A line in the sand VII

Religion's week from hell

By Daniel Burke, CNN Religion Editor

(CNN)Whether you believe that religious violence is fueled by faith or is a symptom of larger factors -- political instability, poverty, cultural chaos -- one thing seems clear: Last week was hellish for religion.

Across several continents, including North America, Europe, Asia and Africa, scores of religious believers suffered and died in brutal attacks over the past seven days. Christians, Muslims and Jews alike all fell prey to assaults.

The causes of violence are complex, and reducing them to talking points only adds to the problem, scholars say. But if you want to rally troops to your side, few tools are more powerful than religion, said Michael Jerryson, co-editor of "The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Violence."

"If you can turn a battle into good versus evil, or doing God's will, you will get so much more devotion," he told CNN. "It's a calling that invokes more than the mundane; it raises the stakes."

 Experts in religious violence say it's too soon to tell whether last week witnessed more terrorist attacks than usual. It often takes several months, if not longer, to tally all of the assaults in a given period of time.

Even so, the brazenness of the attacks -- a gunman shooting up a cafe and a synagogue in a European capital, ISIS decapitating 21 Christians -- makes the past seven days stand out as particularly brutal.

Here are just some of the assaults carried out since last Monday.

Monday

One of the world's most deadly terrorist groups, Boko Haram threatened to continue its assaults, even as several African nations amassed armies to confront it.Boko Haram, the Muslim militant group based in Nigeria, attacked several towns in neighboring Cameroon, kidnapping 20 people. The Islamic extremists also detonated a car bomb in Niger, according to The Associated Press. The death toll is still unclear.

"Your soldiers are infidels, and God's soldiers are victorious," Abubakar Shekau, Boko Haram's leader, said in a video recently posted to YouTube.

Tuesday

Craig Stephen Hicks, an ardent atheist who railed online against religion, was accused of killing three young Muslims in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Police said the shootings likely resulted from a long-running dispute between Hicks and his neighbors over parking spaces.

But Muslims immediately urged the Obama administration to investigate the murders as a hate crime, and the hashtag #MuslimLivesMatter trended on Twitter.

Suzanne Barakat, the sister of one of the victims, said her family members were targeted because they were Muslims and that the slayings should be considered an act of terrorism.

"It's time people call it what it is," Barakat said.

Wednesday

ISIS, the Muslim militant group that calls itself the "Islamic State," launchedseveral attacks across Iraq, striking Kurdish forces in the North and Iraqi civilians in Baghdad.

At least 31 people were killed in Baghdad, including a top Sunni Muslim leader and 10 Shiite Muslims, according to international reports, as ISIS bombs exploded in several neighborhoods.

Thursday

Al Qaeda killed four Yemeni soldiers while seizing a critical military base in the town of Baihan, taking control of its weaponry, according to local security officials.

U.S. officials consider al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which is based in Yemen, the most dangerous branch of al Qaeda. Its sworn enemies, the Houthis, have taken over the nation's capital, throwing the country into chaos.

By Friday, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Italy closed their embassies in Yemen, following the United States and other nations.

"Yemen has turned into another failed state in the Middle East," former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told CNN, "giving al Qaeda a free hand to do what it wants."

Friday

Boko Haram continued its cross-border attacks, killing four civilians and a soldier in neighboring Chad.

The deaths came hours after 21 people were killed in two separate attacks on Akida ‎and Mbuta villages near the northeast Nigerian city of Maiduguri, according to residents and a local community leader.

The violence in northeast Nigeria, Boko Haram's home base, has caused more than 157,000 people to flee into Niger, Cameroon and Chad, according to Adrian Edwards, a spokesman for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.

Also on Friday, an attack on a Shia mosque in Peshawar, Pakistan, killed 19 worshippers and injured dozens of others, the U.N. reported.

The Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack, according to Reuters.

Saturday

A gunman opened fire at a free-speech forum in Copenhagen, Denmark, where a Swedish cartoonist who had depicted the Prophet Mohammed was scheduled to speak.

By the end of the melee, the gunman had wounded three officers and killed a 55-year-old man.

Hours after the cafe attack, police said, the gunman made his way to a Copenhagen synagogue and once again opened fire. Two officers were wounded, and a man providing security for a bat mitzvah party behind the synagogue died.

