ALL TEXT AND PHOTOS © 2024 Marlene A. Condon
Table of Contents
Prologue: How I Came to Write This Treatise
Introduction: Importance of Nature to Human Existence
Chapter One: Bible Tells Us Man Is Dependent Upon Nature
Chapter Two: Observations of the Natural World Confirm the Existence of God
Chapter Three: Other Religions Agree with the Nature Revelation
Chapter Four: The Final Evidence That God Exists
Conclusion—Nature, Man, and God: The Trinity for Life
Epilogue: Why You Should Believe This Treatise
Final Thoughts: Overpopulation of Man a Damning Problem for Eden
Addendum: A Basic Explanation of Evolution
Listing of Scientific Names of Organisms Mentioned in the Text
About the Author
Prologue: How I Came to Write This Treatise
The title of this work might make you think I’m a religious person. I’m not.
Truth be told, I’ve always wondered if God truly exists, mainly because I feel that animals should not ever suffer excruciating physical or emotional pain. I would have hoped that an all-powerful God could have somehow prevented such suffering among creatures that have done nothing wrong and are only living their lives as they are meant to do.
But I have also never felt a need to know for a fact that God exists because, as far as I am concerned, everyone should simply lead a moral life, whether there is a God, or not.
I do not own a Bible, a holy book that I never got to know personally while I was growing up. My family was Catholic, and Catholics—in my experience—did not learn about the Bible. My childhood memories of Catholicism revolve around the memorization of prayers, especially so you could recite them silently as penance for sins that you revealed to a priest during confession.
It is odd to me that the church never taught us about the Bible, but perhaps the Pope felt the laity did not need to know about this Holy Book. After all, the priest spoke the Mass in Latin every Sunday, which meant none of us even knew what he was communicating to us about our religion.
Yet despite my lack of connection to Catholicism, I had an epiphany one day as I was discussing the natural world with my husband, as I often do. I realized that there are aspects of man’s presence on the Earth that are so out of sync with nature that it presents a natural paradox that can only be explained away by invoking the hand of God. In other words, man’s relationship with the natural world provides actual evidence of God’s existence!
I knew that if I were right, the Bible—if it truly is the Word of God—should support my realization. In fact, I was so confident regarding my epiphany that I was not at all surprised to find that it did. Thanks to my husband, who owns a Bible, I was able to investigate, and, sure enough, the Bible confirmed everything I had personally come to know about the natural world via my lifelong observation of and fascination with it. Even more, it confirmed that the only way to discern God’s existence is to use your mind to obtain knowledge and understanding of the natural world:
“For those things of him [sic] which are invisible, are seen—By the eye of the mind. Being understood—They are seen by them, and them only, who use their understanding.” [emphasis mine, Romans I, 1:20-21]
[http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/wesleys-explanatory-notes/romans/romans-1.html]
According to the Book of Job, 12:5, “Wisdom is with the aged, and understanding in length of days.” This statement certainly applied to my epiphany.
Although I had long understood how to garden in agreement with nature by following “Mother Nature’s” examples all around me, it took half a century for me to acquire the wisdom of the aged, in large part thanks to giving nature talks in Shenandoah National Park in Virginia.
After nearly every talk, I fielded questions about gardening problems and how they could be eliminated. As someone who had never personally encountered these obstacles to successfully growing food and beautifying my yard with a variety of flowers and greenery, I was puzzled by the profusion of difficulties other gardeners seemed to face. Ever the scientist who wants to understand the unexplained, I began to ponder why there had been such a huge difference between my decades of gardening and the widespread negative experiences of other gardeners.
The answer was that other people disregarded the natural laws that govern the proper functioning of the environment and their gardens located within it. Just as we get into trouble when we ignore human laws, such as speeding through stop signs or red lights, we get into trouble when we try to garden the way we want, instead of the way Mother Nature demands.
But where did folks get the idea that they could possibly grow plants successfully by disregarding how the natural world works? I had already stumbled upon the answer to this question decades before when, as a young gardener, I’d discovered the plethora of discrepancies between what I read in gardening books and magazines and what I saw happening in the natural world. I realized the horticultural advice was mainly wrong, but I didn’t think about why that was the case; I just stopped reading gardening literature.
When so many years later I pondered the reason for so much ill-advised horticultural advice, I discerned the problem. Horticulturists work in labs or artificially contrived field conditions; they don’t work in, and tend not to possess knowledge of, the real (natural) world. With this determination, I had my “ultimate understanding as a result of my length of days”. It was now clear to me why no one (until now) has ever recognized that the validation of God is in full view of mankind.
The testament for the nature revelation that God exists is the natural world itself—although not because it is beautiful or complex or unexplainable. Rather, once you recognize how logically and sensibly the natural world functions, and how you must live within it, the nature revelation readily manifests itself.
I was fifty when I was asked to give talks in Shenandoah National Park. I had learned so much about nature—mostly by way of my own garden and my time spent roaming outdoors, beginning when I was a child—that I was able to comprehend how the natural world works.
I had been taking notes and photographs for decades, and although I did not have a Ph.D. certifying my status as a researcher, I had been doing exactly what researchers do (except I had never been given money to do it). Within a few years of being hired to give my park presentations, I had also considered how everything I had witnessed fit together.
No one has noticed the clues for God’s existence because no one looks at the natural world properly. For example, people (including scientists) generally tend to view some organisms and weather events as “bad” because they may negatively impact the lives of humans. What they don’t recognize is that these creatures and events are vital to the continuing perpetuation of all life on Earth—a unique frame of reference only obvious to those who are able to view the natural world critically and logically rather than in terms of human existence.
In other words, when you don’t grasp the complete picture of the natural world by figuring out exactly why things happen as they do, but instead focus mainly upon how humans are affected by organisms or weather events, etc., the absolute proof of God’s existence is overlooked.
Introduction: Importance of Nature to Human Existence
We can understand the importance of nature to our own existence not only by scientific study, but also by reading the Bible. If the Bible truly represents a legitimate source of knowledge, it must concur with the reality of life on Earth, and it does.
Genesis tells us that plants were created first. This makes sense because, as we know from science, they would harness the energy from the Sun to pass on to animals. The plants would also create the oxygen-rich environment that most animals depend upon to live.
According to the Bible, a huge variety of creatures appears next. This agrees with scientific observations that each kind of animal has its own roles to play to help maintain the proper functioning of the environment. You need recyclers of organic matter (that is reused again and again) to create new life from those organisms that have died. You need predators to limit other kinds of critters, and seedeaters and (to a much lesser extent) herbivorous animals to keep plant numbers in check. In other words, every organism is essential for keeping the whole system running as it should.
Many people who are religious (as well as, of course, others who do not concern themselves with the natural world or God) don’t seem to comprehend that everything on Earth came into being in the order it did because the environment depends upon the interconnectedness among organisms to function. When people don’t grasp this underlying blueprint, they can’t see that the preservation of nature is vitally important to man’s continued residency on Earth.
Indeed, man appears last in the Bible because he is completely dependent upon all the other organisms (plants and animals) that work to make the Earth habitable for him. If you close your eyes to this truth about our relationship with the natural world, you cannot possibly notice the evidence that is, and always has been, right before our eyes, disclosing the remarkably simple and undeniable proof that a creator exists.
While most people feel they would need to witness a miracle to know that God is real, the truth is that we do not need an extraordinary event of epic proportions. Nor do we need to employ mathematical calculations or to talk about the majesty of nature. The substantiation of His presence has been right there in front of us, and the beauty of it is that you do not even need to be a person of faith to recognize its verity. Please read on to learn why nature, man, and God comprise the trinity for life—the bonds of which cannot be broken without suffering disastrous consequences.
