The Watchtower Society's commentary on the transmission and authenticity of the scriptures.

BIBLE:

The Holy Scriptures, the inspired Word of Jehovah, acknowledged as the greatest book of all times because of its antiquity, its total circulation, the number of languages into which it has been translated, its surpassing greatness as a literary masterpiece, and its overwhelming importance to all mankind. Independent of all other books, it imitates no other. It stands on its own merits, giving credit to its unique Author. The Bible is also distinguished as having survived more violent controversy than any other book, hated as it is by many enemies.

Name. The English word “Bible” comes through the Latin from the Greek word bi·bliʹa, meaning “little books.” This, in turn, is derived from biʹblos, a word that describes the inner part of the papyrus plant out of which a primitive form of paper was made. The Phoenician city of Gebal, famous for its papyrus trade, was called by the Greeks “Byblos.” (See Jos 13:5, ftn.) In time bi·bliʹa came to describe various writings, scrolls, books, and eventually the collection of little books that make up the Bible. Jerome called this collection Bibliotheca Divina, the Divine Library.

Jesus and writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures referred to the collection of sacred writings as “the Scriptures,” or “the holy Scriptures,” “the holy writings.” (Mt 21:42; Mr 14:49; Lu 24:32; Joh 5:39; Ac 18:24; Ro 1:2; 15:4; 2Ti 3:15, 16) The collection is the written expression of a communicating God, the Word of God, and this is acknowledged in phrases such as “expression of Jehovah’s mouth” (De 8:3), “sayings of Jehovah” (Jos 24:27), “commandments of Jehovah” (Ezr 7:11), “law of Jehovah,” “reminder of Jehovah,” “orders from Jehovah” (Ps 19:7, 8), “word of Jehovah” (Isa 38:4), ‘utterance of Jehovah’ (Mt 4:4), “Jehovah’s word” (1Th 4:15). Repeatedly these writings are spoken of as “sacred pronouncements of God.”—Ro 3:2; Ac 7:38; Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11.

Divisions. Sixty-six individual books from Genesis to Revelation make up the Bible canon. The choice of these particular books, and the rejection of many others, is evidence that the Divine Author not only inspired their writing but also carefully guarded their collection and preservation within the sacred catalog. (See APOCRYPHA; CANON.) Thirty-nine of the 66 books, making up three quarters of the Bible’s contents, are known as the Hebrew Scriptures, all having been initially written in that language with the exception of a few small sections written in Aramaic. (Ezr 4:8–6:18; 7:12-26; Jer 10:11; Da 2:4b–7:28) By combining some of these books, the Jews had a total of only 22 or 24 books, yet these embraced the same material. It also appears to have been their custom to subdivide the Scriptures into three parts—‘the law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.’ (Lu 24:44; see HEBREW SCRIPTURES.) The last quarter of the Bible is known as the Christian Greek Scriptures, so designated because the 27 books comprising this section were written in Greek. The writing, collecting, and arrangement of these books within the Bible’s canon also demonstrate Jehovah’s supervision from start to finish.—See CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES.

Subdividing the Bible into chapters and verses (KJ has 1,189 chapters and 31,102 verses) was not done by the original writers, but it was a very useful device added centuries later. The Masoretes divided the Hebrew Scriptures into verses; then in the 13th century of our Common Era chapter divisions were added. Finally, in 1553 Robert Estienne’s edition of the French Bible was published as the first complete Bible with the present chapter and verse divisions.

The 66 Bible books all together form but a single work, a complete whole. As the chapter and verse marks are only convenient aids for Bible study and are not intended to detract from the unity of the whole, so also is the sectioning of the Bible, which is done according to the predominant language in which the manuscripts have come down to us. We, therefore, have both the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, with “Christian” added to the latter to distinguish them from the Greek Septuagint, which is the Hebrew portion of the Scriptures translated into Greek.

“Old Testament” and “New Testament.” Today it is a common practice to refer to the Scriptures written in Hebrew and Aramaic as the “Old Testament.” This is based on the reading in 2 Corinthians 3:14 in the Latin Vulgate and the King James Version. However, the rendering “old testament” in this text is incorrect. The Greek word di·a·theʹkes here means “covenant,” as it does in the other 32 places where it occurs in the Greek text. Many modern translations correctly read “old covenant.” (NE, RS, JB) The apostle Paul is not referring to the Hebrew and Aramaic Scriptures in their entirety. Neither does he mean that the inspired Christian writings constitute a “new testament (or, covenant).” The apostle is speaking of the old Law covenant, which was recorded by Moses in the Pentateuch and which makes up only a part of the pre-Christian Scriptures. For this reason he says in the next verse, “whenever Moses is read.”

Hence, there is no valid basis for the Hebrew and Aramaic Scriptures to be called the “Old Testament” and for the Christian Greek Scriptures to be called the “New Testament.” Jesus Christ himself referred to the collection of sacred writings as “the Scriptures.” (Mt 21:42; Mr 14:49; Joh 5:39) The apostle Paul referred to them as “the holy Scriptures,” “the Scriptures,” and “the holy writings.”—Ro 1:2; 15:4; 2Ti 3:15.

Authorship. The accompanying table shows that about 40 human secretaries or scribes were used by the one Author to record the inspired Word of Jehovah. “All Scripture is inspired of God,” and this includes the writings in the Christian Greek Scriptures along with “the rest of the Scriptures.” (2Ti 3:16; 2Pe 3:15, 16) This expression “inspired of God” translated the Greek phrase the·oʹpneu·stos, meaning “God-breathed.” By ‘breathing’ on faithful men, God caused his spirit, or active force, to become operative upon them and directed what he wanted recorded, for, as it is written, “prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit.”—2Pe 1:21; Joh 20:21, 22; see INSPIRATION.

This unseen holy spirit of God is his symbolic “finger.” Therefore, when men saw Moses perform supernatural feats they exclaimed: “It is the finger of God!” (Ex 8:18, 19; compare with Jesus’ words at Mt 12:22, 28; Lu 11:20.) In a similar display of divine power “God’s finger” began the writing of the Bible by carving out the Ten Commandments on stone tablets. (Ex 31:18; De 9:10) It would, therefore, be a simple matter for Jehovah to use men as his scribes even though some were “unlettered and ordinary” in scholastic training (Ac 4:13), and regardless of whether the individual was by trade a shepherd, farmer, tentmaker, fisherman, tax collector, physician, priest, prophet, or king. Jehovah’s active force put the thoughts into the writer’s mind and, in certain instances, allowed him to express the divine thought in his own words, thus permitting personality and individual traits to show through the writing, yet at the same time maintaining a superb oneness in theme and in purpose throughout. In this way the resultant Bible, reflecting as it does the mind and will of Jehovah, exceeded in wealth and in scope the writings of mere men. The Almighty God saw to it that his written Word of truth was in language easily understood and easily translated into practically any tongue.

No other book took so long to complete as the Bible. In 1513 B.C.E. Moses began Bible writing. Other sacred writings were added to the inspired Scriptures until sometime after 443 B.C.E. when Nehemiah and Malachi completed their books. Then there was a gap in Bible writing for almost 500 years, until the apostle Matthew penned his historic account. Nearly 60 years later John, the last of the apostles, contributed his Gospel and three letters to complete the Bible’s canon. So, all together, a period of some 1,610 years was involved in producing the Bible. All the cowriters were Hebrews and, hence, part of that people “entrusted with the sacred pronouncements of God.”—Ro 3:2.

The Bible is not an unrelated assortment or collection of heterogeneous fragments from Jewish and Christian literature. Rather, it is an organizational book, highly unified and interconnected in its various segments, which indeed reflect the systematic orderliness of the Creator-Author himself. God’s dealings with Israel in giving them a comprehensive law code as well as regulations governing matters even down to small details of camp life—things that were later mirrored in the Davidic kingdom as well as in the congregational arrangement among first-century Christians—reflect and magnify this organizational aspect of the Bible.

