Isis, the Egyptian version of the Babylonian fertility goddess Ishtar, escaped the messes of nature and was pictured as a whole woman, as were some other human deities seen in the hieroglyphics. Generally, however, we find a common theme of animal gods and deities with half human forms. With a pantheon of around 2000 or so deities, the ancient Egyptian belief in transformational beasts and collages of animals and humans cannot be denied.
.
In the centuries long before Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and their many successors, the ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, and other cultures near and around the Mediterranean claimed myriads (i.e., many 10,000s) of ancient ages for various organic developments of monsters, animals, human-animal hybrids, and human life- usually last. Even the greatest of gods first spontaneously generated from the primordial waters, slime, or soil. Grecian philosophers gained and uniquely enhanced these naturalistic faiths, but long ages or infinite time with primordial matter producing life is the common scheme. The pillars of most forms of naturalism- deistic or atheistic- are time, chance, and some form of primordial chaos. Unlike old-Earth creationism, Egyptians and Babylonians did not claim myriads of myriads of time to glorify an infinite God, the “Ancient of Days,” rather they claimed ancient epochs of time to justify elemental gods of intelligence being formed out of primordial chaos and disorder. There kings or pharaohs were therefore descendants of gods that nature created, which made them equal to their gods, but further down the line.  
.
Greek language and alphabet were borrowed from the Phoenicians, and there polytheistic pantheon of gods and heroes clearly have parallels to earlier beliefs from the peoples of the Middle East, who traded with them and shared the Mediterranean coasts. Also, trade routes connected Greeks with peoples of the Far East (who had their own beliefs of a universal nature entity). Grecian astronomy originated from Babylonian astrology and Egyptian astronomy.
.
Thus, material determinism, where nature could create life and worldly systems, and progressively change them, was as ancient as civilization itself. How the philosophers sought to rationally explain those ideas of creation  was the unique contribution of early Greek thought. With human rationalization, cultural deities were stripped from natural philosophy, where man was made the pinnacle of intelligence and, as the Sophist Protagoras asserted, is the “measure of all things.” The belief that the first philosophers of science had bravely shut out the rest of the world and mysticism to develop new disciplines by untainted reasoning is not exactly what occurred; the philosophers were the best and brightest of the story-tellers, and they applied their reasoning to earlier beliefs while stripping them of their nature deities. Nature still kept its power to create and transform life, but the middle-man nature gods were extracted from the midst of the primordial slime.
. 
First to note of Grecian philosophy is Thales, the so-called “father of philosophy” c. 640-546 BC. Along with other thinkers of the city of Miletus in Asia Minor, a tradition emerged of debating what prime element the world was composed of. For Thales the idea of emerging life was presented with an essential element of primordial waters, from which all other elements and forms of life arose: plants, followed by animals, and finally mankind. All organisms came from the life-giving seas, which sounds similar to the early chemical oceans that many methodological naturalists imagine for an abiogenesis event. His student Anaximander c. 611-547 BC altered his ideas with a “primordial mass” of earthly mud, and men developed or evolved from earlier fish forms, which may have influenced evolutionists’ ideas of walking whales. After him there arose Heraclitus of Ephesus c. 540-475 BC who presented the idea of a fire-element type of life that had to struggle against death and decay. Many naturalists after him related emerging life to a struggle for survival. The idea arose via Heraclitus that nature was guided by a force of change, or logos; nature was left personified as a creative entity, only without a deistic name. Empedocles c. 490-435 BC, however, was not content with one primordial element, and thus he invoked a scheme of all four Grecian, primary elements for his origins of life scenario, accompanying it with the idea that only the most successful of emerging forms could reproduce. In this modification we see the ideal of the fittest forms of life being those that can reproduce most- an early type of natural selection. For Empedocles, man developed from plants, and- unlike teleological ideas of natural emergences before him- all life emerged by mere abundance of chances through infinite time. Here we perceive the power of chance and long ages enter into the materialist equation common of today’s atheist philosophers.
.
Democritus c. 460-370 BC contributed to the naturalism faith by incorporating human speech development into the mix of ideas, where primitive mankind’s confused sounds and animalistic imitations (grunts and moans) eventually became intelligible words. He may as well have said that we were apes, so closely did his view of early mankind precede the naturalism of today. Everything was about nature creating simple lifeforms from the primordial chaos and progressively evolving those early monsters into what became intelligent humans. 
.
Not the least or last of many theorizers, Epicurus c. 341-270 BC supported the atomic theory of Leucippus and his student Democritus- the smallest indivisible particles. But Epicurus took atoms down an atheist pathway, where atoms formed the universe by mere chance movements alone; if the gods exist then they must do so apart from nature. Religion he taught to be a foolish invention. The Epicureans, with the Stoic logos that all men “are the products of nature,” concluded that only virtuous men at one with nature could think clearly about it, forsaking emotions and references to gods. Many naturalists have parroted his nonsense to this day in discounting the great scientific works and ideas of theists. In fact, when we read some of these ancient works, it is almost like listening to an atheist professor stuck two millenniums in the past. For them, any talk of God or religion automatically disqualifies reasoning, seeing that their heroes of philosophy believe so.  
.
All of these philosophers- and many that will remain unnamed- had at least one thing in common concerning their colorful beliefs: They were almost entirely based upon subjective speculations without empirical evidences or inferences to best conclusions from honest research. There ideas were mere extensions of mystical stories, centered like the rest upon personifying nature. For materialists of academia in our age to present abiogenesis and macroevolutionary beliefs as some brave new discovery that empirical science brings to enlightened us to is a complete farce. Those who teach and believe such things are no more enlightened than the myth-makers who began them millenniums ago.
.
Nonetheless, Grecian naturalism became so thoroughly engrained in Western thought that from whence their worldview was derived no longer matters. The brilliant methodological development of science via Aristotle c. 384-322 BC- a patriarch of zoology, biology, physics, metaphysics, linguistics, aesthetics, politics, and rhetoric- gained the ancient philosophers a permanent seat at the table of beliefs, and his fire of enlightenment never waned less than smoldering embers among the social elites, learned clergy, and other early scholars in the Western world. Aristotle was a true researcher and indeed a great thinker, perhaps even the earliest scientist, but Aristotle was different in that he never fooled himself into personifying nature without a guiding Creator, or at least not on Earth. For him the heavens above were divine, and Earth was its dump.
