Creation by Evolution?

How old is the earth?

That's easy - Adam lived 4000 years before Christ.  So take 2013, add 4000 years, and that makes 6013 years.

Oh, and Adam was created on the 6th day, so add six days.  It's that simple.  Next question.

Wait.  I've taken Biology, Genetics, and most importantly, Geology.

I know the earth is 4.54 billion years old.  There are a few thousand ways to verify that the earth is at least millions of years old, and plenty of ways to confirm it is billions of years old.

It was part of the forming solar system which revolved around the sun.

Water formed on earth about 100 million years after that. Then there were amino acids, lipids, and the building blocks of life emerged.  First were the prokaryotes, then the eukaryotes, oxygen, moss, plants etc...
The atmosphere changed, animals developed in the water, then on the land.  Eventually there were dinosaurs etc...

About 85 million years ago primates formed, and separated themselves from the other mammals.
The first Homo Sapiens evolved about 300,000 years ago, with minor changes leading up to the human form we know now.

Yeah - that's a really simplified version, but you get the point.  The two stories seem quite divergent.

Now is when I should stand on my soap box and yell "The Dinosaurs are a hoax.  Man was created from the dust!"

Which begs the question - how is anything created?

What if we simply change the word "create" to "make."  Things might make a lot more sense.

Is it possible to make sharp cheddar cheese?

Sure, ask the folks at Tillamook.  You take milk, salt, and culture enzymes, and combine them correctly in the right environment with heating and cooling and drying - and leave them there for a few years and you'll have delicious sharp cheddar cheese.

Can you make a diamond?  Sure.  Bury some coal about 89 miles deep in the ground and leave it there for 2 billion years.

Can we make things that seem to defy reason?  Sure - What if I told you I could make water boil using no heat source.  I could put a cup of water in a box, make the water boil, and you could put your hand inside the box and touch the sides and feel no heat.  What would you say?

You would say I used a microwave.

I am a Mormon, a member of the LDS church.  I have read the words hundreds of times in our scriptures: "The glory of God is intelligence."

We are not meant to be ignorant.  Yes, we are asked to follow with faith, but we are also asked to seek knowledge and understanding about all subjects.

SO - WHAT IS MY POINT?

It makes perfect sense to me that God is the most intelligent being in the universe.  He knows exactly how to create a human body in his own image.  He knows exactly what is needed, when, and through what process you can make a human.  You start with a planet that has a heat source - the sun.
You need the water to separate from the land, the atmosphere to clear, and then you start the process of making life.  First a few cells, then more, then complex organisms, then plants which will evolve to make animals, which will eventually evolve to the form of man.  When the process is complete you have a body in the form and image of God.  A spirit can be placed in that body, and the process of creating the first man is complete.

Like the bible says: "God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

That is exactly what I believe God did.  He created man, from the dust of the earth (over 4.4 billion years) and then breathed into him his spirit, and Adam was the first "living soul" (body + spirit).

This is my idea.  I don't know if it's right - but it makes sense to me.

I don't know how it all works.  Just like 500 years ago a microwave would have befuddled everyone, so do God's miracles befuddle people today.  They would make perfect sense if we had more understanding - of the properties of matter, the laws of physics, the natural rules which govern our universe.

God knows all things.  He knows how everything works.   He knows how to create a human - I think it's through a process called evolution.

Mother's Day or Women's Day?

Is it possible to honor mothers for their unique role of motherhood?

I just read "Lean In" by the female COO of Facebook.  She works very hard in her book to point out that women are just as capable as men in business and in many other pursuits.  Women may choose to be in the home but they can succeed in everything - women have a choice.

She brought up an interesting point: Motherhood is not Womanhood.

Being a mother is something more, A LOT MORE.  It is 24/7 care taking.  It is dealing with vomit, and feces, and baby baths, and clothes and laundry and rides to dance class and games and school.  It's waking up mulitple times per night, it's hiding in the bathroom to eat your candybar so you won't have to share with your kids.  It's fearing the grocery store because manuevering a cart and 4 kids through wal-mart is harder than getting a bill through congress.  That's just motherhood, not including labor and delivery.

