Adam

A local evangelical church recently hosted a debate between two competing groups of Christian scientists on the subject of creation and evolution. The first group, called Reasons to Believe or RTB among its devotees, is a "progressive creationist ministry that promotes day-age forms of old Earth creationism". They believe that God specifically created various forms of life over a long period of time. God made the dinosaurs in a special act of creation, they say, and then much later God made the first couple Adam and Eve. In this way they try to reconcile the Biblical account of the book of Genesis with modern science.

The second group represents main-stream secular evolutionary theory with God thrown in at the beginning to start things off. They believe, as do non-religious secular scientists, that life evolved from a simple-cell organism billions of years ago. They accept the big-bang theory to describe the origin of the universe, but advocate intelligent design - things didn't just happen by chance, but God was there to get them going and guide them along.

The leader of the second group caught my attention when he said he believed in "the historicity of Adam", although not in the sense of RTB. In other words, he believes in a historical person named Adam with a wife named Eve, although he does not believe this couple was specially created by God as the first human couple on earth. The scientist then went on to give his "personal testimony", as it is known in evangelical churches. He was a hard-partying young scientist whose life was falling apart until he had his come-to-Jesus moment. The love and forgiveness of Jesus flooded his heart with joy and peace and changed his life forever, he said. The result was he was now both an evangelical Christian (hence the belief in Adam) and an evolutionary biologist.

It didn't make sense to me, and I raised my hand when the moderator called for questions. Addressing the born-again evolutionist I asked, "It seems to me that your scientific beliefs about evolution are no different than your secular coworkers at the university where you teach. But somewhere along the line you realized, "Oh crap, now I'm an evangelical Christian. I have to believe in a historical Adam who sinned to explain Jesus dying for the sins of mankind." At that point you threw all your scientific reasoning out the window and took a position based solely on faith."

The question brought chuckles from the audience, probably due to my use of the expression "Oh crap" in church (I was going to say something else, but thought better of it). The scientist replied that belief in a historical Adam had nothing to do with his initial conversion experience. It was the love of Jesus, he repeated, that attracted him and changed his life. It was only later that he came to believe in a historical Adam.

Other people had other questions and I couldn't follow up on mine, but it seemed to me that he both side-stepped my question and added fuel to my argument. The fact that he later decided to believe in Adam made it even more clear that it was a decision based not on scientific evidence but religious dogma. He was attracted to Jesus, and began to follow him. Later, as he came to understand the teachings of the church, he learned that Jesus died to pay the price for mankind's guilt. Since guilt for sin did not fit in his evolutionary training and worldview, he had to believe as an evangelical that at some point in mankind's evolutionary development he became guilty. He therefore chose to believe - based purely on faith and not on science - that there really was an Adam who once lived and sinned, and that somehow his sin affected everyone after him with the result that Jesus had to die.

I still don't understand how he can reconcile the two. Wouldn't it make more sense to see Adam and Eve not as a historical couple but as an allegory representing the close relationship people can have with God? Is it possible their leaving the garden of Eden was not a punishment from God, but their stepping out into the real world to face life with all its tragedy, beauty, and mystery? And could the serpent, rather than being a  historical Satan as interpreted thousands of years later, actually have been the friend who reminded them there was much more to knowing God than they already knew?

Was it God or Was it Fear?

Someone, I'll call him Exhibit A, recently attended a trade fair with his boss, Exhibit B. Their job was to manage the booth advertising the products of their company. Since it took two people to effectively run the table, they were inseparable all day long.

As proceedings were winding down, Exhibit A noticed a former co-worker, Exhibit C, walking across the hall towards the exit. Exhibit B blamed Exhibit C for a contract that had been lost when he still worked for their company, and the two men were not on speaking terms.

Exhibit A had not been involved in the original dispute and had nothing against Exhibit C. He wanted to walk up to him and say Hi, but immediately felt the discomfort of being on the horns of a dilemma. If he did so his boss would become angry with him, and Exhibit B's rage was both volatile and toxic.

And so Exhibit A did what any self-respecting religious person would do - and God knows I'm one of them. He sent up a Hail Mary Prayer to the Magic God in the Sky, asking for a miracle. Please God, he said, Give me a chance to say Hi to Exhibit C. And pretty please, don't let my boss know about it.

