Science is both a tool and a process. We are very familiar with its function as a tool but its function as a process has not seeped into our consciousness. As a tool it is something that we use to create models of the world around us. As a process it works on us to fit us for our place in the world. Consequently, we serve two distinct roles in this reality.

It is important that we understand and appreciate the difference between those two roles and how each impacts the other.

If you want to know what Christians think about marriage and family don't pay attention to their marriages or their families. Listen to what they have to say about Adam and Eve's proto-marriage and their family.

Many have expressed the view that Adam was a wuss because he did not abandon his family after his "wife" ate the fruit of the tree. .

There is built into the fundamentals of Christian practical theology a mindset that the family is not important to fight for -- that it should be abandoned on the first provocation. .

If we really want to heal our families we need to get our story on Adam and Eve right.

Why is marriage so important to humans when we are the only species that practices it, it provides nothing that cannot be obtained without it, and we have not found a way to make a success of it?

Clearly, the decision to stick with marriage is not one that we have made but one that has been imposed on us. Wisdom dictates tht we should try to understand this phenomenon for it is part of our cultural DNA.

Are you one of those people who are concerned about the purpose of life? If you want the answer you probably know to ignore the hundreds of books that have been written on the subject, and it doesn't help to analyze your own life. You have not lived long enough.

Here is an idea. Pick anyone you have been close to. The only requirement is that this person must be dead. Here you have all the data you need to figure out the purpose of life. Here is someone who actually completed the cycle of life. The purpose of life is bound in that person's life. What have you learned about life from that life? That is the purpose of life.

It is amusing how committed humans are to the idea that they are radically different from other humans. Have they forgotten what it means to be human?

You could make the argument that you are radically different from other species but how can you think you are radically different from other humans?

That is the height of self-deception.

For the church to continue teaching its current understanding of human salvation and redemption it must abandon its teaching of divine omnipresent. Only a God who is "on his way" can be excused for not yet putting an end to human suffering.

By the same token, scientists have to also admit that nothing they are currently doing is going to change humanity. It is time to get together to find the better way forward.

It is utter madness to continue on the path we are currently.

Humans spend all their lives trying to learn lessons from the world around (and it appears that this is as it should be), blissfully unaware that this is the reason they have not learned anything as a species.

We have thought it unnecessary to learn from themselves. Our natural science is focused on our environment and our behavioral science is focused on the behaviors of individuals and groups of individuals. But we think that no attention needs to be paid to our behavior as a species. The result is that we remain uneducated, short of our highest potential.

We are so enthralled by the wonderful claims made by scientists that we seem not to notice that scientists have NEVER studied the things they make their claims about. How do I know that to be true? Because I am a statistician and statistical analysis is the foundation of all scientific research.

Your first intellectual reaction was to think that I must be off my rocker because when scientists make claims about stars they actually study stars, but that is not where my mind is today

Statistics, like evolution, is based on populations. If a scientist studies one object he knows that he does not have sufficient information to make a reasoned conclusion. That is why they study groups of sunjects. But they never really study the group. They take measurments on the individuals that make up the group and then they aggregate that information in some way. But the information they provide to the publc is about the group even if there is no way they could ever obtain that information from the group. The average height of a group of children is not an actual value; it is a calculated value. There is no way to observe the height of a group.

So, it is obvious that scientists do not describe what they actually study, which leads us to ask, "What are the implications of making claims about something you cannot and did not observe?"

What is the use of having information and then acting as if the information is not known?

We have heard so much about creation and evolution that we believe that we cannot agree on how it is that we, i.e. human beings, appeared on this planet.

The question that should concern us is not whether we were created as humans or evolved into humans from creatures lower down on some evolutionary tree, but whether we came to this earth as explorers from an alien world or emerged as products of the land on which we live.

That is the question that holds the answer to our future. The creation vs. evolution debate is a distraction.

All marriages are perfect; this we must believe. The moment you convince yourself that some marriages are not is the moment you begin to look for imperfections in yours. Opportunities to grow and develop are not imperfections.

The Pacers v. Knicks game is on and George of the Pacers comes away with the ball with 8 seconds remaining. The announcer says "The Pacers will control the ball for the last shot of the period." We have no problem recognizing that he was correct even though it was only George who had the ball in his hands. Why do we find it difficult to understand that every action that every individual human being engages in is done on behalf of the entire human race, including those who disagree with him/her?

If you are convinced (I chose not to say 'believe') that God created the heavens and the earth why do you hold on to theories that could only be true if they were made by trial and error (another term for evolution)?

If you think that evolution has no purpose how do you explain DNA? Nothing shouts purpose like this little, powerful molecule.

There may be a more scholarly way to say this but it is true that when things are working practically problem-free we tend to be less vigilant. We are so enthralled by the positive results that we think any errors or omissions that exist are immaterial.

No where is this more true than in the fields of scientific enquiry. We are so busy using our experimental research trying to figure what what we can get nature to say that we have overlooked the need to listen for what nature is saying to us.