Hello and welcome. Thank you for stopping by. This is Part II of my contentions and opinion related to the latest research results about free will as proposed by neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky in his recently released book titled “Determined”. Based on the summary of opinions by experts in response to the book, it appears that the author concluded that man has no free will. It is my contention however that before we make such a conclusion, I urge experts to include the design of the atom in making this call. The reason is both scientific and biblical.
In my book titled the “THE MAGNIFICENCE OF THE 3”, I’m contenting that according to the biblical record, when God created Adam, He imitated the design of the atom in designing him. This design included the redesign of the atom’s three particles, the neutral neutron, the positive proton, and the negative electron particles. What God did was redesign the atom’s particles and turn them into emotions. This is why emotions turned out to be divided into two groups: positive and negative emotions. As the atom has a neutron, emotions were therefore mandated to have one as well. God redesigned the neutron for emotions and called it desire. This was the reason why desire was the first emotion to show up in biblical records.
By displaying and including desire in the incident in the Garden of Eden, Genesis 3: 6, God made it known that emotions were innate. This is one example of the scientific nature of God’s parabolic records. This was significant as the introduction of an emotion there when there were only two people on earth, contradicts proposals by the evolution crowd of emotions as being learned from the environment rather than innate.
A. The Science of Freewill
I ended Part I with identities of the Tree of Knowledge (brain neuron); Garden of Eden (brain forest); Tree of Life (the Ten Commandments); and the Ark of the Covenant as the manifestation of the invisible atom. These are all elements that we must apply in determining the quest in search of free will, and these four icons were recorded in the Bible. These icons are now scientific facts and we must include them in determining whether God designed the brain with free will in mind.
The very first scientific fact that we must include in our search was how the brain was randomly designed, or by God to be developed for survival purposes. According to available research, it appears that the brain was designed to be developed involving emotions (desire) and neurons (tree of knowledge). Our scientific experts recently linked emotions (desire) to learning (tree of knowledge) and memory (Siegel-Itzkovich, 2015)
The second scientific fact is a brain function known as brain plasticity and a process known as synaptic pruning. Brain Plasticity is the ability of the brain to change and adjust itself due to new experiences. It does this for example, by growing new neurons as a result of learning new things it experiences. It also has the ability to get rid of neurons that were already grown with the synaptic pruning process. Synapses are brain structures that the brain neurons use to transmit chemical signals to other neurons (Cafasso, 2018). A synapse is a small gap at the end of a neuron that is used by the brain to transmit information from one neuron to the next. They are strengthened with repeated use and are weakened when they are not.
When they are weakened, the brain prunes them off and it is this process that we must study further to determine fully whether this element of the brain was designed, and if it was, what is the implication for the host’s free will to choose the best survival traits?
Scientific facts establish that the brain adjusts itself by either strengthening the synapse connections or weakening them. The brain owner strengthens connections through its constant use (driving a car) or weakens synapses with the lack of use (stops driving).
The third interesting fact as of today that must be included as evidence, is the discovery that humans are born with preloaded synaptic connections that the host ends up using for survival purposes. According to experts, we inherit 50% of our neural networks from our ancestors, and we develop the other 50% through our own experiences and from what we learn. (Dispenza, 2007), at pp.186-189. This means that a behavioral trait by an ancestor is passed forward to descendants.
The best example was provided by researchers who observed a worm eating a bacteria that killed it. Before it died, it birthed babies. Researchers then observed four generations of the mother avoid the bacteria that killed her. They came to conclude that the mother passed what appeared to be a survival mechanism that saved the lives of descendants by avoiding the deadly bacteria even though they never come in contact with this bacteria before. Similarly, human mothers have been confirmed to pass stress to babies as well.
It appears from these two examples that the choices for both the worm’s children and the human ones, were preordained, or done by some neurological or biological mechanism without any input from them.
These three basic scientific facts are important as they indicate the following. First, the brain was designed to adjust to improve survival by creating new connections. Second, the brain has to ability to prune off and discard old connections of traits that were no longer useful for survival. Third, there is proof that 50% of traits are inherited by descendants as shown by the worms and stressful human children.
The obvious question for me is who, or what makes the choices to strengthen new connections. Does the host make them or was the brain designed to make them for the host? Furthermore, one structural design appears to say that who we become is partly a result of traits that we inherit from our ancestors. It clearly implicates the individual’s free choice as to whom to become as an adult since half of that choice was already done by design.
B. The Design of the Tree of Knowledge and Garden of Eden.
The design of these biblical icons in their scientific states as proposed by our experts can help shape the conclusion as to whether mankind was designed with the freedom to choose or whether survival decisions are preordained.
The recent discoveries of the link between emotions and learning are crucial in understanding the biblical design. This is where God and science converge. What science helped in revealing and clarifying was the role God meant for emotion to play in developing the Garden of Eden or the brain.
Based on biblical records, God presented the decision by Eve to go for knowledge as a free choice. Here is the summary of the story. God initially told Adam not to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. God then created his female partner, named her Eve, and classified her as the “helper”. Genesis 2: 18-23. It was the helper who decided to disobey God and chose to go for knowledge.