.
But no matter how great the teacher Aristotle was in reasoning, his mind was not exempt from the prevailing, mystical beliefs of his age- that organisms somehow spontaneously generated in the hands of nature and progressively evolved over unfathomable long ages.
.
Today he would be a theistic evolutionist- the belief he did most to spurn. Aristotle’s teleological naturalism (called “Modified Dynamism”) exemplified the idea of scientific methodology- an idea of explaining the world through material reductionism, with causes and effects. But with many successions of philosophy teachers in the Hellenized world, among certain academies, teleological beliefs soon declined. Aristotle had inherited some of the building blocks of his ideas from his famous teacher Plato, who had peculiar teleological ideas of perfect forms in an alternate dimension, in which this world served as a shadowy, imperfect mirror. Plato’s ideas were influenced by his virtuous teacher Socrates, who believed in God but battled Grecian nature polytheism. New schools of scientific thought arose to utilize Aristotle’s methodology that ultimately replaced the creative role of the Divine (or deities) for solo natural explanations of the world- such as the works of Strato of Lampsacus (viz. Peripatetic school in Athens c. 287-269 BC). But nature itself remained personified by its creative abilities, despite the fact that many of the academies denied deities as they left all the power of brilliant engineering with it.  
.
Philosophers of science since Aristotle learned that comprehension of the world and nature’s predictability was gained when phenomena were methodologically investigated, for simply mystically attributing its occurrences to powers of a divine creator or mythical deities of worldly elements provided them no empirical answers. Thus, matter became “all that matters,” and claims on reality that cannot be reasonably explained by some means of material reductionism are in turn rendered “metaphysical” and now “pseudoscience.” But breaking things down and learning causes and effects have never justified nature’s claim on the origins of lifeforms and the engineering marvels of their interdependent systems, which is something devout naturalists have never allowed themselves to admit. It matters not how easily they can explain things that are broken down or how they are build up via following genetic information, for they have never established the original formation of any creature.
.
Philosophers in ancient Greece began something new in the world beginning in the 6th century BC, which was to argue in an educational setting whether God (or Greek gods) should be included at all in explaining nature. Nature itself seemed to possess divine-like abilities, from their perspectives. Philosophers saw illusions of its creative powers in seeds becoming plants, emerging from the ground, and simple sperm making babies spring forth from their mothers’ wombs. Nature, at least in many of their minds, could do all things methodologically, from the tiniest pieces of matter, even if the mechanisms were secret. The magic powers of replication and reproduction in nature were confused with its potential for animal origination and creations. For the former they were justified in excluding as an interactive role of God. They perceived that orderly systems work in nature (although millennia later the complexity and brilliance of reproduction continue to boggle the brightest minds of researchers).
.
The latter or original creation, however, left philosophers no evidence that might justify them crediting nature and denying God. No life has ever emerged on Earth without God. Scientists today have not one single example life emerging, which is why naturalism must keep the origin of life in the unobservable past as a one-time event. What happened with the ancient philosophers, which carries-over to modern science, is that their comprehension of biological reproduction and other organic processes has been exaggerated to justify their faith in spontaneous generations of life, which of course nature has never endorsed. They can call it “abiogenesis” or “chemical evolution” or whatever they want to feel better believing it, but the origins of life are an entirely different game of God, wherein nature unguided dare not pull up a chair to the table. 
.
These schools of these emboldened philosophers began an intellectual war between spiritual explanations (idealism) and solo natural beliefs (materialism), whereas no conflict or attempted divorce of these ideas had thitherto existed in an educational environment. If the world was eternal, some would argued, and they certainly had no reason to believe it was not, then there was no need for an intelligent Creator or any popular, nature deities, for continuous movements of atoms with chance possibilities were all that were required for lifeforms that could emerge again and again over infinite epochs of time. Mechanical systems and laws could form out of natural chaos and chance.
.
Moreover, there is an illusion of a severance with a divorce decree in their philosophical writings, from nature mysticism to science, but not an actual, true separation- more like official breaks. They agreed to disagree with irreconcilable differences, but something was left over. Everyone knows that a change in name does not necessarily mean that properties and children will not be shared after a divorce. Likewise, the cultures that had influenced Grecian philosophy had mystical deities of nature, parts of nature, including Grecian polytheism, which plagued the philosophers.
.
But it was not enough for philosophers to argue that nature deities did not exist while keeping the very claims of nature that other mystics had long held to. Nature does not need a deistic name stamped on its mountainous forehead to be personified, which comes by what it is imagined to be able to create and/or progressively evolve. The philosophers were only fooling themselves, for they had never seen nature produce a single, new creature from the soil, the seas, the sun, or any element. They never saw an example of animal transformism- not in the slightest. They spawned the baby of their beliefs with pagan animism- nature personification- and that baby has grown into the abject materialism of today.  
.
If one religious person says, “My gods are Chaos, Time, Chance, and Primordial Earth and Sea, and they worked together to birth the animals and build the world,” and another says, “I do not believe in your childish gods, for the forces of nature worked together to birth the animals and build the world,” are not they not making identical claims? One consists of intelligent elements (animism) and the other of consistently lucky, dumb elements (materialism), but both are positing the same scheme of nature’s ability to create brilliant systems that act objectively.
.
In fact, animism is much more logical, for intelligence graces the equation. This is why I write that the glorified philosophers of ancient Greece never truly divorced the mystical beliefs common of their age and surrounding cultures. Names can be dropped, along with the dialogues of the gods, but if the same beliefs of the corporeal world are shared then the one is hardly severed from the other. The ancient religious animism could be the stereotypical, emotional and irrational wife (primordial chaos in Babylon) and philosophical naturalism might be the stereotypical reasoning husband (Grecian philosophers). And their lost lovechild is still looming loudly over all logic and reasoning today, casting a dark shadow over sound science and demanding everyone’s attention for animism lunacy.
.
Reducing organisms and materials to particles or atoms did not begin to explain the origins of anything on Earth, especially life and its now understood extremely complex specifications. This is important to understand. It matters not what ability we have to reduce things or take them apart, or even understand the causes and effects of systems already in existence; those things mean nothing if we have neither observation nor empirical evidences of how they were originally created. Breaking something down and learning how it works is a far cry from explaining how it came about. The philosophers were not the first to reason over parts and particles, but they possessed the knack and language to make their rationalizations sound much more reasonable and intelligible. They were eloquent salesmen in a world of mystical con artists. 
