One Step At a Time

I'm trying something new this year and signed up for a marathon training program with Rogue Running. I'm mostly doing it for the social aspect, but I'm also hoping to get help from the coaches to take my running to a higher level. I kick off the season tomorrow with a 7 mile run around Town Lake and I'm pretty excited to see what I can accomplish this year.

Right now my biggest challenge is going to be to monitor my hip pain and try to stay healthy. I went to the doctor 3 weeks ago and while he confirmed that I have mild bursitis in my hip, most of the pain I'm feeling is actually coming from my sciatic nerve which is probably originating with the sacroiliac (SI) joint. He suspects that this is due to muscle imbalances in my hip abductors (outer thigh) and gluteus medius so I'm currently going to a physical therapist once a week for some manipulations of my hip and lower back and for exercises to fix the muscle weakness. I also suspect piriformis syndrome. I had this problem and fixed it on the right using this stretch. But that stretch didn't replicate the pain on the left and wasn't resolving the pain so I was off to the doctor. Things are getting better, but there's still pain when I run. I at least have the consolation that it's not muscular, it's not getting worse, and so far they say it's okay to keep running. Actually, things feel a little better although there's still pain.

If all goes well, I'll be running the Houston Marathon on January 13 and the Austin Marathon on February 17. My goal this year is to get to 12% body fat and complete the marathon in under 4 hours. If I lose the weight then the second part will easily fall into place. I'm optimistic that I'll actually be able to run significantly faster than that, but I'm trying to stay reasonable and set myself for success.

Are Educated People More Religious?

The Mormon prophet recently stated:

A study was made some years ago that indicated the higher the education, the greater the faith and participation in religious activity.

I was curious what study this might be because I'm pretty sure that this is not, in general, the case. It is also interesting that he mentions that it was made some time ago. Sort of like the quote that continues to circulate in the church curriculum about the dangers of caffeine as a justification for the church's prohibition of coffee and tea. Imagine my shock to learn that his reference is another church magazine:

5. From “Rise Up, O Men of God,” Ensign, Nov. 2006, 61.

Great, so he's quoting from another article in a church magazine. This just happens to reference his own talk in General Conference where he originally bemoaned the fact that the men of the church were falling behind the women in education. However, that article does not provide a reference so I guess we'll have to just take his word for it and trust that the study was from a credible source.

A quick Google yielded the following from Wikipedia:

In The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins ^[5] cites an article by Paul Bell in Mensa Magazine, containing a meta-analysis of studies relating to the connection between religiosity and intelligence. Analyzing 43 studies, Bell found that all but four reported such a connection, and he concluded that "the higher one's intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be religious or hold 'beliefs' of any kind."^[6]

Dawkins also discusses the very low percentage of notable scientists (Nobel prize winners, etc.) that are religious and that even those that are religious tend to be very unorthodox in their views and don't seem to take it very literally.

I think the more likely answer is that religion is more strongly linked with culture than education. Churches are full of people who are very religious and also very educated. So education certainly isn't orthogonal to religious belief and practice. But Western Europeans are as well educated (and perhaps more so) than their American counterparts and are very secular and not terribly religious. Education there doesn't seem to enhance religiousity.

I think my own experiences as a Mormon missionary are more typical. The wealthy and the well educated weren't interested in what I was selling. I taught almost exclusively to the poor and uneducated people of Bolivia and they were the only ones that I baptized. The church's greatest growth has been among the poor and uneducated in Latin America, not among the wealthy and educated. The church chalks this up to the pride of the wealthy and educated. They just lack the humility to accept the extraordinary claims. Either that or they have enough education, experience, and critical thinking ability to recognize a fraud when they see it.

The Church Youths' Attitudes Toward Education

They New Era also had the following quotes that speak for themselves.

3. True or false:
A good education is more important for young men than young women.

False.

President Hinckley’s counsel is clear: both young men and young women need to get as much education as they can (see “Seek Learning” on page 4 of this issue). His words are fresh on many teens’ minds as they consider their future.

“I love President Hinckley, and I think it’s cool that he’s stressing that we women get an education,” says Sydnee Barney of the Meridian Idaho Stake. “I think it would be cool to both be smart and be a mom—to be a smart mom.”

“The prophet sees us as equals,” says Camille. “He said it’s just as important for girls to have an education as the guys because both of our roles in the future are important.”

Ryan says, “If my future wife knew how to rear our children well, teach them things that they need to know for school, and help them out, I think that would be great. I think it helps to be with someone that’s around your educational level.”

Ty Harris of the Meridian Idaho Stake remembers President Hinckley’s recent counsel for boys to “rise up” when it comes to getting an education (see Ensign, Nov. 2006, 60–61). “He was straightforward about it. He said that women are getting more college education than men. I think men need to step up and become the caretaker of their family and provide for their family.”

Seek Learning (Especially if you're male?)

The New Era is the Mormon church's magazine for its youth. The September issue arrived in our home today and the First Presidency message for the month caught my eye: "Words of the Prophet: Seek Learning". The church has always stressed the importance of education and supports education through its church universities such as Brigham Young University. But its attitude about education for women has always been a mixed message so I was curious how that aspect of the message was treated in 2007. I guess I wasn't really surprised. Here are a few excerpts although you're welcome to read the entire article (it's linked on the title of this post). The fact that the counsel much be tailored for men and women should tell you something. Here are the relevant sections. I've highlighted and inserted my comments in italics.