The answer came into his mind just a few seconds later. The bathroom! He excused himself, telling his boss he had to use the restroom. He crossed the hall but instead of entering the mens room ducked to the left, darted out the exit, and Voila! Exhibit C was just about to get into his car. Exhibit A ran up to him, they exchanged greetings, and Exhibit A got back to the booth without his boss having an inkling of what had just taken place.

Exhibit A told me the story as proof that God answers prayer. I don't want to take away from the mystery of the moment - maybe he is correct - but isn't it possible that something else was going on? Wouldn't it have been much more emotionally healthy for Exhibit A to simply excuse himself from the table for a minute and greet Exhibit C in the presence of his boss, no matter what his response? It might have been followed by some unpleasant moments and a long silent ride home. But it wouldn't have been the end of the world.

How to Ace a Polygraph

This began as an email to a friend, but I thought I'd expand it to include a larger audience. I think the steps are applicable to any potentially stressful situation, from interviewing for your first job at McDonalds to initiating a break-up in a relationship, or orally defending your PhD thesis.

Step 1 - Take four deep breaths, breathing in your nose and out through your mouth. Feel the air going into your nose, and out through your lips. Observe your chest expand as you inhale, and contract as you breath out. Notice the short space of time between each breath. Do this right now, before you read the next paragraph.

What were you thinking about as you were breathing? The answer is Nothing, because it is impossible to think about anything else while being aware of breathing. It's easy to think about things while breathing - we do it all day long - but you can't think about something else while you are conscious of your breathing. As you wake up on the morning of your polygraph, practice the above exercise.

Step 2 - From the moment you get out of bed until you leave the house, be aware of each thing that you do. Taste the toothpaste as you brush your teeth. Feel the brush running through your hair as you comb it. Feel your stockings against your legs as you put them on, and notice the touch of your shoes against your feet. Feel your feet against the stairs as you come down the steps, and really taste that first sip of  coffee as it crosses your lips. This awareness will keep your mind from doing what it desperately wants to do, run to fearful anxious thoughts. If your mind does take off in that direction, pull it back to the present.

Step 3 - Continue this focused awareness on your way to the test location. Notice the colors of the cars as they pass you. Feel your hands on the steering wheel. Follow the lyrics or melodies of the songs you are listening to. Stay in the present, remembering to pull your mind back if it lunges off to anxious thoughts about the upcoming test.

Step 4 - As you sit in the waiting room, affirm positive qualities to yourself one after the other. For me it would be the form of I am Christ and I am confidence, I am Christ and I am strength. For a more evangelical Christian it could be in the the prayer, The spirit of God is within me and I am wisdom. For a Buddhist it might be, I am the Buddha and I am success. For someone else it could be, I am connected with the universe and I am freedom. Or you don't need a preamble at all - you can just repeat, I am peaceful, I am strong. You can also eliminate negative emotions by repeating, I remove fear, I reject anxiety. I think you get the point. By the way, you can begin this step even earlier to replace Step 3 if you like.

Step 5 - When you are called into the examination room, repeat Step 1 (well, your breaths can be through your nose this time, but be aware of them). Greet the examiner politely, without trying to please or humor him or her (in my experience, they have always been male). If he asks if there is anything you want to share before the test, allow a few seconds for any thoughts to come into your mind and if they do express them to him (Hopefully it won't be, I killed my mother-in-law last week, or Three men in black suits followed me into this building and I think they are after me!).

Step 6 - At the end of the text the examiner will probably ask you to wait while he leaves the room. Again relax, be aware of your breathing or the beating of your heart, perhaps notice the surroundings in the room. Pull your mind back if it begins asking itself how you did, or whether your answers were correct.

Step 7 - If the examiner comes back and says he needs to ask you a few more questions, or some parts of the exam were inconclusive, don't panic! Just say OK, and be aware of your breathing as he begins his questions. If he tells you they need to repeat the examination at a future date, again don't worry. It will just give you the opportunity to practice all the above steps on the second day! And I am sure you will do fine.

I Love You

It was an epiphany, an Aha moment as Oprah might say. I was driving to a class where for a week we had been seriously studying twelve abilities that exist in every person, learning how to develop them in ourselves. As happens in many small classes, an intimacy and closeness had developed among the 15 or so students. These twelve abilities include things such as understanding, zeal, the capacity to organize, faith, and love.