Contents. In contents this Book of Books reveals the past, explains the present, and foretells the future. These are matters that only He who knows the end from the beginning could author. (Isa 46:10) Starting at the beginning by telling of the creation of heaven and earth, the Bible next gives a sweeping account of the events that prepared the earth for man’s habitation. Then the truly scientific explanation of the origin of man is revealed—how life comes only from a Life-Giver—facts that only the Creator now in the role of Author could explain. (Ge 1:26-28; 2:7) With the account of why men die, the overriding theme that permeates the whole Bible was introduced. This theme, the vindication of Jehovah’s sovereignty and the ultimate fulfillment of his purpose for the earth, by means of his Kingdom under Christ, the promised Seed, was wrapped up in the first prophecy concerning ‘the seed of the woman.’ (Ge 3:15) More than 2,000 years passed before this promise of a “seed” was again mentioned, God telling Abraham: “By means of your seed all nations of the earth will certainly bless themselves.” (Ge 22:18) Over 800 years later, renewed assurance was given to Abraham’s descendant King David, and with the passing of more time Jehovah’s prophets kept this flame of hope burning brightly. (2Sa 7:12, 16; Isa 9:6, 7) More than 1,000 years after David and 4,000 years after the original prophecy in Eden, the Promised Seed himself appeared, Jesus Christ, the legal heir to “the throne of David his father.” (Lu 1:31-33; Ga 3:16) Bruised in death by the earthly seed of the “serpent,” this “Son of the Most High” provided the ransom purchase price for the life rights lost to Adam’s offspring, thus providing the only means whereby mankind can get everlasting life. He was then raised on high, there to await the appointed time to hurl “the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan,” down to the earth, finally to be destroyed forever. Thus the magnificent theme announced in Genesis and developed and enlarged upon throughout the balance of the Bible is, in the closing chapters of Revelation, brought to a glorious climax as Jehovah’s grand purpose by means of his Kingdom is made apparent.—Re 11:15; 12:1-12, 17; 19:11-16; 20:1-3, 7-10; 21:1-5; 22:3-5.

Through this Kingdom under Christ the Promised Seed, Jehovah’s sovereignty will be vindicated and his name will be sanctified. Following through on this theme, the Bible magnifies God’s personal name to a greater extent than any other book; the name occurs 6,973 times in the Hebrew Scripture portion of the New World Translation. That is in addition to the use of the shorter form “Jah” and the scores of instances where it combines to form other names like “Jehoshua,” meaning “Jehovah Is Salvation.” (See JEHOVAH [Importance of the Name].) We would not know the Creator’s name, the great issue involving his sovereignty raised by the Edenic rebellion, or God’s purpose to sanctify his name and vindicate his sovereignty before all creation if these things were not revealed in the Bible.

In this library of 66 little books the theme of the Kingdom and Jehovah’s name are closely interwoven with information on many subjects. Its reference to fields of knowledge such as agriculture, architecture, astronomy, chemistry, commerce, engineering, ethnology, government, hygiene, music, poetry, philology, and tactical warfare is only incidental to development of the theme; not as a treatise. Nevertheless, it contains a veritable treasure-house of information for the archaeologists and paleographers.

As an accurate historical work and one that penetrates the past to great depths, the Bible far surpasses all other books. However, it is of much greater value in the field of prophecy, foretelling as it does the future that only the King of Eternity can reveal with accuracy. The march of world powers down through the centuries, even to the rise and ultimate demise of present-day institutions, was prophetically related in the Bible’s long-range prophecies.

God’s Word of truth in a very practical way sets men free from ignorance, superstitions, human philosophies, and senseless traditions of men. (Joh 8:32) “The word of God is alive and exerts power.” (Heb 4:12) Without the Bible we would not know Jehovah, would not know the wonderful benefits resulting from Christ’s ransom sacrifice, and would not understand the requirements that must be met in order to get everlasting life in or under God’s righteous Kingdom.

The Bible is a most practical book in other ways too, for it gives sound counsel to Christians on how to live now, how to carry on their ministry, and how to survive this anti-God, pleasure-seeking system of things. Christians are told to “quit being fashioned after this system of things” by making their minds over from worldly thinking, and this they can do by having the same mental attitude of humility “that was also in Christ Jesus” and by stripping off the old personality and putting on the new one. (Ro 12:2; Php 2:5-8; Eph 4:23, 24; Col 3:5-10) This means displaying the fruitage of God’s spirit, “love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, mildness, self-control”—subjects on which so much is written throughout the Bible.—Ga 5:22, 23; Col 3:12-14.

Authenticity. The veracity of the Bible has been assailed from many quarters, but none of these efforts has undermined or weakened its position in the least.

Bible history. Sir Isaac Newton once said: “I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatsoever.” (Two Apologies, by R. Watson, London, 1820, p. 57) Its integrity to truth proves sound on any point that might be tested. Its history is accurate and can be relied upon. For example, what it says about the fall of Babylon to the Medes and Persians cannot be successfully contradicted (Jer 51:11, 12, 28; Da 5:28), neither can what it says about people like Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 27:20; Da 1:1); Egyptian King Shishak (1Ki 14:25; 2Ch 12:2); Assyrians Tiglath-pileser III and Sennacherib (2Ki 15:29; 16:7; 18:13); the Roman emperors Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius (Lu 2:1; 3:1; Ac 18:2); Romans such as Pilate, Felix, and Festus (Ac 4:27; 23:26; 24:27); nor what it says about the temple of Artemis at Ephesus and the Areopagus at Athens (Ac 19:35; 17:19-34). What the Bible says about these or any other places, people, or events is historically accurate in every detail.—See ARCHAEOLOGY.

Races and languages. What the Bible says about races and languages of mankind is also true. All peoples, regardless of stature, culture, color, or language, are members of one human family. The threefold division of the human family into the Japhetic, Hamitic, and Semitic races, all descending from Adam through Noah, cannot be successfully disputed. (Ge 9:18, 19; Ac 17:26) Says Sir Henry Rawlinson: “If we were to be guided by the mere intersection of linguistic paths, and independently of all reference to the Scriptural record, we should still be led to fix on the plains of Shinar, as the focus from which the various lines had radiated.”—The Historical Evidences of the Truth of the Scripture Records, by G. Rawlinson, 1862, p. 287; Ge 11:2-9.

Practicality. The Bible’s teachings, examples, and doctrines are most practical for modern man. The righteous principles and high moral standards contained in this book set it apart as far above all other books. Not only does the Bible answer important questions but it also provides many practical suggestions which, if followed, would do much to raise the physical and mental health of earth’s population. The Bible lays down principles of right and wrong that serve as a straightedge for just business dealings (Mt 7:12; Le 19:35, 36; Pr 20:10; 22:22, 23), industriousness (Eph 4:28; Col 3:23; 1Th 4:11, 12; 2Th 3:10-12), clean moral conduct (Ga 5:19-23; 1Th 4:3-8; Ex 20:14-17; Le 20:10-16), upbuilding associations (1Co 15:33; Heb 10:24, 25; Pr 5:3-11; 13:20), good family relationships (Eph 5:21-33; 6:1-4; Col 3:18-21; De 6:4-9; Pr 13:24). As the famous educator William Lyon Phelps once said: “I believe a knowledge of the Bible without a college course is more valuable than a college course without a Bible.” (The New Dictionary of Thoughts, p. 46) Regarding the Bible, John Quincy Adams wrote: “It is of all books in the world, that which contributes most to make men good, wise, and happy.”—Letters of John Quincy Adams to His Son, 1849, p. 9.

Scientific accuracy. When it comes to scientific accuracy the Bible is not lacking. Whether describing the progressive order of earth’s preparation for human habitation (Ge 1:1-31), speaking of the earth as being spherical and hung on “nothing” (Job 26:7; Isa 40:22), classifying the hare as a cud chewer (Le 11:6), or declaring, “the soul of the flesh is in the blood” (Le 17:11-14), the Bible is scientifically sound.

Cultures and customs. On points relating to cultures and customs, in no regard is the Bible found to be wrong. In political matters, the Bible always speaks of a ruler by the proper title that he bore at the time of the writing. For example, Herod Antipas and Lysanias are referred to as district rulers (tetrarchs), Herod Agrippa (II) as king, and Gallio as proconsul. (Lu 3:1; Ac 25:13; 18:12) Triumphal marches of victorious armies, together with their captives, were common during Roman times. (2Co 2:14) The hospitality shown to strangers, the Oriental way of life, the manner of purchasing property, legal procedures in making contracts, and the practice of circumcision among the Hebrews and other peoples are referred to in the Bible, and in all these details the Bible is accurate.—Ge 18:1-8; 23:7-18; 17:10-14; Jer 9:25, 26.