What will happen this Sunday? - at church we will give something special to every woman over age 18. 

Why?  Because what if someone can't have kids, or hasn't found the right man, or chose not to be a mother, or isn't there yet?  We don't want them to feel ostracized, or unappreciated, so we recognize them all.

How do we show women that we appreciate them all, and we ALSO want on one day to give a special recognition to mothers.  Whether they be adopted, step-moms, grandma's who have taken over the role of mother or whatever other version there may be: We want to honor and revere mothers.

There are days to honor the other women in our lives.  Can't just one day show that Mom's are special?

Motherhood is something more.  Let's say so.

Veterans: Do they deserve better than everyone else?

Is there any group that categorically deserves a different level of respect?  Is there a group that everyone uniformly says "they have a trump card, they deserve something more than everyone else?"

Today I saw this picture on Facebook:

I work at the VA hospital.  My grandfather served in WWII.  I have close friends, family, neighbors, church leaders, and others who all served.  On Veteran's Day I drive my kids down to the VA's nursing home and we go visit some of my veteran friends and decide what gifts we should make them for Christmas to thank them for their service.

Why do I mention this - so you don't think I'm anti-military in any way.  I have a deep respect for those who chose to serve or were obliged to serve in the military.  I honor them, and respect them.

I am familiar with their struggles.  I treat veterans with PTSD, depression, anxiety, and various other disorders every day - Much of it caused by their military service.  I know how many have lost homes, been divorced, lost jobs, etc...

My question is not whether they deserve our respect and our thanks.  My question is - does their service mean they deserve better than the rest of us?  Do they deserve a better bail-out than school-teachers, fire-fighters, police officers, nurses, etc..

Do any of those groups deserve special treatment?  They certainly deserve our respect, they deserve a good pay check, the appreciation of those they help, and they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

But shouldn't that be standard?  Shouldn't every American have the same opportunities, the same programs available? 

Teacher's know what they are getting into - they know they will be paid less than they deserve.  They know they will be yelled at by parents who aren't parenting and by government administrators who aren't teaching. 

Soldiers know what they are getting into.  They may not know the details - but they know that combat is possible, injury and death are possible.

I knew when I finished college that I would still be in training for the next 8 years.  I wouldn't earn a doctor's salary until I was in my 30's. I'd accumulate $300,000 in debt and there would certainly never be any bail-out for me.  After all - I'm a doctor, and doctor's are rich. Right?

Do I DESERVE any more than anyone else because I didn't get a job after high school or college.  I didn't spend a year travelling Europe.  I've saved my money, married and had kids.  My wedding was $5000, we couldn't afford more.  My house has 3 bedrooms for 6 people... and I wouldn't have it any other way.  I chose this life - I've had luck, I've had trials, and I've had blessings.  This is life.

Most Veterans I know are humble, wonderful people.  They don't feel entitled.  They love their country and they want others to share that love.  Just like most nurses and firefighters and good people in every field.

Soldiers deserve respect. So does everyone else.  I do not believe any group or organization gets an automatic trump card over everyone else.  I believe that is what soldiers fight for -  "One nation, under God, indivisible" - where "all men are created equal."  All give some, some give all - no matter their path in life.

Book Review: The Tipping Point

This was Malcolm Gladwell's first book - but it was not his finest.

Gladwell is a journalist.  He collects interesting stories and interesting research, and tries to find links between the two.

This book is an interesting look at epidemics - in disease, in social ideas, in popular products, in school shootings, etc...

What is "The Tipping Point?" - the point where something goes from slow growth to rapid exponential growth.

Can we cause it on purpose?  Can we make and idea or a product spread like wildfire?  Certainly every advertiser, every political candidate, every business owner has hoped to find the answer.

Gladwell presents very intriguing cases - starting with the shoes called Hush Puppies.  The brand was founded in 1958.  In 1994 the company sold 30,000 pairs.  In 1995 they sold 430,000.  That's 14X more shoes in one year.  How did they do it?

Gladwell says it's because a group of kids in New York City started wearing them (to be different, because no one else was).  A few key designers noticed them wearing these shoes a the coolest clubs, and decided that was "the new fashion."  They started buying them up and using them in their fashion designs.  Then it hit mainstream, and the epidemic had started.

