Mr. Stern Face

Earlier this week I was scheduled to do a driver test for a man from India who will be renting our vehicle.  After waiting about 10 minutes past the scheduled time which has effectively screwed up my schedule I spot a guy who looks like he might be Indian wandering aimlessly around by some stores that are about 80 yards away from our test site.  He is clutching loose papers in both hands and as he rounds the corner out of sight past the Jet's Pizza I decide this might be my guy so I take off after him in the rental.

As I close in he spots me and asks if I am Bob.  I assure Nagaraja that I am indeed the right Bob and tell him to hustle into the passenger seat as we are running late.  "What do you want me to do?" he asks.  I tell him again to get into the passenger seat but I think to him it must have sounded like; "Get your butt into the car so we can get started!"  Nagaraja finally gets said rear end into the car, I drive to the starting spot for the parking lot portion of the test, and ask Nagaraja to show me his required document from the Secretary of State as well as his International Driver's License.

 "While I am looking at these documents I would like you to get into the driver's seat and adjust the seat and mirrors."  I have given these same instructions hundreds of times but perhaps today my vibes were different.  We get the documents done and I read the instructions for how to do the parking lot portion of the test and although Nagaraja's English seems fine he never looks at the charts that I have displayed for him and he keeps telling me "I don't understand."

You know how it's our natural tendency to speak slower and louder (and maybe even jab at the diagram more aggressively) when someone doesn't understand what you are trying to tell them?  That was me.  He especially cannot understand what he needs to do for the blind side backing exercise.  I show him the charts again. He doesn't understand. I stand in the spot he needs to get into and tell him "I am the car. The front end faces this way and the rear end faces that way.  Start with the front end facing this way and back or reverse the vehicle into this space."

He starts to drive the car God knows where and I yell; "Stop the car!  Stop the car!"  Then I tell him to get out of the car, walk him over to the area and tell him that "the car goes here."  He points the wrong way and asks; "In this direction?"  I whip up my clip board once more and explain; "Just like it shows on this picture, you start over there, you back up into this space, the front of your car faces that way and the back of your car faces the other way.  If you would look at the diagram you would understand.  I can't tell you how to do this but you must end up here."

Well, after starting late and wasting so much time the guy actually passes the parking lot portion.  I get into the car, now about 25 minutes behind schedule, to begin the driving portion of the test and get a lecture.  "You have a stern face.  I am 50 years old and have been driving for 30 years and you should not treat me as a child. I am an actor but unemployed and I need this license.  And I am worried that if I drive you may fail me because you do not like me."  I calmly tell Nagaraja that my personal feelings will have no bearing on how he is graded and that we can get started.

We turn right out of the parking lot.  There are two lanes that go to the right with a car approaching in the outside lane.  Nagaraja turns out of the parking lot into the right lane then starts to fade into the left lane.  I grab the steering wheel so we don't run into the other car.  We turn right into a nearby residential area.  Nagaraja is going 32 in a 25 zone and I tell him that he needs to stay at the speed limit or slower.  We turn left at the first stop with out making a complete stop, but then he stops completely at a through intersection where we have the right of way and the side streets have stop signs.  However he does not even slow down for the four way stop at the next intersection.  Again we stop at a through street for no reason and roll through a stop sign turning left out of the residential area.

For obvious reasons I'm heading back early to Go at his point but that requires turning left at the next intersection.  The light is green and I need to grab the steering wheel again because Nagaraja tries to turn in front of the oncoming traffic.  We do make it back and I very sweetly inform him that he did not pass, explain in detail what he did wrong, and advise him that although Michigan Department of State regulations allow him to take the test again in 24 hours he would be wasting his money without first getting lessons from a trained professional.