.
Grecian investigation and reasoning over nature was not something new or even ideologically opposed to Judeo-Christian Scripture, seeing that many Old Testament (Tanakh) passages are filled with proverbs about seeking knowledge, wisdom, and understanding of the works of God in creation. In Malachi 3:10, the Lord called the doubting priesthood of Judaism to “test Me in this,” which concerned His interventions in nature to cause abundant harvests when His people were faithful. In the New Testament the Lord our Messiah said, “So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you” (cf. Luke 11:9). There was “nothing hidden that would not be revealed” at the appointed times. Despite many materialists’ claims today, concerning “blind faith” and lack of Judeo-Christian reasoning, where rationalism is only credited to ancient Greek schools of philosophy, the Bible is securely fastened to the best inferences of sound logic, history, reasoning, testing, and order; the difference is that the Bible reveals a single God over the universe whereas philosophy personified nature to explain away inferences of intelligence and purposive designs. 
. 
To further differentiate from naturalism, the scriptural view of “seeking” natural truths pertains to God guiding faithful individuals to understand the invaluable “whys” of nature’s manifold mysteries- the reasons in which His transcendent Spirit inspires those who earnestly seek higher insight. In Scripture there is a call for investigators to explore an exciting world purposely crafted with unfolding objectives that harmoniously correlate to His historical framework, wherewith purposeful designs encourage respect for the Creator’s wisdom and ultimate objectives for humankind. In Judeo-Christian creative idealism the “whys” are more important than the deducible “hows,” which many philosophers of nature sought to explain. The “whys” of creation demand a reasonable mind and purposes, whereas the “hows” need only credit causation to random possibilities of an infinite nature. In Hebrew thinking, finished products reveal reasoning by an intelligent God, whereas materialists of yesterday and today seek only ways to reduce purposeless materials. In short, in Hebrew thinking God provides answers that must be searched out with help of the Spirit, whereas materialists simply reduce matter, mistaking material reduction revelation for creations of life.
.
Thus says the LORD [YHVH], the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: “Ask Me of things to come concerning My sons [children]; and consider the work of My hands, you command Me. I have made the earth, and created man on it. I- My hands- stretched out the heavens, and all their host [heavenly bodies] I have commanded [put under law]. I have raised him up in righteousness, and I will direct all his ways; he shall build My city [Jerusalem] and let My captives go free [from Babylon], not for price nor reward,” says the LORD of hosts. (Isa. 45:11-13) NKJV; intrpl. mine 
.
As an example of human learning via nature, the Bible describes the gathering of foods by ants as a picture of work ethics, and slugs as a picture of laziness. Ants are industrious, whereas slugs make mockery of “survival of the fittest” nonsense if we picture the fitness of a species as anything other than the baby-making tautology that it obviously is. In the biblical worldview we learn the natures of organisms to relate them to aspects of our own spiritual growth and understanding. One can envision a line of ants carrying food particles several times their own weight and mass to their sculptured underground bunkers and earthly mounds without having to be whipped into conformity to do their work. Not only do they travel to great distances (in the ant world), but often they do so alone. And rather than consuming all their discovered foods immediately on location, the species described in Scripture provides us another lesson that can be learned: preparations or savings. “Go to the ant, you sluggard! Consider her ways and be wise,” wrote King Solomon, “which, having no captain, overseer or ruler, provides her supplies in the summer, and gathers her food in the harvest. How long will you slumber, o sluggard? When will you rise from your sleep?” (See Proverbs 6:6-9 NKJV.)
.
An ant probably cannot fully appreciate a great work of human art like the Mona Lisa or the coding of a computer program, no matter how closely he investigates the brush strokes of a painting or how thoroughly he inspects as he moseys upon a monitor; neither can we fully perceive nor appreciate the wisdom and higher objectives behind all Deistic designs. The attributes and wisdom of God remain mysterious on levels higher than us, requiring insight from the Spirit. Nature indicates that we are naturally subject to intellectual limitations, and only by being a higher intelligence could we hope to fully perceive the highest objectives of Divine intelligence. To deny our limitations is illogical, unscientific, and contrary to nature. And to conclude that we have the highest intelligence in the universe is but a mere, invalidated assumption, for most of the universe, and what is beyond the observable universe, remains as much a mystery to us as commands on a monitor are to ants. So while we can learn things from ants, we must have the mind of God to understand the deeper mysteries of creation.
.
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,” says the LORD. “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isa. 55:8-9) NKJV
.
Thus, for us to negatively critique or deny the existence of higher Intelligence without fully understanding the universe and His universal plans is essentially an act of natural ignorance based upon our species’ arrogance with our limited knowledge and comprehension. Therefore, naturalists contradict themselves in stating absolutes in denial of a Designer, for the naturalist must conclude that we are but another species subject to our natural limitations of ability and understanding, whereas a world of greater understanding yet remains beyond the reach of our discoveries.
.
However, nature does reveal that we possess great intelligence despite the limitations of our mortal reasoning; therefore, we are able to maximize the intelligence granted us to reason over tangible and worldly works which we are capable of observing and understanding. Moreover, what can be known of God by carnal minds can be found in nature and in our history- even without substantiating our claims of higher Divine revelations- for us to collectively reach reasonable conclusions and tenable explanations without involving ourselves in endless arguments over things which cannot be understood of eternity and His fullness.
. 
Higher Intelligence can be proven to exist, and inferences of higher Intelligence and power can be perceived all around us, but disproving the existence of an Entity of higher intelligence is merely an impossible attempt of presumption acting upon limited intelligence and lots of arrogance. Attempting to deny God is more of a personal reflection on the tempter rather than the Tempted.
.
Such arguments over God and infinity have not been restricted to religious theologians and philosophers of origins, in their attempts at reasoning beyond human limitations, but are sometimes expressed in the arrogance of practicing scientists, particularly within the fields of theoretical physics, molecular biology, and paleoanthropology when researchers postulate new data as the ultimate answers of life. We will not find the greatest truth of origins in particle-free voids, fields of energy, E. coli mutations, questionable old bones, or in the hypothetical existence of a multiverse– popular in quantum physics. The Designer has left us a viable record which can be commonly understood, and only it has the information needed to unify all truths and reveal the mysteries that exist beyond the reach of sciences.