Danish authorities theorize that attacks may have been modeled on the assaults that killed 17 in Paris last month, and Jewish leaders say they are worried about a rising tide of anti-Semitism sweeping across the continent.

Sunday

In a new video released Sunday by ISIS, the militant group claims to have beheaded over a dozen members of Egypt's Christian minority on a Libyan beach.

The video shows jihadists in black standing behind each of the victims, who are dressed in orange jumpsuits with their hands cuffed behind them.

The five-minute video, released by the terror group's propaganda wing al-Hayat Media, includes a masked English-speaking jihadi who says, "The sea you have hidden Sheikh Osama bin Laden's body in, we swear to Allah, we will mix it with your blood."

All the victims are then shoved to the ground and beheaded.

CNN's Holly Yan, Susanne Gargiulo. Laura Smith-Spark and Aminu Abubakar contributed to this report.

The original technologist continues to instruct.

Romans1:20NIV"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."

Looking at Nature with an Engineer's Eye

Evolution News & Views February 23, 2015 2:13 AM 

Here are two examples of researchers looking for "design principles" in living organisms, showing that an engineering focus leads to scientific progress.

Cell Replication as System Engineering

The job of an efficiency expert is to find better ways to get more things done in less time at less cost. From "Taylorism" in the early 20th century, through "Operations Research" in the days of World War II, to "systems engineering" today, efficiency expertise has grown into an essential discipline for manufacturing and project scheduling. Recently, Rami Pugatch, a systems biologist at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, looked at the humble lab bacterium E. coli with the eyes of an efficiency expert. PhysOrg explains how he approached "cellular replication as a systems engineering problem" --

The paper describes the problem of task scheduling in cellular replication processes and ultimately produces a mathematical distribution that characterizes an optimal replication strategy for E. coli cells. The scope of Pugatch's work encompasses individual cellular processes, algorithmic descriptions of optimized replication,systems engineering concepts, and even the history of the concept of the self-replicating factory. [Emphasis added.]

The history referred to is John von Neumann's 1948 theoretical work on how to build a self-replicating factory. Pugatch finds that a replicating bacterium meets those requirements: it keeps all ingredients in well-stocked reservoirs for each task, it schedules them optimally, and duplicates the instructions as part of the job. The bacterium even succeeds when resources are scarce, a "hard-to-solve scheduling problem" according to the paper published in PNAS.

Bacterial self-replication is a complex process composed of many de novo synthesis steps catalyzed by a myriad of molecular processing units, e.g., the transcription -- translation machinery, metabolic enzymes, and the replisome. Successful completion of all production tasks requires a schedule -- a temporal assignment of each of the production tasks to its respective processing units that respects orderingand resource constraints. Most intracellular growth processes are well characterized. However, the manner in which they are coordinated under the control of a scheduling policy is not well understood. When fast replication is favored, a schedule that minimizes the completion time is desirable. However, if resources are scarce, it is typically computationally hard to find such a schedule, in the worst case. Here, we show that optimal scheduling naturally emerges in cellular self-replication. Optimal doubling time is obtained by maintaining a sufficiently large inventory of intermediate metabolites and processing unitsrequired for self-replication and additionally requiring that these processing units be "greedy," i.e., not idle if they can perform a production task. We calculate the distribution of doubling times of such optimally scheduled self-replicating factories, and find it has a universal form -- log-Frechet, not sensitive to many microscopic details. Analyzing two recent datasets of Escherichia coli growing in a stationary medium, we find excellent agreement between the observed doubling-time distribution and the predicted universal distribution, suggesting E. coli is optimally scheduling its replication.

The paper makes no mention of evolution or natural selection; neither does the PhysOrg summary. Instead, one finds the language of "PERT" (project evaluation and review technique), "critical path," and other terms familiar to system engineers.

When von Neumann proposed the self-replicating factory, it was a futuristic idea that science fiction writers latched onto, envisioning space-traveling robots that could replicate themselves with resources found on planets they landed on as they spread throughout the galaxy. But right here on earth, we have a perfect example in one of the smallest, "simplest" living organisms.