Special Counsel for Girls

In this day and time, a girl needs an education. She needs the means and skills by which to earn a living should she find herself in a situation where it becomes necessary to do so. [This is code for the case in which she can't fulfill her divine calling as a wife and mother.]

The whole gamut of human endeavor is now open to women. There is not anything that you cannot do if you will set your mind to it.7 I am grateful that women today are afforded the same opportunity to study for science, for the professions, and for every other facet of human knowledge. You are as entitled as are men to the Spirit of Christ, [The fact that he feels the need to point this out should tell you something. Apparently it's not clear otherwise or perhaps it speaks to common attitudes in the church. Still, it's nice that he's trying to counter it.] which enlightens every man and woman who comes into the world (see D&C 84:46).8

You can include in the dream of the woman you would like to be a picture of one qualified to serve society and make a significant contribution to the world of which she will be a part.9 Set your priorities in terms of marriage and family [In other words, getting married and having kids is more important.], but also pursue educational programs which will lead to satisfying work and productive employment in case you do not marry [The prophet has already counseled that a wife and mother should stay home, not work.], or to a sense of security and fulfillment in the event you do marry [Again, if you get married you shouldn't pursue a career. In that case your education is a bauble or an insurance policy in case your marriage isn't successful.]. Education will increase your appreciation and refine your talent.

Special Counsel for Boys

No boy anxious to please his Heavenly Father would fail to take advantage of educational opportunities.11 But there is a troubling trend taking place. Young men are more likely to drop out of school than young women. Women have earned more bachelor’s degrees than men.

It is plainly evident that young women are exceeding young men in pursuing educational programs. [The implication here is that this is clearly a bad thing. There's no question whether or not you'd find this comment in the previous section if the opposite were true.] And so I say to you young men, rise up and discipline yourself to take advantage of educational opportunities. Do you wish to marry a girl whose education has been far superior to your own? [This is not the first time he has said this. He's also made the same comment in General Priesthood Meeting where it was met with laughter from the congregated men. Is it too much to ask what would be so bad about that?] We speak of being “equally yoked.” That applies, I think, to the matter of education. [In fact he's saying quite the opposite. He thinks that in education the man should strive to be superior in educational attainment to his wife.]

I knew a young couple that had recently graduated from college. The wife was very intelligent and had a masters in accounting while the husband wasn't nearly as smart or accomplished. She surrendered a likely successful career to stay at home and start a family because that is what the church teaches. While that's their choice, it would be refreshing if the church could consider that there might be equally acceptable alternatives such as another Mormon couple where the wife continued to pursue her successful engineering career while her husband sacrificed his job as a public school PE teacher to be a stay at home dad.

I'm a Total Geek

Here I am sitting in the back seat of the Suburban while my son drives to Lubbock where he's starting his freshman year at Texas Tech University and I'm on the web reading about publishing.

I have a Sprint PocketPC 6700 phone that is also a small computer with a slide out keyboard that has a word processor, email, web browser and more. I recently upgraded the firmware on it and noticed a new application called "Wireless Modem". I had been considering getting a wireless broadband card for my laptop, but didn't want to shell out $150 for the card and another $50 per month so I wondered if my phone could now be used to give my laptop access to the internet. After a call to Sprint I tentatively extended my contract for a year and signed up for their wireless broadband service for an extra $35 per month. Now all I have to do is start up the wireless modem application on my phone, connect it to the USB port of my laptop, dial up the internet, and voila! I have a high speed internet connection.

So far I've been using it for about 350 miles and several hours across BFE Texas without the connection dropping once. In fact, I'm composing this over my cell phone while traveling along at 65 miles per hour.

I guess that the fact that I find this really, really exciting means I'm a total geek.

Oh yeah. My cost justification? Over the last two weekends I've more than paid for the service for over a year by being able to book consulting fees while sitting at the car while I'm at the horse show with my daughter.

A Pain in the

A man walks into a doctor's office with a duck on his head.

"Can I help you?" asks the doctor.

"Yeah, can you get this guy off my ass," replies the duck.

Sorry. Relevance? Probably none except that the pain in my left hip that started in February's marathon hasn't gone away despite laying off running for 7 weeks. It's back with a vengeance now that I've started running again. I thought it was a muscle strain, but I think I've ruled that out. I thought maybe it was nerve pain, but I think I've ruled that out because there is local tenderness. One possibility is ITB syndrome. The iliotibial band is a ligament that runs from your hip to your knee on the outside of your leg. It often gets tight in runners and usually presents with pain on the outside of the knee, but it can cause hip pain too. But ITB stretches and exercises don't seem to help. My last choice is hip bursitis and that is what I think I'm suffering from. There is a small area of tenderness right on the point of the hip that feels "lumpy" as I massage it. So, I'm laying off running again, taking ibuprofen, massaging it, and doing hip stretches and exercises. It doesn't bother me so much during the day, but right now it aches at night and keeps waking me up.

Did You Know? Or Insipid News "Events"

Does anybody know what happened to Lindsay Lohan last week?

How about the ongoing saga of the hotel heiress? (Bet you know her name.)

Did you see the story about the news helicopters that crashed and killed their crews while broadcasting a pickup truck towing a trailer through city streets?