Candor. Bible writers displayed a candor that is not found among other ancient writers. From the very outset, Moses frankly reported his own sins as well as the sins and errors of his people, a policy followed by the other Hebrew writers. (Ex 14:11, 12; 32:1-6; Nu 14:1-9; 20:9-12; 27:12-14; De 4:21) The sins of great ones such as David and Solomon were not covered over but were reported. (2Sa 11:2-27; 1Ki 11:1-13) Jonah told of his own disobedience. (Jon 1:1-3; 4:1) The other prophets likewise displayed this same straightforward, candid quality. Writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures showed the same regard for truthful reporting as that displayed in the Hebrew Scriptures. Paul tells of his former sinful course in life; Mark’s failure to stick to the missionary work; and also the apostle Peter’s errors are related. (Ac 22:19, 20; 15:37-39; Ga 2:11-14) Such frank, open reporting builds confidence in the Bible’s claim to honesty and truthfulness.

Integrity. Facts testify to the integrity of the Bible. The Bible narrative is inseparably interwoven with the history of the times. It gives straightforward, truthful instruction in the simplest manner. The guileless earnestness and fidelity of its writers, their burning zeal for truth, and their painstaking effort to attain accuracy in details are what we would expect in God’s Word of truth.—Joh 17:17.

Prophecy. If there is a single point that alone proves the Bible to be the inspired Word of Jehovah it is the matter of prophecy. There are scores of long-range prophecies in the Bible that have been fulfilled. For a partial listing, see the book “All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial,” pp. 343-346.

Preservation. Today none of the original writings of the Holy Scriptures are known to exist. Jehovah, however, saw to it that copies were made to replace the aging originals. Also, from and after the Babylonian exile, with the growth of many Jewish communities outside Palestine, there was an increasing demand for more copies of the Scriptures. This demand was met by professional copyists who made extraordinary efforts to see that accuracy was attained in their handwritten manuscripts. Ezra was just such a man, “a skilled copyist in the law of Moses, which Jehovah the God of Israel had given.”—Ezr 7:6.

For hundreds of years handwritten copies of the Scriptures continued to be made, during which period the Bible was expanded with the addition of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Translations or versions of these Holy Writings also appeared in other languages. Indeed, the Hebrew Scriptures are honored as the first book of note to be translated into another language. Extant today are thousands of these Bible manuscripts and versions.—See MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE; VERSIONS.

The first printed Bible, the Gutenberg Bible, came off the press in 1456. Today distribution of the Bible (the whole or in part) has reached over four billion copies in upwards of 2,000 languages. But this has not been accomplished without great opposition from many quarters. Indeed, the Bible has had more enemies than any other book; popes and councils even prohibited the reading of the Bible under penalty of excommunication. Thousands of Bible lovers lost their lives, and thousands of copies of the Bible were committed to the flames. One of the victims in the Bible’s fight to live was translator William Tyndale, who once declared in a discussion with a cleric: “If God spare my life ere many years, I will cause a boy that driveth the plough shall know more of the Scripture than thou doest.”—Actes and Monuments, by John Foxe, London, 1563, p. 514.

All credit and thanksgiving for the Bible’s survival in view of such violent opposition is due Jehovah, the Preserver of his Word. This fact gives added meaning to the apostle Peter’s quotation from the prophet Isaiah: “All flesh is like grass, and all its glory is like a blossom of grass; the grass becomes withered, and the flower falls off, but the saying of Jehovah endures forever.” (1Pe 1:24, 25; Isa 40:6-8) We, therefore, do well to pay “attention to it as to a lamp shining in a dark place” in this 21st century. (2Pe 1:19; Ps 119:105) The man whose “delight is in the law of Jehovah, and in his law he reads in an undertone day and night” and who puts in practice the things he reads is the one who prospers and is happy. (Ps 1:1, 2; Jos 1:8) To him Jehovah’s laws, reminders, orders, commandments, and judicial decisions contained in the Bible are “sweeter than honey,” and the wisdom derived therefrom is “more to be desired than gold, yes, than much refined gold,” for it means his very life.—Ps 19:7-10; Pr 3:13, 16-18; see CANON.

[Chart on page 309]

TABLE OF BIBLE BOOKS IN ORDER COMPLETED

(The order in which the Bible books were written and where each stands in relation to the others is approximate; some dates [and places written] are uncertain. The symbol a. means “after”; b., “before”; and c., “circa” or “about.”)

Hebrew Scriptures (B.C.E.)

Book Writer Date Time Place Written

Completed Covered

Genesis Moses 1513 “In the Wilderness

beginning”

to 1657

Exodus Moses 1512 1657-1512 Wilderness

Leviticus Moses 1512 1 month Wilderness

(1512)

Job Moses c. 1473 Over 140 Wilderness

years

between

1657 and

1473

Numbers Moses 1473 1512-1473 Wilderness/

Plains of Moab

Deuteronomy Moses 1473 2 months Plains of Moab

(1473)

Joshua Joshua c. 1450 1473– Canaan

c. 1450

Judges Samuel c. 1100 c. 1450– Israel

c. 1120

Ruth Samuel c. 1090 11 years Israel

of Judges’

rule

1 Samuel Samuel; c. 1078 c. 1180-1078 Israel

Gad;

Nathan

2 Samuel Gad; c. 1040 1077–c. 1040 Israel

Nathan

Song of Solomon c. 1020 Jerusalem

Solomon

Ecclesiastes Solomon b. 1000 Jerusalem

Jonah Jonah c. 844

Joel Joel c. 820 (?)  Judah

Amos Amos c. 804 Judah

Hosea Hosea a. 745 b. 804– Samaria

a. 745 (District)

Isaiah Isaiah a. 732 c. 778– Jerusalem

a. 732

Micah Micah b. 717 c. 777-717 Judah

Proverbs Solomon; c. 717 Jerusalem

Agur;

Lemuel

Zephaniah Zephaniah b. 648 Judah

Nahum Nahum b. 632 Judah

Habakkuk Habakkuk c. 628 (?)  Judah

Lamentations Jeremiah 607 Nr. Jerusalem

Obadiah Obadiah c. 607

Ezekiel Ezekiel c. 591 613–c. 591 Babylon

1 and 2 Jeremiah 580 c. 1040-580 Judah/Egypt

Kings

Jeremiah Jeremiah 580 647-580 Judah/Egypt

Daniel Daniel c. 536 618–c. 536 Babylon

Haggai Haggai 520 112 days Jerusalem

(520)

Zechariah Zechariah 518 520-518 Jerusalem

Esther Mordecai c. 475 493–c. 475 Shushan, Elam

1 and 2 Ezra c. 460 After Jerusalem (?)

Chronicles 1 Chronicles 9:44,

1077-537

Ezra Ezra c. 460 537–c. 467 Jerusalem

Psalms David c. 460

and others

Nehemiah Nehemiah a. 443 456–a. 443 Jerusalem

Malachi Malachi a. 443 Jerusalem

[Chart on page 310]

Christian Greek Scriptures (C.E.)

Book Writer Date Time Place Written

Completed Covered

Matthew Matthew c. 41 2 B.C.E.– Palestine

33 C.E.

1 Thessalonians

Paul c. 50 Corinth

2 Thessalonians

Paul c. 51 Corinth

Galatians Paul c. 50-52 Corinth or

Syr. Antioch

1 Corinthians

Paul c. 55 Ephesus

2 Corinthians

Paul c. 55 Macedonia

Romans Paul c. 56 Corinth

Luke Luke c. 56-58 3 B.C.E.– Caesarea

33 C.E.

Ephesians Paul c. 60-61 Rome

Colossians Paul c. 60-61 Rome

Philemon Paul c. 60-61 Rome

Philippians Paul c. 60-61 Rome

Hebrews Paul c. 61 Rome

Acts Luke c. 61 33–c. Rome

61 C.E.

James James b. 62 Jerusalem

Mark Mark c. 60-65 29-33 C.E. Rome

1 Timothy Paul c. 61-64 Macedonia

Titus Paul c. 61-64 Macedonia (?)