He stares at me blankly, brown eyes and mustache not moving, with a look from that ancient land not really understood in this new world.  "You mean I didn't pass?"  "No, you didn't pass."  "What would you advise me to do?"  "Get lessons, from someone who is trained to teach driving."  "But this is my 5th time taking this test.  It makes me mad that young girls who know nothing can pass this test and here am I, 50 years and driving for 30 years and you do not pass me.  What do you suggest I do?"

Several interesting thoughts ran through my mind at this point but over the years I've learned to control myself.  I tell him that it would be cheaper for him to pay a little more first for lessons so that he would understand the rules of the road here, but that he can do whatever he wants.  Nagaraja goes to the office, makes a fuss, and is scheduled to be tested by Mr. Stern Face tomorrow.  Pray for me.

   

Let There Be Light

"So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart."  (Ephesians 4: 17-18)

Then God said, "Let there be light", and there was light . . . and God separated the light from the darkness . . . And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day". (Genesis 1: 3-5)

"Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night . . . And God made the two great lights; the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness . . . And there was evening and there was morning, a forth day". (Genesis 1: 14-19)

-

"Now I can see!" (From a past blog entry by my youngest daughter Becky, telling about changing a headlight all by herself on her Toyota Corolla)

-

When I took biology in high school our teacher told us that we shouldn't look to the Bible for information on the beginnings of life because in the Biblical account vegetation appears on the third day, and the sun isn't created until the forth day, meaning that all the vegetation would have died instantly without the sun. I suppose in a universe without a Designer and Creator, that begins from point B (point A cannot be discussed), and which runs through to point Y (Z also cannot be discussed), where all matter expands from a BB sized unit, expanding and forming in that expansion - time and space, gravity and forces, elements and stars, planets and water, nuclei and DNA - that all the vegetation would have indeed died.

In a viewpoint that does not include a Designer and Creator all things must be reduced to mathematical equations, which the average person cannot even begin to cipher or comprehend, although we are asked to trust both the method and the messenger. Understand this; There is no such thing as being belief neutral. All men are both physical and spiritual beings, and the physical and the spiritual are intertwined in all creation. To claim that spiritual considerations are not science ignores the fact that atheism is a religious viewpoint. And if atheists make the rules for science, then science becomes an extension of that intellectual denomination.

Nova once did a program looking at a 2006 court case brought by the ACLU, representing a parent group, against the Dover (PA) school board.  Our newspaper reviewer praised this as being a very even handed presentation.  That was not my reaction.  Clue 1;  The judge in the "reenactments" always displayed an approving smile anytime a "true scientist" would testify  Clue 2;  There were shown ample examples of religious bigotry and hysteria.  Clue 3;  A scientist displayed and discussed a fossil of a fish with leg bones that he identified as a missing link between fish and land animals.

Not discussed were the facts that (A) No fossils exist showing the process of development of more complex features (all features found on fossils are already fully developed and useful for that particular species), (B) No reason is given why non-working leg bones would be a benefit to that species for the million years it took to develop them to the point found on the fossil, (C) There was no consideration that the DNA of the species might be programmed so that form and shape can change to adapt to different conditions (that of course would require "intelligence"), and (D) No mention of the obvious;  Contrary to what the public has been led to believe it has not been observed , in the lab or in nature, that genetic mutation increases complexity.

Species are observed becoming extinct, but new species do not appear (unless discovered in previously unexplored areas or classified as new because of variations of existing features).  Life forms change, but not from simple forms to more complex forms.  The observable fact that species can change over time in regards to color, size, shape and number should not be considered proof that genetic mutations will develop more complex features. Genetic mutations always result in a limiting of variation, not an increase it.  A reasonable person should consider those facts as more than just "minor difficulties."

-

The Dover case is hailed as a benchmark victory of scientific evidence for evolution crushing the religious belief of intelligent design, although the case had nothing to do with the merits of either. Yes, arguments for both were presented, but the case was all about the idea that any challenge to the teaching of evolution is an imposition of religion doctrine into the public classroom. It was an argument that could not be won by debating the validity of evolution, and the outcome was predetermined by the acceptance of the perception that the definition of science excludes the discussion of design by an intelligent force. In other words, there is already a pre-existing religious doctrine (atheistism) in place, which prohibits discussion of opposing religious viewpoints.