I think it's extremely likely that you know about at least one of the above stories because they've received extensive coverage. The real question is why. There is nothing inherently newsworthy in those stories other than satisfying people's morbid curiosity. I guess you could argue that if people are willing to watch it then the networks have a commercial obligation to give people what they want.

But I'd argue that this is just laziness. Inventive companies are often successful because they create a product that people never knew they wanted until they saw it. Take the iPod, for example. People weren't out clamoring for it. But once they saw it, they had to have it.

I think that the news networks have fallen into the trap of spooning out the same old shlock and aren't trying to figure out how to create interest around genuinely noteworthy events.

My own self-serving example?

How many of you know who Alan Webb is?

Chances are you have no idea or why he is in the news. He just broke a 25 year old American record for the mile. The old record was an incredible 3:47.69 set in 1982 by Steve Scott; Alan ran a 3:46.91 a couple of weekends ago at a small track meet in Belgium. Even today it is a major hurdle for runner to run a mile in less than 4 minutes. Alan did it as a senior in high school. It is just inconceivable what it takes to run it in 3:46, but the second 400m was actually slower than Steve Scott's pace so it is pretty easy to imagine Alan running under 3:46 with his current conditioning. His goal, however, is to break the world record. Hold your breath for this one. The world record was set in 1999 by Hicham El Guerrouj with a 3:43.13. If none of this boggles your mind, I invite you to head down to your local school track to run a mile.

Thanks to modern technology you can see Alan break the record. He's so fast it won't take long so head over to Flotracks.com and watch him.

Folks, that is a newsworthy event.

Validation

I started a book back in March and submitted a book proposal in June. I just got back feedback from a reviewer and the publisher and it was very positive and they want me to press forward. Unfortunately, not as interesting as Sideon's stories, but it'd be cool to be published even if it is a technical, geeky book. Then I'd literally become "the man that wrote the book" in my area of specialty.

The scary thing is that I actually need to get on a solid writing schedule because it's going to be a fairly long book.

Go West!

I don't take very many vacations, but I just got back from a good one. I used a couple of frequent flier tickets to jet the wife and me to Ft. Lauderdale and then rented a car for a weekend in Key West. I finally got to scuba dive on coral reefs and see lots of fish and sharks up close and personal. We also did lots of turisty things. Unfortunately, I'm now back home looking at a long short work week with a pile of work I left behind.

Here are a few of the hundreds of pictures I snapped while diving. Not all that great, but they give you an idea.

This nurse shark was just chilling out under the reef.


This is pretty typical; lots of fish sheltering under the reef trying not to become a meal for a bigger fish.


I was just minding my own business when I looked up to see a 6 foot long shark swimming straight at me. It took one whiff and swam on by.

Delusions

Upon All the Ships of the Seas

I rarely post over on RfM (Recovery from Mormonism) any more because it's a little hostile for my tastes (meaning disagreement is more often met with name calling and accusations of being a mormon apologist troll than any kind of reasoned debate) I still drop in for the occasional nugget information or juicy news.

Tonight I found one that addresses one of my few unanswered Mormon questions.

The title of this post should link to Brent Metcalf's web site which I'd never visited before. It has an essay about an interesting passage in the Book of Mormon.

While I was on my mission in Bolivia I diligently read every doctrinal and historical church book I could get my hands on. I remember reading about 2 Nephi 12:16. What's so important about that verse? Nothing from a doctrinal standpoint, but when you compare it to its corresponding verse in Isaiah 2:16 you'll see that it adds a phrase. The King James Bible says:

And upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.

But the Book of Mormon says:

And upon all the ships of the sea, and upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all the pleasant pictures.

The footnote in the Mormon edition of the King James Bibles makes the following claim which I found quite compelling:

16a The Greek (Septuagint) has “ships of the sea.” The Hebrew has “ships of Tarshish.” The Book of Mormon has both, showing that the brass plates had lost neither phrase.

For those unfamiliar with Mormon doctrine and the Book of Mormon, the Book of Mormon extensively quotes from the book of Isaiah in the Bible and is almost word for word identical to the King James version. The Book of Mormon states that the passages come from plates of brass that Nephi stole from their Jewish caretaker in Jerusalem prior to leaving for the promised land. Therefore, one would expect it to be a close to the original writings of Isaiah. This verse seems like evidence that the Book of Mormon preserved an obscure phrase that was dropped over the years as a result of translation or transcribing or something.

If Joseph Smith were plagiarizing the Bible, the how in the world could he have known to add back in that phrase that the Septuagint had, but was missing from his edition of the Bible? He couldn't have, right? Surely an unschooled farm boy couldn't have done this.

That is the argument of the church's apologists and since it agrees with their preconceived conclusions they stop there and don't dig deeper.

As with so many other things Mormon, the answer is quite simple. Click on the Book of Mormon link over on the mormonscripturestudies.com web site and you'll find a single essay by David P. Wright that provides a pretty straightforward explanation. Many bible commentaries of the time correctly explained that "ships of Tarshish" was commonly translated as ships of the sea and the proper noun "Tarshish" was commonly rendered as "sea" by translators.