.
In contrast, the emerging schools of natural philosophy- ones that forbade teleological ideas- considered not the purposes of good and evil in nature or its instructive virtues (i.e., differences between predators and passive creatures), or each creature’s unique form as purposed in creation and whole by design. They focused their considerations of nature solely upon the means behind all things that exist. Thus, along with their new insights into nature, something valuable was lost in their way of thinking- that an intelligent God had methodologically created the natural world in a historical framework to communicate higher purposes. Prophecies and spiritual insights were, probably for the first time in history, denied credibility in materialist schools, which is particularly clear in the works of Cato the Elder c. 234-149 BC. The academies that took the secular materialism path learned some of the “hows” behind nature, even the spherical shape and size of the world, whereas the “whys” which provide deeper insight for investigators were thought irrational and abandoned.
.
In essence, to this day the inheritors of philosophical materialism deny half of the truths expressed by the natural world for a meaningless existence of matter. They can tell someone how a rainbow is formed, but they have no clue what a rainbow means. They can attest that some dogs factually return to their vomit, but understanding the implications of the fact is lost on them. They study neuron cells and memory capacities in brains, but they are clueless at interpreting prophetic dreams and visions, or distinguishing those messages from the garbage of memories. In fact, they remain ignorant to an entire language of natural symbols created by God to instruct, and much of the world has joined them in slumber of spiritual truths that are confessed in nature.
.
As for the “hows” of nature, the new schools extended far too much faith in chance emergences of life. It was smart for them to conclude that Greek gods and ancient heroes were not in particular elements like lightning, wind, fire, etc., but in dismissing those gods they chose to attribute a mind to nature that mere natural laws cannot justify. They purposely forbade themselves of the truth that a higher Intelligence had objectively created many things in ways that mere chance collisions cannot rationally explain.
.
In leaning only upon material causation- for ancient philosophers did not then know the limitations of nature’s ability- they supplanted the Creator with self-creation and the oneness of a divine-like nature. Just as pagans had molded and crafted their own idols and images that they could credit with creation and phenomenal acts of the natural world, the new materialists carved-out their own philosophies of nature to explain all things. While they thought to remove a Creator from nature, they in essence personified nature as a brilliant creator.
.
Scholars and philosophers of science who study ancient history cannot convincingly deny that Abiogenesis and most of the Theory of Evolution is based upon literary works from the Stone Age to Iron Age. If this is not widely known, it may be that acknowledging the truths of evolution’s origins was at an earlier time an academic taboo in elite ivy league universities. Adherents of materialism in Darwin’s generations envisaged the advancement of human understanding towards the methodological truths of biological origins and developments, and wished for creationists to believe that our beliefs are founded upon ancient “myths”- not theirs. Many of the famous philosophers and their works are often explicated for various reasons in literature and media, but seldom are they cited today to denounce materialism via its philosophical origins- as roots of the evolutionary worldview. If pressed, professors might claim that Greeks were extraordinary men of wisdom on the edge of understanding the facts of evolution, not the poorly-educated source of the failed theory.
.
Today, it would be a mistake to conclude that some conspiracy has silenced most educators from plainly disclosing the origins of materialism via animism and speculative philosophy, simply because naturalistic beliefs have for generations indoctrinated Western minds, to the point that they are considered facts without need of investigation of their origins. Thus students today are presented two means of origins: spontaneously-generated life from abiotic matter and a worldview from spontaneously-generated empirical facts; the latter presuppositional fallacy supports the former one. And astonishingly, many scientists are actually surprised to learn that their cherished beliefs and worldview were not founded on empirical evidence and modern discovery.
.
When some do perceive evolution’s roots, they do not feel an intellectual need to question what they have long believed to be the facts of life, but rather feel compelled to conclude how great the minds of the pagans mystics and philosophers’ must have been for them to reach the same conclusions on life without the help of empirical research or modern science. The last thing they would want to do is offer more “ammunition to creationists” by making a big deal out of it. So instead of thinking that they should perhaps reevaluate their beliefs, which they learned through educational bias that has been shaped over centuries, they beam over how bright the philosophers must have been to think of spontaneous generations of life and animal transformism two thousand or more years ago.
. 
The point is that there was a purposeful commitment to what early evolutionists perceived from ancient Greek writings. Everything had to spontaneously generate from primordial mud or water and transform over time, for to believe otherwise was irrational. It did not matter how it occurred, only that it did occur. For Darwin a genetic mechanism to support the belief could later be asserted- one that everyone could scientifically believe. On an ID science website, Discovery, Granville Sewell, digging up an 1888 treasure: Evolution, by Joseph LeConte (D. Appleton and Company), captures this truth. In the article LeConte explains how the geological record in no way supports evolution theory, but surprisingly he goes on to explain why he supported it without doubt. Plato’s “forms” of imperfect lifeforms and his student Aristotle’s progressive perfection of primordial life or animal transformism were taken as facts:
.
We are confident that evolution is absolutely certain- not evolution as a special theory– Lamarckian, Darwinian, Spencerian…but evolution as a law of derivation of forms from previous forms. In this sense it is not only certain, it is axiomatic [needs no evidence]…The origins of new phenomena are often obscure, even inexplicable, but we never think to doubt the validity of reason, and the rational constitution of Nature. – LeConte (1888); emp.  & intrpl. mine
.   
Here we perceive that evolution was early on considered a natural “law” with little need of investigation, simply because some beloved Grecian philosophers considered it the only rational means of explaining the existence of life. It mattered not how obscure the genetic means were or how contradictory the geological record was; it was already a fact in many naturalists’ minds. Whether there is no evidence or contradictory evidence, evolution must be true as a belief system.
.
We perceive that the books Darwin read contained the early ideas of evolution theory (e.g., Edinburgh Philosophical Journal and the natural philosophy magazine Rambler). Charles Darwin’s father and his mentors believed the works of philosophy before him. Naturalists were thoroughly indoctrinated into Grecian natural philosophy for centuries before Origins of Species. They knew Anaximander had beaten them to the punch on believing mankind ascended from the lower animals. Darwin was in a race with naturalists in assembling those ancient philosophical ideas under the guise of empirical science. In reality, he only supplemented ancient myths of naturalism.