-

Several Christian members of the Dover school board, believing that evolution is more theory than fact, pushed through a proposal whereby the 9th grade science teacher needed to read a brief prepared statement at the beginning of the first day of class, only stating there were "gaps" and "problems" with the theory of evolution, and that intelligent design was another option to consider. If any student wanted more information, the school had available the book, Of Pandas and People (which discusses intelligent design without reference to God). That was it. The ACLU argued, and the judge agreed, that the words "gaps" and "problems" came from creationist literature, which talks about a Judeo-Christian God, meaning that intelligent design was simply creationist doctrine in disguise. The use of those two words implies acceptance of creationist ideas by the school administration, and thus was the imposition of religious doctrine into the school.

-

That was the type of catch-22 logic used in the old Soviet bloc countries. Any citizen that would disagree with Soviet policies must be crazy, and was sentenced to a mental hospital in the gulag. Here we have science excluding a Designer and Creator from consideration, making evolution both a necessary and a foundational concept. Any disagreement with the foundational concept cannot be true science, allowing the judge to rule that intelligent design was not science. Even though all complex structures, including the cell, look designed, design cannot be included as a consideration in science because all matter and structure must be the result of non-intelligent, mathematical processes of movement and relationship.

-

Now, let us briefly take a closer look at the two passages from Genesis, from the viewpoint of those that consider the word of God to have been written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and is an accurate account of the beginning of life on our earth. We believe that the Designer and Creator of all matter can do anything He wants with it, and the result will still be within the bounds of the laws of physics that He Himself established.
-

From this camp there are three major, but different viewpoints. Each looks at scripture literally, but each sees a somewhat different story.
-

There is the traditional interpretation, where creation happens over six, 24 hour days. All matter began about 6,000 years ago and all life was formed from the material of the earth, by God, during those days. Species multiply each after their own kind, but with multiple variations designed into each species.
-

Then there is the group, best represented by scientist Hugh Ross, who see the six days as being long ages, with the age of the earth, and the progress of creation during those ages, as being compatible with current scientific understanding. They see God implanting in the physics the design for the beginning of life, with life evolving on an evolutionary model, albeit under the watchful eye and plan of God. Perhaps man was created separate, or perhaps God put into an existing creature, at the right point of evolution, the first divine spirit.
-

The third group believes that Genesis may be telling the story (after Genesis 1:1), not of original creation, which may have happened thousands, or even millions of years before, but of a restoration of the Earth after a judgment by God. They see the evil one as having an exalted position on the pre-Adamic earth, and judgment coming upon the earth after he rebels, taking with him a third of the angels. The Earth becomes formless and void, and the Spirit of God hovers over the waters (v2), and restores shape and life to the earth over six, 24 hour days. Things then progress from there along the same lines as the first group.

-

Exploring these three viewpoints would take quite a bit of time, but I want to move on to the answer for my high school biology teacher.
-

A careful reading of Genesis verses 3-5 indicates that the earth was rotating on the 1st day, and that there was a fixed light source, causing the side of the earth toward the light to be in the day, and the side away from the light to be in the night. The presence of vegetation before day 4 meant that there was also some source for heat as well. Although we are not given the identity of that light source, it could be the sun, depending on how the passage is interpreted, or it could be something else.
-

An example of a something else is given in the 21st chapter of Revelation in the description of the New Jerusalem. The time period is after Jesus returns and rules on the Earth for 1000 years. Near the end of those 1000 years the evil one is released for a short time to bring rebellion to a close and then is thrown into the lake of fire. This is followed by a final judgment for those whose names were not found written the the book of life, who also end up being thrown into the lake of fire. 
-
"And then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband . . . And I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God, the Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine upon it, for the glory of God illumined it, and its Lamp is the Lamb".