It was through her decision that God introduced what I claim to be the neutron of emotions, that of “desire”. I am claiming that when God created Adam, He imitated the design of the atom to create him. God redesigned the atom’s opposite-attract particles to create Adam with and our scientists came to refer to them as emotions. These emotions had been classified by our experts coincidentally as opposite-attract as well. Emotions are of two classes: positive and negative emotions, similar to the design of the atom’s opposite-attract particles.
With Eve’s decision to go for knowledge, God included an emotion in the decision. It was a monumental revelation as it was one example of the scientific nature of the Bible. God was the first to connect emotion (desire) and learning (knowledge) with the story in the Garden of Eden and this is now confirmed by our experts who recently linked emotion to learning and memory (Siegel-Itzkovich, 2015).
This discovery finally brought science and the Garden of Eden together for me. What God preserved in the story about the so-called fall-of-man, was that desire, the representative of emotions in the story, would be the tools needed for developing the neurons (tree of knowledge) and the brain (neuron forest or Garden of Eden). This was why God included “desire” in the decision by Eve to go for knowledge in spite of death.
Eve’s decision provided the very first example of a human decision for survival facilitated by emotion. Remember that our experts have concluded that behind every human action, reaction or behavior is an emotion and God revealed this brain design then with Eve. How did this decision by Eve implicate free will?
A general review of the literature from science appears to point out that Eve’s decision might have been automated if the brain was designed to grow new neurons with each experience or prune them off with the synaptic pruning process cited above.
What’s even more telling are findings that we inherit 50% of traits from our ancestors. So who we become as people is partly the result of traits developed and inherited by others. This conclusion makes sense with the story about Eve and the decision to go for knowledge. Developing the brain began from somewhere and according to God, it began with Eve and desire the emotion.
The church attributed mortal death mistakenly to Eve’s decision to go for knowledge, but all God recorded was the structural design of the neurons and the brain. To develop it, emotions were going to be needed. After all, the Tree of Life was also in the Garden, indicating that living immortal in the flesh was not available.
The decision by Eve had free will overtones. God attached death to acquiring knowledge and yet, Eve chose knowledge. Was the brain designed to make this call for Eve? This is the area where better minds must dig deeper into as Eve’s decision to disobey with mortal death hanging over her denoted a free will decision.
Furthermore, Eve had no human ancestor to learn from whether knowledge was good or bad for survival. She did not inherit any traits from any other humans except for Adam as she was designed from his rib, but Adam was without the desire for knowledge. Where did she learn that knowledge of good and evil would be good for mankind if she did not inherit it from Adam since he had no desire for knowledge?
The only biblical explanation was that Eve was created as the helper for Adam. Eve as I claim, was the manifestation of emotions in the flesh. God gave emotions flesh and bones and Eve was it. God cited Eve as the helper, and our experts came later and classified emotions as helpers as well. Classifying emotions as helpers gave meaning to God’s classification of Eve as the helper. There is a more expansive discussion of this claim in the book.
Eve however did have an ancestor. Our experts came later and identified it as the ATOM. The atom as I claim in the book, was God’s firstborn. Furthermore, the ability of the atom to change shape reveals an element of its design that is similar to human nature under biblical principles. Since all in heaven and earth including the human body are created from the atom, then this was Eve’s ancestor. The conversation in the Garden of Eden between the snake and Eve revealed the transfer of the design from the atom to the humans in Genesis 3: 4-5 (NKJV):
“Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.””
Our experts classify the atom’s particles as “positive” and “negative” coincidentally, but God introduced emotions in the conversation with the snake as opposite-attract and labeled them as “good” (positive emotion) and “evil” (negative emotion). Emotions were the redesign of the atom’s particles as tools for facilitating survival for mankind, just as the atom’s positive and negative particles do for the atom. God classified Eve as the “helper” and our experts came to explain what God meant by classifying emotions as “helpers” as well.
Emotions have to be included as an important element and factor in determining the final solution.
C. The Laws of Free Choice in Science
The fascinating thing about the atom is its laws. From the literature available, the Big Bang theory is the leading scientific authority when it comes to determining how the universe began. I am using this theory in the book to explain how atoms came to be formed. How the particles came about and formed to be positively, and negatively charged is even more persuasive for me of an intentional design rather than accidental or random as experts suggest. How these invisible things come out of the fires of the Big Bang’s singularity to form “negative” and “positive” forces that produce electricity needs explanation if it was not designed.
The best evidence of the atom being designed is its ability to produce electricity. Even more so as it turns out, our bodies are made up of atoms and the electricity the atom produces ends up required for the human body to function in order to survive. Without the atom’s electricity, there is no life whether we came from fish, monkeys, or created from dust.
