B-H
By Matys Weiser
I’ll try my best to keep this short—short by my standards, that is. To explain how I became fascinated by the topic of the Mabul (Noah’s Flood) and, in turn, became a young Earth creationist, I need to share a bit of my background.
My education was strictly rooted in the theory of evolution. Growing up in a communist country, evolution played an even more significant role than in the Western world in promoting a materialistic worldview. Life was seen as the product of an accidental mix of amino acids in a primordial soup, and the universe randomly constructed itself over billions of years. This was the dogma I was taught.
Like everyone in my generation, my mind was wired to see everything through the lens of evolution. We believed everything in nature was ancient—rocks, fossils, mountains, and valleys. Animals changed over time by some mysterious mechanism into something better, and we never questioned that under the slogan of “survival of the fittest,” there had to be something that was not fit to survive. No one asked how things that were not "fit" even came into existence in the first place.
As a child, I was perhaps more fascinated by the idea of evolution than my peers. Maybe it was because I read more books than others, but I devoured information on all kinds of topics.
My brain was fully immersed in an evolutionary worldview.
Then, in my early teenage years, around the age of eleven or twelve, I came across books by the German philosopher Hoimar von Ditfurth. Not much of his work stays with me today, but one image from his writing struck me deeply. It was a blurry picture in the book, as electron microscopes were still new in the seventies, but it was exactly this creature:
By Matys Weiser
I’ll try my best to keep this short—short by my standards, that is. To explain how I became fascinated by the topic of the Mabul (Noah’s Flood) and, in turn, became a young Earth creationist, I need to share a bit of my background.
My education was strictly rooted in the theory of evolution. Growing up in a communist country, evolution played an even more significant role than in the Western world in promoting a materialistic worldview. Life was seen as the product of an accidental mix of amino acids in a primordial soup, and the universe randomly constructed itself over billions of years. This was the dogma I was taught.
Like everyone in my generation, my mind was wired to see everything through the lens of evolution. We believed everything in nature was ancient—rocks, fossils, mountains, and valleys. Animals changed over time by some mysterious mechanism into something better, and we never questioned that under the slogan of “survival of the fittest,” there had to be something that was not fit to survive. No one asked how things that were not "fit" even came into existence in the first place.
As a child, I was perhaps more fascinated by the idea of evolution than my peers. Maybe it was because I read more books than others, but I devoured information on all kinds of topics.
My brain was fully immersed in an evolutionary worldview.
Then, in my early teenage years, around the age of eleven or twelve, I came across books by the German philosopher Hoimar von Ditfurth. Not much of his work stays with me today, but one image from his writing struck me deeply. It was a blurry picture in the book, as electron microscopes were still new in the seventies, but it was exactly this creature:
Bacteriophage - virus that infects and replicates within bacteria.
I realized that this creature’s complexity could not have happened by accident. It required a Creator to be assembled this way. That realization felt as certain to me as my own existence—like recognizing a life-saving cairn in the desert, a clear sign that someone had intentionally stacked the stones. Even if those are only three or two stones on the top of one another.
Around the same time, I read the biography of Louis Pasteur, the scientist who conclusively proved that life cannot arise from inorganic matter.
Eventually, I understood that I had become an adherent of the Intelligent Design worldview—or, more specifically, a Theistic Evolutionist or Old Earth Creationist.
I won’t delve into the details of this view, as I promised to keep it brief. For anyone who wants to learn more, just ask your computer—or phone.
I held this view for much of my life, all while following the teachings of The Book. First as a non-Jew, and later becoming Jewish—Orthodox and Hasidic in my adult years. Unlike some of my Christian friends, I didn’t feel the need to accept the creation story literally. Like many in my faith, I syncretized the two stories—Evolution and Adam and Eve. It was a weak point in the whole system, but it was still possible to live as a Haredi Jew with that mixture.
Adhering to Halachic requirements doesn’t demand an answer to that question.
That’s my understanding, even today. Even as I grew stronger in my acceptance of Young Earth Creationism and established this website to share that perspective.
So, why did this shift happen?
Over 20 years ago, I began traveling to the western United States. I fell in love with this part of the continent, but more importantly, the landscape there made it crystal clear to me that nothing in those rocks was as old as I had been taught. How old—or young—was it? I didn’t have an immediate answer, but I didn’t immediately jump to the biblical timeline either. It didn’t take long, though, before I started seeing things differently.