Chapter One: Bible Tells Us Man Is Dependent Upon Nature
[Note: All Bible quotes in this chapter are from The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, The World Publishing Company, 1962.]
“For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.” [Romans 1:19-20]
Bible authorities agree that the previous passage informs us that nature (the creation) proves God’s existence. However, they disagree on how nature is supposed to make this fact apparent to us.
Some people suggest that nature is so wondrous that we should stand in awe of its eloquence and complexity, which surely speaks to the existence of a creator. “Great are the works of the Lord, studied by all who have pleasure in them.” [Psalm 111:2]
Others argue that people recognize when a human being has made something of complexity (such as an analog watch), therefore they should be able to recognize that God must have made our complex world. Of course, some scientists would argue these points differently.
The world-famous physicist (and atheist) Stephen Hawking is quoted as proclaiming that, “Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now science offers a more convincing explanation.”
It is clear, then, that these differing views of whether nature provides proof of God’s existence come from subjective interpretations of either Bible passages or of nature itself. Therefore, if God wants us to know He exists, the proof He has provided us must be external to our minds, so that any individual can recognize the evidence without question—regardless of personal beliefs, feelings, or opinions.
The Bible does inform us, again and again, that we can find confirmation of His existence in the natural world. However, the convincing proof that He exists does not become apparent until people obtain a valid understanding of how the natural world works. And that accomplishment is only possible when you carefully and unobtrusively observe nature.
What we find is that each creature provides services that support the perpetuation of all life forms and thus fulfills necessary functions in the environment. This factuality explains why God instructed Noah to bring not just any two of every kind of animal onto the ark, but rather a male and a female of each kind: “And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female.” [Genesis 6:19] With this command, God was ensuring that each animal’s lineage would continue to exist following the flood. It’s a crucial point because a variety of creatures are necessary for the environment to function properly.
We should be able to recognize and understand this truism because the Bible tells us [Genesis 1:1-26]¹ that God created the natural world before He created humans. Obviously, mankind could not survive upon a barren planet. Yet, many people doubt the importance of the environment to our lives. They dismiss the idea that each creature fulfills a necessary function and should be preserved to maintain the integrity of the environment.
But this disbelief, when looked at objectively, begs the question, “Would God frivolously create organisms for no purpose, which we know denies the truth of what the Bible itself has told us?”
This argument contends that man rules the planet because God gave him dominion over all animals on the Earth. [Genesis 1:26]¹ In other words, man can use the natural world howsoever he chooses, even if his actions are detrimental to the other forms of life with which he shares the planet. But no definition of “dominion” includes the demand that authority over other life forms automatically includes bringing harm to them. Such a suggestion is a corruption of the meaning of the word, undoubtedly the result of rulers throughout the history of mankind who have abused their power by abusing their subjects.
Mirriam-Webster defines “dominion” for learners of the English language as simply, “the power to rule.” The word’s etymology tells us that dominion derives ultimately from the Latin words for “rule, ownership” and “master, owner.” A man is certainly the master or owner of a pet, but no one would contend that his dominion over the animal allows him to mistreat it. Likewise, no one should insist that man’s dominion over the Earth allows him to mistreat it, either.
Thus, it is exceedingly reasonable to suspect that the negative connotation that “dominion” is understood to have nowadays results in a misinterpretation and/or misunderstanding of the original text of the Bible. The English, “to have dominion,” results from translating the Hebrew verb, “rada”, meaning “to rule.” However, if we are to understand what God truly meant by His statement, it is critically important that the translator choose the English verb that best represents the genuine meaning of the Hebrew word at that time in history.
Some people who have studied the original language of the Bible feel that the use of the word “dominion” in this context is inappropriate because of its current negative connotation. Language scholar Robert Alter translates “rada” as “to hold sway” in his 1996 translation of Genesis 1:26. His interpretation does away with the sense of absolute power people tend to believe is inherent in the word “dominion.”
Mr. Alter’s translation implies merely “to have a controlling influence.” This interpretation of “rada” is the only one that makes sense in terms of real life. Envision a shepherd with his flock of sheep. A shepherd recognizes the worth of his flock and therefore strives to ensure its wellbeing. His guidance of the flock helps to sustain the sheep as well as himself since he is dependent upon them for food and for clothing to protect him from the elements.
The same relationship holds true for humans and wildlife. By recognizing the worth of wildlife (which keeps the environment functioning properly) and ensuring its wellbeing, people ensure the perpetuity of mankind—which was exactly God’s plan.
But man, following his own council, has now made his own rules regarding his existence upon the Earth, ignoring the biological laws that govern all life forms. For example, when people attempt to banish many kinds of God’s organisms from their yards and towns, as if these creatures don’t belong there, their actions interfere with the natural system of checks and balances that prevents overpopulations of plants and animals. Problems arise because an overabundance of any kind of organism creates an imbalance that, if not soon corrected, will domino throughout the rest of the environment.
This situation can bring about a total collapse of the natural order, and if that occurs, the environment will become unstable and unsustainable for mankind—for whom it was created. The result is inevitably a variety of difficulties that people attempt to repair—albeit unsatisfactorily—because they don’t recognize that they do not possess the wisdom of the world’s Creator to solve such manmade environmental issues.
People need to understand that we must embrace the natural (i.e., godly) environment given us, rather than constantly trying to change it because we are convinced that we can “improve” it. However, man originally considered everything in Eden to be good, as God Himself had declared it to be as He worked on His creation [Genesis 1:4-31]¹, declaring seven times that everything He had created was either “good” or “very good.”
Man had no reason to think otherwise. But once he partook of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil against God’s instructions [Genesis 2: 16-17]², man then decided he knew better than God how to run the natural world. He became his own god, no longer revering the sanctity of God’s creations.
According to some Bible authorities, the word “good” in Genesis 2:16-17 is taken from a Hebrew word that does not mean a sense of righteousness, but rather something that is pleasant, agreeable, or valuable in estimation. The Hebrew word translated as “evil” more typically means unpleasant, disagreeable, or displeasing.
[http://www.meaningofgenesis.com/2011/09/and-lord-god-commanded-man-you-are-free.html]
Thus, man could now decide if something displeased him and he could try to change his environment, even if doing so went against the Lord’s will. Yet, it’s illogical to believe that God created a home for man that wouldn’t adequately support him, and that man would therefore need to “improve” his living conditions.
However: “A scorner [who refuses to believe the importance of maintaining a healthy environment] seeketh wisdom, and findeth it not; but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth [the value of the environment].” [Proverbs 14:6, comments in brackets mine] Consequently, man has irreparably damaged his home by giving in to his own desires.
But “woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes…” [Isaiah 5:21] “Seeist thou a man wise in his own conceit? There is more hope of a fool than of him.” [Proverbs 26:12]
Indeed, people often quote Genesis 1:28 (“Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it”) as the excuse for more and more people to exist with less and less wildlife. But the Bible doesn’t only tell man to multiply. According to Genesis 1:22¹, “And God blessed [His creatures of the air, ground, and sea], saying ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply upon the earth.’”
Obviously, humans are not meant to take up all the room on the planet. They are supposed to share it with all the other kinds of creatures God told to go forth and multiply—and with good reason: Man is dependent upon a properly functioning environment, which is only possible by way of those other kinds of organisms.