To quote Wright's article:

The many pre-1829 editions of Thomas Scott's The Holy Bible Containing the Old and New Testaments (Philadelphia: 1810-12; New York: 1812-15; Boston: 1823-24, 1827) also cite Lowth's comment:

'Ships of Tarshish signify in scripture, any trading or merchant ships: accordingly here the Septuagint render the words "ships of the sea," as our old English translation does: Ps. xlviii. 7.' (Lowth.)[16]

¶16 The appearance of this datum in so many printed sources indicates that it was not obscure, but relatively well-known. Joseph Smith could have learned about it from any one of these commentaries, or, as is far more likely, from sermons he heard or conversations he had on biblical subjects with those who might have known this particular Bible "fact." Smith may have come by this bit of information specifically via Methodist influence, since John Wesley's teachings provided the matrix for Methodism—a religion for which Smith had felt a passing affinity.

If I'd know this, I wouldn't have been at all impressed by his inserting a footnote into the proper text as if he was restoring an ancient text instead of merely repeating two redundant translations. Of course, I also didn't know that the Isaiah chapters quoted in the Book of Mormon are almost exactly the same chapters quoted in Ethan Smith's "View of the Hebrews" which appears to have contributed a significant number of ideas to the Book of Mormon.

In the end, this has been the pattern of my study of Mormonism. As a believing Mormon I came across items that seemed contradictory or troubling but put them on a shelf believing that they'd eventually be clarified or answered in the church's favor. But as I started studying non church sources I systematically discovered the lies, distortions, misrepresentations, half truths, and omissions of the church and found explanations for all the things that sat on my shelf of questions gathering dust. In the process I had to put some things on another shelf of things that seemed to support the church and that I didn't have an explanation for. That shelf was pretty bare and this is the last item left that I'm aware of. All my reading had taken care of everything else.

Remember, the truth has nothing to fear and distrust any person or organization that tries to limit your information.

Taking a Break

I haven't posted much lately. Things have been hectic, but they always are so that's not really much of an excuse. I guess I just haven't felt a need to share.

I was talking to my sister the other day and she informed me that a couple of her friends missed the posts and want me to post more, just not about running. So I guess I'll apologize for boring you with the details of my running. I understand that it may seem irrelevant or boring, but it is actually quite important to me on a number of levels.

First, I only have one body and everything depends on it working properly. Running has cured my high blood pressure and helped relieve day to day stress. I also suffer from migraines which comes with an associated elevated risk of stroke so maintaining good cardiovascular fitness is important to protect by brain.

Second, it helps meet my need for competition. I'm only competing against myself, but that's enough. Having goals drives me to train and gives purpose to the training. It's disappointing when result don't come, but when I have a breakthrough race like I did in my last race of the season it feels great.

I don't think I wrote about it, but on May 19 I ran a 5k around the Texas state capitol. I averaged 7:36 per mile and beat my personal record by a minute and a half. I followed that up about an hour later by running the Congress Avenue Mile. My mile was relatively slow because my legs were shot from the 5k, but I'm still excited by my 5k performance a month later. But after I finished I realized that I needed to take a break. My hips hurt, I had sharp shooting pains in my right shin, my right foot was sore again and had started having shooting pains in the ball, and my hamstrings were very tight and tender. I'd started my marathon training at the beginning of August and trained hard with only a week break after the Dallas Marathon in December and two weeks after the Austin Marathon in February. I'd exceeded all of my goals, but now my body was starting to break down and needed a break.

So I actually haven't run since before Memorial Day. It's only been a little over 3 weeks, but it feels like forever. Am I really a runner? I don't feel any compulsion to put on my shoes and go out for run. In fact, I'm appreciating having a little bit more time each day. Part of me dreads starting running again but not for the reason you might think. I enjoy running, but I'm afraid that I'll be so out of shape that it won't feel good and that I'll be nearly starting over. Plus, I still have my niggling aches and pains.

I received notification that I didn't get a lottery spot in the New York Marathon so my winter marathon plans are up in the air but I'm thinking of doing the Marathons of Texas series and doing Dallas in December, Houston in January, and Austin in February. Regardless I won't start marathon training again until after Labor Day. Between now and then it will all be about losing weight, regaining flexibility, doing some strength training, and having an enjoyable summer.

Islam and World Peace

I finally finished my book on Islam and thought I'd follow up on what I learned.

The book met my expectations because it clearly articulated a belief system that is appealing and attractive and helped me understand why many good people can believe in Islam. As long as I restrained my critical thinking and an instinct to mentally rebut what he was saying I found myself agreeing with a lot of his philosophy and doctrine. In fact, at one point what he was saying resonated to the point where I felt that he was teaching a universal truth that would be helpful for me to follow.

It's tough for me to review an audio book because I have no text to refer to and as a result I'm really relating my recollections and what I received and perhaps not what the author originally intended, but I'll briefly relate the key points.

The author clearly and repeatedly stated that no follower of Islam would ever use violence or coercion or harm another person. Despite the teachings in the Koran and Hadith that can be used to justify violence, he believes that true Jihad is a spiritual battle using the spiritual tools of the teachings of the Koran to help each person conquer their natural "monkey man" and exemplify the divine attributes of God. This strongly follows Paul's teaching that the natural man is an enemy to God that must be conquered and also reminiscent of Paul's whole armor of the Gospel.

So, the whole point of Islam is to follow certain practices that aid people to overcome their 4 trillion and 10 thousand base attributes and learn to have the attributes of God. The author repeatedly used such numbers, but I suspect that this is shared by the Bible where numbers are not meant literally but figuratively. Anyway, some of the practices include certain declarations of belief such as that there is only one God and that Mohammed is his messenger. Another is praying 5 times a day. Another is to fast. Another is to pay alms. And others that I can't recall. It doesn't really matter to me; the point is that the practices are to serve as a constant reminder of an ideal that you are trying to achieve.