At first, I noticed how the landforms in the west, stripped of the thick vegetation characteristic of the eastern part of the country, looked sharp and fresh—far too sharp for something that had supposedly been shaped by millions of years of erosion. The mountains were jagged; the canyons were deep and steep. The cliffs, composed of a mixture of hard and soft materials, stood thousands of feet above the base, with little to no accumulated debris from erosion at their base. The talus under these cliffs suggested that the land had been uplifted rapidly, before the elements had time to wear down the sharp edges or gather material at the bottom, turning the cliffs into gentle hills.
Around the same time, I read the biography of Louis Pasteur, the scientist who conclusively proved that life cannot arise from inorganic matter.
Eventually, I understood that I had become an adherent of the Intelligent Design worldview—or, more specifically, a Theistic Evolutionist or Old Earth Creationist.
I won’t delve into the details of this view, as I promised to keep it brief. For anyone who wants to learn more, just ask your computer—or phone.
I held this view for much of my life, all while following the teachings of The Book. First as a non-Jew, and later becoming Jewish—Orthodox and Hasidic in my adult years. Unlike some of my Christian friends, I didn’t feel the need to accept the creation story literally. Like many in my faith, I syncretized the two stories—Evolution and Adam and Eve. It was a weak point in the whole system, but it was still possible to live as a Haredi Jew with that mixture.
Adhering to Halachic requirements doesn’t demand an answer to that question.
That’s my understanding, even today. Even as I grew stronger in my acceptance of Young Earth Creationism and established this website to share that perspective.
So, why did this shift happen?
Over 20 years ago, I began traveling to the western United States. I fell in love with this part of the continent, but more importantly, the landscape there made it crystal clear to me that nothing in those rocks was as old as I had been taught. How old—or young—was it? I didn’t have an immediate answer, but I didn’t immediately jump to the biblical timeline either. It didn’t take long, though, before I started seeing things differently.
At first, I noticed how the landforms in the west, stripped of the thick vegetation characteristic of the eastern part of the country, looked sharp and fresh—far too sharp for something that had supposedly been shaped by millions of years of erosion. The mountains were jagged; the canyons were deep and steep. The cliffs, composed of a mixture of hard and soft materials, stood thousands of feet above the base, with little to no accumulated debris from erosion at their base. The talus under these cliffs suggested that the land had been uplifted rapidly, before the elements had time to wear down the sharp edges or gather material at the bottom, turning the cliffs into gentle hills.
Goose Necks. Capitol Rif NP UT
Everywhere I went, everywhere I visited, I saw the work of water carving these mountains and valleys. And I was told this by countless guides and rangers. Geology books I picked up in the region echoed the same idea—water, water, water.
Petrified water ripples in Utah, Colorado, Idaho and New York.
My archives are filled up with pictures of those features from all over the American continent.
My archives are filled up with pictures of those features from all over the American continent.
In caves, it was water that carved them; in canyons, it was also the force of water. Literally, almost all the landscape was shaped by water. Of course, in the context of the evolutionary timeline, but still, it was water.
Some of the deserts or basins in the west looked like water had only recently drained from them.
Not even thousands of years ago, that’s what my intuition was telling me.
I admit, intuition alone isn’t enough to change a worldview. But when your inner knowledge tells you something, when it sparks curiosity, you start to follow it and connect the dots.
The surface of our planet is made up of three types of rocks:
Some of the deserts or basins in the west looked like water had only recently drained from them.
Not even thousands of years ago, that’s what my intuition was telling me.
I admit, intuition alone isn’t enough to change a worldview. But when your inner knowledge tells you something, when it sparks curiosity, you start to follow it and connect the dots.
The surface of our planet is made up of three types of rocks:
- Igneous rock, the "mother rock," formed from the cooled crust of the hot, molten inner Earth.
- Sedimentary rock—the "daughter rock," which is formed from the first type, crushed, ground, and transported by the force of water.
- Metamorphic rock, a rock that began as one of the first two types but was subjected to tremendous pressure and heat, changing its mineral structure and, chemically, structurally, and visually becoming something different.
Crystalline Igneous Granit as a base for sedimentary rock above.
Direct contact
Direct contact
Igneous Rocks
Was the formation of the planet’s crust a slow process, cooling over billions of years? Or was it an act of creation by a Supreme Being, who formed the planet in His desired time—along with time itself?