For the atom to stabilize to produce electricity that our survival depends upon, it came with what appeared to fit under the definition of scientific laws. The most fascinating thing for me about the atom is the scientific laws that it requires for its operation. For example, for the atom to be stable, it has to have even numbers of negative electrons and positive proton particles. There are laws that hold the neutron and the positive proton in the nucleus of the atom. Because the negative and positive particles are attracted to each other, there are laws also that keep the negative electron out of the nucleus of the atom to avoid coming in contact with the positive proton. If by any chance the negative electron does enter the nucleus, other laws come into play to remove it from the nucleus.
These are just a few examples of laws that keep the atom stable in order to perform its purpose as a tool of creation. It is reasonable to assume that without these laws, the atom would have never formed, and since all ordinary matters were made from this atom, then the heavens and earth could not be created, therefore, we could not be here wondering what our purposes in life are.
These laws include the most fascinating one for me because of its spiritual dimension. This law enables the atom to change shape in a process known as electron capture. This is the law that allows the atom to change from one element to another by reducing its atomic number. An element is a substance that cannot be broken down into any other substance. This is a short summary as an example.
Nitrogen gas is an element that has 7 positive proton particles, 7 neutral neutron particles, and 7 negative electron particles. However, it can change its atomic structure by reducing the number of its protons, neutrons, and electrons to 6 each. This happens when a negative electron (evil) enters the nucleus of the atom where the neutron (God) and positive proton (good) live.
To stabilize itself, the Nitrogen atom balances itself by ejecting the electron from the nucleus of the atom. But in doing so, the atom is left with 7 protons and 7 neutrons but with only 6 electrons. What the nitrogen atom does then is to turn one positive proton (good) into a neutron (God) particle. In doing so, the atom is left with 6 protons, 6 electrons, and 6 neutrons.
The element with 6 protons, 6 electrons, and 6 neutrons is the carbon gas. So the atom that once formed the nitrogen gas element changed shape and formed something different, a carbon gas element. The process is a lot more complicated with its own laws but this is a simple summary of this one process.
The atom’s electron capture law enables the atom to eject the negative electron (evil) out of the atom when it tries to enter the nucleus of the atom where the neutron (God) and the positive proton (good) live. In doing so, the atom becomes something else.
This is what I mean by the atom having the ability to change shape as it can form a new element that is totally different from the element it formed previously.
It is reasonable to assume that it is these types of laws that are responsible for the operation of the atom and its stability. And one of them enables the atom to change shape. This is one aspect and characteristic of the atom that calls for much more attention because of its religious implications.
For example, the biggest theme of the New Testament revolves around the emphasis on the ability of a human being to change from one stage to another for survival purposes. Regardless of who you once were, even if you applied negative emotions in your past life, you could still survive immortally by restructuring your characteristics. This is the theme of the New Testament (not sure about dropping bombs on women and children to take lands in the name of God though).
The best example was provided by the crucifixion of Jesus with two prisoners. Luke 23: 39-43. All three represented a particle of the atom. While they were dying on their crosses, one of the prisoners showed remorse for his past behavior. This was the prisoner that I claim represented the positive proton. The other prisoner did not show it and he represented the negative electron. Jesus was placed in the middle between the two prisoners. In doing so, provided another circumstantial piece of evidence to point out that the neutron is God’s particle in the atom.
The atom’s neutron sits between the negative electron and the positive proton. It is responsible for keeping the proton in the nucleus of the atom and away from the negative electron.
The remorseful prisoner’s ability to change shape at the last minute by showing remorse ended up extending his survival as Jesus took him to heaven after he showed that he recognized the errors of his ways and was remorseful for them. He was the equivalent of the nitrogen atom that changed shape and survived.
This scene depicted the application of the laws of the atom that enable it to change shape and become a different element. The prisoner who applied negative behavior for survival purposes changed his characteristics at the last minute and survived. The unremorseful prisoner stayed the same and therefore did not. He was representative of the negative electron.
The atom literally changes shape with its electron capture law. This is why I claim that the atom acts like it is alive and if Adam was designed in imitation of the atom, then Adam was designed also with the ability to change shape in a similar fashion to the atom. The questions here for me are these: if it is the laws that enable the atom to change shape, do these laws remove that atom’s free will? And if Adam was designed after the atom, was he designed with free will if his design included preordained laws designed for automation survival purposes? When he chose Eve’s voice who was his helper over God’s command not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge, was his decision a free will one or preordained?
If the atom could change shape, was the remorseful prisoner the biblical depiction of the design of the atom? Was Eve’s decision to go for knowledge an example of inheriting the 50% design of the atom’s electron capture law if the atom was her ancestor?
We will expand further on this subject of free will in the third and final blog of the series. Thank you for stopping by and hope you order yourself a copy of the book just out of curiosity if anything. Discovering the atom in the bible for those of you in the know, should be of great interest considering its implications as to whether the universe was designed or not. It will be a great gift for the holidays as you will all come to find God the Scientist like you never did before. Happy Thanksgiving.
Timeout A. Taumua, Author.
References
Dispenza, J. D. (2007). Evolve Your Brain: The Science of Changing Your Mind. Dearfield Beach, Fl: Health Communications, Inc.