The tipping point was when those few kids were noticed by those with widespread influence.  The kids weren't trying to start a new trend, they just wanted to be different.

There are those who try new things, then there are those who can make that new thing a trend.  Hush Puppies now had both.

Gladwell's book builds on it's own momentum until about 2/3rds of the way through the book.  Then he starts reaching - making comparisons and conclusions that just don't pan out or make any sense. 
It's like he had 5 or 6 great ideas, but was told by the publisher he needed 8 or 9. 

His first great point is about what makes something grow epidemically.  It needs to be "sticky," something that makes a real impact, it needs those few right people to get it going, and it needs the right environment to grow in.

Environment: Sometimes it's not about the people involved, it's about the circumstance. (see this blog post about circumstances determining behavior rather than personality or character)

If the environment is right (like the American colonies on the brink of war) and message is right (the British are Coming!) - you still have to have the right messenger.

The night of Paul Revere's Midnight ride - there were actually two messengers: Paul Revere and William Dawes. 

Revere and Dawes both rode hard, telling people all night along about the impending attack - but only one is remembered, because only one was able to rouse the troops and get people to listen.

Revere knew the towns, he knew the people - he knew who to talk to, and he knew how to spread the message to people who were already in bed.

Dawes tried - but he had no such connections.  He'd knock on doors, give warnings - and everyone would just go back to bed.  He didn't have the influence, the social network, the reputation with the people. 

It's not just about the message, or the environment, it's also about the messenger.

Throughout this book Gladwell gives some great advice - about how to gain real power, how to find the "connectors" (those people who know everyone, and can spread ideas quickly).

He also teaches us about "Mavens" - Those people who are ridiculously passionate about something.  The people who actually call the 1-800 number on the back of Ivory Soap to tell the company about their experience with the product - because they really know all about every kind of soap, have tried them all, and care enough to give feedback.

"Just as there are people we rely upon to connect us to other people, there are also people we rely upon to connect us with new information. There are people specialists, and there are information specialists." - p. 59

There are people like that.  People who care. They aren't doing it to make money, or to sell their information or advice.  They want to share it with everyone - because they've researched it deeply, and they know.

Who do you go to to ask about cars?  or computers?  or investing?  or which school to send your kids to?  Do you know an expert, that person who knows every detail about something that no one else in the world could possibly care that much about?  These are the people that companies want to find and please.  If you can influence the person who everyone else goes to for advice, you'll have the best word-of-mouth advertising in the world.  Money can't buy that.  We all see ads, we all hear about products from friends, but who do we listen to.  Who could make something into an epidemic?

Do we want new information - better information?  Then we need contacts outside our close friends.

"When it comes to finding out about new jobs -- or, for that matter, new information, or new ideas -- "weak ties" are always more important than strong ties. Your friends, after all, occupy the same world that you do. They might work with you, or live near you, and go to the same same churches, schools, or parties. How much, then, would they know that you wouldn't know? Your acquaintances, on the other hand, by definition occupy a very different world than you. They are much more likely to know something that you don't... Acquaintances, in short, represent a source of social power, and the more acquaintances you have the more powerful you are." - p. 54

Overall - This book gets a B+.  It is creative, original, and makes you think.  But it is too long, tried too hard, and should have been 60 pages shorter.

Character or Context - Why do we do what we do?

 

Are people evil or good?  Are there really people who are always honest, and people who always lie?

Does one’s character mean you can predict their behavior in most situations?

In the 1980’s and 90’s – Crime in New York City plummeted.  The authors of Freakonomics would tell you this is because there were less low income teenagers on the streets because abortion had been legalized about 15 years prior.

Malcolm Gladwell would say it’s because the environment changed. 

In 1984 Bernhard Goetz boarded the Subway like he did most mornings.  He was white, and sat down next to four young black men, with most other people sitting at the other end of the subway car.  The four young men were being rowdy, and soon asked Mr. Goetz for $5.  Then they demanded it.  Then one of them pointed at the suspicious bulge in his jacket pocket and smiled.  Mr. Goetz reached into his own pocket, pulled out his .38, and shot all four young men. 