Surprisingly, our analysis of recently measured datasets of E. coli exponentially growing in a stationary medium reveals that the measured distribution of doubling times fits well to the predicted distribution of doubling times of an optimally scheduled self-replicating factory. [PNAS]

Such a [von Neumann] factory is called "non-trivial" if it includes a universal constructor as a component. The duplicative process is not considered to be complete until a copy of the instructions is provided. Instead of directing their own replication, the instructions are instead duplicated from a template by a separate dedicated machine that is not triggered until the completion of the factory replication phase. This is closely analogous to actual cellular processes. [PhysOrg]

It took an engineer's eye to see this connection. Now, our understanding of bacterial replication is enriched accordingly, with no reference to natural selection. In fact, this revelation of the process creates new problems for neo-Darwinism: how could a self-replicating von Neumann machine emerge in piecemeal fashion, without all the parts, instructions, and "universal constructor" already present?

Materials Science

Meanwhile, the strongest biological substance known has come to light. This material can withstand 5 gigapascals of tension, equivalent to a string the width of spaghetti holding 3,000 half-kilogram bags of sugar, according to the BBC News. What is it? It's the radula, or tooth, of the humble limpet, a snail-like aquatic animal with a spiral shell. And who found it? An engineer. The University of Portsmouth explains:

Professor Asa Barber from the University's School of Engineering led the study. He said: "Nature is a wonderful source of inspiration for structures that have excellent mechanical properties. All the things we observe around us, such as trees, the shells of sea creatures and the limpet teeth studied in this work, have evolved to be effective at what they do.

"Until now we thought that spider silk was the strongest biological material because of its super-strength and potential applications in everything from bullet-proof vests to computer electronics but now we have discovered that limpet teeth exhibit a strength that is potentially higher."

Aha! the Darwinist says. See? Barber said they "have evolved to be effective at what they do." Upon reading the material, though, evolutionary theory had nothing to do with the findings. It was little more than a throwaway line that the professor uttered probably out of habit. He's an engineer, after all, who knows good design when he sees it:

"This discovery means that the fibrous structures found in limpet teeth could be mimicked and used in high-performance engineering applications such as Formula 1 racing cars, the hulls of boats and aircraft structures.

"Engineers are always interested in making these structures stronger to improve their performance or lighter so they use less material."

Barber's work involved testing the tensile strength of the limpet teeth with specially designed instruments. It was difficult work. The teeth are only a millimeter long, and very thin. The limpet uses its radula to scrape algae from the rocks on which it feeds. Barber's team found that, because the way the teeth are constructed with a mineral called goethite, its properties would scale: i.e., the same principles would work on larger sizes, since the strength of the material is not dependent on the size.

Finding out about effective designs in nature and then making structures based on these designs is known as 'bioinspiration'.

Professor Barber said: "Biology is a great source of inspiration when designing new structures but with so many biological structures to consider, it can take time to discover which may be useful."

"Bioinspiration" -- there's a neologism that's a keeper. Think of the prospects for finding more designs out there! As the BBC News article says, "We should be thinking about making our own structures following the same design principles." Good idea. Design is an inspiration to explore, discover, understand, then imitate.

Fear itself VI

Fear itself V

Darwin's finches for the prosecution.

Evolution Within Limits: Nature Study Identifies Genetic Basis for Galápagos Finch Beak Variation

Casey Luskin February 17, 2015 11:51 AM

 

 

Decades ago researchers Peter and Rosemarie Grant conducted painstaking research on finches in the Galápagos Islands. They found that during a drought period the seeds eaten by the finches became tougher, and those birds with bigger beaks were better able to survive and reproduce. After the drought ended, however, the seeds returned to their normal state and beaks also returned to their pre-drought sizes. As the Grants explained:

Effects of the droughts of 1977 and 1982 were approximately offset by selection in the opposite direction -- toward smaller body size -- in 1984-85. A relative scarcity of large seeds, together with an ample supply of small ones, favored small finches. Because the food supply on this island changes in composition and size from year to year, the optimal beak form for a finch is shifting in position, and the population, subjected to natural selection, is oscillating back and forth with every shift. Whether or not there is a net directional arrow through the oscillations is unclear and could be determined by a much longer study.

