Creation Reflects the Creation

Mossy Bolder at Burleson Bluff

Last weekend I walked with my daughter by the Brazos River and took some photographs that reflect events in the first three days of the Creation.

“And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.”

Micro-Sorting of Sand and Clay

We walked on a sand bar that is in rainy seasons the riverbed.  When the river gathers together unto one place and the bar appears, it is a mottled firmament of mud and sand.

And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called the Seas: and God saw that it was good.”

God saw that it was good because he was building a home for terrestrial creatures and not fish.  We are those terrestrial creatures and we live on the lower firmament, under the upper firmament, and in the fluid element of air.  We sometimes descend into the other fluid element, water, and the other fluid element sometimes descends onto us.

“And God said, Let the earth bring forth vegetation.”

The last word is sometimes translated as vegetation, sometimes as grass.  It may be best understood as greening of the earth, just as grass greens the hillsides in a desert land.  This was God’s second creative act because life did not evolve from the lower firmament of earth, but rather came from outside as an altogether new fifth element.

The greening in the photo is a fine moss that, under special conditions,  appears on a sandstone boulder that has fallen from a bluff on the river side.  In one sense the boulder brings forth the fine moss, which is dormant and invisible when the conditions are not met.  But in another and deeper sense, the boulder cannot green until it is ordered to green by an outside command.

7 thoughts on “Creation Reflects the Creation

  1. Very good, sir. Your post put me in mind of Matthew Fontaine Maury’s keynote address given at the laying of the cornerstone of the University of the South, now known as Kewanee University, in east Tennessee, Bishop Otey presiding. Here is a short but relevant excerpt from the speech:

    As a student of physical geography, I regard earth, sea, air, and water as parts of a machine, pieces of mechanism, not made with hands, but to which, nevertheless, certain offices have been assigned in the terrestrial economy; and when, after patient research, I am led to the discovery of one of these offices, I feel, with the astronomer of old, ‘as though I had thought one of God’s thoughts,’ and tremble. Thus, as we progress with our science, we are permitted now and then to point out here and there in the physical machinery of the earth a design of the Great Architect when He planned it all.

    • That’s a good quote. The spring semester begins tomorrow and I’m once again teaching a course on the history of geography. I’ll try to fit this in somewhere.

      • Excellent, sir. Commander Maury’s speech in question contains a number of such statements. Here is a longer excerpt I plucked from it a couple of minutes ago:

        I have been blamed by men of science, both in this country and in England, for quoting the Bible in confirmation of the doctrines of physical geography. The Bible, they say, was not written for scientific purposes, and is therefore of no authority in matters of science. I beg pardon! The Bible is authority for everything it touches. What would you think of the historian who should refuse to consult the historical records of the Bible, because the Bible was not written for the purposes of history? The Bible is true and science is true, and therefore each, if truly read, but proves the truth of the other. The agents in the physical economy of our planet are ministers of Him who made both it and the Bible. The records which He has chosen to make through the agency of these ministers of His upon the crust of the earth are as true as the records which, by the hands of His prophets and servants, He has been pleased to make in the Book of Life.

        They are both true; and when your men of science, with vain and hasty conceit, announce the discovery of disagreement between them, rely upon it, the fault is not with the witness of His records, but with the worm who essays to interpret evidence which he does not understand.

Comment

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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.