1 Peter Peter c. 62-64 Babylon

2 Peter Peter c. 64 Babylon (?)

2 Timothy Paul c. 65 Rome

Jude Jude c. 65 Palestine (?)

Revelation John c. 96 Patmos

John John c. 98 After Ephesus, or near

prologue,

29-33 C.E.

1 John John c. 98 Ephesus, or near

2 John John c. 98 Ephesus, or near


3 John John c. 98 Ephesus, or near

Darwinism Vs. the real world XVI

Blood Pressure and the Goldilocks Principle

Howard Glicksman October 16, 2015 11:38 AM

Editor's note: Physicians have a special place among the thinkers who have elaborated the argument for intelligent design. Perhaps that's because, more than evolutionary biologists, they are familiar with the challenges of maintaining a functioning complex system, the human body. With that in mind, Evolution News & Views is delighted to present this series, "The Designed Body." Dr. Glicksman practices palliative medicine for a hospice organization.

My previous article in this series showed that having enough blood pressure is required to have sufficient blood flow to the organs so they can work properly. However, having too high of a blood pressure can be problematic as well. When it comes to blood pressure, and most of the other chemical and physiological parameters of life, the body must follow the Goldilocks principle. The numbers have to be "just right," not too high and not too low, for the body to survive within the laws of nature, a vital aspect of life that evolutionary biologists never seem to address.

Using electrical devices without destroying them depends on having the right amount of electricity going through them. The same applies to the organs and tissues of the body as blood flows into the capillaries to supply them with the water and nutrients they need to live and work properly.

To get energy to your home, generating stations send out electricity along transmission lines that carry hundreds of thousands of volts. This electrical energy is scaled down for consumer use by passing through substations and transformers, finally entering the home through wires carrying a safe voltage. Similarly, the mean arterial pressure (MAP) as the blood leaves the left ventricle and enters the aorta is about 100 mmHg, and by the time it travels through the arteries and arterioles to the capillaries, has been scaled down to about 35 mmHg. This reduction in pressure is accomplished by the vascular resistance applied to the blood as it flows from the larger arteries through the smaller branching arteries and in particular, the microscopic arterioles which lead into the capillaries.

As the blood enters the capillaries under pressure, this causes some fluid to be pushed out of the circulation into the tissues, just like how water is squeezed out of a sponge. As noted previously, when the pressure on entering the capillary is about 35 mmHg, most of this filtered fluid is brought back into the circulation by the osmotic pull of albumin. This usually keeps the amount of fluid between the cells where it should be for proper organ function. Also, as noted a couple of articles back, if the MAP rises above 100 mmHg, the brain is at risk of having too high of a pressure as blood enters its capillaries, so the body protects itself by using autoregulation to contract the muscles surrounding its arterioles.

But, there are definite limits to how much vascular resistance the arterioles in the brain can apply to protect itself. In fact, if the MAP persistently stays above 170 mmHg (BP of 250/130) this can result in a hypertensive crisis. When this happens, too much fluid from the capillaries can enter the tissues and cause swelling of the brain. This usually manifests as headache and dizziness followed soon after by confusion and lethargy. If not quickly relieved, it can progress to coma and can be fatal.

Another way that too high of a blood pressure can quickly cause severe debility and even death, is related to the physical limitations of the blood vessels. After all, life doesn't take place within a vacuum or within the imaginations of evolutionary biologists. Just like in pipelines carrying water or oil, real numbers have real consequences, and when the pressure inside them is higher than what their walls can withstand, an acute rupture can take place. Probably the commonest location for this type of hemorrhage is within the brain. The brain is located in the skull, which protects it from physical injury. However, since bone is harder and less compliant than soft tissue, bleeding within the brain can cause a quick buildup of pressure, since the blood has nowhere to go.

Nerve cells do not like being put under pressure. Think of what happens when you hit your funny bone and feel tingling in your pinky for several seconds. The tingling takes place because the nerve traveling inside the bony channel of the elbow has suffered a pressure injury and malfunctions temporarily. When pressure like this builds up in the brain, it often causes headache and dizziness which, depending on the severity and location of the bleed, can quickly progress to confusion, lethargy, and coma.

For our earliest ancestors to survive long enough to reproduce, their blood pressure would have had to have stayed within a specific range. The brain generally doesn't have to use autoregulation when the MAP is between 70 and 100 mmHg (BP of 90/60 - 140/80). However, chronic elevations of MAP above 110 mmHg (BP of 140/90) can often lead to heart disease, stroke and kidney disease. A chronically elevated MAP causes an increased strain on the inner lining of the arteries, eventually resulting in endothelial damage and hardening of the arteries.

Over 95 percent of people with high blood pressure have primary idiopathic essential hypertension, which means we really don't know what causes it. It is a silent and serious condition that is very prevalent in our modern society, even in teenagers as the incidence of obesity rises within this age group. The remaining five percent have secondary hypertension, usually related to kidney disease. The higher the chronic elevation in blood pressure, the more likely and faster these complications of heart and kidney disease and stroke can occur. People with hypertension are also at increased risk of having episodes of hypertensive urgency and crisis, which, as noted above, can be fatal.

Rembember, the three main factors that affect blood pressure are how strong and fast the heart pumps, how much blood is in the arteries, and the peripheral vascular resistance applied by the downstream arterioles. It is interesting to note that the treatment of hypertension usually consists of medication that reduces the rate and force of heart contraction (beta blockers), pushes sodium and water out of the body through the kidneys (diuretics), and relaxes the muscles surrounding the arterioles to reduce the peripheral vascular resistance (vasodilators). It would appear that it is only in this modern age that medical science been finally been able to figure out what the human body has already inherently known since it first came on the scene.

Since the various functions of the body must follow the Goldilocks principle, being "just right" when it comes to the numbers, evolutionary biology's explanation for how life came into being by just looking at its various parts without considering what it takes for it to survive within the laws of nature should be viewed as, not only inadequate but also unscientific.

Now that you understand how the body makes sure its cells get what they need through the circulation of blood by way of the cardiovascular system with the right amount of blood pressure, it's time to consider another dilemma. Remember, life is a dynamic process that must come up with innovations to survive within the laws of nature. When our earliest ancestors were literally fighting to win the battle for survival, how did their bodies make sure that the necessary increase in cardiac output would result in it going where it was needed, to organs like the heart and tissues like the muscles, while at the same time preserving it within the brain?

Next time we'll answer this question and you can ask yourself why students aren't being taught these "facts of life."

Darwin defenders have got ad hominem attacks down to a science.

Using Scientific-Sounding Language to Psychoanalyze ID Proponents
Casey Luskin November 30, 2011 6:00 AM 

Earlier this year David Klinghoffer commented on a paper that tried to psychoanalytically link support for ID to the fear of death. As I noted in my recent analysis of law professor Frank Ravitch's 2011 Cambridge University Press book attacking ID, we commonly see attempts to dress up otherwise uncivil dismissals of ID with scholarly rhetoric.

Interestingly, another Cambridge University Press book that does much the same thing as Ravitch's book is the 2010 volume Evolution, Creationism, and the Battle to Control America's Classroom, by Penn State professors Michael Berkman and Eric Plutzer. (Berkman and Plutzer are the same pair who co-authored the recent survey of evolution-education published in Science, which suggested students should not "should make up their own minds" on evolution.) They deemed it appropriate to undertake a scientific evaluation of whether people who support teaching criticisms of evolution in public schools are "rational." Thankfully, they found that those people are "rational," although they suggested some suffer from "science illiteracy" (p. 52), and many are not "highly educated." (p. 79)

Then, they felt it worthwhile to scientifically investigate the attacks of Richard Dawkins on Darwin-skeptics. This is an amusing read:

The second part of the anti-evolutionist stereotype suggests that those who do not accept the evidence for evolution are poorly educated, ignorant, and unintelligent. ... Richard Dawkins ... writes, for example: "It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)" (Dawkins, 1989). In this section, we will see whether there is some truth to this stereotype by examining three potential indicators of ignorance and knowledge: general cognitive ability, general scientific literacy, and formal educational attainment. (p. 75)
While these scholars are kind enough to rule out a lack cognitive ability, and feel that scientific illiteracy is only a minor factor, they do conclude that "education is a strong predictor of attitudes toward teaching evolution." (p. 83) But isn't the mere fact that they felt obliged to scientifically investigate Richard Dawkins-style stereotypes and insults just a bit disconcerting?
Apparently scientifically investigating the intellectual abilities of Darwin-critics is now a legitimate scholarly exercise for opponents of intelligent design. This approach was also taken in a 2011 book from Routledge titled Epistemology and Science Education: Understanding the Intelligent Design Controversy. This volume contains various essays that attack ID as unscientific, joined by a wholesale refusal to acknowledge the scientific accomplishments and research of ID proponents.