As I was listening I was strongly reminded of the appeal of religion. First and foremost is the belief in an idealized being who is perfect in every way. This belief in perfection is very important because it is the measure by which we judge good and evil and that is the ideal to which we aspire. Mormons capture this in their belief that our ultimate goal is to be perfect like God and to eternally progress until we become gods ourselves. While this is heresy to some, it mirrors what I think is a core belief for devout religious people: God is a model of perfection that we try to follow in our lives.

This lead to a realization on my part. I feel like my loss of faith in Mormonism and a personal God has left me somewhat adrift and cut off from the one part of my religious life that I valued. I realized that I still valued that and that there was no need to lose it. The only thing that has changed is a realization that I can't rely on authorities, whether they be sacred books such as the Bible or Koran, or people such as Abraham or Mohammed or Joseph Smith or a pope or a pastor to set my ideals. Those may be useful sources, but I believe that rationalism, evidence, and reason need to be the basis of my ideals. This leaves me free to draw on the strengths of the worlds great thinkers and religions and also to reject their errors. Along with that freedom comes the burden of accepting responsibility for my own beliefs; I can no longer say I believe because of my book or my prophet, it has to make sense to me. I think that religious people vilify atheists because they think that along with rejecting God they've also rejected the ideals that God represents for them. At least in my case, that is not the case. I've rejected some ideals that are unjustifiable, such as that coffee drinking is a sin, but retained others such as that we should treat others the way we'd like to be treated.

In that context, the five daily prayers of Muslims makes a lot of sense, not in a literal sense, but in a figurative way. It is a call to regularly form in our mind an ideal of what we would like to be and then to reach out to that regularly throughout the day in an appeal to try to conform to what we want to be. For me, that would mean to control my anger, to try to have more empathy for others, and to work toward my goals instead of getting distracted. For you it might be something completely different. If God represents our personal ideals, then regularly touching base with those core beliefs throughout the day would seem to be a good thing. I think that for me this would be more a meditation or perhaps some time of cognitive behavioral therapy, but I think it would be a good thing and make me a better person.

The best analogy I can think of in my personal life is weight loss. I have in my mind an ideal body composition that I'd like to attain. I know what it takes to lose weight, but I've only ever been successful when I log every calorie I eat every day. What essentially happens is that the logging make me very conscious of all of my eating. I have limited calories each day and try to make them count. Every bite involves a conscious decision because I have to log it. The goal is my ideal and life becomes a journey of changing my life to meet that ideal. The process takes something that is otherwise impossible for me and sets me on a long term journey of personal transformation.

Anyway, I can now see both sides of Islam. It's very clear that it can be used to justify horrific human behavior. It is equally clear that at least some Muslims are horrified at the atrocities committed in the name of Allah and that they believe that such things are completely incompatible with the true nature of God and Islam. I hope that the latter group grows stronger in the same way that Judaism and Christianity have mostly moved past their violent pasts to become more moderate and compassionate religions.

One last interesting observation was the very Mormon belief of the author that Islam is a superset of all the good of all the religions of the world. For him a good Jew or Christian or Hindu is practicing Islam because they are trying to be peaceful and godlike. To him since there is only one God that he calls Allah, everyone is really worshiping the one true God. This is very like Mormons who believe that all religions of the world have a part of the truth, but the complete and pure truth is only found within Mormonism. The only difference is that he thinks that everyone will ultimately follow Allah and Mohammed and Mormons think that ultimately everyone will follow the Godhead and Joseph Smith. My belief is that they are all wrong and that ultimately everyone has to be accountable for forming their ideals as best they can and trying to live them as well as they can.

Full of It

It seems that when I occasionally post over on RfM my alias is misinterpreted as indicating what I'm full of. It really doesn't bother me since I was raised in a very literalist Mormon household by a father who was a devout John Bircher and lover of unorthodox thinking. So I'm used to being an oddball and an outsider.

But that's not why I call myself Bull. That moniker was applied by one of my employees who loved giving everyone a nickname. The guy with allergy problems was Hack because he was constantly hacking up his phlegm. I became Bull when I showed up at work with a shaved head because I reminded him of the giant, shaved-headed bailiff on the TV show Night Court. I thought it beat the nickname I picked up in junior high (Jimmy, after the peanut farming former president) and I've used it ever since. The nickname probably fits in a number of other ways such as my physique and my direct approach toward handling problems.

World Peace

Contrary to the opinion of my father and other believers, I actually try to keep an open mind and see both sides, especially in areas where my knowledge is limited. So, I'm trying to learn more about Islam because I work with Muslims and so far they all seem very nice, decent, hard working people and not a single one has threatened me or tried to do me harm or, for that matter, tried to convert me to their religion. In other words, they are a lot like most of the people I work with and I'd like to understand a little more about their religion and how they can believe and be peaceful while many of their fellow believers use Islam as a philosophical springboard for genocide and hatred.

I recently finished listening to "The Truth About Mohammed." When I finished I felt I'd learned how Islam is used to justify violence and repression around the world, but I also felt like I'd just read a very one sided polemic. What I didn't learn from the book was what made Islam such a popular religion throughout the world and across many different cultures. The author didn't even make an attempt to show any redeeming value to Mohammed's life or the religion he founded.