(Peter R. Grant, "Natural Selection and Darwin's Finches," Scientific American, pp. 82-82 (October, 1991).)

The finches thus provide us with an example of natural selection, specifically oscillating selection, but the example entails small-scale evolutionary change. Indeed, many of the finch species can interbreed, regardless of whether they have slightly different-sized beaks. As a paper in BioScience explains, the "finch species retain the ability to interbreed and produce viable, fertile hybrids." There is little doubt that these highly similar and genetically compatible finch species are closely related, but what is the genetic basis for the differences in the size and shape of finch beaks? A new paper in the journal Nature has identified a gene, ALX1, involved in helping to cause the different beak shapes. One variant of the ALX1 gene seems to be associated with pointed beaks, while the other variant is involved with blunted beaks.

But the Nature paper's authors also conducted a phylogenetic study that further confirms extensive interbreeding between the finch "species":

Phylogenetic analysis reveals important discrepancies with the phenotype-based taxonomy. We find extensive evidence for interspecific gene flow throughout the radiation. Hybridization has given rise to species of mixed ancestry. ... The discrepancies between phylogenies based on morphology and genome sequences may be due to convergent evolution and/or interspecies gene flow. ... [O]ur analysis of demographic history using the pairwise sequentially Markovian coalescent (PSMC) model was consistent with extensive interspecies gene flow among the ground finches, as they have maintained larger effective population sizes than the other species.

In other words, they had difficulty creating a gene-based phylogenetic tree because these species are so closely related that they still interbreed, obscuring the true phylogenetic signal. This evidence for interbreeding further reveals the small degree of evolutionary change that has taken place within the finches. As BBC News reports, some of these finch "species" really aren't even different species:

The most extensive genetic study ever conducted of Darwin's finches, from the Galápagos Islands, has revealed a messy family tree with a surprising level of interbreeding between species.

[...]

Prof Peter Keightley from the University of Edinburgh, though largely convinced by the results, was less surprised that the finches had interbred so extensively.

"These islands are pretty close together. So it's not surprising that they are flying from one island to the other," he said.

Some of the traditional species might not, in fact, be genuinely distinct, he added.

It turns out that these interspecies hybrids may be responsible for mixing producing different sizes of beaks. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, there are different alleles of ALX1 in the population, and heterozygosity for the gene may lead to intermediate-sized beaks:

A lot of evolution is driven by random mutations. The process of natural selection favors mutations that provide some advantage, and organisms evolve in particular directions. But in the Galápagos, another mechanism was at play as well.

In their fieldwork, the Grants noticed that individuals of two different finch species would sometimes pair off, a process known as hybridization.

In theory, that should transfer genes from one population to another. But the evolutionary consequences of this were unknown.

The Nature study shows that the process of hybridization had indeed mixed the different variants of ALX1 and has thus played an important role in the evolution of Darwin's finches.

So can intelligent design make sense of this? What we may be looking at are variants of an allele that have been in this population of finches since long before they migrated to the Galápagos Islands. These variants can help cause pointed beaks, blunted beaks, or beaks of intermediate size and shape. Environmental conditions can cause the variants to increase or decrease their prevalence within the population of finches.

The bottom line is that we might be looking at variants of an allele that are designed to allow a population of finches to evolve different beak sizes and shapes within predefined limits. Of course work on the finches from an ID perspective could bear out this hypothesis, but one thing seems clear so far: the Galápagos finches don't show the unlimited creative capacity of the Darwinian mechanism, as popularly claimed, but instead only small-scale, very modest evolutionary change, the kind almost no one doubts.

Thought your kids were in school to acquire critical thinking skills?You dear sweet child,read on.

Survey Suggests Students Should Not be Allowed to "Make Up their own Minds" on Evolution

Casey Luskin February 9, 2011 5:43 AM | 

As we reported, the journal Science recently published a survey which underreports the number of Darwin-doubting science teachers, instead finding that 28% of teachers are "Advocates of evolutionary biology," 13% are "Advocates of creationism," and 60% are "Advocates of neither." (Strange that their percentages add up to 101%.) Discovery Institute in fact does not support mandating intelligent design, and does not support teaching creationism. Rather, we think teachers should teach the scientific controversy over neo-Darwinian evolution.