The opening chapter of Epistemology and Science Education: Understanding the Intelligent Design Controversy has zero citations to any ID literature yet managed to conclude that "there are numerous examples of how scientific discourse and practices are perverted by proponents of 'intelligent design.'" (p. 18)

The third chapter, titled "Differences in Epistemic Practices Among Scientists, Young Earth Creationists, Intelligent Design Creationists, and the Scientist-Creationists of Darwin's Era," by Clark A. Chinn and Luke A. Buckland, offers inaccurate but scholarly sounding attacks on what it blithely refers to as "intelligent design creationists." Much like Josh Rosenau or Frank Ravitch, the authors find it convenient to simply deny that ID's scientific research program exists, making statements like:

"IDCs perform no experiments to verify their claims ... nor do they propose and test hypotheses regarding potential alternatives" (p. 54) 
"IDCs have not launched empirical research initiatives to investigate their claims" (p. 63) 
"The Discovery Institute has no such journals of new empirical research." (p. 63)
Apparently they haven't heard of BIO-Complexity, which is not a "Discovery Institute journal" but rather a venue where Discovery Institute fellows and other scientists not affiliated with Discovery Institute have published peer-reviewed papers describing new empirical research testing and investigating the claims of intelligent design. Nor have they followed much of the research published by pro-ID scientists supporting pro-ID claims.

These critics find it easier to respond to a body of scientific findings when you just claim that it doesn't exist. What's most ironic, therefore, is that these same authors charge that "IDCs have had to actively ignore an enormous body of empirical evidence" (p. 58).

One of the book's authors (Chinn) is a psychology professor at Rutgers, so it's not surprising that the book delves into the psyche of ID proponents, claiming that "IDCs hold a heavily overconfident view of their own cognitive capabilities" (p. 60) The book further claims that ID proponents "have refused to acknowledge criticisms and contrary evidence when it is placed before them" (p. 62), "ignore or radically reinterpret almost all lines of empirical evidence supporting evolutionary theory" (p. 70), have ideological goals "rather than truth-seeking" (p. 65), and "continue to make assertions that are refuted." (p. 70) Again, what an irony given the falsity of these same authors' confident claims about the non-existence of ID empirical research!

Conclusion: Be Encouraged
The examples cited in the recent articles I've written here on anti-ID rhetoric show that books and articles by leading ID critics often amount to little more than the kinds of inaccurate and uncivil arguments we commonly see in blog rants. They argue that ID proponents and Darwin-skeptics are uneducated, scientifically illiterate, "intellectually dishonest," and have overinflated intellectual egos as well as a myriad of other faults and failings. Of course, these critics simply deny the existence of ID research, but then ironically charge that "IDCs have had to actively ignore an enormous body of empirical evidence."

Their charges against ID are demonstrably false, of course. But what is really going on here? Well, returning to the observations of Inna Kouper and Dale L. Sullivan, they are using "mockery," "ridicule," "emotional and insulting evaluations," and public scorn in displays of derision" in order to "demonstrate not only their rightness, but also to distinguish their group of reasonable and worthy individuals from others, who are wrong, unintelligent, and overall worthless" and "de-authorize publications that could be perceived as dangerous to the community."

This is the level of rigor and civility we're seeing in many anti-ID publications from highly respected publishing houses like Cambridge University Press and Routledge, and numerous other ID critics not discussed here.


ID proponents who really do care about truth-seeking should find strong reasons in all this to be encouraged: If these are the quality of counter-arguments coming from some of the top scholarly critics of intelligent design, then we can be confident that ID arguments are strong. If our opponents had something else to say, anything of greater substance, you can assume we would have heard it by now.

Darwinists continue to wander from one dead end to another re:the Cambrian explosion.

In Allaying Darwin's Doubt, Two Cambrian Experts Still Come Up Short
Evolution News & Views October 16, 2015 3:16 AM


Perceptive readers will find hints of worry in a journal's one-sided presentation of the Cambrian explosion. Darwin's Doubt? What doubt would that be? Current Biology's senior reviews editor, Florian Maderspacher, is too enraptured with "The Tree View of Life" to pay any attention to doubt. Waltzing through the grass, he ponders the distant relatives under his feet.

Whatever we see moving and growing around us is a member of our extended family. The mighty eagle and the ugly slug, the sequoia, the grass and the green slime on the beach -- all are our relatives. And also what we don't see -- the microbes on our skin and in our guts, the bacteria that can kill us and the fungi that provide antibiotics -- it's all in the family. [Emphasis added.]
Though earlier biologists had noted the nested hierarchies in life, it was Charles Darwin who organized the leaves into a tree, he explains. Maderspacher ponderss the power of that vision.

This is powerful stuff. Not only because it is so evocative of this "greatest show on Earth", but also because there is a great deal of apparent truth in it. Trees not only reflect the hierarchies of traits naturalists used to classify the diversity of life. The bifurcations in the tree's branches also echo the bifurcations that are a hallmark of life on all levels of biological organization. Populations split, sometimes leading to separate species, cells divide -- so each multicellular organism is its own Bonsai tree of life -- and most profoundly the bifurcations of the tree reflect the splitting of the DNA strand during replication. So, the tree is more than a metaphor, it mirrors real biological processes. No wonder then that to this day trees pervade biological thinking. This is probably most evident in the family tree of animals, which fascinates us not only because it's our immediate arboreal neighbourhood, but also because it provides the framework within which we can now begin to try to understand the processes that gave rise to the staggering diversity of animal forms.
But what if it's not true? What if the evidence shows abrupt appearance of complex life without a tree-like pattern of ancestry? Perhaps he should read two other papers in the special issue, The History of Life on Earth, more carefully. They're updates on the problems of the Cambrian explosion.

Graham Budd

The first, Graham Budd of Uppsala University, is co-author with Maximilian Telford and Hervé Philippe in an article on "Phylogenetic Insights into Animal Evolution." We met Graham Budd in Darwin's Doubt denying that alleged trace fossils in the Precambrian represented animal remains (p. 85), and confirming Meyer's denial that alleged Precambrian ancestors of bilaterians, like Vernanimalcula, represented animal ancestors (pp. 90-91). Does he have any news since these citations from 2008 and 2004?

While the Cambrian yields a continuous and diverse fossil record, the fossil record before is discontinuous (i.e. fossil finds rely on rare instances of exceptional preservation) and few taxa can be seen to cross into the Cambrian. The fossils from the Precambrian are generally problematic and no clear consensus exists about their status, even though some have been claimed to be animals or even bilaterians and members of crown-group phyla. These problems of interpreting the Precambrian record have led to wide variations in charts that attempt to plot animal phylogeny against the fossil record....
Some control exists though. For example, despite the general patchiness of the fossil record, some remarkable discoveries of microscopic fossils have been made in the Precambrian (e.g. Doushantou Formation from South China), yet none of these can be confidently assigned to bilaterians. In contrast, the emerging field of studies of microscopic organic fragments in the Cambrian reveals many such fragments that are clearly bilaterian in origin. Even if bilaterians were tiny in the Precambrian, they would be capable of being preserved in the microfossil record, suggesting that their absence is real.

Thank you for that update. Dr. Budd and his colleagues still believe in the tree view, in spite of the evidence, but they just admitted the Precambrian has no precursors of bilaterians. They should be there if they existed. "Their absence is real." So what is more real, the tree view or the sudden emergence of most of the animal phyla?

Doug Erwin

In Darwin's Doubt (2013) and Debating Darwin's Doubt (2015), Douglas Erwin of the National Museum of Natural History is one of the most frequently cited Cambrian experts. The latter book cites Erwin as agreeing that the main burst of biological innovation was short, about 5 to 6 million years, not 20 or 50 million as some others have claimed. His book with James Valentine, The Cambrian Explosion (2013), is cited frequently in Debating Darwin's Doubt. Casey Luskin reviewed it favorably in Chapter 44, noting that Erwin and Valentine admitted the brevity of the explosion and the current lack of evolutionary "uniformitarian" mechanisms to explain it.