So I picked up what I knew would be a polemic in the opposite direction, "Islam and World Peace." So far it is pretty typical of a lot of religious writing in that it consists of a sequence of unjustified assertions that probably seem like self-evident truths to the author, but that quite questionable to me.

The gist so far seems to be that the cause of all of the violence in Jerusalem and the rest of the world is unbelievers and that if all of the believing nations of the world would just expel or otherwise get rid of the unbelievers and follow the law of God then the world would be at peace. My interpretation would be that if we would all just accept the truth of Islam then we'd have peace. That makes sense in a certain way but begs the question about how to persuade the unbelievers to believe. Mohammed started out preaching and trying to persuade, but the only thing that ultimately worked for him was warfare and complete intolerance of other religions. So, does that mean that to achieve peace the believers need to declare war on unbelief and destroy or expel all unblievers? Wait, isn't that what the Islamic terrorists are saying? Now I'm confused again. I guess I'll have to keep listening to the rest of the book.

Transitional Life Forms

Man, Kirk Cameron is a nut job. I was watching Nightline and they had a "debate" between the Christian religionists and a couple of atheists debating the existence of God. The best proof of the atheists was the stretched analogy between a painting and the universe; a painting is proof of a painter so the universe is proof of a creator. They had no good answer to the question of if everything has a creator then who created the creator (i.e. infinite regress). They claim, incorrectly, that most people disbelieve in God because of evolution. Their chief complaint seemed to be the lack of transitional life forms. Cameron put up artistic rendering such as a croco-duck, a bull dog, etc. Humorous, but I think he was being mocking.

The trouble is that these arguments seem to hold sway with creationists which just shows how ignorant they are about evolution and science in general.

Just last week I stumbled into an evolution discussion with a co-worker. I quickly found myself scurrying to extricate myself as the claims became more extraordinary and the lack of touch reality mounted. All this with an intelligent, well-educated, engineer. I was amused when he admitted that the whole point of intelligent design was not to put forward an alternate scientific theory but to use real or perceived holes in scientific knowledge as evidence that there must be a God. He also admitted that it was essentially appealing to magic to explain what we don't understand.

As Dawkins would point out, just because we don't know something or that a scientific theory is disproved doesn't mean that the default belief should be God or some other supernatural explanation. God is such an improbable being that it should require extraordinary proof before being seriously considered at all.

Looking back over the past 1000 years, compare the contributions of science and technology as opposed to religion. Religion, scripture, and revelation have never given us light and knowledge about the universe and its workings. Quite the opposite. Religion has had to be dragged kicking and screaming, resisting all the way, and often denouncing truth as heresy.

Anyway, here are my examples of transitional life forms that will probably never be found in the fossil record. Seriously, look at what has happened to the poor old wolf. All the following animals are very, very close genetically to the wolf at the top and in the case of the Doberman are very recent inventions by breeding. Gene sequencing shows remarkable sharing of genes between completely different species. All of these things are to be expected based on evolution. But, let's say that we never are able to explain how one species evolved from another. Does this automatically mean that they were created or engineered by a creator? Perhaps that does become more likely. But then, how did he do it? Was God really a master recombinant DNA engineer and breeder that engineered the earth with natural means? Or was it magic? Is he truly supremely powerful?

I'll favor non-magic explanations because I see no evidence in the world I know to suggest that magic is real. In fact, nature is continually yielding up her secrets to the questioning of science.

Besides, if God does exist, then he has a lot of explaining to do because his creation is a real mess.




Credit



Credit




Credit



Credit

The Worst Sci-Fi Novel Ever

I pity you if you ever did like I did and tried to read L. Ron Hubbard's science fiction epic, Battlefield Earth. I happened on it in the Rochester, Minnesota public library and started reading it shortly after graduating from college. I made it through the first volume and finally gave up on it. Not only was the language terribly inept, the plot struggled along from one implausible situation to another enacted by characters that were completely unbelievable and unsympathetic.

I'd heard the name L. Ron Hubbard and had seen the TV commercials for Dianetics but hadn't yet learned about the connection to $cientology. Later when I learned more about that cynical, invented religion I remembered Hubbard's clumsy book and about died laughing when I realized that the deepest secrets of the so-called religion were just cheap copies from a poorly written sci-fi novel.

Now I read that Battlefield Earth is Mitt Romney's favorite novel. OMFG! This guy's running for president. This is a standard fluff question for candidates. There are approximately a gazillion possible choices that would be better and maybe a dozen that might be worse and he chooses this one. The sheer ridiculousness of the choice precludes this being a calculated answer chosen by pollsters and campaign groomers so I have to assume that this was an honest answer. Which leaves me wondering how sharp this guy can be.

Hmmm. Just realized that I may have confused Battlefield Earth with the 10 volume Mission Earth series. So maybe I'm wrong. But I doubt it.

Information Asymmetry

I probably spelled that wrong, but oh well. I'm currently reading Freakanomics. Chapter 2 is about the effects of people having different access to information and what happens when informational inequity is equalized by things like the internet. One example is that term life insurance premiums have plummeted in the last decade. Why, because there are very little differences in the products and people are able to easily go to internet web sites to shop for the lowest quote. This cuts off the high pressure insurance salesman and allows people full access to the competitive landscape.