It was love that caught my attention that morning. It's a universal emotion, practiced by people the world over. Love one another, the Bible says. Even love your enemies, Jesus added. But why is it so hard for us to tell people that we love them? Is it because the word has been so misused, has so many levels of meaning, can be so easily misunderstood, that we are afraid to use it? I've never told anyone I love them, with the exception of close family members. What would happen if I simply said to people whom I have learned to trust and who trust me, I love you?

After reaching the class I told the person sitting next to me what I'd been thinking about and then added, I love you. Her response was, Thank you. I love you too.

This is great! I thought. I turned to the person on the other side of me and said, I love you. Again the response was, Thank you. I love you too.

A few hours later the class was finished and the students were all saying good-bye to each other. As I shook the hand or embraced each one I repeated the same phrase.  I love you. The reply was always the same. Thank you. I love you too.

The thought came to me strong, like a river. You should tell the teacher that you love him. And I suddenly felt a strange resistance, a lack of comfort.

The teacher is gay. I'm a 65-year old straight guy. What was going to happen when I walked up to him and told him I loved him? And why was I suddenly feeling so uncomfortable?

I realized that his response no matter what was beyond my control, not my responsibility, but I needed to do what I was feeling an urge to do. I walked up to him, waited until he finished the text he was sending and looked up to me, and then said, Thank you. I love you.

I'm not always good at reading emotions on people's faces, but something came across his. He stood up and said to me, Is that worth a hug? And we exchanged a warm embrace.

At lunch a few minutes later, he came up and sat next to me at the picnic table where we were eating our sandwiches. With the other people sitting there, we had a good conversation.

Would he have felt as welcome to sit next to me at the table if I hadn't told him I loved him? I'm not sure, but I'm sure glad he did. 

Snap! Crackle! Pop!

Where does your mind go when it's not in the present? To the future, or the past?

Some friends recently discussed that question in a small group setting. Most people said their minds went to the future. I was the lone dissenter, saying that mine wanders to events or conversations of the recent past. Here's a recent example:

It's a few minutes after six when I roll out of bed, pull on a pair of shorts and a t-shirt, and go downstairs to make a cup of coffee. Jake is waiting for me, tail wagging expectantly. He knows it is his favorite time of the day.

Ready to go for a walk, Jake? I ask. He literally leaps in the air, all feet off the ground, in anticipation.

A few minutes later we are on the trail, ready for our four mile walk. I slow my pace, take a few deep breaths, and listen to the birds chirping. A few weeks ago I hadn't even realized the variety in the sound of a bird. Some have a high shrill tone, and others are melodious. Some have just a short single sound, repeated again and again, while others seem to carry out a melody. Some seem to sing only to themselves, while others are carrying on a conversation.

So what's this Unitarian church you visited? 

It's not Unitarian, I replied, it's called Unity.

Is it a denomination or what?

Yes.

How is it different than other denominations?

Well, I think most denominations limit themselves to Jesus and the Bible. This church sees spirituality as having a wider range than that.

So they think that Buddha is just the same as Jesus?

I didn't say that. I just meant they might quote Buddha as well as Jesus. You don't hear Buddha mentioned in most churches.

That's not true.

Well, I've never heard a pastor mention him before, at least not positively.

So basically you are putting people like Eckhart Tolle on the same level as Jesus. 

No, I'm just saying that all truth is God's truth, no matter who says it. I mean, if Eckhart Tolle says two plus two equals four, and Jesus says two plus two equals four, they are both true.

So you don't believe Jesus is the only way to God? Do you believe he died for our sins and rose from the dead?

I'm not sure what I believe about Jesus right now. But I don't want to argue about it.

I'm not arguing. I just want to understand.

I wanted to say that if you really wanted to understand, you would read the books yourself, or visit the church, and then draw your own conclusions. But I knew that conversation wouldn't go anywhere, and I felt myself becoming frustrated. I didn't respond.

SNAP! 

I take a few deep breaths, and notice the green surrounding me. I'd never realized there were so many shades of green in the woods. Each tree, each bush, each clump of grass, seems to be a different color. Some are a deep green, others light and glossy, and some seem almost translucent.

Not only that, there are so many shapes. Each tree, bush, and flower has leaves of different shapes.