Like all the other contributors to Current Biology's special issue, though, Erwin completely ignores Meyer. His entry, "Novelty and Innovation in the History of Life," provides him a platform to answer Meyer's critique -- assuming he knows about it (and how could he not?). In particular, Erwin should be able in this article to answer Meyer's primary challenge, the origin of biological information required to build new animal body plans, also the subject of our new short documentary, The Information Enigma.

Here, I begin with an overview of adaptive radiations and ecological opportunity, and provide examples of the variety of evolutionary diversifications identified from the fossil record. The limitations of the adaptive radiation model lead to the recognition of a broader array of patterns of evolutionary diversifications. Next, I turn to the historical contingency of the processes leading to some phenotypic novelties. Thus, one cannot simply assume that novel phenotypes will be available whenever ecological opportunity arises. Macroevolutionary lags and the contingent nature of novelty demand that we consider the processes generating phenotypic novelty separately from the ecological and evolutionary processes that regulate their success. Finally, I turn to the processes generating morphological novelties.
Remember, we're looking for fossil evidence of gradually increasing complexity, or for a theory about how biological information can arise by unguided natural processes. It will not be satisfying to hear restatements of belief in the evolutionary tree view of life.

Has Erwin come across anything new since his 2013 book? Here are his mentions of the Cambrian:

"Striking morphological novelties appeared during some of these evolutionary diversifications, from appendages and eyes in the Cambrian to feathers in the Cretaceous."
"In the case of the Ediacaran to Cambrian appearance and diversification of animals, many lineages were involved that had diverged tens of millions of years earlier. Morphological novelty was pervasive, but describing this as an adaptive radiation stretches the definition of the term beyond reason."
"Several challenges have arisen to claims that adaptive radiations are responsible for most evolutionary diversifications. For one, many events have been identified among both living and fossil clades that cannot be explained as the outcome of diversification from a single species. Examples range from the Cambrian explosion of animals, which involved many major clades but relatively few species, to the diversification of grasses."
"The sudden appearance of numerous bilaterian lineages in the fossil record at the base of the Cambrian is a paradigmatic example of a novelty event: the appearance of morphological novelties (individuation of new characters) and thus an increase in morphological disparity, but these novelties generally were unaccompanied by increases in taxonomic diversity or ecological abundance."
These remarks show that he still believes the Cambrian explosion is real. Now, does he have a theory for the origin of information to build novel body plans as seen in the Cambrian animals?

Maybe we'll find it in this subsection: "Phenotypic Novelty and Innovation." He begins, "The focus on ecological opportunity as the driving factor in adaptive radiation led to a neglect of the mechanisms underlying the generation of novel phenotypes." We search eagerly for the mechanism.

Surprisingly, Erwin turns to Lenski's E. coli experiment with bacteria that adapted to digest citrate (Cit+). But wait -- bacteria are not multicellular animals!

A scenario emerges for the four aspects of novelty and innovation: potentiation, novelty, adaptation and innovation (Box 2). This model is an extension and generalization of the Cit+ mutant example discussed previously. The distinction between novelty and innovations borrows from economics, where invention, the origin of a new technology, is distinguished from innovation, the spread or diffusion of such a technology so that it has an economic effect. A critical aspect of this scenario is that some environmental and ecological potentiating events may actually occur after the novelty emerges, thus creating the conditions for the macroevolutionary lags described earlier. The final stage of innovation following refinement distinguishes the ecological events associated with the success of novelties.
It's hard to see how any evolutionist can take comfort from this proposal. What is the vera causa behind economics, invention, or technology? Clearly it is intelligence. That's Meyer's point. When we observe these features, we know the cause able to produce them. Erwin seems to assume that novelties arise by accident, and turn into innovations when they become economically successful. That begs the question.

Does Erwin explain it under the subsection "Evolutionary Novelty"? No; he begs the question again, merely assuming that novelties, like feathers, "arise" somehow. He adopts G.P. Wagner's "restrictive view of novelty" that "the origin of a morphological novelty is the evolutionary process through which a novel character identity arises." Let's understand this: the evolution of novelty is the evolutionary process by which a novel character arises. Isn't this what we're trying to find out?

Maybe developmental gene regulatory networks (dGRNs) can explain it:

This restrictive definition of novelty links the appearance of novel characters to the structure of developmental gene regulatory networks. Specifically, it proposes that small networks of transcription factors within larger gene regulatory networks are responsible for these novel characters. Such recursively wired subnetworks of developmentally significant genes have been identified for characters ranging from feathers to heart formation. They have been described as character homology identity networks, or CHiNs and kernels (Figure 3). CHiNs were first identified in the formation of patterns associated with new cell types, while kernels are associated with regional patterning mechanisms in developing embryos. Each concept reflects the significance of structured, hierarchical developmental gene regulatory networks in underpinning novel morphological structures. During development, character identity involves these recursively wired regulatory subnets. Positional information determines where the characters form, while the downstream components of the network are responsible for localized cell differentiation. The focus on novel individuated structures is particularly helpful as these can, in principle, be recognized in the fossil record. Novel individuated structures also feature in major evolutionary transitions, critical events in the history of life including the origin of eukaryotes, multicellularity and social systems.
More question-begging. Where do the "new cell types" come from? Did they just "arise" too? Where did "structured, hierarchical... networks" come from? Where did "positional information" come from? And where is the evidence in the fossil evidence that "in principle" can be recognized? The very things we are looking for are the very things he fails to provide.

Meyer addressed the "developmental gene regulatory network" theory of novelty in detail in Debating Darwin's Doubt, since it was the centerpiece of Charles Marshall's critical review. Meyer showed how it assumes the very thing it needs to prove: that genetic information can arise by unguided processes. It's hard to imagine Erwin being unaware of this interchange, but he writes as if he thought of this himself and nobody ever challenged it.

Maybe Erwin can explain the origin of biological information in the subsection, "Innovation and Morphological Disparity." The disparity of animal body plans is a key feature of the Cambrian explosion. Here, sadly, he only makes his problem worse:

A recent analysis of disparity in 98 metazoan clades through the Phanerozoic found a preponderance of clades with maximal disparity early in their history. Thus, whether or not taxonomic diversification slows down most studies of disparity reveal a pattern in which the early evolution of a clade defines the morphological boundaries of a group which are then filled in by subsequent diversification. This pattern is inconsistent with that expected of a classic adaptive radiation in which diversity and disparity should be coupled, at least during the early phase of the radiation.
What this admits is that disparity is a worse problem than evolutionists had realized: it's ubiquitous, not just in the Cambrian.

We see from his conclusion that he knows neo-Darwinism has a serious problem. If he had answers, he wouldn't be calling on fellow evolutionists to get together and solve it.

Does evolutionary biology need a new research program in evolutionary novelty distinct from the existing work on adaptation and speciation? Some evolutionary biologists view morphological novelty as built upon the variation existing within a species. Others, particularly many evolutionary developmental biologists, view novelty as based on evolutionary changes distinct from standing variation. Considerable experimental work will be required to test the hypothesis that evolutionary novelties are underpinned by the origin of particular gene regulatory network structures. I suspect that novel individuated morphological structures will be identified that are not associated with such gene network structures, which will draw attention to the developmental mechanisms that ensure their evolutionary stability. Turning from novelty to innovation, there is great opportunity for carefully documenting the environmental and ecological circumstances under which innovations arise, how closely they are linked to morphological novelty, and whether there are particular conditions that foster increased innovation.
Erwin just danced around Meyer's challenge by speculating that gene regulatory networks, or unspecified developmental mechanisms, or the environment can create the high levels of information necessary to build new animal body plans. If he had anything better than idle speculations or promissory notes since Meyer's books came out, or if he had better fossils to muffle the explosion, this was a prime opportunity to share them.


The strength of a theory can be gauged by how well it stands up to attacks and how well it incorporates new evidence. If Current Biology's "History of Life on Earth" issue represents the best evolutionary thought on the Cambrian explosion to date, by the world's most knowledgeable experts, with access to the best fossil evidence, Meyer's thesis is doing pretty well. His critics would do well to stop ignoring the challenge and address its claims directly.

