tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-56414147932549807322024-03-21T13:16:17.672-07:00Faith. Physics. Rants.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-49065192442269569692014-01-29T10:14:00.000-08:002014-01-29T10:14:05.925-08:00D is the new F<h4 style="text-align: center;">
The Myth of Raising Standards through Minimum Grades </h4>
<div>
<br /></div>
There is a trend at America’s colleges and universities to raise standards by instituting minimum grades.<br />
<br />
Typically the minimum grade is a <i>C-</i>. It may be in the form of a prerequisite:<i> You may not take BIOCHEM 202 unless you have completed BIOCHEM 201 with a grade of C- or better</i>. Or it may be in the form of program requirements: <i>You must achieve a grade of C- or better in all courses required by the major.</i><br />
<br />
This is not raising standards. It is creating grade inflation and grade compression.<br />
<br />
Imagine you are teaching physics to a senior biology major. Imagine the student is in the second semester of his senior year. (Biology students often delay taking a physics until the last possible moment!) Now imagine the student needs a <i>C-</i> to graduate. When you compute your grades you find that this student earned a <i>D+</i>.
What do you do? Do you give a biology student a <i>D+</i> in a physics course, preventing graduation?<br />
<br />
Well, what you are likely to do is to give a <i>C-</i> because—you simply don’t want to prevent a student from graduating because of the minor difference between a <i>D+</i> and a <i>C-</i>.<br />
<br />
I have seen grade distributions that confirm this. Distributions that demonstrate that professors show a great reluctance to give <i>D’s</i> if the student needs a <i>C-</i>.
That’s grade inflation (giving higher grades than deserved) and grade compression (<i>C-</i> now incorporates earned <i>C-’s</i> and<i> D’s</i>—patently unfair to the true <i>C-</i> student.)<br />
<br />
Employers know what a <i>D</i> means (or used to mean.) They can no longer be confident what a <i>C-</i> on a transcript means.<br />
<br />
This is all based on apple pie “raise the standards” nonsense. In my view, if a student completes BIOCHEM 201 and is not ready for BIOCHEM 202, <i>the student should fail 201</i>. A <i>D</i> has historically meant a <i>passing </i>grade. It includes the message: you passed, barely, and if you don’t work harder we are not optimistic that you can do well in 202, but we are going to let you try. Because, well, you did pass. Likewise if you fail to master the content of a course required for a major <i>then you should fail the course</i>. If you get a <i>D</i> then you pass, and let the <i>D</i> stand on the transcript.<br />
<br />
In the twisted universe of minimum grades, there is no difference between a <i>D</i> and an <i>F</i>. They are equivalent failing grades. The <i>D</i> is the new <i>F</i>.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-11176208404947254362014-01-20T10:41:00.003-08:002014-01-20T10:49:58.563-08:00Coyne's Bad Logic Bowl XLVIIIJerry Coyne is all excited over the fact that an account that predates the Jewish writing of the Noahic flood has striking similarities. <a href="http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/newly-translated-and-pre-biblical-tablet-details-a-great-flood-and-a-rescue-boat-with-animals-put-aboard-in-pairs/">On his site he writes</a>:
<br />
<blockquote>
We’ve known since at least 1872 that the Great Flood detailed in Genesis is a descendant of earlier flood myths from Mesopotamia. And there may be some credibility to the presence of at least some serious floods then, based on the fact that Mesopotamia is a giant flood plain and the presence of some archeological evidence for a big flood around 5000 BC. But what we didn’t know until now is that those earlier flood myths also incorporated a boat onto which species of wild animals were sequestered to save them—two by two! This clearly shows, as if we didn’t know it already, that the Genesis story of Noah and the Ark isn’t true, but was simply an embroidery of earlier flood stories. </blockquote>
Coyne's logic is so bad one wonders why he is allowed to teach.<br />
<br />
We are only discussing the logic--not the truth of any sort of flood. Coyne's logic is wrong--very wrong, regardless of whether or not the flood is global, local or a total fabrication. His logic is so bad that I would consider it embarrassing if we were on the same side.<br />
<br />
It is trivial to understand how wrong he is. Imagine:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>5000 years ago there is some cataclysmic event. Maybe it's a flood. Or a volcano. Or an earthquake. </li>
<li>A description of the event is passed from generation to generation, starting with the survivors, and originally confined to the area of the event. </li>
<li>Eventually the people split into different groups or tribes. Their stories begin to diverge. Not totally--but they are distinguishable. </li>
<li>3000 years later group <i>A</i> writes down its version of the ancient event. </li>
<li>500 years later group <i>B</i> writes down its version--which has similarities. </li>
</ul>
<br />
Coyne's faulty logic is that the similarities between <i>A</i> and <i>B</i> combined with the later date for <i>B</i> means we now know (Coyne likes to say we <i>know</i> things--he is almost always incorrect in how he uses that word) that <i>B's</i> account isn't true.<br />
<br />
It may be that <i>B</i>'s account is not true. But we don't <i>know</i> that. The two groups may be describing the same actual event (or the same ancient myth.) Furthermore, it may be that people <i>B</i> did a better job at preserving the story from generation to generation.<br />
<br />
We don't know that <i>B</i>'s account is not true. And Coyne doesn't know it.