.
But for those of us who have no attachment to natural philosophy or sensitivity to their worldview, we disclose that the roots of abiogenesis and macroevolution grew directly from the seeds of unfounded ancient philosophy and nature mysticism, and were further refined into a structure of ideas that could mirror the accepted paradigm of Judeo-Christian history (see previous articles on ATLAS Theory). Most early scientists, and scientists of our age, were educated in that ancient faith, with beliefs that are directly at odds with the creationist worldview, as Michael Behe (a non-creationist Roman Catholic) summed-up very nicely in his first book:
.
“It was only about seventy years ago [almost 90 today] that most scientists thought the universe was infinite in age and size. That view had been held by some Greek philosophers in antiquity, as well as by diverse religious groups, and by those who thought there was nothing beyond nature. In contrast Judaism and then Christianity thought that the universe was created in time and was not eternal. Having few scientists among them, the early Jews did not try to adduce evidence for the finiteness of the universe, and in the Middle Ages Thomas Aquinas, the eminent theologian, said that it could be known only through faith that the universe had a beginning. But time marches on. Earlier this century Einstein discovered that his general theory of relativity predicted an unstable universe- one that would either expand or contract, but would not remain stationary. Einstein was repulsed by such a universe and, in what he later admitted was the greatest mistake of his career, inserted a “correction factor” into his equations solely to make them predict a stationary, eternal universe.” – Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, p. 244 (1996); intrpl. & emp. mine
.   
I may discuss Einstein a bit more in upcoming articles, but for now it should be understood that Einstein forsook his early Judeo-Christian education at the age of twelve for reasons such as this. The Bible claimed a specific creation event in time, and philosophical naturalists mocked creationists in the popular science publications that young Einstein read, which led him to believe that the Bible could not be trusted. Clearly his adult beliefs, oftentimes arrogantly expressed against Judeo-Christianity, stemmed from his admiration of ancient philosophers of nature. The amusing thing is that Einstein missed the historical connections between the philosophers and the dark history of the Roman Catholic Church that he was known to openly critique. He also missed the connection between Grecian philosophy and mystical animism of ancient religions.
.
“There are only a few enlightened people with a lucid mind and style and with good taste within a century. What has been preserved of their work belongs among the most precious possessions of mankind. We owe it to a few writers of antiquity (Plato, Aristotle, etc.) that the people in the Middle Ages could slowly extricate themselves from the superstitions and ignorance that had darkened life for more than half a millennium. Nothing is more needed to overcome the modernist’s snobbishness.” – Albert Einstein, 1954
.   
In other words, we needed ancient philosophy desperately, whereas all other beliefs were an entanglement of ignorance that once darkened our perceptions, especially within the centuries when many of the ancient works were set aside or only available in Arabic. Yet Einstein was willing to darken the truth on the entire universe’s beginning because he so adored those ancient beliefs of his luminary heroes. He was willing to mathematically squander a precious truth and keep the world in the dark for the sake of his philosophical beliefs. Judaism and Christianity were foolishness, and he absolutely knew that, so it was better to find a way around his empirical discoveries than yield biblical adherents another victory. Einstein believed in God and honored Him in an agnostic sense, but in his mind the brilliance of God was expressed only in an infinite nature, not textually; thus he thought highly of the natural philosophy of Aristotle but despised the biblical claims of Moses. Here we perceive just how much like an embraced religion philosophical naturalism really is, where actual facts take a backseat to worldview. Their beliefs are as old as civilization, but for us they are presented as empirical facts.  
.   
Like other protected naturalists’ beliefs that allow no contradictions and are hidden behind science, Edwin Hubble’s evidence that dismissed an eternal universe was not well-received by the scientific community. Once again that blasted Bible and those ignorant creationists were somehow right! Naturalists would not easily embrace the clear creation implications of the “Big Bang Theory.” Many of them sought to explain-away Einstein’s equation and Hubble’s discoveries with alternative theories (e.g., Hoyle’s steady-state theory), at least until astronomers in the 1960s discovered the universe’s radiation background. Some of them clearly exclaimed that they would have liked to find any way around it.
.
For naturalists the evidence meant little when it came to their deeply held, ancient beliefs, and some of them vehemently denied the Big Bang evidence of a beginning even being true science. By the 1930s and the following decades philosophical naturalism was so confused with reality and empirical science that the German chemist Walther Nernst vented against the Big Bang theory, claiming that science, by its very definition, necessitates an infinite universe (see von Weizsacker 1961, p. 151). Borrowing from Behe’s references once more, we gain a sense of many scientists’ distaste even for amazing science discoveries when those discoveries challenge their long-held, cherished worldview:
.
“Philosophically, the notion of an abrupt beginning to the present order of Nature is repugnant to me, as I think it must be to most; and even those who would welcome a proof of the intervention of a Creator will probably consider that a single winding-up at some remote epoch is not really the kind of relation between God and his world that brings satisfaction to the mind”- A.S. Eddington quoted from S. Jaki, Cosmos and Creator (1980)
.   
The Big Bang conclusion clarified creationists’ long-held belief in an instantaneous creation of the universe, which God initially stretched, and still stretches according to Isaiah, but naturalists had inherited the idea of an infinite universe, that by chance formed everything out of timeless chaos and primordial particles. It was abrupt and made no sense to them.
.   
If scientists should have learned by now to put away old naturalists’ notions, why is the Theory of Evolution, with the crutch of so-called “chemical evolution,” presented as an all-purpose answer for the greatest mysteries of life? The only possibly explanation it is that evolution is an alternative worldview for those who do not wish to believe that there is an active, transcendent Creator who has created living organisms in our world for purposes and by His intelligence. It is much easier to subtly personify nature than to consider the demands of a God. Naturalism is also an ancient faith in the powers of nature, so strong for adherents that they cannot let it go no matter how many protective barriers are torn down. They picked a fight against God, and sadly they will play the role of the ancient pharaoh until they are left in shambles.
. 
Earth turned-out not to be the center of the universe. The universe turned-out not to be eternal. Spontaneous generations of life turned-out not to be occurring in nature. The geological record turned-out not to offer the intermediates materialists once hoped for, only more anomalies. And though naturalists never seem to learn to turn away from myths or not to question our God YHVH, animal transformism will also be another embarrassment, someday universally understood for the myth that it is. In future generations children will look back in amazement and say, ‘Surely the scientists of that age were the blindest and most stubborn people that were ever born into the world. How did they mistake variations in species with a systematic development of parts and systems?’