-

Viewing the physical world without any comprehension of it's spiritual dimension is like driving at night in a heavy rain with only one headlight. There is so much more that is out there.

My Favorite Martian

NASA's newest rover has landed on Mars and in the weeks, months and years ahead we will get some great pictures sent back and lots of soil and rock samples analyzed.  Bravo!

One of the main goals of this expensive venture is to search the dry surface for areas that once contained water for evidence of extinct Martian life forms.  You probably are not aware of this but our scientist really have no idea how life actually started on Earth.  It must have required water since water is the universal solvent but all theories on how something as complex as the most basic DNA chain could have formed by chance hold about as much water as is visible on the surface of Mars.

If you don't see life spontaneously form around you, if you can't combine the right materials to do so in the lab, if you don't have a reason that long DNA chains would form in the first place, then perhaps a stray Martian meteor infused with life might hold the answer.  Ray Bradbury would be proud.  This may be - Instant Recall 1, 2 and 3 -  My Favorite Martian, rated R  -  "ACK!  ACK!  We come in peace.  ZAP!"

In honor of man's latest, greatest achievement I have re-posted below an article I wrote some years ago.

I love big numbers although I can barely comprehend them. For example, light from the Sun can get to the Earth in less than 10 minutes. But if you had a spaceship that only traveled as fast as the car in your garage and started heading for the Sun today, neither you nor the kids that you brought along for the ride would live long enough to get there. The Sun is 93 million miles away so you do the math. 
                                                                                   -
Yet if you wanted to travel to the next nearest star with a possibility of a planet suitable for life, and could travel at the speed of light, it would take you something like 20 years to get there. Well, except for one little problem. A few nuclear fuel rods allow a large submarine to go for a year without refueling. But if all the atoms present in the entire Earth were split there still would not be enough energy produced to enable that same little spaceship to obtain light speed. Or let me put it this way. UFO's do not come from beyond our solar system.
                                                                                   -

The Hubble telescope has scanned the universe and it is estimated that there are 200 billion trillion stars. Scientists have looked at something called red light shifts and calculated the speed and time that all matter is moving outward from some central point and have estimated the universe is between 13 to 20 billion years old. I recently heard a creation scientist ask this question. If we divide 200 billion trillion by 20 billion years, there need to be 20 million stars formed per second, from then until now, to reach 200 billion trillion. If this is so, then why do we see so few stars being formed? 

                                                                                    -

So I checked out star formation on Google.  Seems that Hubble has identified a lot of "star birthing areas", visible only with infrared scanners, and these have great "potential" to form lots of new stars, although the last new star identified for sure was birthed 1000 years ago. But not to worry, it's a little telescope and a very big universe. So what's 20 million per second among friends?

                                                                                     -

We are told that the Earth began forming about 4 billion years ago, and that conditions for life were not present until about 400 million years ago. Now 400 million years is a lot of time, but not enough to program by trial and error the 3 million links of genetic code needed for the most basic initial life form. Even if chance could provide the first 100 links, why would links be added year after year after year, when those links would not benefit the potential life form until a million years later?
                                                                                     -  

The same argument applies to the latest idea that there might have been millions of shorter RNA links floating around. Where is the evidence?  What is the purpose of their existence? What would cause more than a few links to combine over any amount of time?
                                                                                       - 

I think the DNA of all life is already programmed to allow for variation up to certain limits. But check out sources such as the National Geographic edition on evolution, or evolution web sites and still you will not find any evidence presented that shows gradual development of new features over time.
                                                                                       -

Anthropologist can chart extinct species and suggest that one led to the next. But the fossil record is absent of uniqueness in development. You might find a small dinosaur fossil with wings, and if that is an actual fossil then it's an already done deal. We simply do not have evidence of wings in the process of being developed over time. Nor do we find in any species of animal, plant or insect existing today new features in the process of development. Maybe we should actually call modern evolutionary science, "faith based science".