Another example is a Mr. Stetson whose life mission was to combat racism and bigotism. He took on the Ku Klux Klan and realized that because of its secretive nature nobody really knew about it. So he infiltrated it and became a member. While walking in his neighborhood he noticed some kids playing a game where they had secret passwords and the similarity to the Klan struck him. He thought it would be great to expose the Klan as the juvenile, childish organization that he knew it was. So he arranged for the Superman radio show to create a story line where Superman takes on the Klan. This was post WWII so the show needed a new bogeyman to replace the Nazis who had just been defeated. On the show they revealed all of the Klans terminology, secret passwords, and everything else. After the first show, kids everywhere were playing Superman vs. the Klan and using secret Klan passwords, handshakes, and terms. The Klan members were embarrassed and participation at the local Klavern dropped precipitously after a very short time.

The same thing happens in many other areas, but it struck me that the same phenomenon also applies to religions including Mormonism. Mormonism makes many, many claims that would be very difficult to investigate without the internet because the church very early on tries to control all access to information about itself and methodically discredits anything that may make it look bad. The most blatant admission of this is the talk by Boyd Packer, the current president of the church's 12 apostles, that some truths are not particularly useful. What he was talking about were facts that might make people doubt the church's claims.

This is why the temple endowment is so "sacred" that no one is every allowed to talk about it. Almost everyone who hasn't been through laughs in disbelief when they hear or read what goes on in there. It IS ridiculous and shocking in its total inanity so it must be kept secret.

But, churches everywhere, not just the Mormons, are feeling the effects of more equal access to information. Gone are the days where Bibles are in Latin and chained to the pulpit where only priests can read and interpret them and the congregation is illiterate and superstitious.

Refuse to be a Victim

Here's a good link I saw today on CNN of all places.

Ted Nugent (don't laugh) does a pretty good job of explaining what the problem is and what an effective solution would be. He also gives some poorly publicized examples where his solution (the same one I proposed yesterday) has worked effectively. It seems that criminals usually turn out to be cowards when armed citizens confront them and if they suddenly decide to be brave then their criminal careers reach a premature conclusion. I'm hard pressed to see how that is bad.

Endowed With Power From On High

Last month I had the opportunity to meet with Sideon while I was out in California on business. I had a great time and although I typically talked way, way too much, I think he did too. At some point in the conversation it came out that he had never been blessed with the opportunity of going through the temple. So I regaled him with an account of my own endowment session. It was strange then and it seems even stranger now. I can only imagine how it must seem to someone who has never been and never wanted to.

The term endowment comes from the scriptural promise of being endowed with power from on high. Joseph Smith gradually developed a set of rituals meant to fulfill this prophecy. It started with washings and annointings in the Kirtland temple. After the church got run out of Kirtland in the aftermath of the church's bank scandal they no longer had a temple until after they got run out of Missouri and settled in Nauvoo. While there Joseph became a master Mason and soon after had the rest of the endowment ordinances revealed to him. Coincidentally, these ceremonies included many of the secret handshakes and symbols of Masonry.

When I went through the temple the only thing I knew about it was that I'd have to wear garments for the rest of my life. That's it. No temple preparation classes or anything else prepared me for what I was about to go through. I was interviewed for worthiness by my bishop and stake president and promised that although I must have lots of questions about what goes on in the temple I'd have to wait and all of my questions would be answered inside.

Early on Saturday morning the week before I was to enter the missionary training center I headed to the Washington D.C. temple to take out my endowments.

First, I had to buy garments. Yes, you have to pay for the privilege of wearing those uncomfortable underwear that reach to your knees and have funny marks sewn over each nipple, your belly button, and your right knee. In the temple they explain what the symbols represent, but they don't tell you that the symbols come from Masonry.

Next I had to rent my "packet." This was a flimsy nylon envelope about twelve inches on a side that had some more cloth inside. Then I was given a shield and a one piece garment and ushered into the locker room. I was instructed to take off all of my clothes and put on the shield and carry the garments. They meant ALL of my clothes and the shield was nothing more than a very low thread count cotton-poly sheet with a hole cut in the middle for my head. This was the first unsettling thing. You think that a hospital examination gown is revealing? With my first step the "shield" billowed out revealing me in all of my naked glory. Are you kidding me? After 19 years of endoctrination in modesty I'm supposed to go traipsing through the temple buck naked to who knows where?

It turned out that the "where" was at one end of the locker room where they had stalls for the washings and annointings. The original ceremony involved an actual bath tub and being actually bathed by another person, but then it only involved an extremely rushed blessing while I was dabbed with consecrated water (the washing). Then it was on to the next stall where the same procedure was done with consecrated oil (the annointing). Then I was clothed in the garment of the holy priesthood. The man actually held the garments open while I stepped into them and then he raised them up on me. Then it was back to my locker.

Wierd doesn't even begin to describe what I had just been through. Now I got to put on my own new two piece garments and get dressed in all white clothes right down to socks and slippers. They pinned a special name tag on me to flag me as a "live" endowment as opposed to most everyone else who was serving as a proxy for a dead person.

Now I was lead through a very thick curtain into a booth where I was given a new name that I was never to reveal. Only later did I discover that everyone who went through that day gets the same name. The booth exited into the hallway and then we were escorted to the endowment room.