God granted man the authority and ability to make use of other kinds of life forms to help him survive, but He made clear that such power came with a moral responsibility regarding the welfare of those animals. For example, God gave man permission to employ animals, such as oxen, to plow a field in order that man could grow enough food for himself. But he was to take care of the oxen properly, which is why God instructed man to give the animals a day of rest: “Six days you shall do your work, but on the seventh day you shall rest; that your ox and your ass may have rest…” [Exodus 23:12]
The Bible tells us that “A righteous man has regard for the life of his beast, but the mercy of the wicked is cruel.” [Proverbs 12:10] Whether it be farmed animals, lab animals, or a multitude of wild animals, society has assuredly parted ways from the spirit of these Biblical texts.
Humans are loathe to recognize that they can’t change what God has wrought, because “With God are wisdom and might; he has counsel and understanding.” [Job 12:13] “In his hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind.” [Job 12:10]
Long ago, I adopted a quote from Zeno of Citium (an ancient Greek philosopher who lived from about 334 to 262 BC in this Phoenician-Greek city of Cyprus) as my motto to live by. Writing that “The goal of life is living in agreement with nature,” Zeno shared his realization that one would acquire peace of mind by living in harmony with the natural world.
He promoted the idea that everything happens for a reason, writing that “Divine Reason” sets into being natural laws of God’s design, and that grasping those laws in their entirety is the path of knowledge. Zeno felt that knowledge affords a strong defense in arguments, which is an indicator of a virtuous mind in tune with the nuances of the universe.
[http://www.thenagain.info/webchron/westciv/stoicism.html]
The Bible is in full agreement: “Happy is the man who finds wisdom, and the man who gets understanding, for the gain from it is better than gain from silver and its profit better than gold. She is more precious than jewels, and nothing you desire can compare with her. Long life is in her right hand; in her left hand are riches and honor. Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace. She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her; those who hold her fast are called happy. The Lord by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding he established the heavens; by his knowledge the deeps broke forth, and the clouds drop down the dew. My son, keep sound wisdom and discretion; let them not escape from your sight, and they will be life for your soul and adornment for your neck. Then you will walk on your way securely and your foot will not stumble. If you sit down, you will not be afraid; when you lie down your sleep will be sweet.” [Proverbs 3: 13-24]
God gave man everything he needed in Eden so man could focus on worshipping Him. Those folks who do not appreciate the necessity of living in agreement with nature have overlooked the warning dispensed in Genesis 2:16-17, “the day that you eat of [the tree of knowledge], you shall die.” Although most religious interpretations see this comment as referring to an individual’s mortality, it makes perfect sense to read it as a reference to the extinguishment of mankind on Earth.
It’s well known, historically, that civilizations collapse when their environments are despoiled. Everyone should be an environmentalist. The Bible—and nature—could not make this point any clearer.
“Let Heaven and Nature sing.”
[From the English Christmas carol written in 1719 by the English minister and hymn writer Isaac Watts, the lyrics of which are a Christian reinterpretation of Psalm 98; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_to_the_World]
FOOTNOTES:
¹Genesis 1:1-26
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.
And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
And God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. And God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.
And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. And God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
And God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens.” So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the cattle according to their kinds, and everything that creeps upon the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.
²Genesis 1:27-31
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” And God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food. And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so. And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.
³Genesis 2:16-17
And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die.”
Chapter Two: Observations of the Natural World Confirm the Existence of God
Although the Bible informs us that the proof of God’s existence is right before our eyes, many people—believers as well as non-believers—seem to be doubtful of this message. Believers often tend to regard as true that the existence of God is a matter of faith only. Non-believers simply do not consider whether proof exists because they have already reached a conclusion about the matter.
Other people claim that no one can prove or disprove the existence of God. They say there is no physical evidence we can use to verify His existence based upon our own observations or experience. They consider intellectual curiosity unwarranted because they deem the question unanswerable.
Then there are folks who feel that whether God exists makes no difference, so no one need bother asking the question in the first place. They feel whatever the answer turns out to be, it will not alter one’s life.
But if people were given undeniable proof that God does in fact exist, I am convinced that there would be a paradigm shift in people’s attitudes towards each other, the wildlife that shares this planet, and the physical environment that supports us.
How does having knowledge of nature make clear the existence of God? As explained in the Introduction, empirical evidence (based upon or verifiable by observation of the natural world) reveals a basic truth: All the organisms we study clearly exist to provide services that keep the environment functioning for the benefit (i.e., perpetuation) of nearby life forms.
However, there is one, and only one, organism that does not adhere to this truism: man. Mankind contributes absolutely nothing to the natural world. We exist simply to lead our lives; we do not pitch in one bit to help the environment sustain other life on Earth.
Man exists as a unique life form; he is not a part of nature. Science cannot explain such an evolutionary anomaly. American astronomer Carl Sagan popularized the statement that, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”, and you now possess that extraordinary evidence.
People have long believed that English naturalist Charles Darwin’s idea of biological evolution by natural selection (as opposed to “artificial” selection, which refers to selective breeding controlled by humans) disproved the existence of God. Darwin believed that natural selection was a plausible explanation for how a wide variety of life forms could have developed over time from one common ancestor, which seems to contradict the Bible. Darwin, himself, came to doubt the existence of God “now that the law of natural selection has been discovered.” [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Charles_Darwin]
And yet, Darwin’s theory supports the existence of God. He would have realized this truth if he had looked at the natural world from a broader perspective, rather than only looking at the survival capabilities of unique organisms within it.
Natural selection revolves around populations adapting, or becoming more well suited, to their environments as these surroundings change over time. Because Darwin focused only upon how the individual organism can better relate to its environment and itself survive, rather than going further and considering how the environment performs better due to the success of the individual’s adaptation, he missed the crucial point that the lives of organisms help maintain a properly functioning environment—which leads us directly to man’s aberrant place within it.
There can be only one explanation for such a deviation from the pathway of all other life forms. God must exist and He must have created mankind as a special entity—one that is not required to work for the benefit of all. Instead, man depends upon every other creature to work for his benefit as well as its own.
If man had simply evolved alongside other organisms, as scientists posit, why would his life role so completely depart from the established standard of every other organism upon the Earth? Evolution simply cannot explain such an incongruity.
However, the Bible tells us that God gave man everything he needed in Eden so man could focus on worshipping Him. Man was, most assuredly, exceptional. There was no expectation that man would participate in activities that keep the environment working correctly—and he doesn’t.
This glaring peculiarity begs the question of how it could have ever been overlooked. However, it only becomes obvious to those who completely grasp how the natural world—in its entirety—works, and very few people truly look at this big picture. If they do, they consider it only in terms of their own existence, rather than in conjunction with other life forms.
Of course, folks can always argue that irregularities happen, and that perhaps man’s odd status is simply due to a singularity in man’s evolution. But another peculiarity cinches the argument for the existence of God as the creator of man: All the large predatory animals that could easily rip people apart, if they wanted to do so, instead live in fear of mankind. It’s a fact that man has no natural predators, providing us with, perhaps, the most accurate meaning of God’s statement that man would have “dominion” over the Earth.
You may doubt that man has no natural predators. Nowadays, people are so removed from the natural world that they possess mistaken ideas about it. They tend to fear predators (even as small an animal as a fox), erroneously believing that animals which feed upon other animals would feed upon humans as well. However, historical sources confirm this isn’t so.
Lions, tigers, wolves, cougars, and bears, for example, have never readily preyed upon human beings, even though they could so effortlessly kill them for food. Throughout history, when given a choice, these predators preferred to move quickly and quietly away from people when their paths crossed.
Kevin Hanson, author of Cougar: The American Lion, tells us that American Indians respected the big cat’s hunting prowess, which apparently resulted in a way for them to get food without expending any effort themselves. After a cougar eats some of its meal, it caches the rest, and Native Americans took advantage of this trait to obtain meat more easily.