Both of these possibilities cannot be proven scientifically, and they come down to what you choose to believe.
Was the formation of the planet’s crust a slow process, cooling over billions of years? Or was it an act of creation by a Supreme Being, who formed the planet in His desired time—along with time itself?
Both of these possibilities cannot be proven scientifically, and they come down to what you choose to believe.
Sedimentary strata in Gran Canyon AZ.
On the horizon - Red Bute, remnants of the sedimentary layers which mostly eroded.
On the horizon - Red Bute, remnants of the sedimentary layers which mostly eroded.
Sedimentary Rocks
Were these formed by slow erosion over billions of years, or did they result from the quick formation of land masses emerging from the waters on the third day of creation?
And what about the fossils found in many sedimentary rocks? Were these creatures fossilized over slow, gradual processes, or did catastrophic events trap them, preserving them quickly in oxygen-free environments, preventing bacterial decay, and leading to fossilization in a short time?
For me, the second option is far more plausible. We haven't observed the process ourselves, but the conditions necessary to preserve the shapes of billions of creatures in petrified mud suggest a catastrophe—not a slow, gradual process.
Were these formed by slow erosion over billions of years, or did they result from the quick formation of land masses emerging from the waters on the third day of creation?
And what about the fossils found in many sedimentary rocks? Were these creatures fossilized over slow, gradual processes, or did catastrophic events trap them, preserving them quickly in oxygen-free environments, preventing bacterial decay, and leading to fossilization in a short time?
For me, the second option is far more plausible. We haven't observed the process ourselves, but the conditions necessary to preserve the shapes of billions of creatures in petrified mud suggest a catastrophe—not a slow, gradual process.
Fossilized bones embedded in rock. Dinosaur NM UT/CO
Metamorphic Rocks
As for metamorphic rocks, the common explanation is plate tectonics.
Looking at the map of the world, we can clearly see that at least some of the continents fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.
Which scenario is more feasible for the rocks to be pressed and transformed? A slow process in which a once-single continental mass moved apart over hundreds of millions of years? Or perhaps a catastrophic event that split the original landmass into smaller sections, rapidly moving them apart in a fast-paced, dramatic fashion?
For me, the second option is once again more plausible.
As for metamorphic rocks, the common explanation is plate tectonics.
Looking at the map of the world, we can clearly see that at least some of the continents fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.
Which scenario is more feasible for the rocks to be pressed and transformed? A slow process in which a once-single continental mass moved apart over hundreds of millions of years? Or perhaps a catastrophic event that split the original landmass into smaller sections, rapidly moving them apart in a fast-paced, dramatic fashion?
For me, the second option is once again more plausible.
I understand that this may be a crude and simplistic analysis, but when we dig into the details, the idea of a global catastrophe seems to explain Earth’s geology much better than the idea of millions of years of slow processes.
I attempt to explain these details in my own work, which I share on the blog here on this website. Some of these details are very minute, but at the same time, they are decisive in the larger struggle between worldviews.
Over time, I found an immense amount of information on the topic of Young Earth Creationism, written by Christian scientists. With their PhDs and multimillion-dollar budgets, they can explain much more than I could, given my limited resources. Needless to say, they also coined the term "Young Earth Creationism." It resonates with me, and I use it the same way I use general terminology when discussing geological deposits and the dates assigned to them. Not because I have any inclination to believe in these dates, but for the sake of communication—so we have a common language.
However, I hesitate to suggest reading material from Christian sources on the topic, because for many Christians, Young Earth Creationism is a matter of faith. It’s not for me. For us—though I personally feel deeply convinced that this framework is the truth—I don’t expect or require my co-religionists to share this view.
If you come from a Haredi background, you may not have a problem with this. In fact, my website might be helpful if you ever need answers.
If you're a Baal Teshuva or a Modern Orthodox Jew, you might still be wired to believe in the Old Earth model, as I once did. That’s fine. Take your time to analyze the data for yourself.
Another reason I wouldn’t suggest reading Christian sources is their constant attempt to convert people. I understand that it comes from a good place, out of concern for our souls, but we’ll be fine, B"H. That said, I do acknowledge that their body of work is very impressive.
What they’re missing, however, is our Mesorah—the collective national memory.
This was my slow, yet exciting discovery: those facts are preserved in our memory, facts that can only be known to those who witnessed them and made sure future generations would remember.