What we do know is that Coyne has a serious problem with basic critical thinking.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-53223663056522732392014-01-13T10:25:00.001-08:002014-01-15T04:46:57.233-08:00Science Denialism: Pot. Kettle. Black.<div class="MsoNormal">
On atheist blogs you generally see a strong and not
unwarranted attack on climate-change deniers, especially those who “don’t
believe” in any significant <span style="background-color: white; color: #444444;">anthropogenic
contribution to global warming. <sup>1</sup></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The general
criticism (of the deniers) has four common planks:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The climate-change
deniers, though typically not scientists themselves, show utter disregard for
the scientific consensus. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The climate-change
deniers are ideologically motivated, by politics, economics or both.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The “science” of the
climate-change </span>deniers<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> often is not
science at all, but trivial and anecdotal. (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Gee
it’s cold out, I could sure use a bit of that global warming! Ha ha!</i>)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The references
provided by climate-change deniers, if any, are often not to scholarly
peer-reviewed literature but to unpublished work of fringe scientists or
popularizations.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I have seen, for
years actually, the exact same pattern of science denialism, often by those <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">making</i> the charges against climate change
deniers.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">They are fine-tuning
</span>deniers<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Let me give my
definition of fine-tuning. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Fine-tuning:</span></b><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> It is the observation that the ability of the
universe to synthesize heavy elements (heavy = anything beyond Helium, or
“metals” to Astronomers), which are necessary for <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">any kind of life</i>, appears to be sensitive, extremely so in some
cases, to the values of various physical constants. This sensitivity is across
the board: first in the fact that there are any stars at all, then to the range
of lifetimes of the stars, then to the process by which stars synthesize heavy
elements, and finally to process by which some stars end their lives (by
exploding) and thereby seed the universe with those elements.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Here are some facts
about fine-tuning:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">It has <u>nothing</u>
to do with probability. It has to do with <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">sensitivity</i>.
There is nothing in the definition that relies on any assumption of the a
priori probability of the constants. They could be random draws (extremely low
probability) or unit probability (from some unknown theory of everything). It
only matters that the creation of the elements necessary for life is sensitive
to the values. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">It is a consensus
viewpoint, especially among “in-field” scientific disciplines, such as cosmology,
astronomy, particle and nuclear physics.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">It has nothing to
do, per se, with religion or “intelligent design”. Sure, it has been co-opted
by some, and very stupidly by the ID crowd <sup>2</sup> who, without reason
(and ultimately to their disadvantage) hitched their wagon to a “low-probability
therefore god” argument. But ideas can always be co-opted </span><sup>3</sup><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">, such as evolution and genetics being co-opted
for eugenics. You have to evaluate the scientific idea on its scientific merits,
not on its potential for use by people you don’t like.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color: #444444; font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">It is considered a
serious scientific problem/puzzle (and therefore quite interesting) by
scientists of all religious stripes. Some of them quite famous for their
atheism as well as their science, such as Weinberg, Susskind, Krauss, Smolin,
etc.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The fine-tuning
problem is even a very real part of the motivation for a push toward a
multiverse theory of one form or another. It is appealing to solve the problem
by confirming there are many (essentially infinite) universes with different
constants, and only those (such as ours) with a fortuitous draw have
intelligent life pondering their good fortune.</span><sup><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">
4</span></sup><span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #444444; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">This is the state of
affairs. It is irrefutable that many scientists, many of them famous <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">atheist</i> scientists, view the appearance
of fine-tuning as a serious problem, one that should not be summarily dismissed
because of a perceived ideological inconvenience. No, it is a problem that is screaming
for a scientific solution.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Yet If you try to make this point on
atheist blogs (I have tried countless times) some of the same people who legitimately attack climate-change denialism will use the same methods in their fine-tuning
denialism.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">They will disregard the scientific
consensus. It suddenly won’t matter that a majority of in-field scientists
think fine-tuning is a serious problem. In fact, pointing out that many
scientists think so will often be “refuted” by charges that one is “arguing from
authority.” But pointing out that most in-field scientists acknowledge global
warming and pointing out that most in-field scientists acknowledge the fine-tuning
problem is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> an irrational appeal
to authority. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Like climate-change deniers, many of
the fine-tuning deniers appear to be motivated not by science, but by ideology.