European immigrants, on the other hand, felt only fear and hatred for the animal—an attitude that is still very much prevalent in today’s descendants. That mindset is not surprising, considering that by the 1500s and 1600s, many of the people in Europe were already living in cities far removed from life in the natural world. Their lack of familiarity with predators undoubtedly resulted in fear of them, even though humans and such predators as wolves had already coexisted just fine for millennia.
However, the white settlers in America did not kill off cougars because the big cats went after them, but rather because these meat-eating animals sometimes went after their cattle. Likewise, in Africa, human/lion conflicts that had not formerly been a big issue are now threatening African lions with extinction.
Again, the problem is more about predation of livestock rather than of people, and its increase has much to do with modern herding methods. In the past, people conscientiously watched over their livestock, as mentioned in the Bible in Luke 2:8: “And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock [of sheep] by night.” [The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, The World Publishing Company, 1962.] Their simple presence served as a certain deterrent to livestock predators fearful of man.
Because the human population has grown so much—leaving limited space for lions and their prey—a starving lion may occasionally attack a human, adding to the desire to eliminate these animals altogether. But going after humans because of starvation is an act of sheer desperation. All animals need to eat and will take whatever they can get to quell hunger pangs, even if that happens to be a vulnerable human in the vicinity.
Starving people behave similarly. Although abhorrent to our sensibilities, some of the migrants in the snowbound Donner party (winter of 1846-47) were so desperate for food that they resorted to cannibalism. More recently, 16 survivors of a 1972 plane crash in the Andes also relied on cannibalism to survive the ordeal. Intense hunger is a stern and unapologetic driver of behavior.
[https://www.today.com/popculture/andes-uruguay-plane-crash-1972-survivors-now-rcna133498]
In America, native peoples may have domesticated the wolf (the wild ancestor of our dogs) because this species hung around their settlements looking for handouts. Another suggestion is that a reciprocal relationship existed in which both species provided food for each other or shared food. Either way, this canine allowed itself to become subservient to humans instead of asserting the power embodied in its size and fangs.
[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.2993/etbi-35-02-262-285.1]
If you are still skeptical and doubt that man has no natural predators, you need only to watch a circus act in which trainers demand unnatural behaviors from lions and tigers, such as making them jump through a hoop of fire. (Although circuses with animal acts no longer exist in the United States, videos are available for viewing on www.youtube.com) It is puzzling to see such big, muscular animals so intimidated by a man who couldn’t possibly defend himself against such brawny creatures, should they attack. Only the existence of God could possibly explain this seemingly nonsensical situation.
Of course, these captive big cats have, on occasion, killed their handlers, but not in a predator/prey relationship, but rather, in self-defense. The lifetime of stress they were made to endure (by being caged, frightened, and forced into abnormal behaviors) is antithetical to their biology (how they would be living their lives in the wild). As with humans, animals have their limits.
Sometimes you hear about bears or cougars attacking people, but it’s usually the result of an adult inserting himself into a situation of his own making by allowing his dog to run loose. Coming upon a bear or cougar minding its own business, the dog will harass it by barking in too-close proximity, which forces the predator to defend itself from perceived harm. When the dog owner tries to save his dog, he gets injured by the bear or cougar, too.
Similarly, when people leave their small pets, babies, or toddlers unattended in bear/cougar country, they invite predators to take what appears to be an easy meal. These animals fear adult humans, but not their children or small pets that adults are expected to know should never be left unguarded in such circumstances.
Unfortunately, these incidents get misrepresented to the public, giving the predatory animals a bad rap they do not deserve, which results in people misunderstanding, fearing, and despising such animals. But when you look at the natural world with an open mind and see it as it truly is, rather than based upon personal feelings or opinions influenced by erroneous assumptions, you can clearly recognize the evidence of God’s existence, whether or not you are already a believer.
In the case of these large predators, evolution cannot explain their apprehension when encountering humans. In nature, larger size equates to greater strength and thus the ability to dictate in which direction a confrontation proceeds. Yet this intense fear of mankind took place long before people were empowered by guns and other such weaponry to fight off any kind of large-predator attack.
Human beings, unlike other organisms, possess no built-in defenses to protect themselves. Even our basic senses are poorly developed for thriving in the natural world; we don’t see or smell or hear as well as other creatures do to avoid dangerous confrontations—if such a situation presented itself. Thus, from a scientific standpoint, humans are so ill-suited to survive in the natural world that it’s nonsensical to posit they evolved in the same manner as other life forms and are in no way different from them.
This is not to say that mankind did not evolve through time. The fossil record makes clear that while Homo sapiens may be the only humans alive today, other hominins (species regarded as human, directly ancestral to humans, or very closely related to humans) preceded us by millions of years.
[https://www.britannica.com/science/human-evolution/Increasing-brain-size]
But to be human is to be far different from the other creatures. To survive, humans needed a larger brain that enabled them to think and eventually to communicate with others, so they could figure out such things as how to stay warm in cold climates and how to make tools that would help them catch prey and engage in agriculture.
It’s far more rational to recognize how this situation speaks to the existence of God, who created a world in which man had no need to defend himself. The natural behavior of all the large predators on Earth has always been to avoid, rather than to confront, man—if possible. Only the existence of God can explain man’s degree of non-physical dominion over all the other kinds of creatures on Earth.
In fact, the Bible confirms this statement. Genesis 9:2 states: “The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every bird of the air, upon everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish of the sea; into your hand they are delivered.” [The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, The World Publishing Company, 1962.] Remarkably, but not surprisingly, everything I’ve learned on my own about the natural world is confirmed within the Bible.
A question often asked and answered is whether man is a part of nature or whether he is apart from it. Scientists argue via biological principles that man is a part of nature, while some politically minded folks say we are a part of nature only to justify our impacts upon the Earth, no matter how big or small.
In a paper published in 2017, John A. Vucetich, a professor of population ecology at the School of Forest Resources and Environmental Sciences at Michigan Technological University, concluded that common biological ancestry makes the animals and plants comprising nature our “siblings”, and thus we are “fundamentally one and the same.” He wrote that, “Ever since Darwin, common ancestry among living creatures is part of the bedrock of modern scientific thought.”
Other people argue that man is a part of nature only to excuse his damage to the Earth. After all, if man is a part of nature, then anything he does is “natural” and therefore must be acceptable as natural processes.
Rachel Carson declared that, “Man is a part of nature, and his war against nature is inevitably a war against himself.” Of course, she meant that desecration of the Earth would result in the destruction of mankind because, just as with other organisms, people depend upon the natural world.
[https://www.azquotes.com/author/17642-Rachel_Carson#google_vignette]
Yet, man’s “war against nature” furnishes yet more evidence that he is, in truth, apart from it, rather than a part of it. No other organism works out of agreement with the world around it.
You can see this for yourself by taking an honest look at your neighborhood. How much of your local area looks natural? Probably not much, because people view “overgrown” (i.e., what should be seen as “natural”) areas as unkempt and unbefitting a civilized society. Therefore, they constantly mow or herbicide plants alongside roadways and in parks—even national ones—to do away with the natural look that is so supportive of wildlife.
At entrances to homes, “wild” areas are replaced with plants more to the owners’ liking that makes everything neat and orderly, resulting in a sanitized (read “does not support wildlife”) appearance.
By not living in harmony with nature, man is obviously a different “beast”—one that is biologically disjunct from all others. Therefore, he can’t possibly be part and parcel of the natural world.