A beautiful woman is jogging on the path towards me, shoulders back, head high, and chest out. We smile and nod as she passes.

There are so many stories of women who get attacked and raped as they are jogging in the woods. What should we do to someone who does that? Kill him? No, that seems a little extreme. Put him in jail for 20 years costing taxpayers millions of dollars? At least he won't be raping while he's in jail, but who knows what he'll do as soon as he gets out. Maybe we should castrate rapists. No, that's probably not a good idea. There are sociopathic and vindictive women out there. It's easy to imagine an angry woman accusing a former boyfriend of rape just to see his balls cut off. 

CRACKLE!

Jake stops, totally focused on the deer standing less than 20 feet away. They glare at each other. Jake lifts his front paw. The deer lifts his right foot, stamps it on the ground, and does the same with his left. 

The beautiful jogger passes again, this time on her way back. Looks like your dog and that deer are having a real staredown, she says.

I give a tug on Jake's leash, and we continue down the path. A minute later, I hear a rustling and turn around. The deer is following us. She and Jake repeat their same routine, with the deer stamping her feet, and I again pull at his leash. A minute later I turn around, to see the deer still following us. She and Jake seem to be infatuated with each other.

Do you know what Obama did today?

I replied that I didn't, knowing I was going to hear it now. A 60-minute commute on the Beltway listening to Fox News complain about the President is enough to put anyone in a combative mood. I wonder how to say that I actually like and respect him and his administration, and don't appreciate hearing an unending stream of negativity about him.  But I don't say anything. I just listen, trying to pretend I'm interested.

POP!

I notice the chaos of the woods. Dead trees and branches are lying everywhere in the midst of beautiful live trees and bushes. Sprouts are pushing their way upward from the ground. Birds that were alive yesterday are now dead, with Jake rustling in the bushes for their bones. The cycle continues of birth and death, chaos and beauty.

I think of the phone call I received from my daughter yesterday. One of her friends was married last August. This weekend her husband of only a few months was hit and killed while riding his bicycle.

What do you say in a situation like that? How do you try to explain that the universe - or God or whatever you call it - just pushes us into the world and then takes us back again? Some people get to live 90 good years. Others are taken at the beginning of a new, joyous life.

Jake's tongue is hanging out now - it's been almost two hours on the trail - so we stop at our favorite watering hole and he drinks from the fresh flowing stream. We come back to the house. He collapses on his bed, and I make a fresh fruit breakfast smoothie. 

Judge Not

I was recently at the funeral of a relative. It's a family where an ancient incident has resulted in a complete estrangement between two sets of siblings. Neither side has spoken to the other for years.

I was never party to the conflict, and after the memorial service greeted one of the excommunicated brothers who had come with his girlfriend. I thought it was courageous and generous of him to attend a service where his own siblings completely ignored his presence.

As we were talking I looked over at my daughter, hoping she would join us. To my surprise, she didn't even glance in our direction.

I was heartbroken. I expected more of her. I couldn't believe she had been so influenced by the hostility and hatred in the family she wouldn't even come over for a greeting. But I took a deep breath, and chose to accept the reality of the situation. I won't judge her, I thought. This is where she is right now, and that's OK.

Easier said than done. As we were leaving the church a few minutes later I blurted out, "Honey, couldn't you even say hello to your uncle?"

Her response was immediate. "But I did, Daddy," she said. "You just didn't see me. I went over to him, gave him a big hug and told him I loved him." The relief I felt was palpable.

We discussed the incident the following morning. When I told her I had made the decision not to judge her, her response was again immediate but higher-pitched this time. "NOT JUDGE ME?! Daddy, the first thing you said was, 'Couldn't you even say hello to your uncle?'"

Judge not, lest ye be judged. I think Jesus said that. And as I learned that evening, it's easier said than done.

Zachery Chesser and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Zachery Chesser is a young man from Virginia serving a 25-year prison sentence for providing material support to an Islamic terrorist organization. The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs recently published this case study on his radicalization.

The committee began its report with a glossary of relevant terms in which it defined Jihad as follows: an Arabic word commonly translated as "struggle;" used in the Qur'an to mean either a struggle on the battlefield or an inner spiritual struggle.