For example, the fact that there was originally only one continent that emerged from the water. The fact that there was significant remodeling of the planet just a few generations after creation, during the time of Enosh. We may see the results of this first Mabul (flood) in geological strata, while our Christian friends have no explanation for these layers and forms.
I attempt to explain these details in my own work, which I share on the blog here on this website. Some of these details are very minute, but at the same time, they are decisive in the larger struggle between worldviews.
Over time, I found an immense amount of information on the topic of Young Earth Creationism, written by Christian scientists. With their PhDs and multimillion-dollar budgets, they can explain much more than I could, given my limited resources. Needless to say, they also coined the term "Young Earth Creationism." It resonates with me, and I use it the same way I use general terminology when discussing geological deposits and the dates assigned to them. Not because I have any inclination to believe in these dates, but for the sake of communication—so we have a common language.
However, I hesitate to suggest reading material from Christian sources on the topic, because for many Christians, Young Earth Creationism is a matter of faith. It’s not for me. For us—though I personally feel deeply convinced that this framework is the truth—I don’t expect or require my co-religionists to share this view.
If you come from a Haredi background, you may not have a problem with this. In fact, my website might be helpful if you ever need answers.
If you're a Baal Teshuva or a Modern Orthodox Jew, you might still be wired to believe in the Old Earth model, as I once did. That’s fine. Take your time to analyze the data for yourself.
Another reason I wouldn’t suggest reading Christian sources is their constant attempt to convert people. I understand that it comes from a good place, out of concern for our souls, but we’ll be fine, B"H. That said, I do acknowledge that their body of work is very impressive.
What they’re missing, however, is our Mesorah—the collective national memory.
This was my slow, yet exciting discovery: those facts are preserved in our memory, facts that can only be known to those who witnessed them and made sure future generations would remember.
For example, the fact that there was originally only one continent that emerged from the water. The fact that there was significant remodeling of the planet just a few generations after creation, during the time of Enosh. We may see the results of this first Mabul (flood) in geological strata, while our Christian friends have no explanation for these layers and forms.
We know that the waters of the Mabul were thick as mud, and the Earth became a grave for living things.
Petrified tree logs in Petrified Forest NP AZ.
We know that the ocean during the Mabul was hot, warming up from the exposed, hot inner parts beneath the continental plates as they separated from one another.
We are told that mountains were formed as a result of the Mabul, as the Psalmist tells us.
We know from our sages that there have been major climate changes in the last few thousand years that have caused droughts and famine.
The body of knowledge in the works of the Rabbis is immense. Of course, the Torah, Talmud, and the commentaries (Meforshim) are not scientific books. They’re not economic textbooks, either. But there’s plenty of insight in them on topics like economy. Then there is natural science, geometry and algebra, sociology, psychology, astronomy, geography—and much more in them. Who would have thought that when you study these topics carefully, you might also find elements of geology?
For more on this specific aspect of my conviction, please see the Chazal section of this website.
It’s clear that by spending so much time in the mountains and deserts, doing my research and establishing this website, I have a goal.
My goal is to disseminate knowledge about a topic that, up until now, has been largely untouched in my Haredi circles. But I’m not doing this just for the Haredim, and not even primarily for them.
I have nothing to lose if I’m wrong. But if I’m right, this has the potential to change the way we perceive G-d in nature, G-d in history, and G-d in our personal lives.
We are told that mountains were formed as a result of the Mabul, as the Psalmist tells us.
We know from our sages that there have been major climate changes in the last few thousand years that have caused droughts and famine.
The body of knowledge in the works of the Rabbis is immense. Of course, the Torah, Talmud, and the commentaries (Meforshim) are not scientific books. They’re not economic textbooks, either. But there’s plenty of insight in them on topics like economy. Then there is natural science, geometry and algebra, sociology, psychology, astronomy, geography—and much more in them. Who would have thought that when you study these topics carefully, you might also find elements of geology?
For more on this specific aspect of my conviction, please see the Chazal section of this website.
It’s clear that by spending so much time in the mountains and deserts, doing my research and establishing this website, I have a goal.
My goal is to disseminate knowledge about a topic that, up until now, has been largely untouched in my Haredi circles. But I’m not doing this just for the Haredim, and not even primarily for them.
I have nothing to lose if I’m wrong. But if I’m right, this has the potential to change the way we perceive G-d in nature, G-d in history, and G-d in our personal lives.