You now have in your possession the incontrovertible evidence that God exists. Will it change your attitude towards our natural world and the way you live your life? Only you can decide.
Chapter Three: Other Religions Agree with the Nature Revelation
By way of the Bible, I have shown that nature is a gift from God to humanity, which people are supposed to care for properly, not only out of respect for God’s property, but also for their own welfare. Additionally, I employed the Bible to show that nature proves the existence of God. I made extensive use of the Bible because it contains the Word of God in the Christian and Jewish faiths, the two religions with which I am most familiar.
However, I would be remiss if I did not discuss, to some extent, Islam and Hinduism—the two religions that, along with Christianity, comprise almost 70% of religious adherents in the world. If God truly exists, and He expects people to take care of His creation (the natural world), then we should find the same proof of these truths in the holy books that are akin to the Bible for each religion.
(It is not necessary for the purposes of this treatise to consider the remaining 30% of people who are either nonreligious or whose religious affiliations comprise several different religions.)
Those who practice Islam (“submission to the will of God”) worship the same God (“Allah”) as does a Christian and a Jew. However, to a Moslem (the word means “one who submits”), God’s word was incompletely expressed in the earlier scriptures of the Bible and fulfilled only by the Koran (or Qur’an, the Romanized form of Quran, “the reading” or “the recitation”).
The Koran, then, is the one sacred scripture of Islam. It consists of writings that convey revelations from God, delivered to Mohammed by the angel, Gabriel. However, Mohammed (unlike Jesus) claimed no divinity, insisting that he was only a man chosen to be the spokesman of God.
Like the Bible, the Koran discusses nature, which should not be surprising. It was written later than the Bible, in 609 AD (“Anno Domini”, “in the year of our Lord”, referring to the year of Christ’s birth) or CE (“Common Era”, referring to the date in the most commonly used calendar system, the Gregorian). Mohammed was not only familiar with the Scriptures of the Jews and the Christians, he testified to the truthfulness of them.
The Koran mentions nature numerous times, but there is no need to go into the amount of detail that I went into for the Bible. Verse 164 from the second Surah (chapter) entitled, “The Cow”, conveys the essence of Romans 1:19-20 (from the Bible) that nature (the creation) proves God’s existence, which supports my thesis.
Romans 1:19-20:
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.
Surah 2:164:
(To guide) those who use their reason (to this Truth [of Allah’s sovereignty]) there are many Signs in the structure of the heavens and the earth, in the constant alternation of night and day, in the vessels which speed across the sea carrying goods that are of profit to people, in the water which Allah sends down from the sky and thereby quickens the earth after it was dead, and disperse over it all manner of animals, and in the changing courses of the winds and the clouds pressed into service between heaven and earth.
Surah 2:162:
If a man were to observe the constant operation of this universe, reflect on it in a manner befitting a rational being, and think about it without either stubbornness or bias, he would find sufficient signs to convince him that this gigantic system is absolutely subservient to the will of the Omnipotent and Wise Being, Who alone wields all power and authority.
[http://islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=2&verse=164&to=167]
Of course, the many signs [of Allah’s sovereignty] for those who “use their reason” are only discernible to those who possess an accurate knowledge of how the natural world works and how it relates to the lives of humans. As specified in Surah 162, people “must reflect on [the constant operation of this universe] in a manner befitting a rational being, and think about it without either stubbornness or bias”. In other words, only those who observe objectively (without personal feelings or opinions) the workings of nature can recognize the natural order of life and the usefulness (value) to their own existence of everything that surrounds them. This knowledge in particular points the way to the definitive proof of God’s existence, as revealed in Chapter Two.
Also mentioned in the Koran, just as in the Bible, Allah made the Sun and the Moon, the entire celestial sky, all beings on the earth, the day and the night, the rivers, and whatever is in the earth “subjected” to man. As with the Bible, the meaning in the original language of the Koran (Classical Arabic, “tasxir”—“subjection”) implies that these things exist alongside humans to sustain them. Humans were not to utilize them as if man owned and could do with them whatsoever he wished.
[https://www.al-islam.org/enlightening-commentary-light-holy-quran-vol-8/section-1-signs-allah-nature]
As pointed out in Surah 162: “Moreover, this system seems to be such as to rule out all possibility of any interference from others whether independent of the Creator of the universe or in partnership with Him. Since this One True God is the Lord of all creation and none else is in possession of any power or authority, none is entitled to any share in His godhead or overlordship [emphasis mine]”.
[http://islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=2&verse=164&to=167]
Nowadays, many people often misinterpret the word, “dominion”, in the Bible, to mean they do have the authority to treat the Earth howsoever they wish. Yet such an interpretation of the Bible or the Koran is senseless; God would never suggest that people take actions that would destroy the environment He created especially to feed, clothe, and shelter them.
Nor does it make sense that God would allow the suffering of creatures at the hands of man. What kind of example would that set for the way people should behave? It is well known that people who mistreat animals are highly likely to mistreat their fellow human beings.
As humanitarian Dr. Albert Schweitzer wrote, “Anyone who has accustomed himself to regard the life of any living creature as worthless is in danger of arriving also at the idea of worthless human lives.” Robert K. Resslar, an FBI agent and author who developed psychological profiles of serial killers, wrote that “Murderers…very often start out by killing and torturing animals as kids.”
In Hinduism, on the other hand, every creature—even an ant—is sacred because believers see God in all of creation, as indeed everyone should, regardless of religious affiliation. Such reverence, demonstrated by nonviolence to animals as well as humans, is in sharp contrast to the manner in which many people in modern American and European society tend to treat their fellow inhabitants of the planet.
Consider snakes. It is obvious from popular culture that many, perhaps even a majority of, Americans greatly fear and despise these animals, and that they kill them on sight. This attitude surprised an Indian rheumatologist who treated my rheumatoid arthritis for a few years. Knowing that I was a nature writer, he wondered why Americans were so afraid of snakes. He told me how, in India, people revered these serpents because of the environmental role they play in helping to limit rodent numbers. And therein lies the crux of the matter.
In India, where people view wildlife as being of God, and where they comprehend the importance of wildlife to their own existence, they tend not to be afraid of nature. But, in America, most folks are so removed from the natural world that they usually hardly notice it, and they consider nature as possessing no, or very little, value to their lives.
Only when wildlife interferes with their existence do folks give it much thought, and then only to get it removed because they fear it, or find its presence inconvenient. Such views, of course, are only possible if one does not understand the natural world—or God.
Shri Ramakrishna, said to be India’s most influential religious reformer, spent his life (1836 to 1886) contemplating God. Having practiced the spiritual disciplines of many different religions, he concluded that all of them were true and led to the same goal of communion with the same God [emphasis mine]. He therefore saw all religions as harmonious, each providing us with representations of one truth, with the differences between religions being due simply to viewing the truth from a variety of perspectives.
The fact that the major religions of the world reached the identical conclusions—that there is but one God, and that nature is of great significance to human lives—furnishes the ultimate validation of my thesis that a true (accurate) knowledge of nature reveals that God exists.
Lastly, the people who best understand the natural world—because their survival depends upon it—are aboriginal groups living close to the land, as the American Indian once did. A sampling of quotes from Native Americans illustrates their belief in one god whom nature revealed.
Native American Wisdom
Edward S. Curtis, the photographer renowned for his twenty-volume magnum opus completed in 1930, The North American Indian, included text with his photographs that described folk stories, religious rites, tribal histories, and songs. In 1994, Running Press published a very small book (3.25 by 2.5 inches) called Native American Wisdom, with some of Curtis’ photos and text that quotes “statements of cultural value, beliefs, and attitudes from a number of Native Americans who lived and experienced tribal life in the years between the Civil War and 1930.”