.
In the 9th century BC a zealous prophet to the ten-tribe nation of Israel learned that God having control over nature and being in nature are two completely different things. God’s interventions to control nature are for purposes when He intervenes, but higher revelations of His “whys” can only be fully understood by the voice of the Spirit and, by extension, the sages, prophets, and others who receive and share His messages. Higher truths of nature could be learned by the instructing Spirit, but nature alone lacked the ability to communicate the meanings behind God’s works. Further, displays of natural power are not the primary mechanism that God utilizes to instruct His people. Hence, that prophet was allowed to call upon the Divine’s power over nature as an important lesson, but he left no literature to communicate the greater will and knowledge of God, as did the spiritual prophets and scribes that arose thereafter.
.
Likewise, God had once told Moses to “Speak to the rock,” because the Israelites murmured bitterly for lack of water in the barren wilderness, but Moses chose to display God’s power over nature rather than communicate His will (i.e., what it meant to “speak to” the symbolic Rock for the saving waters of life). People had to learn to reason over God’s peculiar works rather than merely submit to Him because He has power. There was much to be learned about God’s purposive creations in the natural world, and communicating and reasoning over Divine messages was disclosed as the greater means of His revelations.
.
That message was echoed later from the Book of Zechariah as the Lord spoke of bringing down the high mountain of Babylon that obstructs His biblical truths and will for His people:
.
So he answered and said to me: “This is the word of the LORD [YHVH] to Zerubbabel [descended from Babylon]: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’ says the LORD of hosts. Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain! And he shall bring forth the capstone [Messiah] with shouts of “Grace, grace to it!’” Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying: “The hands [works] of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this temple; his hands shall also finish it. Then you will know that the LORD of hosts has sent Me [the Messiah] to you. For who has despised the day of small things? For these seven rejoice to see the plumb line [i.e., a plummet stone for measuring the Temple] in the hand of Zerubbabel. They are the eyes of the LORD which scan to and fro throughout the whole earth.” (Mal. 4:6-10) NKJV; intrpl. & emp. mine
.   
We no longer live in an age in ancient Israel when those who killed the prophets and forsook the true Creator for their own ideas of nature and their self-made gods were gathered together for the sword, that the heart of a divided nation might be turned back to the truths of Lord YHVH. In fact, that kind of restoration did not fully succeed over twenty-eight centuries ago. A brief victory in Israel’s history could not change the hearts of a people in rebellion or a despotic royal family who led them in national Baal worship. When the prophet who called down fire was in bitterness of his soul and wanted to perish for the failure of his zealous displays of God’s power- to make a lasting difference- the Lord taught him a lesson in the Spiritual element of meaningful and true change. It came not by wind rending a mountain, or by an earthquake, or even by a great fire from the heavens, for the Lord is not in the nature He has control over.
.
Truly lasting changes of hearts must come with spiritual insight and grace, and the complete victory of Truth comes not by might or power but only by the “still, small voice” of the Spirit. People have to understand His works in their hearts, and the Spirit speaks to the heart. Displays of natural power are but a means God uses to get the attention of clueless people who do not know His Word or recognize His Spirit. 
.
Thus, the mountains to be brought down low are high places that have gained weight among the rebellious- exalted ideas lifted to Heaven to boast against the Creator. Likewise, the swords of our mouths are words sharpened on the truths of the Lord, by which we battle to explain His works. This is not to say that God no longer intervenes in nature at certain times, or that He will not again display apocalyptic acts of power to a carnal and rebellious world lost on lies, but only that among His called people knowledge and understanding leave longer lasting effects. Metaphysical truths are manifest in physical parallels, but the point is to get people to contemplate the higher meanings of things in creation. Without the mind of God and the small voice of His Spirit confessing truths to the heart, meaningful changes will not come, and nature will not be understood for its spiritual lessons.
.
The Lord YHVH asked the prophet what he was doing there in the cave, for the people would not be gathered in one at Horeb as in the days of Moses, when they committed themselves to the Covenant of the Law, but the Spirit would gracefully call them individually at their appointed times, and more understanding would be given with the scrolls of the Book. Thus, people cannot receive anything of the transcendent truths unless God calls them and grants them insight through His Spirit. All the natural evidences in the world would prove futile for convincing hearts that are unwilling to hear their manifold confessions. The prophet could not reenact the glorious gathering of the past because God had greater purposes in mind that displays of natural power merely foreshadowed. And the gathering that the prophet had in mind and desired, the Lord had preappointed for the end of the age, when His Spirit would confess all biblical mysteries with reason and measurements (see Dan. 12:4-10).
.
Some might still ask, ‘If the prophet to Israel could not change the hearts of a pagan-inspired royalty, and most Israelites of the errant nation remained indifferent, what was the purpose of bringing fire down from the heavens and slaying the priestly liars? Since Israel was destined to be scattered during the harsh Assyrian captivity, which came more than a century later c. 722 BC, and after other prophets of Judah arose to warn them, what was accomplished by those natural displays of God’s power?’
.
In the story of the Tishbite were several lessons to be learned about God, nature, and God’s purposes from the Hebrew perspective: 1) God has control over nature and can intervene at His choosing for particular purposes; 2) God is not confined to the nature He created (e.g., winds rending mountains, earthquakes, blazing fires from the heavens); 3) true changes of hearts and awakenings to truths come by revelations from the voice of the Spirit, which is often like a whisper difficult for zealots of natural displays of power to discern. Dreaming of the past and self-pity would not bring about the restoration of all things. If “Mount Improbable” or any mountainous doctrine exalted over God is to be removed, it is not by might or power, but by grace of the Spirit, with revelations that announce the coming of the Capstone- the Messiah. The Spirit is like the wind that rends the mountains exalted against us. The Spirit is like fire that burns-up false doctrines. The Spirit shakes the Earth with truths. Those who are called had to learn the meanings behind the things created and how God communicates His peculiar truths. God is our true Mountain of Refuge, and by Him we have victory over all whom oppose Him and the coming of the Rock our Messiah (cf. Dan. 2:34-35; 8:25). Only by trust in Him will we ultimately defeat those who reject Truth.
.