Rumors of wars II

Daniel Ch.11 " 1“In the first year of Darius the Mede, I arose to be an encouragement and a protection for him. 2“And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia. Then a fourth will gain far more riches than all of them; as soon as he becomes strong through his riches, he will arouse the whole empire against the realm of Greece. 3“And a mighty king will arise, and he will rule with great authority and do as he pleases. 4“But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out toward the four points of the compass, though not to his own descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded, for his sovereignty will be uprooted and given to others besides them.
      5“Then the king of the South will grow strong, along with one of his princes who will gain ascendancy over him and obtain dominion; his domain will be a great dominion indeed. 6“After some years they will form an alliance, and the daughter of the king of the South will come to the king of the North to carry out a peaceful arrangement. But she will not retain her position of power, nor will he remain with his power, but she will be given up, along with those who brought her in and the one who sired her as well as he who supported her in those times. 7“But one of the descendants of her line will arise in his place, and he will come against their army and enter the fortress of the king of the North, and he will deal with them and display great strength. 8“Also their gods with their metal images and their precious vessels of silver and gold he will take into captivity to Egypt, and he on his part will refrain from attacking the king of the North for some years. 9“Then the latter will enter the realm of the king of the South, but will return to his own land.

      10“His sons will mobilize and assemble a multitude of great forces; and one of them will keep on coming and overflow and pass through, that he may again wage war up to his very fortress. 11“The king of the South will be enraged and go forth and fight with the king of the North. Then the latter will raise a great multitude, but that multitude will be given into the hand of the former. 12“When the multitude is carried away, his heart will be lifted up, and he will cause tens of thousands to fall; yet he will not prevail. 13“For the king of the North will again raise a greater multitude than the former, and after an interval of some years he will press on with a great army and much equipment.

      14“Now in those times many will rise up against the king of the South; the violent ones among your people will also lift themselves up in order to fulfill the vision, but they will fall down. 15“Then the king of the North will come, cast up a siege ramp and capture a well-fortified city; and the forces of the South will not stand their ground, not even their choicest troops, for there will be no strength to make a stand. 16“But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him; he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand. 17“He will set his face to come with the power of his whole kingdom, bringing with him a proposal of peace which he will put into effect; he will also give him the daughter of women to ruin it. But she will not take a stand for him or be on his side. 18“Then he will turn his face to the coastlands and capture many. But a commander will put a stop to his scorn against him; moreover, he will repay him for his scorn. 19“So he will turn his face toward the fortresses of his own land, but he will stumble and fall and be found no more.

      20“Then in his place one will arise who will send an oppressor through the Jewel of his kingdom; yet within a few days he will be shattered, though not in anger nor in battle. 21“In his place a despicable person will arise, on whom the honor of kingship has not been conferred, but he will come in a time of tranquility and seize the kingdom by intrigue. 22“The overflowing forces will be flooded away before him and shattered, and also the prince of the covenant. 23“After an alliance is made with him he will practice deception, and he will go up and gain power with a small force of people. 24“In a time of tranquility he will enter the richest parts of the realm, and he will accomplish what his fathers never did, nor his ancestors; he will distribute plunder, booty and possessions among them, and he will devise his schemes against strongholds, but only for a time. 25“He will stir up his strength and courage against the king of the South with a large army; so the king of the South will mobilize an extremely large and mighty army for war; but he will not stand, for schemes will be devised against him. 26“Those who eat his choice food will destroy him, and his army will overflow, but many will fall down slain. 27“As for both kings, their hearts will be intent on evil, and they will speak lies to each other at the same table; but it will not succeed, for the end is still to come at the appointed time. 28“Then he will return to his land with much plunder; but his heart will be set against the holy covenant, and he will take action and then return to his own land.

      29“At the appointed time he will return and come into the South, but this last time it will not turn out the way it did before. 30“For ships of Kittim will come against him; therefore he will be disheartened and will return and become enraged at the holy covenant and take action; so he will come back and show regard for those who forsake the holy covenant. 31“Forces from him will arise, desecrate the sanctuary fortress, and do away with the regular sacrifice. And they will set up the abomination of desolation. 32“By smooth words he will turn to godlessness those who act wickedly toward the covenant, but the people who know their God will display strength and take action. 33“Those who have insight among the people will give understanding to the many; yet they will fall by sword and by flame, by captivity and by plunder for many days. 34“Now when they fall they will be granted a little help, and many will join with them in hypocrisy. 35“Some of those who have insight will fall, in order to refine, purge and make them pure until the end time; because it is still to come at the appointed time.

      36“Then the king will do as he pleases, and he will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will speak monstrous things against the God of gods; and he will prosper until the indignation is finished, for that which is decreed will be done. 37“He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers or for the desire of women, nor will he show regard for any other god; for he will magnify himself above them all. 38“But instead he will honor a god of fortresses, a god whom his fathers did not know; he will honor him with gold, silver, costly stones and treasures. 39“He will take action against the strongest of fortresses with the help of a foreign god; he will give great honor to those who acknowledge him and will cause them to rule over the many, and will parcel out land for a price.

      40“At the end time the king of the South will collide with him, and the king of the North will storm against him with chariots, with horsemen and with many ships; and he will enter countries, overflow them and pass through. 41“He will also enter the Beautiful Land, and many countries will fall; but these will be rescued out of his hand: Edom, Moab and the foremost of the sons of Ammon. 42“Then he will stretch out his hand against other countries, and the land of Egypt will not escape. 43“But he will gain control over the hidden treasures of gold and silver and over all the precious things of Egypt; and Libyans and Ethiopians will follow at his heels. 44“But rumors from the East and from the North will disturb him, and he will go forth with great wrath to destroy and annihilate many. 45“He will pitch the tents of his royal pavilion between the seas and the beautiful Holy Mountain; yet he will come to his end, and no one will help him."

The Divine law and blood XII:The Watchtower Society's commentary.

BLOOD:

A truly marvelous fluid that circulates in the vascular system of humans and most multicelled animals; in Hebrew, dam, and in Greek, haiʹma. Blood supplies nourishment and oxygen to all parts of the body, carries away waste products, and plays a major role in safeguarding the body against infection. The chemical makeup of blood is so exceedingly complex that there is a great deal that is still unknown to scientists.

In the Bible, the soul is said to be in the blood because blood is so intimately involved in the life processes. God’s Word says: “For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for you to make atonement for your souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul in it.” (Le 17:11) For like reason, but making the connection even more direct, the Bible says: “The soul of every sort of flesh is its blood.” (Le 17:14) Clearly, God’s Word treats both life and blood as sacred.

Taking Life. With Jehovah is the source of life. (Ps 36:9) Man cannot give back a life that he takes. “All the souls—to me they belong,” says Jehovah. (Eze 18:4) Therefore, to take life is to take Jehovah’s property. Every living thing has a purpose and a place in God’s creation. No man has the right to take life except when God permits and in the way that he instructs.

After the Flood, Noah and his sons, the progenitors of all persons alive today, were commanded to show respect for the life, the blood, of fellowmen. (Ge 9:1, 5, 6) Also, God kindly allowed them to add animal flesh to their diet. However, they had to acknowledge that the life of any animal killed for food belonged to God, doing so by pouring its blood out as water on the ground. This was like giving it back to God, not using it for one’s own purposes.—De 12:15, 16.

Man was entitled to enjoy the life that God granted him, and anyone who deprived him of that life would be answerable to God. This was shown when God said to the murderer Cain: “Your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground.” (Ge 4:10) Even a person hating his brother, and so wishing him dead, or slandering him or bearing false witness against him, and so endangering his life, would bring guilt upon himself in connection with the blood of his fellowman.—Le 19:16; De 19:18-21; 1Jo 3:15.

Because of God’s view of the value of life, the blood of a murdered person is said to defile the earth, and such defilement can be cleansed only by shedding the blood of the murderer. On this basis the Bible authorizes capital punishment for murder, through duly constituted authority. (Nu 35:33; Ge 9:5, 6) In ancient Israel no ransom could be taken to deliver the deliberate murderer from the death penalty.—Nu 35:19-21, 31.