The inside cover of my pre-owned copy of Native American Wisdom holds a birthday inscription from “Pop”, who wrote, “There is much wisdom in this little book.” And so, I found, there certainly is. Herewith, Native American quotes that fall right in line with the idea of one God whose existence is obvious by way of the natural world.
From Eagle Chief [Letakots-Lesa] who lived in the late 19th century and was a member of the Pawnee: In the beginning of all things, wisdom and knowledge were with the animals, for Tirawa [the Pawnee tribe’s “father” spirit], the One Above, did not speak directly to man. He sent certain animals to tell men that he showed himself through the beasts, and that from them, and from the stars and the sun and the moon should man learn…all things tell of Tirawa [emphasis mine].
From Brave Buffalo (late 19th century), a Teton Sioux medicine man: I have noticed in my life that all men have a liking for some special animal, tree, plant, or spot of earth. If men would pay more attention to these preferences and seek what is best to do in order to make themselves worthy of that toward which they are so attracted, they might have dreams which would purify their lives. Let a man decide upon his favorite animal and make a study of it, learning its innocent ways. Let him learn to understand its sounds and motions. The animals want to communicate with man, but Wakantanka [the “great spirit” of the Dakota Indian tribe] does not intend they shall do so directly—man must do the greater part in securing an understanding [emphasis mine]. NOTE: This comment especially struck a chord with me the moment I read it, as it describes exactly what led me to my nature revelation.
From Lone Man [Isna la-wica] (late 19th century) of the Teton Sioux—advice he received from a medicine man: If a man is to succeed on the hunt or on the warpath, he must not be governed by his inclination, but an understanding of the ways of animals and of his natural surroundings, gained through close observation. The earth is large, and on it live many animals. The earth is under the protection of something which at times becomes visible to the eye [as it did to me].
From Chased-by-Bears (1843-1915) of the Santee-Yanktonai Sioux: When a man does a piece of work which is admired by all we say that it is wonderful; but when we see the changes of day and night, the sun, the moon, and the stars in the sky, and the changing seasons upon the earth, with their ripening fruits, anyone must realize that it is the work of someone more powerful than man.
From Luther Standing Bear (1868?-1939), an Oglala Sioux chief: Out of the Indian approach to life came a great freedom—an intense and absorbing love of nature; a respect for life; enriching faith in a Supreme Power [emphasis mine]; and principles of truth, honesty, generosity, equity, and brotherhood as a guide to mundane relations.
From Gertrude Simmons Bonnin [Zitkala-Sa] (1876-1938) of the Dakota Sioux: … the voice of the Great Spirit is heard in the twittering of birds, the rippling of mighty waters, and the sweet breathing of flowers. If this is Paganism, then at present, at least, I am a Pagan.
From Big Thunder [Bedagi], a Wabanaki Algonquin who lived in the late 19th century: The Great Spirit is in all things; he is in the air we breathe. The Great Spirit is our Father, but the earth is our mother. She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us…
From Mourning Dove [Christine Quintasket] (1888-1936), a member of the Salish: …everything on the earth has a purpose, every disease an herb to cure it, and every person a mission. This is the Indian theory of existence.
From Wooden Leg (late 19th century) of the Cheyenne: The old Indian teaching was that it is wrong to tear loose from its place on the earth anything that may be growing there. It may be cut off, but it should not be uprooted. The trees and the grass have spirits. Whatever one of such growths may be destroyed by some good Indian, his act is done in sadness and with a prayer for forgiveness because of his necessities…
From Luther Standing Bear (1868?-1939), an Oglala Sioux chief: I am going to venture that the man who sat on the ground in his tipi meditating on life and its meaning, accepting the kinship of all creatures, and acknowledging unity with the universe of things was infusing into his being the true essence of civilization [emphasis mine].
From Toohoohoolzote (mid-19th century), a Nez Perce chief: When I shot any kind of bird, when I killed, I saw that the life went out with its blood. This taught me for what purpose I am here. I came into this world to die. My body is only to hold a spirit life [emphasis mine; it’s how I felt when my mother died, which I’ve written about in the Epilogue].
From Seattle [Seatlh] (1786-1866), a Suquamish chief: There is no death. Only a change of worlds.
From Chased-by-Bears (1843-1915) of the Santee-Yanktonai Sioux: It is the general belief of the Indians that after a man dies his spirit is somewhere on earth or in the sky, we do not know exactly where, but we are sure that his spirit still lives…So it is with Wakantanka [the “great spirit” of the Dakota Indian tribe]. We believe that he is everywhere, yet he is to us as the spirits of our friends, whose voices we cannot hear.
From Black Elk, a Wichasha [Holy Man] of the Oglala Lakota: We should understand that all things are the work of the Great Spirit. We should know the Great Spirit is within all things: the trees, the grasses, the rivers, the mountains, and the four-legged and winged peoples…When we understand all this deeply in our hearts, we will love and know the Great Spirit, and then we will be and act and live as the Great Spirit intends.
Chapter Four: The Final Evidence That God Exists
You may wonder how the proof of God’s existence presented in this treatise is distinct from Creationism and/or Intelligent Design. Basically, these two “theories”—or explanations, if you will—ask folks simply to believe a supreme being brought about the universe and everything in it, but they offer no real authentication that shows this assumption to be valid. The Nature Revelation, on the other hand, serves as a testament to what anyone can personally confirm for himself by way of direct observation of the natural world.
Supporters of Creationism see the scientific theory of evolution as problematic due to a lack of fossil-record completeness, or because of other things that are difficult to verify fully (such as more-complex life forms having arisen from much simpler ones, or life arising from non-life). However, evolution is based upon actual physical evidence (such as fossils) and well understood laws of physics and chemistry that allow the aging of soils, etc., that cannot be denied. Reality is the final arbiter of truth.
Evolution is simply a way to explain the documentation available from hands-on research, even if it’s insufficient to answer every question we might have. But that does not necessarily signal it’s wrong, in and of itself, nor that it says anything about whether God exists, or not.
If God has all eternity to experiment, who’s to say He didn’t just get the ball (the Earth) rolling (by creating it) and is watching patiently to see how things go? Mankind does not need to know exactly how life began or why, but that doesn’t mean we can’t do our best to understand the world, and even the universe, around us in terms of what we know to be physically real.
The primary focus of Intelligent Design, besides expressing concern about evolutionary theory not fully explaining the origin of life and its continuing progression towards a huge variety of life forms, is that nature is complicated, and therefore a designer (God) must be involved in its creation. However, the fossil record does show successively more-intricate life forms with the passage of time; it’s a physical record of life on Earth that attests to this reality of simple to more complex. Thus, it’s hard to definitively argue that you can’t get complexity in nature without a god, although—of course—the fossil record does not necessarily imply this wasn’t the blueprint of a god.
In other words, evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design explanations of life on this planet consist of conjecture, not hard-and-fast proof. Only the tenets of the nature revelation put forth previously in this treatise provide genuine evidence of the existence of God.
That said, a singular example in temperate regions of the natural world upholds the idea of an empathetic and caring God—the existence of biennial plants, a type of plant that starts to grow roots, stems, and leaves from seed in the late summer/early fall of the year.
At that time, the biennial (sometime called a short-lived perennial) puts forth a very short stem, and leaves that normally form a rosette at ground level. These leaves invariably degrade to some extent over the winter, if they are not first eaten by herbivorous animals. By spring, when warm temperatures encourage the plant to resume growing, it must grow new leaves and then the flowering stalk(s) to produce seeds for the next generation. When it has accomplished its “mission”, the plant dies.