He turned himself into police a week later, and was acquitted of all charges other than carrying a concealed weapon.  Some called him a hero, others called him a monster.  Was he a criminal?  Was he a vigilante?  Was he a murderer?  He had no criminal background while all four of the young men had criminal backgrounds.

So why did he do it?  Some say it was because he had been bullied as a kid, and mugged a few months earlier.  Some say it’s because he was a concerned citizen and someone had to stand up against the thugs.  After all -NYC had 2,000 murders and over 600,000 felonies in the past year.  The subways were a prime location for crime.  They weren’t respected, or patrolled, they weren’t even clean.  The subways were covered in graffiti, the token machines were broken and the tracks were cracked so the subway could only go 15 mph in some spots.

So – was it the character of this man and the four young men, who made this incident occur?  If they had been getting on a bus on a city street at 2 p.m. - would the same thing have happened?

The New York Transit Authority decided they were going to reduce crime by first cleaning up all the graffiti on the subway cars, and in the stations.  If things looked better, people would treat the Sunway better.  Graffiti was covered up, and crime dropped.  They decided to arrest anyone who didn’t pay a subway token. They did, and crime dropped.  They decided to arrest anyone who was drunk in public, who urinated on the street or broke a window, etc.  They did, and crime dropped.  Not only did those crime rates drop, but felonies and murders dropped too.  All crime decreased.

The environment changed.  Sure you could say people changed, more criminals were being arrested so there were less on the street – but not by much.  The rate in crime dropped FAR MORE than the number of criminals being locked up.  SO WHAT HAPPENED? 

The people who were committing crimes instead did other things.  The environment had changed, so they changed.

The same is true of people doing good. 

Princeton University conducted a “Good Samaritan” experiment.

Give the Seminary students a task, then on their way have them run into a man slumped over in the alleyway, coughing and groaning – and see if they stop to help him.

It wasn’t just about seeing who would stop and who wouldn’t, but if they could make people react differently if the situation changed.

They asked students from the Seminary to prepare a short sermon, and then walk to a nearby building and present it.  Some were given the topic of “The Good Samaritan” while other s prepared sermons on other biblical themes.  They also asked each student why they chose to go into Theology. Was it for prestige, to help people, for money, for God’s glory, etc?

Then right before they went to give their sermon, they told them one of two things. 

1.   “Oh, you’re late.  They were expecting you a few minutes ago.  You’d better get moving.”

2.   “It’ll be a few minutes before their ready for you, but you might as well head over now.”

You can guess the result.  Who stopped and who didn’t?  It didn’t matter why they went to school, or what their sermon was on – what mattered was whether or not they were in a hurry.

Of those in a rush – 10% stopped to help.  Of those who thought they had a few minutes – 63% stopped.

They all had the same convictions in their hearts.  They knew what was “right” and that they should help those in need.  They all had helped many people before, and will likely help many more.  But it isn’t always about the character of the person, it’s about the context.  It isn’t the person, but the place.

If I grew up with the same parents, in the same religion, but in South Central Los Angeles instead of the West side of Idaho Falls, Idaho – would I have a criminal record?  Would I have gone to college?  Would I have tried drugs?  I’d like to say “I’d be essentially the same person I am today, regardless.” – but I doubt it.

In my church there is a famous quote by a church leader that states:

“The devil knows how to destroy our young girls and boys. He may not be able to tempt a person to murder or to commit adultery immediately, but he knows that if he can get a boy and a girl to sit in the car late enough after the dance, or to park long enough in the dark at the end of the lane, the best boy and the best girl will finally succumb and fall. He knows that all have a limit to their resistance”

This year in church we are focused on the phrase “Stand ye in Holy places, and be not moved.”

I have been taught my whole life to be honest, ALWAYS.  The goal is to be perfectly honest in all situations, live your standards no matter what.

I am coming to see that this doesn’t just mean developing strong moral fiber, standing for truth and right, reading scriptures, praying, helping your fellowman, etc.

It’s about being in the right places, building the right environments.  Giving yourself time.  Not being in a hurry.