And the Lord had other reasons for revealing power through the Tishbite, seeing that His remaining people of Judah would someday be influenced by the myths of Greek gods, which could carry them away in idolatry- much as children are caught-up in their imaginations when playing with superhero action figures. If the Hebrew God YHVH had already brought fire down from the heavens to consume pagan enemies, and thereafter the great God of Heaven arrived in a flaming chariot of a whirlwind (tornado), how could the Hebrews then become so impressed by great stories of Baal or later Greeks gods that they might altogether fall away? Clearly the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel had the power to destroy all false deities and false prophets who spread their myths. And foreknowing that Judah would later be Hellenized, wherein Jews would be tempted by things more alluring than a false deity of rain, they would need strengthening against them- their close contact with natural philosophies and amazing stories of triumphant titans of nature and heroes. 
.
Beyond that, God offers foreshadowings of things to come, when hearts are to be turned back to Truth, lest the Lord strike the earth with utter destruction. In other words, at a future time when many people would no longer believe in the Creator and opinions on creation would be splintered, knowledge of God’s works would be increased. At that time servants could arise who could, with better understanding and retracing the steps of Moses and Joshua, bring things to mind that declare who the Creator of the world really is.
.
True revelations are from the fire of God’s Spirit send down from Heaven, and the water of the Word rains down from a cloud of witnesses. By these things the altars of God’s people- their hearts- could be restored. Hence, the humble Right Hand of God will be seen in a cloud on the seventh time, and that is the mystery that all of nature will soon declare. What was perceived as meek in view of the vast heavens will grow into a storm of raining clouds for cleansing and refreshment. Once again there will be a restoration, but one of “all things,” and the fountains of Heaven will pour down God’s truths and cleanse a people who have not yet been cleansed in their heart by the Messiah. And, according to Scripture, the Tishbite, along with Prophet Moses, will lead them into all truths of the Right Hand of God. 
.
However, a pure language of nature, expressed through elementary biblical symbolism, must first be restored. But how can people with a naturalistic view of the world learn great mysteries of the Bible and its instructive parables, or any form of spiritual communication, if they do not consider the purposive designs found in nature? Greek philosophers struggled with deceptions of religious mysticism, but the materialist worldview that they left as an alternative in the West is handicapped by not investigating transcendent truths that can indeed be learned. They wrestled with deep questions about the world, but in turn for denying God and deities they fell asleep to the language of nature and created their own myths of godless naturalism.    
.
Today people still wrestle with myths of natural philosophy and material idolatry, much as Israelites did with self-molded gods in ancient times. God’s people must be taught that we have an awesome God who is in complete control of nature- a God of knowable purposes. Greek gods were known by their elemental powers, and thus nature was concluded to have semi-divine and phenomenal powers even after those action figures of their mythology were put away in the development of early scientific disciplines. Their gods were abandoned by many of their schools, but the supposed unlimited power of nature was not. In contrast, the Hebrew God is above the raw elements of nature and he intelligently reveals His purposes to those who will hear Him.
.
In other words, because Greek teleology was so tied into nature, nature retained powers to create all things, at least in their minds, even after their gods were rightly thought foolish. In early Hebrew thought nature only acts miraculously when God or His commissioned ministers act to confirm His purposes. In Hebrew thinking (at least before the influx of mysticism) there were no magical elements in the natural world, though the universe is upheld by God’s will. Natural systems were purposely designed to mechanically perform after God’s creations and apart from his purposeful interventions- not being a creator. Mankind was the last of God’s purposive creations, and no new form of life would- nor evidentially ever has- come into the world since mankind. But what the naturalists do, like the ancient philosophers who shaped materialism, is confuse the happenings in life with the origination of all things God created in nature. Still, a semi-divine power is credited to a nature thought able to create life and its brilliant systems.
.
And this is where philosophical naturalism and biblical creationism most oppose one another: Creationists rightly perceive that nature is limited in what it can actually accomplish while naturalists confuse the creation of organisms and their anatomical features with the continuity of what has been created long ago. Naturalists still, without the scientific warrant of evidence, attribute creative qualities to nature, ignoring that no organism, or even their needed proteins, has ever arisen by chemical chance. Pasteur’s unbroken Law of Biogenesis and relative empirical facts are unquestionably on the side of creationism, as opposed to naturalism. These facts make the biblical worldview much more scientific from a historical perspective than today’s materialist rival of myths.
.
Although there were probably always more Grecian philosophers who investigated nature and formed new ideas with teleological constructs, from Plato to Neo-Platonism, long before and after, the basic idea that everything can be explained without Divine interventions, that nature itself was a divine unit (non-dualistic physics), grew widespread in certain academies (e.g., the Stoics). Philosophical schools further declared that the material world is all that exists (e.g., the Monists or Atomists), and such schools strengthened a growing foundation of anti-religion in the philosophy of naturalism, which means a creation separated from any purposeful acts of deities or the Creator (e.g., the Epicureans).
.
In the simplest of today’s terms, we can think of the overlapping academies of ancient philosophy as 1) creationist science, 2) agnostic science, and 3) materialist science, where ideas about God (or gods) and nature were oftentimes blurred. Some Epicureans, for example, were not atheists; they merely placed deities apart from nature, in an agnostic sense. Plato, on the other hand, saw God’s unfolding work in forming everything. Most Atomists, however, are concluded to have been devout atheists. Was God in nature or outside of a created nature, or was nature in no need of God or gods, as a sufficient causer of all things?
.
Today, any student can quickly read from volumes of ancient works (or translations) and know that little of macroevolutionary theory is original of Darwin’s day. What was not borrowed from creation scientists from medieval times until the mid-19th century was derived of their intellectual heroes. Democritus, among others, shared his belief in spontaneous generations of life from the magical mud of the earth, and then his own version of survival of the fittest among animals, where primitive man progressively strived against the lower creatures. The Epicurean school of philosophy proposed that human language originated from animal grunts and noises, which were the expressions of their primeval feelings. Strato replaced Plato’s teleological constructs of eternal ideal forms with monistic forces of a creative nature. Aristotle believed that nature in itself is divine and does everything with purpose as it progressively strives for perfect forms and preservation of our species. Theophrastus, a zoologist of Eresus, studied variations in animal colors and asserted that animals adaptively change to survive in their environments. Heredity, too, was an enigmatic pondering pursued with naturalists’ theories, contemplated by inquiring philosophers such as Aristotle in On the Descent of Animals. The Roman philosopher Pliny the Elder replaced God with chance and time. Panaetus of Rhodes attached superior intellects to Grecians as a result of heredity, where those who were fortunate enough to live in the world’s ideal climates evolved greater minds to pass on to their progeny- no doubt to him that meant the predominately Caucasian regions of the Grecian and Roman world. Truly it is disingenuous for anyone to claim that the foolish theories of abiogenesis and macroevolution are not old worldviews hidden under empirical science- nothing more.