What's ironic about the survey is that someone who follows the advice of a different paper published in Science last year could never qualify as an "Advocate of evolutionary biology."

Last year Science published a paper by Jonathan Osborne titled, "Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse," which found that students learn science best when they learn "to discriminate between evidence that supports (inclusive) or does not support (exclusive) or that is simply indeterminate." According to Osborne's paper, it's vital to teach students what scientific critique looks like:

Critique is not, therefore, some peripheral feature of science, but rather it is core to its practice, and without argument and evaluation, the construction of reliable knowledge would be impossible.

(Jonathan Osborne, "Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse," Science, Vol. 328 (5977): 463-466 (April 23, 2010).)

In fact, Osborne's paper warns about presenting science as a "monolith of facts" or an "authoritative discourse":

Typically, in the rush to present the major features of the scientific landscape, most of the arguments required to achieve such knowledge are excised. Consequently, science can appear to its students as a monolith of facts, an authoritative discourse where the discursive exploration of ideas, their implications, and their importance is absent. Students then emerge with naive ideas or misconceptions about the nature of science itself....

All of this of course flies in the face of the teaching method endorsed by the survey, which recommends authoritatively telling students that "the broad consensus" is that "evolution is fact." If a teacher qualified as an "Advocate of evolution" by the criteria used in survey, they could never take the scientific approach recommended by Osborne's paper

Incredibly, this new Science survey claims that teachers who "teach the controversy" will "fail to explain the nature of scientific inquiry." The reality is precisely the opposite: teachers who teach evolution dogmatically as fact will fail to explain the nature of scientific inquiry.

The authors of the survey even go so far as to criticize a teacher who felt that "Students should make up their own minds" on evolution "based on their own beliefs and research." Their reasoning is that students would not be able to think through the issues:

But does a 15-year-old student really have enough information to reject thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers? This approach tells students that well-established concepts like common ancestry can be debated in the same way we debate personal opinions.

(Michael B. Berkman and Eric Plutzer, "Defeating Creationism in the Courtroom, But Not in the Classroom," Vol. 331:404-405 (January 28, 2011).)

Here are just a few reasons why their argument for dogmatism fails:

It's false to pretend that dissenting from the Darwinian consensus requires "rejecting" all peer-reviewed science or that dissenters simply have "opinions" but not evidence. There are peer-reviewed scientific papers which dissent from the majority viewpoint on topics like the efficacy of natural selection or the tree of life.

Evolution education deals with a fundamental question of humanity--"Where did we come from?" Yes, modern neo-Darwinian evolutionary biology is the majority viewpoint and students must learn about this viewpoint. But there are significant numbers of scientists who dissent from that viewpoint. From a purely humanistic standpoint, it seems unconscionable to withhold from students the fact that there are credible scientific views that dissent from the majority viewpoint on this fundamental question of humanity--even if those views happen to be in the minority right now.

If students can learn the evidence for a particular proposition of modern evolutionary theory, there's no in principle reason they could not learn about evidence against it. Students don't have to sift through thousands of scientific papers to learn about the debate. A well-trained teacher can synthesize the material, spend a couple weeks explaining the standard neo-Darwinian consensus view, and then cover the scientific controversy over neo-Darwinian evolution in one or two lectures. If Osborne's educational theories are valid, students will understand the topic better under this approach.

As we've seen, science education theorists find that students learn science best when they study different sides of a scientific debate. Scientific elites praise the importance of inquiry-based science education -- with all of its critical thinking, skepticism, and consideration of alternative explanations -- but unfortunately jettison such beneficial educational philosophies when it comes to teaching evolution.

Bloodsport III

The Watchtower Society's commentary on the Beast of revelation Ch.13.

What Is the Seven-Headed Wild Beast of Revelation Chapter 13?

The Bible’s answer

The wild beast with seven heads introduced at Revelation 13:1represents the worldwide political system.