-

So is the universe really 14 billion years old, beginning with a big bang? Did life begin 400 million years ago? Have the ancestors of modern man been walking around this planet for 100,000 years? The search to understand the ever increasing flood of knowledge is both exciting and important. But Christians need to learn how to properly balance what science tells us and what scripture teaches.
                                                                                   -

Science looks at material evidence and interprets everything mechanically and mathematically. It looks at only the material world and cannot measure or comprehend the spiritual world. And science is limited by two biases.
                                                                                   -

The first is that because it cannot measure the spiritual, it then denies it. I personally believe there are physics that govern both, perhaps the same physics. If so then the non spiritual man's glass will always be half empty in understanding the universe.  Finding one "God particle" will only lead to the next unknown.  Would the search to understand more still have happened if science did not exclude the spiritual?  Men like Isaac Newton stand as a testament that states otherwise.
                                                                                    -

And the second is that because everything is regarded mechanically science is most comfortable with a uniformest view of time. This measures the pace that things happen at today and the conditions that are known today and then applies that pace and condition when looking backward. So an earth-shaking event like a universal flood is ignored, not because of the lack of a tremendous amount of evidence, but because that very idea comes from non scientific books and thus would be "introducing religion into science".

-

There is going to be bias in play as well when using scripture as a guide to interpret science. Christians need to seek the leading of the Holy Spirit to help understand and discern what is written and what is taught. If there is a conflict between what God says in scripture and what science says, then God is always right.
                                                                                    -

But if a verse talks about the "four corners of the earth" we can understand the truth in that statement without having to believe that the earth is flat. Scripture talks about the sin of Adam and Eve, and believing that Adam and Eve were real people is critical to understanding God's plan of redemption for man.  Putting a time frame on when Adam lived, and when "God created the heavens and the earth", is a matter of interpretation.
                                                                                        -
Science may lead us to better examine certain sections of scripture, and it could be very wrong in its interpretation of evidence. However, the tools we use to help us understand scripture, such as teachings, and commentaries, and books, may or may not be inspired. Honest people can look at scripture  literally, and consider scriptural evidence as a whole, and still have areas of disagreement.

-

Unfortunately the overall tendency in the church today is to try to conform scripture to current scientific and cultural information and standards. There is an evolutionary flavor being injected into the teaching of redemption and morals. It denies the authenticity of people and events in the Old Testament and transforms a Spirit-breathed, Spirit-reborn relationship with the Creator of the universe into a values-changing, society-conforming philosophy left by an evolved grand master. But this has been true even from the time of the apostle Peter.
                                                                                   -

"Mockers say, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation . . . When they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgement and destruction of ungodly men . . . Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people should you be in holy conduct and godliness . . . But according to His promise we are looking for a new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells." (2 Peter 3)

When Is A House A Home?

Yesterday we had an annual family picnic at my brother Jim's beautiful place on Lake Michigan.  Dale Van Lente was always part of the gatherings there, his mind and humor sharp even though he was in his 80's.  He was the remaining patriarch of our clan from my mother's side and his heart gave out this July, leaving our hearts empty as well.

I wrote this the night before to share with his two daughters, Katrina and Gretel.  I told them I think most of this is true.

Sometimes I remember my uncle Dale by the different places that he lived.

The first was the house he grew up in on 17^th street in Holland, the site of so many of our family gatherings with Grandma and Grandpa Van Lente, the aunts and uncles and cousins. I stayed overnight there several times in a bedroom that overlooked 17^th street and I'm told that 17th was once a part of a main route that headed West and then South toward Chicago. Getting up early I would watch the cars stream by, wondering where they were headed. Perhaps Dale did as well and that was one reason he left Holland for education, the military, work and love.