Botanically speaking, no reason justifies a plant starting to grow as the end of the normal growing season is approaching. Producing leaves that may be eaten or turn to mush by spring, and having then to grow yet more leaves when warmth returns, seems a waste of energy.
If this “strategy” for success of a biennial were truly advantageous, there wouldn’t be far fewer biennial species than perennial and annual ones. So, what is the point of growing over the course of two different growing seasons? There can be only one reason, and that is to supply food for wildlife.
Herbivorous mammals (such as deer and rabbits) that remain active during winter face the difficult task of finding food when there is no fresh growth to be had and cold temperatures are pushing them to find ever more sources of sustenance to maintain their core body temperature. Biennial leaves serve as a source of fresh food. Also, in spring some kinds of insects (such as bees) respond quickly to rising temperatures, coming out of hibernation when a variety of very early-blooming biennials can feed them with nectar and pollen.
Biennials do not really get an evolutionary advantage over perennials and annuals to perpetuate their own species, making their existence an irrefutably valid proof of thoughtful consideration—by God.
Conclusion—Nature, Man, and God: The Trinity for Life
The natural world is currently viewed by most people as if it is expendable. This happens, unfortunately, when people become more “civilized” and thus no longer directly interact so much with nature. Over time then, they lose touch with how essential it is to their lives.
Indeed, a goodly fraction of people feel that if land is not developed or somehow utilized by humans, then that land is wasted. They see no value whatsoever in land conserved mainly for the benefit of wildlife.
But, if you don’t landscape in a manner that mirrors the natural world and supports an abundance of wildlife, you are turning a blind eye towards the appropriate relationship of man to nature. God gave the planet Earth to man, and in its God-given (i.e., natural) state, it served as a pristine haven that provided a source of nourishment for the body and soul.
Man was not required to change, modify, or “correct” in any way this holy gift. All he had to do was to take care of this wondrous benefaction by living by the rules that governed it. In other words, he had only to obey the laws of nature.
Is all of this to say that we should not use our ingenuity to live with less hardship? No, it is not. However, we do need to transform our lives to live more simply. To accomplish this change, we must first humble ourselves so that we may determine what is truly meaningful and necessary for our existence upon the Earth. Then we can more easily implement how best to both fit in with, and impact less, the natural world.
For example, by keeping our immediate environment in a more natural state, as we should, we would cause less air, water, and soil pollution because there would be less mowing, weed-whacking, and leaf blowing. By limiting our use of energy to that which is truly vital to our wellbeing, such as heating homes in the dead of winter or cooling them during summer heat waves, we would conserve natural resources and curb harm to the environment.
Yes, this is a call to live less extravagantly, but not less comfortably. Sensible limitations are neither too burdensome nor too restrictive, especially when you consider how much they lessen your impact upon the planet. If everyone took better care of the Earth, scientists wouldn’t need to figure out how to get people to Mars and then somehow create a habitable environment on a celestial body not at all conducive to human existence.
Today, too many folks think wrongly about the natural world and about how to live their lives in relation to it. This attitude must change, even if you do not believe that God exists. It is simply common sense to conserve resources, and to follow the dictates of Mother Nature, if you will.
Be inspired by nature to live in harmony with it and you will find peace of mind. The nature revelation of God’s existence is hard to dispute: Nature, man, and God are inextricably entwined, making up the trinity for life not only to exist, but to persist.
Epilogue: Why You Should Believe This Treatise
From time immemorial, man has felt that there was more to life than his physical manifestation upon the Earth. Throughout the ages and in every culture, man has expressed a belief in his own immortality.
Is this preoccupation with life after physical death just the result of man’s hope to avoid the finality that appears to be the fate of all living things? Or could it be our intuition that we really do possess an indestructible soul that lives on once we depart our bodies, and we inherently sense this truth?
As stated at the beginning of this treatise, I have never concerned myself with religion or even pondered much whether we would somehow live on following death. Yet when my mother died in my home in 1993 as I held her hand, I experienced what I truly felt to be a departure of her “soul”.
Several minutes before she stopped breathing, her eyes opened briefly, and then reclosed. I immediately sensed that only her body remained and that she herself (the essence of what comprised who she was) had just left. I cannot explain why exactly I felt as I did, other than to say that—for some reason—my mother just did not seem to be “in there” anymore. Her body seemed lifeless, even though it was still breathing air in and out.
Having never before watched someone die, and never having given much thought to the actual process of dying and what it might mean for one’s soul, I certainly cannot offer any explanation for why I should have felt what I did. However, about two weeks prior to my mom’s death, something else had occurred which, in retrospect, lends credence to the idea that a person has a soul that would indeed leave the body to go elsewhere.
My mother had cancer and I was her sole caregiver during the final year of her life. About two weeks before she passed (how appropriate a word for what I experienced), I walked into the room where she had been bedridden for many months and noticed a strange look on her face. She was staring off into the corner of the room in front of her.
I asked what she was looking at, and she told me her family was telling her it was time to “come home”. Ever the scientist, I wanted more details so I could understand what was happening. Although she herself was still “all there” mentally, I could not help but wonder if this was simply an hallucination as the cancer infiltrated her brain.
So, I inquired who was there in front of her. The answer astounded me. She saw her long-dead father and mother, as well as her brother who had died as a child from scarlet fever, a leading cause of death among children in the early 20th century. She did not see her still-living brother; she saw only the members of her immediate family who had all died a long time ago.
If, indeed, we are more than just the sum of physical parts that make up our being, and we each possess a soul (or some sort of spiritual aspect to who we are) that really is immortal, my mother’s experience makes perfect sense. How incredibly loving is the thought that the members of her family, who had already moved on, would come to her as her physical body was giving out so she would not fear going “home”.
Throughout my life, my mother had made clear that death was not something she wanted discussed in her presence. For as long as I can remember, she had been terrified of death, the result, I believe, of losing her brother when she herself was a mere child.
In fact, the association of flowers with funerals so impacted her that she absolutely hated flowers inside the house. One day my father brought home a lovely white Easter lily, and she screamed at him to get rid of it—a scene I’ll never forget because her angst so clashed with the serene beauty of the blossom.
Yet, less than two weeks after my mother saw her long-departed family, she met her end without the least bit of fear—a truly miraculous feat, considering that throughout her illness, her impending death was not something I could discuss with her. Her last words to me were in a tone of total acceptance as she stated very matter-of-factly that she was “going now”.
I then asked if she wanted me to get a priest, as we had been Catholic and she had gone to church up until she was too ill to attend anymore. She chuckled—in a derisive manner, no question about it and much to my surprise—before answering no. She seemed confident that no religious “fuss” was necessary. And that is just as I would expect it should be.
The Dalai Lama XIV is quoted as saying, “This is my simple religion. No need for temples. No need for complicated philosophy. Your own mind, your own heart is the temple. Your philosophy is simple kindness.”
[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/34322-this-is-my-simple-religion-no-need-for-temples-no]
Religions function as a way for man to feel connected to God in communion with other folks, but perhaps a better way to find God is via the appreciation of nature, the holy gift that not only makes our physical lives possible, but also attests to God’s existence. It took almost two decades after my mother’s dying days for me to experience my nature revelation, but when I did, it was astonishing to see how well it meshed with my mother’s end-of-life experiences.
Still, you may be skeptical of the nature revelation that God exists. However, you should not be skeptical of the information about the natural world contained in this book, which is real and vitally important to the future of mankind.
