Re: Word order (was Powers that Be (was Year of Destiny?!))

Moorad Alexanian (
Tue, 28 Sep 1999 09:14:43 -0400

Dear Vernon,

I believe that Scripture (the Word of God) and nature (the work of God) are
on equal footing when it comes to man learning about them. Our understanding
of both, nature and the Word, changes with time. Many opponents of the Word
use this as an argument against the Bible; but the same can be said of our
changing knowledge of nature that is ascribed to our leaning more rather
than that nature cannot be trusted. With this in mind, I do not disagree
with what you say under 3) in the sense that good research is what one must
do in all cases. Of course, some of this numerology may get us nowhere. In
physics, there are numerical coincidences that are accepted as being very
fundamental but that we do not truly know what they really mean. Paul Dirac,
a very famous physicist, use some of these coincidences to develop a theory
that the gravitational constant changes with time. Of course, Dirac is so
well-respected that people do believe that there is something fundamental in
these coincidences. One must never forget that in science and Scripture
there are truths that are not presently accessible to man no matter how
clever man thinks he is.

Take care,


-----Original Message-----
From: Vernon Jenkins <>
To: Moorad Alexanian <>
Cc: <>
Date: Monday, September 27, 1999 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: Word order (was Powers that Be (was Year of Destiny?!))

>I agree with much of what you have to say. In particular,
>(1) (if I may summarise your closing remarks) The fact that one's
>'works' in this world - no matter how cleverly conceived - will be of
>little avail when we come face to face with our heavenly Judge! It seems
>to me that the Lord's words, "Verily I say unto you, except ye be
>converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the
>kingdom of heaven." (Mt.18:3), put the matter very much in perspective.
>A child innocently believes what he is told; likewise, the wise follower
>of Christ believes what he reads in God's word! With the destiny of our
>eternal souls in mind, can there be any safer course? Are we likely to
>be condemned because we took the Lord at his word?!
>(2) Concerning origins, all statements and studies based upon
>naturalism, or upon non-literal interpretations of the early chapters of
>Genesis, are speculative, and based on assumptions which are rarely, if
>ever, declared.
>(3) Clearly, we are at one in believing that Genesis 1:1 is supernatural
>in origin. Can I take it that you would also agree the numerical
>accretions(arising from the Hebrew scheme of alphabetic numeration,
>c200BC) are there by divine intent? - and therefore must have some
>significant purpose? This, of course, bears directly upon your
>contention that 'it (Genesis 1:1) is out of the reach of scientific
>inquiry'. I believe the numerical characteristics of this verse -
>together with those of the Creator's Name - suggest otherwise! After
>all, we find no scriptural guarantee that God will not provide signs and
>wonders in our day!
>Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>> The statement that God created the whole thing is certainly supernatural
>> origin and so it is out of the reach of scientific inquiry. All studies
>> origin are therefore speculative and the best they can do is to assume
>> things and logically derive something from such assumptions. But the
>> assumptions will always be out of the realm of science. We ought to be
>> humbled by observing nature and bow before it. I often imagine the
>> encounter of a scientist with God to whom the scientist wants to prove
>> worth. Imagine a scientist going to meet God with his briefcase full of
>> all the reprints of his work. As he travels the road to meet God, he
>> the briefcase and removes some reprints, which the scientist thinks are
>> very good or not his best. As he keeps traveling, he keeps removing and
>> throwing away more and more reprints. Eventually when he meets God, the
>> scientists is crawling on his knees!
>> Moorad