halite Archives - DOES GOD EXIST? TODAY

February 11, 2023February 8, 2023

Chemical Bonds and Human Relationships

I have always enjoyed teaching units in my science classes that explore the design of chemical bonding and how it produces over 5000 naturally-occurring mineral species. We can learn some lessons by comparing chemical bonds and human relationships. Four different kinds of bonds form all those minerals:

IONIC BONDS. An ionic bond forms when two or more elements are held together by the giving and taking of electrons that exist in the outer energy levels of each atom. The classic example is sodium chloride, in which sodium gives up an electron, and chlorine takes on an electron. Both atoms are striving for stability, and they bond by one giving and the other getting. This kind of bond is not very strong. For example, halite, rock salt, is easily dissolved in water. Comparing these chemical bonds and human relationships, we see co-dependency as a similar type of bonding, and it, too, is not very strong.

COVALENT BONDS. Sharing of electrons creates this type of bond. This is the method of carbon bonding, which is the foundation of biochemistry. It is the bonding technique used to create life. In covalent bonding, the nuclei draw closer together, and the bond is very strong. A diamond is a classic example, and the contrast to halite is obvious. In human relationships, covalency is like marriage when both partners are respected and share in the bonding.

METALLIC BONDS. Elements in this bonding method have an outer layer of delocalized electrons that have fluid movement and are not tightly bound to individual atoms. This cloud of electrons gives a charge to the crystal and allows the material to be ductile, malleable, opaque, and a good conductor of heat and electricity. Copper is a classic example of this bonding. Humans with no solid attraction for others can be very singular in nature.

VAN DER WALLS BONDS. Rubbing a balloon on your shirt and sticking it to a wall exemplifies this very complex bonding. This bonding uses both ionic and covalent techniques. It has silicon-oxygen structures in layers with a variety of elements included in the layers. Examples are mica and clay. This layering prevents anything 90 degrees away from the plane of the layers from passing through it. That makes clay extremely useful in agriculture, landfills, and water reservoirs.

We can compare clay to God’s love for us. We see God’s genius as we use an electron microscope to examine clay crystals that are 1/256 mm or less in diameter. We can see the bonding God calls each of us to realize we don’t all bond in the same way. Our bonding with God gives us an understanding of the unique nature He has given us and everything around us. Geologist Jeffrey Greenberg wrote, “We do not worship Nature in Creation, but we worship the Creator and certainly should love the created as He does.”

Reference: “Bonding” by Dr. Jeffrey Greenberg in God and Nature, Winter 2023

June 23, 2022June 22, 2022

The Salt Has Lost Its Savor

An atheist recently attacked the credibility of the Bible by quoting Matthew 5:13: “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has lost its savor, how shall it be seasoned? It is good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden underfoot.” The atheist complained that Jesus was incredibly ignorant because salt can’t lose its “savor” no matter what happens to it. Reading the whole verse and understanding something about salt makes this attack an excellent example of ignorance about science and faith.

Today we get salt from well over 90% pure salt deposits. Halite (sodium chloride) is the mineral name, and the city of Detroit, for example, is built over a salt deposit that is, in fact, some 99% pure halite. That is true in many other places, but not in the Dead Sea, where the salt came from in Jesus’ time. Dead Sea salt is a mixture of the minerals halite (table salt), gypsum (calcium sulfate used in drywall), and other minerals. The halite part of Dead Sea salt was used for seasoning food or preserving meat, but the gypsum was used for footpaths. This is what Jesus referred to when He said, “the salt has lost its savor,” and His listeners would have understood that.

The lesson here is that you can’t read the Bible in 2022 and understand what was written some 2000 years ago unless you investigate what life was like back then. It is essential to understand that the biblical account is not about Americans living in modern times. People have not changed spiritually, but society and customs have made enormous changes. Add to that the fact that the original biblical manuscripts were not written in English, and Bible translators may not understand the culture in which they were written. Even languages have changed over the years, which is a problem with the King James translation.

For non-scholars, it is essential to be critical of Bible critics and Bible translations. Was the version you use translated by people who knew the culture and conditions while avoiding their own biases? God has provided us with tools through honest scholars that help us find answers to complex Bible issues. Nevertheless, we still need to apply the principle, “Study to show yourselves workmen who do not need to be ashamed rightly dividing the Word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

December 4, 2018December 3, 2018

Relying On Ignorance

Relying on Ignorance of Grand Canyon Formation
We often hear from young people who have been taught something in a Bible class or sermon or a religious publication or video that they know cannot be true. Many creationists and creationist groups lack training in the fields in which they claim to be experts, and they are relying on ignorance of their hearers. When smart young people hear something they know is incorrect, it gives them a reason to reject the church and perhaps reject God’s existence.

A classic example of this is shown in explanations of the Grand Canyon. Many writers try to explain away the formation of the Grand Canyon by saying that the Flood of Noah did it. They say the Flood formed the Canyon in a short time just a few thousand years ago. They claim that the Flood laid down the sediments, and when the water swept off the land, it carved the Grand Canyon.

As an Earth Science teacher in the public schools in South Bend, Indiana, I taught young people about petrology — the study of rocks. Knowing how rocks were formed enabled scientists to find resources such as copper, oil, marble, iron, and certain gems. We can now synthesize some of these materials by copying the methods by which they were formed in the Earth’s past. Relying on ignorance would not allow us to find or synthesize these materials.

We know that the deposition of materials and subsequent erosion by the Flood did not form the Grand Canyon. The dominant rock in the Grand Canyon is limestone. Children taking Earth Science courses learn that limestone is a chemical precipitate. Quiet waters produce it over a long time. Most of us know about rock candy in which a solution of sugar crystallizes to create the candy. Limestone produced by a similar process, as is halite, dolomite, and gypsum. These are chemically precipitated rocks, never deposited in moving water.

A recent headline in a creationist journal reads, “Rapid Limestone Deposits Match the Flood.” A young person told me that she didn’t want to hear anything else from the Church because the statements in the journal were clearly not true. She doubted anything the Church said was true as a result. She also pointed out other problems. The Canyon is not just one rock type. It has alternating layers of different materials produced by different climates and processes. There are desert-produced sandstones, conglomerates which are produced by running streams, salt deposits produced by evaporation, and lavas that flowed across the top of the rock layers below them and were not injected as sills.

There is a huge burden on us to know what we are talking about. We must be as accurate as we can in understanding what the evidence shows. The general public is ignorant of most of these things and will not call an error to our attention. However, young people today are better educated in scientific facts, and we must not be relying on ignorance to expect our explanations to go unchallenged.
–John N. Clayton © 2018