Even in cases where the manslayer could not be found on investigation, the city nearest the site where the body was found was counted bloodguilty. To remove the bloodguilt, the responsible city elders had to perform the procedure required by God, had to disclaim any guilt or knowledge of the murder, and had to pray to God for his mercy. (De 21:1-9) If an accidental manslayer was not seriously concerned over the taking of a life and did not follow God’s arrangement for his protection by fleeing to the city of refuge and remaining there, the dead man’s nearest of kin was the avenger authorized and obligated to kill him in order to remove bloodguilt from the land.—Nu 35:26, 27; see AVENGER OF BLOOD.

Proper Use of Blood. There was only one use of blood that God ever approved, namely, for sacrifice. He directed that those under the Mosaic Law offer animal sacrifices to make atonement for sin. (Le 17:10, 11) It was also in harmony with His will that His Son, Jesus Christ, offered up his perfect human life as a sacrifice for sins.—Heb 10:5, 10.

The lifesaving application of Christ’s blood was prefigured in a variety of ways in the Hebrew Scriptures. At the time of the first Passover, in Egypt, the blood on the upper part of the doorway and on the doorposts of the Israelite homes protected the firstborn inside from death at the hand of God’s angel. (Ex 12:7, 22, 23; 1Co 5:7) The Law covenant, which had a typical sin-removing feature, was validated by the blood of animals. (Ex 24:5-8) The numerous blood sacrifices, particularly those offered on the Day of Atonement, were for typical sin atonement, pointing to the real sin removal by the sacrifice of Christ.—Le 16:11, 15-18.

The legal power that blood has in God’s sight as accepted by him for atonement purposes was illustrated by the pouring of blood at the base, or foundation, of the altar and the putting of it on the horns of the altar. The atonement arrangement had its basis, or foundation, in blood, and the power (represented by horns) of the sacrificial arrangement rested in blood.—Le 9:9; Heb 9:22; 1Co 1:18.

Under the Christian arrangement, the sanctity of blood was even more strongly emphasized. No longer was animal blood to be offered, for those animal offerings were only a shadow of the reality, Jesus Christ. (Col 2:17; Heb 10:1-4, 8-10) The high priest in Israel used to take a token portion of the blood into the Most Holy of the earthly sanctuary. (Le 16:14) Jesus Christ as the real High Priest entered into heaven itself, not with his blood, which was poured out on the ground (Joh 19:34), but with the value of his perfect human life as represented by blood. This life right he never forfeited by sin, but he retained it as usable for sin atonement. (Heb 7:26; 8:3; 9:11, 12) For these reasons the blood of Christ cries out for better things than the blood of righteous Abel did. Only the blood of the perfect sacrifice of the Son of God can call for mercy, while the blood of Abel as well as the blood of martyred followers of Christ cries out for vengeance.—Heb 12:24; Re 6:9-11.

To whom does the prohibition on the eating of blood apply?

Noah and his sons were allowed by Jehovah to add animal flesh to their diet after the Flood, but they were strictly commanded not to eat blood. (Ge 9:1, 3, 4) God here set out a regulation that applied, not merely to Noah and his immediate family, but to all mankind from that time on, because all those living since the Flood are descendants of Noah’s family.

Concerning the permanence of this prohibition, Joseph Benson noted: “It ought to be observed, that this prohibition of eating blood, given to Noah and all his posterity, and repeated to the Israelites, in a most solemn manner, under the Mosaic dispensation, has never been revoked, but, on the contrary, has been confirmed under the New Testament, Acts xv.; and thereby made of perpetual obligation.”—Benson’s Notes, 1839, Vol. I, p. 43.

Under the Mosaic Law. In the Law covenant made by Jehovah with the nation of Israel, he incorporated the law given to Noah. He made it clear that “bloodguilt” was attached to anyone who ignored the procedure stipulated by God’s law even in the killing of an animal. (Le 17:3, 4) The blood of an animal to be used for food was to be poured out on the ground and covered with dust. (Le 17:13, 14) Anyone who ate blood of any sort of flesh was to be ‘cut off from among his people.’ Deliberate violation of this law regarding the sacredness of blood meant being “cut off” in death.—Le 17:10; 7:26, 27; Nu 15:30, 31.

Commenting on Leviticus 17:11, 12, M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia (1882, Vol. I, p. 834) says: “This strict injunction not only applied to the Israelites, but even to the strangers residing among them. The penalty assigned to its transgression was the being ‘cut off from the people,’ by which the punishment of death appears to be intended (comp. Heb. x, 28), although it is difficult to ascertain whether it was inflicted by the sword or by stoning.”

At Deuteronomy 14:21 allowance was made for selling to an alien resident or a foreigner an animal that had died of itself or that had been torn by a beast. Thus a distinction was made between the blood of such animals and that of animals that a person slaughtered for food. (Compare Le 17:14-16.) The Israelites, as well as alien residents who took up true worship and came under the Law covenant, were obligated to live up to the lofty requirements of that Law. People of all nations were bound by the requirement at Genesis 9:3, 4, but those under the Law were held by God to a higher standard in adhering to that requirement than were foreigners and alien residents who had not become worshipers of Jehovah.

Under the Christian arrangement. The governing body of the first-century Christian congregation, under the direction of the holy spirit, ruled on the matter of blood. Their decree states: “For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!” (Ac 15:22, 28, 29) The prohibition included flesh with the blood in it (“things strangled”).

This decree rests, ultimately, on God’s command not to eat blood, as given to Noah and his sons and, therefore, to all mankind. In this regard, the following is found in The Chronology of Antient Kingdoms Amended, by Sir Isaac Newton (Dublin, 1728, p. 184): “This law [of abstaining from blood] was ancienter than the days of Moses, being given to Noah and his sons, long before the days of Abraham: and therefore when the Apostles and Elders in the Council at Jerusalem declared that the Gentiles were not obliged to be circumcised and keep the law of Moses, they excepted this law of abstaining from blood, and things strangled, as being an earlier law of God, imposed not on the sons of Abraham only, but on all nations, while they lived together in Shinar under the dominion of Noah: and of the same kind is the law of abstaining from meats offered to Idols or false Gods, and from fornication.”—Italics his.

Observed since apostolic times. The Jerusalem council sent its decision to the Christian congregations to be observed. (Ac 16:4) About seven years after the Jerusalem council issued the decree, Christians continued to comply with the “decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication.” (Ac 21:25) And more than a hundred years later, in 177 C.E., in Lyons (now in France), when religious enemies falsely accused Christians of eating children, a woman named Biblis said: “How would such men eat children, when they are not allowed to eat the blood even of irrational animals?”—The Ecclesiastical History, by Eusebius, V, I, 26.

Early Christians abstained from eating any sort of blood. In this regard Tertullian (c. 155-a. 220 C.E.) pointed out in his work Apology (IX, 13, 14): “Let your error blush before the Christians, for we do not include even animals’ blood in our natural diet. We abstain on that account from things strangled or that die of themselves, that we may not in any way be polluted by blood, even if it is buried in the meat. Finally, when you are testing Christians, you offer them sausages full of blood; you are thoroughly well aware, of course, that among them it is forbidden; but you want to make them transgress.” Minucius Felix, a Roman lawyer who lived until about 250 C.E., made the same point, writing: “For us it is not permissible either to see or to hear of human slaughter; we have such a shrinking from human blood that at our meals we avoid the blood of animals used for food.”—Octavius, XXX, 6.


Integrity Involved. From the time that the new covenant was inaugurated over the blood of Jesus Christ, Christians have recognized the life-giving value of this blood through Jehovah’s arrangement and through Jesus as the great High Priest who “entered, no, not with the blood of goats and of young bulls, but with his own blood, once for all time into the holy place and obtained an everlasting deliverance for us.” Through faith in the blood of Christ, Christians have had their consciences cleansed from dead works so that they may render sacred service to the living God. They are concerned about their physical health, but they are primarily and far more seriously concerned with their spiritual health and their standing before the Creator. They want to maintain their integrity to the living God, not denying the sacrifice of Jesus, not counting it as of no value, and not trampling it underfoot. For they are seeking, not the life that is transitory, but everlasting life.—Heb 9:12, 14, 15; 10:28, 29.