How did the intelligent, highly-educated young Senate staffers conclude that the Qur'an describes Jihad as an "inner spiritual struggle"? Was it from their own study of Islam's sacred text and their analysis of its more than 150 "Jihad verses"? I don't think so;  if they would have, they would have known that more than 95% of these verses were written when Muhammad was conducting wars from Medina, and almost every reference is to the primary meaning of Jihad which is effort exerted to ensure the victory and supremacy of Islam.

Chances are they watched this movie, What a Billion Muslims Really Think, perhaps at a government-sponsored conference on how to avoid offending Muslims in the workplace, and listened to Dalia Mogahed explain that to her Jihad is a wonderful word that expresses her desire to draw close to God. The fact that this has nothing at all to do with the Qur'an would be lost on them, because it is information Dalia and her many associates do not want them to have.

The report next defined Kafir as an "Arabic term used in Islamic doctrine and often translated as "non-believer", "disbeliever", or "infidel". The reality is that a Kafir in the Qur'an is anyone who did not accept Muhammad as a Prophet from Allah or the Qur'an as the word of Allah. In other words, a Kafir is simply a non-Muslim.

The glossary then defined Violent Islamist Extremism as "the ideology whose core goal is the establishment of a global state - or caliphate - by violent means in which the most radical interpretation of Shari'ah (Islamic religious law) will be enforced by the government."

The question to be asked, with just a slight rewording of the text, is this: does this define Violent Islamist Extremism, or is this nothing more than Islam as envisoned and practiced by Muhammad? Did the state established by Muhammad enforce "the most radical interpretation of Shari'iah", or did it simply enforce Qur'an-defined Shar'iah? Instead of calling this a definition of Violent Islamist Extremism, could it not simply be:

Islam as Envisoned and Practiced by Muhammad: The ideology whose core goal is the establishment of a global state - or caliphate - by violent and non-violent effort (Jihad) in which Shari'ah (including the Qur'anic Hudud of amputations, floggings, and capital punishment) will be enforced by the Caliph (God's representative on the earth).

The Senate report then establishes a timeline to describe "The Rapid Radicalization" of Chesser in 2008. What I find amazing is that the report says absolutely nothing about how he became radicalized. It devotes a single sentence to his conversion to Islam,  describes three sentences later his newly-developed conviction that voting in presidential elections is un-Islamic, and shortly afterwards notes his committment to violent Jihad.

Why would the report's authors not be interested in the process of Chesser's radicalization? Why would their report not include the verses from the Qur'an, the instructions of Muhammad in the Hadith, the examples from his life in the Sira, that caused Chesser to become in a short time someone who issued violent threats against the writers of South Park for showing Muhammad in a bear costume?

As government reports do, this one ends with "Findings and Recommendations". The Findings were that radicalization takes place over the Internet, is likely to increase, and Law Enforcement Agencies  are unable to counter it. The reason for the latter is that Law Enforcement is not allowed to interfere in the two basic American values of freedom of belief and freedom of speech. If I believe that Islam must rule, and if I openly proclaim that conviction, Law Enforcement is powerless to stop me until I engage in  criminal activity that puts my conviction into practice.

The recommendations were that "the U.S. Government needs a comprehensive Internet strategy to address online radicalization", and that the Government "should strengthen its ability to assist Muslim American communities seeking to address and counter radicalization online".

The problem is that the Government and Muslim American communities have nothing to counter the persuasive and powerful arguments of the Jihadists. Dalia Mogahed can tell us that Jihad is her effort to draw closer to God, but the Jihadist will recite hundreds of examples from the Qur'an and Hadith that Jihad is warfare in the way of Allah to spread and strengthen Islam. The moderate American Muslim can note with pride that Muslims serve in the U.S. military, but the Jihadist will challenge him to show a single verse in the Qur'an that allows a Muslim to serve in the armies of the Kuffar (non-Muslims) against the Mu'mineen (believing Muslims). The Muslim Colonel in the Marine Corps might be a good American, but he is not a good Muslim.

Zachery Adam Chesser is a 22-year old man, born three days before Christmas in 1989, now serving a 25-year sentence in a maximum security prison for attempting to follow the instructions of his Prophet to migrate from the land of the Kuffar and engage in Jihad among the Mu'mineen. In other words, he is just another young man whose life was tragically destroyed by Islam.