Dale did come back and he and Ann first lived in an old house on Graves Place, just down the road from Centennial Park and a building that once housed the Dutch/Holland Museum. I was at that house on New Years Day in 1960 and watched a review of the decade of the 50's on the TV in the den. Would we ever see such change again? The home even then had a grape arbor in the back.

Out front across the street was an empty field on which would be built Hope's 6 story tall library. Many years later my son Ben played soccer at Hope and one day we had a soccer luncheon in a room on the top floor. It provided an amazing view of all of Holland and even Lake Michigan was visible from there. Little known to the college officials was the fact that the night before the official groundbreaking some of us “Van Lentes” brought our own shovels, dug a little ground, and had a pre-official groundbreaking ceremony. I remembered that as I looked out the 6^th floor windows and thought, “Dale and I helped build this place.”

Later Dale and Ann moved into a 100 year old home on 12^th street, just across from their church, 3^rd Reformed. There are a lot of great and warm images from that house – The formal dining room, the living room with all those salt dishes, chats and music in Katrina and Gretel's bedroom, the grape arbor and sundial out back, ghost club with the cousins, and the large always green lawn for running around at 3^rd Reformed.

Eventually the girls grew up and Dale and Ann built a house along side the Kalamazoo River. I guess the address was considered Saugatuck but believe me, this place was isolated. We would drive thru farm fields, over or under the freeway until the road ended, turn right for a couple of miles and then left into the woods, drive around until you find a house with lights on. At least that's how I recall the directions. Oh, the view of the river and all the nature was glorious, the house was beautiful, but somehow this place was out of character with the aunt and uncle I knew.

Dale was always there next to the heartbeat of Holland. He was close to where he worked and taught, the people he served and the place he worshiped. Even living in those old homes was like he was part of the breath and history of Holland. I know Dale and Ann loved their new home but it was easier for Dale. He could still come into town everyday, see it's people, feel it's rhythm, maybe even have a big, fat juicy hamburger or some ice cream without Ann's knowledge. My mother told me later that this was a tough time for Ann who was mostly isolated. Beautiful place, yes. Home, no.

And so they would sell that house and buy, what else, an old house across Lake Mac on South Shore Drive, just a short jog from where my parents were living. Combining old and new they modernized parts of it such as kitchen and their bedroom, allowing for a view of the stunning formal garden that I think will capture most of my children's memories of Dale and Ann. The formal garden. They were still in Holland, close to everything, but somehow through the garden they brought a little living culture home.

After Ann died, so close to her beloved garden, Dale would spend more time out West with Katrina in a little trailer on the Frey Vineyard property. I've been there only once and never saw the trailer but this is how I think things might have gone for Dale in his part time home there.

I noticed pictures posted on the beautiful Frey Vineyard web site of Dale helping out the family in their business. My favorite is senior citizen Dale, sweat pouring off his brow, working in the winery. The next is Dale, wide hat to protect from the sun, a bag of wheat slung over his shoulder, and a cane to help him walk. There was a chain, attached to his ankle on one end and to a large iron ball on the other. The web site described the genius of the Frey enterprise. Instead of just growing grapes the space between the rows could be used to produce additional crops. The cane was sharp on one end, poking a hole into the soil. Dale would then toss out the seed from his satchel in the same natural way that was done for thousands of years. The chain would break up any seed clumps that didn't find a hole, and the iron ball would close soil over the seed, completing the process.

After a grueling (but enjoyable) day Dale would retreat to his little trailer. Every other day Katrina would stop by with a cup of warm broth. At first Dale would gulp it down, then hold the cup up to Katrina with both hands and say “More please”. But after some time he would learn to savior it, sip by sip, allowing him to better contemplate French literature and Amazon birds. And wasn't this why he came West to begin with? He wasn't the hobo of Ukiah. This was his Walden's pond. Dale wanted to suck all the marrow out of life and now life just kept on, well, it was always interesting.