Each person must recognize how much his own life is contingent upon the proper functioning of the environment that depends completely upon the existence of wildlife. Only then will people understand the absolute necessity of altering their lifestyles as necessary to live simply (with as small an impact upon the Earth as possible) so that we allow plenty of room for wildlife to continue to coexist with us.
Individuals must also speak out and set examples by their own behaviors (such as landscaping in a more natural manner) to those who are afraid or unwilling to make the changes necessary to sustain life on Earth in these modern times.
My hope is that you will see this treatise as a beacon, a guiding light to salvation for all life on Earth. I also hope that you will take to heart the words of thirteen-year-old Anne Frank (the young Jewish girl who wrote a diary during the two years she and her family were hiding from Nazis): “How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world.” Indeed. Let us all get started immediately.
Final Thoughts: Overpopulation of Man a Damning Problem for Eden
You now know that the Bible tells us that all creatures were to go forth and multiply (Chapter One) so that the Earth—unique in all the universe, as far as we know—could then function in a self-sustaining manner for man and all of God’s other creatures.
Because the planet was mostly uninhabited, there was plenty of space for all life forms, including man, to fill at that time. But even then, for this system to work properly, populations of every creature had to be kept limited in number relative to each other, which is why a system of checks and balances existed, even for humans.
Before modern medicine came along, injuries and diseases shortened the life spans of both children and adults, and giving birth was fraught with peril for women. But once man figured out how to rather successfully get around these limiting factors, the Earth began to become overwhelmed by his numbers. Many circumstances nowadays point to the validity of this statement, such as the extinction of other life forms as humans have taken over their space, and the pollution of land, sea, and air as too many people live their lives.
Perhaps a more obvious proof is the depletion of natural foodstuffs, bringing about the need to create artificial ones, such as imitation vanilla, imitation crab, and imitation shrimp. Most telling of all is the talk of now using insects as an animal protein source.
The Earth is in a state of rapidly failing health, and is moving inexorably to the point of no longer being able to provide the essentials necessary for our existence. We would be wise to heed a quote from Lao Tzu, an ancient Chinese philosopher and writer, who warns us, “If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading.” Do we really want to continue upon our current path that will inevitably lead us to the end of the road for mankind?
[https://www.learnreligions.com/laozi-the-founder-of-taoism-3182933]
It’s easy enough to comprehend the “prescription” that has come to us from the Bible for how man is to survive upon the Earth because it’s so logical. God does not just expect humans to coexist with other organisms upon the Earth; He demands it. Like it or not, we cannot change how His system works, which tells us that an overpopulation of humans is a damning problem for the Earth (Eden)—and ultimately, us.
Addendum—A Basic Explanation of Evolution
Before Virginia became overpopulated with White-tailed Deer, the author was able to grow an abundance of yellow In 2024, these plants demonstrated their will to live, despite being fed upon continuously by deer, by trying to regrow leaves—and in the end, a single blossom—in an unsuccessful effort to perpetuate their kind.
Evolution is a complex explanation of how life forms have changed over time. A common misconception is that it informs us of how life began on Earth, but it does not.
What it does do is explain how populations of organisms become modified over generations, leading to a diversity of organisms, some of which can be quite different from their original ancestors. The driving force behind this biological concept is known as natural selection.
The biological unit of heredity that can change how an individual looks, behaves, and/or how its body works, is known as a “gene”. At its simplest, evolution is about adaptation to one’s environment by way of gene mutations that allow helpful survival traits to be passed on to subsequent generations. It’s a wonderful manner in which to perpetuate life as environmental transformations occur on a physically evolving planet. Of course, it means that the planet is changing biologically as well.
Some folks would argue that the interconnectedness of organisms, as—for example—in the dependence of flowers upon pollinators such as bees to help them reproduce, speaks to “spontaneous creation”. The fallacy here arises due to folks making the mistake of looking at the world as it is today, and assuming it has always been the same. It hasn’t.
Evolution—which fossils corroborate—is the process of life forms going from simple to more complicated. Thus, the first plants were not flowering plants dependent upon insects, but ferns and other primitive plants that could reproduce themselves by self-developed spores.
By the time the much more-intricate flowering plants arrived on the scene, insects not as advanced as bees—such as flies and beetles—existed that could pollinate them. Although bees get the lion’s share of the credit for pollination by insects, numerous other kinds of these creatures assist flowering plants to reproduce, even to this day.
To many people, perhaps especially scientists, evolution killed God. However, this view is wrong, as shown by this treatise. The natural world works perfectly and logically, its function being to perpetuate life in all its wondrous diversity of forms.
Indeed, a life force (which can be described as a push or pull upon an object) exists inside every organism, pushing or pulling it in various directions throughout its life. Unlike in physics, where a force is an external agent capable of impacting a body, the life force is an internal agent comprising an extremely strong will to live.
My decades of careful nature observations have revealed to me the stubbornness of this force. I’ve witnessed how animals, and even plants, fight to live, even when death—so seemingly feared by all—is inevitable.
The poet, Dylan Thomas, wrote:
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
[https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46569/do-not-go-gentle-into-that-good-night]
But my mother’s experience tells me differently. I don’t believe there is a “dying of the light”, and I hope you won’t either. I don’t believe the life force within each and every organism is extinguished, but rather that it continues on in the universe. Do not fear death; my mom didn’t, and now, neither do I. We are simply “going Home”.
Listing of Scientific Names of Organisms Mentioned in the Text
ANIMAL
INSECT
Ant—Family Formicidae
Damselfly, Aurora—Chromagrion conditum
Beetle, Red Milkweed—Tetraopes tetroph
Bug, Large Milkweed—Oncopeltus fasciatus
Butterfly, Monarch—Danaus plexippus
Butterfly, Sachem Skipper—Atalopedes campestris
Butterfly, Variegated Fritillary—Euptoieta claudia
MAMMAL
Ass (Donkey)—Equus africanus asinus
Bear, American Black—Ursus americanus
Cougar—Puma concolor
Cow—Bos taurus; Ox—usually, a castrated adult bull (Bos taurus)
Deer—Family Cervidae; Deer, White-tailed—Odocoileus virginianus; Elk—Cervus canadensis; Moose—Alces americanus
Dog—Canis lupus familiaris
Lion—Panthera leo
Man—Homo sapiens
Raccoon, Common—Procyon lotor
Sheep—Ovis aries
Tiger—Panthera tigris
Wolf—Family Canidae
MARINE
Oyster—Family Ostreidae
REPTILE
Black (or Eastern) Rat Snake—Elaphe obsoleta obsolete
PLANT
Black Knapweed—Centaurea nigra
Daylily—Hemerocallis spp.
Fleabane, Common—Erigeron philadelphicus
Fleabane, Daisy—Erigeron annuus
Lantana—Lantana camerata
Lily, Easter—Lilium longiflorum
Milkweed, Common—Asclepias syriaca
Rose, Cultivated—Family Rosaceae
Strawberry, Domestic—hybrid between Fragaria virginiana and Fragaria chiloensis, two different species native to the Americas
Violet, Common—Viola sororia
About the Author
Naturalist Marlene A. Condon has a degree in physics. Her scientific background includes published contributions to astrophysical research in The Astrophysical Journal and The Astronomical Journal. She is the author and photographer of The Nature-friendly Garden (Stackpole Books, 2006) and gave monthly slide presentations in Shenandoah National Park for 13 years (spring through fall). You may contact her at marlenecondon@aol.com
The Nature Revelation: God Exists
The Bible Declares It; Evolution Confirms It
© 2024 Marlene A. Condon All Rights Reserved
THE END
Leave a Reply