What do you think?

At what point does support of a company become support of the company's values? Buying their products? Buying their stock? Selling them advertising? Becoming an employee? Never?

I would ask that you refrain from saying something like, "a company can not have values, only people have values". Companies are made up of people and pretty much every major corporation in the U.S. has a code of ethics written in their by-laws. They have value statements, they have official stands on moral positions, they advertise that they are not in business only to make a profit but to benefit society, and so on.

Future dentist?

This may be one of those things that only a parent can appreciate. Tonight after supper my 7 year old was wiggling his very loose tooth. But as usual, he was too scared to pull it out--he hates pain. So, my 4 year old started begging to pull it out.

What possesses a 4 year old to pull out his brother's tooth? I have no idea but the kid was intent on doing it. So after a lot of bartering and cajoling and screaming Jonathan finally let Jeremiah reach in his mouth with a kleenex. Jonathan jerked back and Jeremiah calmly said, "I dot it." And sure enough he had the tooth. There was much rejoicing all around.

Guess you had to be there, but it was pretty funny.

In the beginning...

I'm at home sick, so I have a little time to write something. Unfortunately, though, I'm not sure I can keep this one short enough to hold your interest. So the three of you who read this might just have to skim.

On November 14th I asked you if you thought Adam and Eve had immune systems before the fall. Let me explain a little about why I was pondering that. There are some pretty foundational truths in the book of Genesis. They help shape our theology and therefore how we live and respond to God. A proper understanding of Genesis can also help us solve some problems that one searching for God might have with Christianity.

I find it really sad that, as important as Genesis is, not only do Christians argue its message with non-Christians, we also argue about it with each other. You know that in the culture wars we have this huge debate of Darwinism vs. Creationism. However, do you realize that within the walls of the church we also debate Old Earth vs. Young Earth Creationism, Darwinism vs. Creationism vs. Intelligent Design, Theistic Evolution vs. Creationism is six literal days, and other conflicts over this primary book of God's word?

So, for the sake of unity and usefulness I think it is good to work towards an accurate understanding of this vital book. There are a couple of options that vie for our interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2. First, there is the literal six days of Creation. This basically says that Genesis 1:1 through 2:3 is a literal account of God's creative work in our universe and the rest of Genesis 2 is a more detailed description of God's relationship with Adam (and Eve).

One problem is that since God declares all of creation good it offers no real explanation as to the origin of the evil serpent that enters the picture in Chapter 3.

One alternative to the literal six days of creation interpretation is the Gap Theory. Gap theory basically says that God created the universe in Genesis 1:1 but there is a time gap of unknown magnitude between 1:1 and 1:2. During this time Satan rebels in heaven and is cast down to the earth resulting in the chaotic state of the planet that we find in verse 2. Then God comes along and decides to prove to Satan that there are beings who will love and serve him voluntarily so he (God) continues his creative process by fixing up the earth, forming the garden, and humankind, and so forth.

Back to the idea of creation being good. Opponents of the gap theory point out that the world could not have been spoiled by Satan prior to chapter 3 because in Genesis 1:31, "God saw everything that he had made, and behold it was very good." Those who want the Genesis record to be a literal six days of creation often state that there was no death in the universe and certainly not on earth prior to the fall.

I have not picked a side yet. I want it to be a literal six days of creation because I feel that overall, the best way to interpret the Bible is literally (taking into account the type of literature, historical context, biblical context, etc. of each given passage). So far, I'm not convinced that six days is correct though. If it were and there were no death on the earth think about the populations that would grow unchecked. The world would fill up with bacteria and mold and insects faster than Adam and Eve could tend to them. These populations would become huge and quickly consume all necessary resources, like oxygen. Also, Adam and Eve were eating, so plants were dying. And did Adam and Eve utilize every nutrient from their food or were they creating waste materials. Without bacteria and fungi that feed on dead things what would happen to the wastes and the wastes of all the elephants, and hippopatami, and girrafes, etc.? And again, if there were no death, no sickness, no evil, then Adam and Eve would not need immune systems.

So, now you see how my pea brain got to the question of immune systems in the first humans. I'm sure you wish I had something better to do. There is another theory about Genesis that intrigues me a lot. It is similar to the gap theory but it places the events of Genesis 1-3 as God's preparation of the Holy Land for his people rather than as a garden for only the first man and woman. Maybe one day we can talk about that some more...