What if instead of working harder to find criminals and lock them up, we tired harder to build environments where crime was less likely?  A place where people were more likely to help, to be honest, etc.

It isn’t just about “being a good person.”  It’s about being in the right place, and making your environment the “right place.”

Context is just as important as character.  Stand Ye in Holy Places - and maybe it’s just as important to make where ever you are, a holy place.

Will Power or Willingness Power?

I read a lot about addictions, go to a lot of 12 step meetings, and treat a lot of addicts.

I am finding that it really isn't about will power.  As I read the Alcoholics Anonymous Big Book I found this:

"The fact is that most alcoholics, for reasons yet obscure, have lost the power of choice in drink. Our so-called will power becomes practically nonexistent. We are unable, at certain times, to bring into our consciousness with sufficient force the memory of the suffering and humiliation of even a week or a month ago. We are without defense against the first drink."

I agree with that.  It doesn't excuse an addicts actions.  It doesn't relieve them of consequences, or tell others to just forgive and forget.  It simply points out the fact that it isn't about will power.

Then the AA book says this about a man who decided he was willing to try the 12 steps:

"The moment I made up my mind to go through with the process, I had the curious feeling that my alcoholic condition was relieved, as in fact it proved to be."

That is how life works.  That is how God intended it to be.  This is like the age old question about Faith v. Works. 

Are we saved by grace, or by our actions?  Can an addict exert enough will power to overcome his addiction?  Can a sinner work hard enough to pay for his sins and be perfect?  Should everyone stop trying because we never can do enough?

It says in Ephesians "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God"
Then it says in James 2 "faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone."

WHICH IS IT???

I think the answer to my first question and this question are the same.  It's not about Will Power.  It's about Willingness Power.

When we admit we can't do it alone, and we are willing to seek the help of God - he gives us the ability.  We must be willing to place our faith in something greater than ourselves.  We must stop relying on our personal strength and will - at which point we are given exactly that strength and will which we lacked.

It's like C.S. Lewis said:
"In one sense, the road back to God is a road of moral effort, of trying harder and harder. But in another sense it is not trying that is ever going to bring us home. All this trying leads up to the vital moment at which you turn to God and say, "You must do this. I can't.” 

After we make that admission, and really beleive it - we then work with all our heart, might, mind, and strength (which God has given us) to do what we should.  We help others and avoid those things which we know destroy our lives.

We become WILLING to stop trying on our own.  We use Willingness Power, and are then granted the Will Power we could never attain by ourselves.

We are always responsible for our actions.  There is always a choice, and we always have access to the power to choose the right- The power is often not within us, but we can accept that power from above.

Facebook makes it personal

I've heard people say that Facebook is a waste of time.  It's impersonal, it replaces meaningful communication, and it makes us connect more superficially instead of having real conversations.

That may be true for some Facebook users - but not me.


Facebook makes events or topics I would have mostly ignored - become very personal.

When there was the school shooting in Newtown - I would have responded like every other tragic event in the world.  I would have been sad, asked why, prayed for the victims in general, and then tried to just move on.
But then I found out through Facebook that my friend's daughter was shot and killed in that Elementary.  Her dad and I knew each other back in 2001 as missionaries in Brazil.

When the Boston Marathon bombing occurred - I knew some friends that were runners, but no one there.  Then one of my friends posted the story of her friend - who was working the medical tent at the finish line.  Suddenly a friend of a friend had heard the explosions, and helped the injured.

These events were not drowned out by the din of the news today. 

With North Korea, and drone strikes, and the Texas stabbing, and all the atrocities and terrors that happen every day - it's easy to become immune.

I remember when the Columbine shooting happened.  It never really hit home until I was in a choir with high school kids from Littleton, CO an entire year later.  Now things hit home much faster.  I feel the humanity - I know someone.

I can't glaze past it, or try to shrug it off.

The same is true of successes.  I find friends who are running for their state legislature, starring in movies, graduating from professional schools, starting companies.  I read their struggles, their successes, and it all makes me more human, more connected.

Stories in the news are not longer just stories, they are "What's happening to my friends."

Facebook has made it all personal - and I am a better person because of it.