• It has authority, power, and a throne, which point to its being a political entity.—Revelation 13:2.
• It rules over “every tribe and people and tongue and nation,” so it is greater than a single national government.—Revelation 13:7.
• It combines features of the four beasts described in the prophecy atDaniel 7:2-8, including the appearance of a leopard, the feet of a bear, a lion’s mouth, and ten horns. The beasts in Daniel’s prophecy are identified as specific kings, or political kingdoms, that rule in succession over empires. (Daniel 7:17, 23) Thus, the wild beast of Revelation chapter 13 represents a composite political organization.
• It ascends “out of the sea,” that is, from the turbulent masses of mankind that are the source of human governments.—Revelation 13:1; Isaiah 17:12, 13.
• The Bible says that the number, or name, of the beast—666—is “a man’s number.” (Revelation 13:17, 18) That expression indicates that the beast of Revelation chapter 13 is a human entity, not a spirit or demon entity.

Even though nations may agree on few things, they unite in their determination to maintain their authority rather than submit to the rule of God’s Kingdom. (Psalm 2:2) They will also join forces to battle God’s armies commanded by Jesus Christ at Armageddon, but this war will result in the nations being destroyed.—Revelation 16:14, 16; 19:19, 20.

“Ten horns and seven heads”

Certain numbers are used symbolically in the Bible. For example, ten and seven represent completeness. The key to understanding the specific meaning of the “ten horns and seven heads” of the beast ofRevelation chapter 13 is an “image of the wild beast” identified later in Revelation—a bright-red beast that has seven heads and ten horns. (Revelation 13:1, 14, 15; 17:3) The Bible says that the seven heads of this red beast mean “seven kings,” or governments.—Revelation 17:9, 10.

Likewise, the seven heads of the beast of Revelation 13:1 represent seven governments: the primary political powers that have dominated through history and have taken the lead in oppressing God’s people—Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, and Anglo-America. If we conclude that the ten horns represent all sovereign states, small and large, then the diadem, or crown, on each horn shows that each nation rules concurrently with the primary political power of the time.

Daniel Ch.2 the tanakh.

2:1 And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him.

2:2 Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, for to shew the king his dreams. So they came and stood before the king.

2:3 And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream.

2:4 Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriack, O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will shew the interpretation.

2:5 The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill.

2:6 But if ye shew the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore shew me the dream, and the interpretation thereof.

2:7 They answered again and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will shew the interpretation of it.

2:8 The king answered and said, I know of certainty that ye would gain the time, because ye see the thing is gone from me.

2:9 But if ye will not make known unto me the dream, there is but one decree for you: for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed: therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can shew me the interpretation thereof.

2:10 The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, There is not a man upon the earth that can shew the king's matter: therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things at any magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean.

2:11 And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can shew it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh.

2:12 For this cause the king was angry and very furious, and commanded to destroy all the wise men of Babylon.

2:13 And the decree went forth that the wise men should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain.

2:14 Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king's guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon: 2:15 He answered and said to Arioch the king's captain, Why is the decree so hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel.

2:16 Then Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would give him time, and that he would shew the king the interpretation.

2:17 Then Daniel went to his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions: 2:18 That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon.

2:19 Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven.

2:20 Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: 2:21 And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding: 2:22 He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him.

2:23 I thank thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and might, and hast made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for thou hast now made known unto us the king's matter.

2:24 Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch, whom the king had ordained to destroy the wise men of Babylon: he went and said thus unto him; Destroy not the wise men of Babylon: bring me in before the king, and I will shew unto the king the interpretation.

2:25 Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste, and said thus unto him, I have found a man of the captives of Judah, that will make known unto the king the interpretation.

2:26 The king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Art thou able to make known unto me the dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof? 2:27 Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, shew unto the king; 2:28 But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these; 2:29 As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed, what should come to pass hereafter: and he that revealeth secrets maketh known to thee what shall come to pass.

2:30 But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king, and that thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart.

2:31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.

2:32 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.

2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.

2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

2:36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.

2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.

2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.

2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.

2:41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.

2:42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

2:46 Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and worshipped Daniel, and commanded that they should offer an oblation and sweet odours unto him.

2:47 The king answered unto Daniel, and said, Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret.

2:48 Then the king made Daniel a great man, and gave him many great gifts, and made him ruler over the whole province of Babylon, and chief of the governors over all the wise men of Babylon.

2:49 Then Daniel requested of the king, and he set Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, over the affairs of the province of Babylon: but Daniel sat in the gate of the king.

---