The endowment room is nothing more than a small theater complete with fold down seats. An altar and a movie screen are at the front of the room along with a couple of old people who are the officiators. The altar is covered with cloth; it's not for offering animals or anything like that. This temple had a white rope down the middle that separated the room into a side for women on the left and men on the right.

The session starts with a disembodied voice talking over speakers. The part that spooked me was the following:

If you proceed and receive your full endowment, you will be required to take upon yourselves sacred obligations, the violation of which will bring upon you the judgment of God; <queue very ominous, threatening voice> for God will not be mocked. If any of you desire to withdraw rather than accept these obligations of your own free will and choice, you may now make it known by raising your hand.

At this point I wanted more than anything else to raise my hand and leave. How was I supposed to take upon myself sacred obligations of my own free will and choice when I had absolutely no idea what they where? But, I'd deferred my BYU scholarship for 2 years to serve a mission. I'd received my mission call. I'd said goodbye to my girlfriend. I was scheduled to give my missionary farewell the following day. If I didn't go through with it then I would lose my scholarship and be a pariah in my family and church. It took a huge leap of faith to stay seated when it felt like I was ready to levitate off my seat and out the door.

I now think that the church does this intentionally. Members generally are not allowed to take out their endowments until very shortly before their mission or their marriage. They have no idea what is involved other than that it is required for the imminent milestone. Once you're totally committed you really can't back out without major consequences. Then, once you're in you're bound under the most solemn obligations to "God, angels, and these witnesses." Doesn't that seem a little manipulative and cult-like?

It gets better. The lights dim and a film shows a depiction of the creation and God giving further light and knowledge to Adam and Eve via Peter, James, and John. The packet contains green satin apron embroidered with fig leaves, a flimsy toga that you put on during the ceremony, a white cloth sash, and a really terrible looking masonic cap with a string that ties to the shoulder of the toga. At points you are given secret handshakes and passwords along with a sign and execution of a penalty. The penalties are ritually acted out by each participant while promising not to reveal the handshake and password. "Rather than do so I will suffer my life to be taken." The penalties involve slicing your throat, tearing open your chest, and disembowling yourself. My understanding is that these are copied from the Masonic ceremonies. If you want the details you can read the entire ceremony here. I'll vouch for its accuracy.

In the Book of Mormon the Gadianton robbers are the incarnation of evil who take blood oaths to keep each others secrets. These secret passwords, handshakes, and blood oaths were revealed by Satan to Cain and are revealed throughout the ages to his servants. So, having read the Book of Mormon I wondered how the same types of things would be revealed in the House of the Lord. Now I was really feeling sick to my stomach.

Even more, as naive as I was I knew that you could get copies of the endowment ceremony outside of the temple from non-Mormon sources. Why would we have to promise to give up our lives for something that was openly available? Why would anyone kill for such a thing?

At the end we were presented at the veil (a thin nylon curtain with three holes cut in it) where we received the last password while embracing a man through a curtain who was acting in place of God. After getting the last password we were drawn through the veil into the presence of God and entered into the Celestial room of the temple.

I felt ripped off. I had been promised that when I went through the temple all of my questions would be answered. It had been presented to me like an educational session where I'd be taught. But at no point was anyone ever available to answer questions and we were discouraged from talking at all and when we did it had to be in hushed whispers. The Celestial room was especially holy and was the first chance to say anything, but no one talked in there. So it was back to my locker and into street clothes for a long quiet ride home where no one discussed then or at any point in the future what had just transpired.

Every doctrinal point in the endowment is openly taught outside the temple. The only things unique are the handshakes, passwords, and penalties. The covenants are also pretty straightforward such as the law of chastity and law of consecration. I guess I can best summarize it as a very unsettling let down. In typical Mormon fashion I secretly suspected that it didn't go well because of my own personal unworthiness. Personal sin and guilt are a safety net to explain everything in the church and they are very effective since no one is perfect.

Over the years I returned hoping that I'd catch the spirit of temple worship and gain an understanding and appreciation of it. But I never did. At best I became numb to it and tried to stay awake.

In 1990 our bishop encouraged all the endowed members of the ward to attend the temple. He couldn't say why but promised that it was great. So we went and I was shocked to discover that they'd removed the elements of the ceremony that I'd found most troubling such as the penalties. This shattered me for two reasons. First, I'd been taught that the endowment, like all ordinances in the church, had been given by revelation and was unchangeable. I couldn't see any doctrinal reason for the changes. If it had been correct in 1989 then it should have still been correct in 1990. Nothing in the external world had changed so why would God suddenly alter his most sacred ordinances? This is very similar to the kind of changes in ordinances (such as baptism by sprinkling instead of immersion) that the church uses as evidence of a general apostasy by Christianity.

Second, the things that they'd removed had always seem wrong to me. This seemed like a confirmation and tacit admission by the church that they were wrong. Maybe my gut feelings on that day in 1983 had been right and the church had been wrong. If it could be wrong on something like this, what else might be wrong? If I could expect them to be right about ONE thing, wouldn't it be their most sacred ordinances?

I never went through an endowment again. It took a long time to come to a full realization of the many other lies I'd been taught in the church but I eventually decided to ask the hard questions and research the church's claims. I find that they fail from start to finish.

So, I apologize to Sideon and you if I've bored you with my account. But at least you can compliment Sideon, if you should ever have the pleasure to meet him, on how well endowed he is.