.
Concerning the sun, a reforming Stoic to Rome, physicist Posidonius of Apamea c. 135-51 BC concluded that it was the source of all warmth, but also a life-granting force- a giver of souls in On Heroes and Demons  (similar to the “open system” of thermal energy argued for an abiogenesis event of life). Fiery souls took to their light journey from the sun and pit-stopped at an inhabitable location beneath the moon, as fiery/air demons inhabiting their earthly forms as ancient mythical heroes. For Posidonius the world and its souls were divinely-guided, with attention to minute details, in sense of gradual ascension of innumerable physical structures from its materials, from plants to simpler animals, higher animals, and finally to mankind. In his world man was the spiritual/intellectual bridge between the upper imperishable heavens- that fed by their forces the sub-lunar world- and perishable things down below, with man apparently being an animal created as the ideal image. Thus, life came from the sun. In his beliefs we find the usual philosophical mix of easily understood natural facts (like the sun providing warmth) and unjustifiable animism- nature deification with myths.
.
These things, such as life coming from solar currents, may sound strange to some of us, but naturalist scientists in our own age still offer up the strangest beliefs when God is not allowed to account for the brilliant structures of life. Consider Thomas’s Woodward’s notes of astrophysicists Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe’s Evolution from Space, in which they calculated the improbability of a single enzyme of protein arising from Darwinian means to be 1020 and all the enzymes utilized by all organisms to 10 to the 40,000th power. They had properly concluded that intelligence was needed for creation of even the simplest lifeforms, and that spontaneous generation and The Origins of Species turned out to be wrong, but apparently God was too much for consideration. The Theory of Evolution had to be rescued from minds in space. All they needed was to look back on Grecian philosophy and turn another speculative myth of animism into scientific naturalism.
.
This “genetic fallout” was produced, they suggested, not by God but by some intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, and the genes were sent here by means of the drifting solar wind. This “panspermia” idea of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe was rhetorically contaminated, and Hoyle’s credibility as a theoretician was damaged by his weird speculation that the alien intelligence may have actually taken up a covert residence on earth in the form of the numerous insect species! – Thomas Woodward, Doubts About Darwin, p. 43; emp. mine
.
The Greek philosopher Posidonius believed that his naturalistic ideology was scientific. Religion, however, had an original source that sprouted from guilt/fear of punishment, gratitude for worldly materials like crops, and primitive man’s wonderment of the stars. According to him, religious branches then spread under various systems of elite legislators who possessed the power to harness those primitive beliefs and organize them into implements of authority for their communities, which granted them firm control in their desired city-state systems. Though speculative, Posidonius’ simplification of all religions has been passed down to our day and is often reasserted when antitheists seek to belittle the foundation of Judeo-Christianity. The same claim is spouted: that our beliefs have their origin in ignorance, fear, and guilt, but they are smart to claim that the first life arose on Earth by the brute thermal energy of the sun, or- if they learn the improbabilities of that- transfer the beginning of life elsewhere in space so as to preserve the rest of their evolutionary claims and worldview. And to top it off, science is now being utilized to regulate people to the empowerment of government elites; they are doing what Posidonius asserted of religions.
.
For naturalist it matters not that we can trace the origin of our beliefs throughout history to before the earliest city-state civilizations in southern Mesopotamia, or that their belief in spontaneous generation of life and their escape route in Panspermia is founded upon speculation and ancient ignorance of the natural world; their philosophical roots afford them any idea except their unscientific arch enemy in biblical creationism. They have clearly been indoctrinated by educational systems that were founded in the West upon Grecian philosophy.
.
None of these things prove that abiogenesis and macroevolution are merely theories from a collection of ancient, naturalist myths stripped of polytheistic teleology or animism, but it does denote that naturalism- abiogenesis and macroevolutionary- is not rooted in latter empiricism or “facts.” The entire survival of the fittest scheme of animal transformism was retold at campfires long before the Messiah came to announce the Kingdom of Heaven and clarify the prophecies. 
.   
Consider a few of the things handed down to methodological naturalism- lacking any empirical evidence- from over two millennia ago: 1) chance and a lot of time replacing a purposeful God, where atoms assembled in a reciprocating universe; 2) primordial matter for emerging life, with early life emerging by, or coming from, the sun; 3) spontaneous generations of small lifeforms; 4) morphing animals from the seas seeking their ultimate forms; 5) survival of the fittest; 6) creatures with abilities to physically adapt to their niches and ecosystems; 7) human progression from primitive nomadic hunters to communities of agriculture and animal husbandry; 8) human speech arising from imitation of animal sounds; 9) religion arising from ignorance and fear; 10) skepticism and cynicism of teleology; 11) naturalists winning debates through sophistic arguments rather than by empirical facts; 12) morphological terminology; and 13) evolved intelligences
.
Note that this is hardly an exhaustive list, but merely a few parallels. Philosophy scholars can easily list dozens of other parallels and explain them in much greater detail. So much of the so-called “modern synthesis” worldview is derived from over two millenniums ago that those who know this could not be surprised even if Darwin’s famous finches turned up in some dusty copy of an ancient Greek manuscript. (N.B. Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, by Eduard Zeller, offers a quick read for students to perceive many of these parallels.) While it is completely untrue that modern science is rooted more in ancient Greek philosophy than Judeo-Christianity idealism, it is a fact that evolution naturalism is directly rooted in those ancient beliefs. Most disciplines of science have no need or use of the Theory of Evolution, but those that do are financed to prolong the myths and are entirely indebted to the speculations of people who pondered upon nature over two millenniums ago.
.
In a future article, we will hasten our sagacious journey to show how nature mysticism and their offshoot natural philosophy survived in the West. The answer, as we shall see, was by help of new, Mystery Babylon.
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s