The reasoning, sometimes behind the scenes and sometimes front and center, is “fine-tuning</span><span style="background: white; color: #444444; font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">→i</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">ntelligent design</span><span style="background: white; color: #444444; font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">→</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">religion</span><span style="background: white; color: #444444; font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">→</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">bad</span><span style="background: white; color: #444444; font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">→</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">therefore it must be wrong (at all
costs).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It connects the evaluation of science
(the reality of the fine-tuning problem) with something not scientific (it
gives the “bad guys” an advantage)—and that reasoning is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">always</i> wrong. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Most frustrating to me is that the
“rebuttal” of fine-tuning is often trivial. I cannot count how many times
someone has given me, in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">gotcha</i> tones,
the Douglas Adams puddle argument, which has no application whatsoever to the
cosmic fine-tuning problem. <sup>5</sup> Another kind of trivial response is the
“how do we know there couldn’t be life with only hydrogen and helium?”
rebuttal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This ignores the fact that you
can’t make anything out of those elements, and that any life, using a
non-controversial assertion, needs large molecules to store information. And,
by the way, the (effectively) “I saw a creature on <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Star-Trek</i> who was made of pure energy so who knows?” Stated with an
assumption of moral superiority overs us matter chauvinists, is not a
scientific response. Another trivial dismissal of the fine-tuning problem is to
project one’s own disinterest onto the human population at large. This is the
“I just don’t see it as a big deal, we are here and that’s that, just move on”
argument. This implies that scientists should just shut up and listen and not
consider “how is it that we are here?” to be a question of interest. Finally,
some will irrationally attack it because of its name. But “fine-tuning” does
not imply a tuner—it’s used a metaphor. Get over it.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The fine-tuning deniers have their
authorities that they believe should end the argument. First and foremost is
Victor Stenger. Because Stenger (who, to be fair, has a good idea, to show that
the fine-tuning is an illusion) has published a popularization—well that
settles it, doesn’t it? But the fact is that Stenger, in attempting to show fine-tuning
is an illusion, has only done sloppy work, he has not published in peer-reviewed
journals, and you do not find those scientists who consider fine-tuning a
serious problem (like the atheists I mentioned) now saying: “OMG, we were
worried about nothing! Stenger solved it for us!” Because Stenger did nothing
more than a few back-of-the-envelope calculations and then wrote a
popularization in which he claims to have solved a serious problem. He didn’t.
He has a good idea that he has not run with scientifically—he has, instead,
marketed it adroitly. (</span>For a competent takedown of Victor Stenger, read <a href="http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1112/1112.4647v1.pdf">Luke Barnes</a>.)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p>As an example of someone who is willing to look stupid to deny science just because it bothers him ideologically, consider P. Z. Myers. He was aflutter over a piece in the New York Times that was concerned, in part, with fine-tuning. (And its close cousin, the weak Anthropic Principle, which is essentially what the multiverse proponents, in lieu of any experimental data, are invoking to explain the fine-tuning.) <a href="http://www.edge.org/discourse/science_faith.html#myers">Myers wrote</a>:</o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Alas, Davies also brings up the anthropic principle, that tiresome exercise in metaphysical masturbation that always flounders somewhere in the repellent ditch between narcissism and solipsism. When someone says that life would not exist if the laws of physics were just a little bit different, I have to wonder…<i>how do they know?</i> Just as there are many different combinations of amino acids that can make any particular enzyme, why can't there be many different combinations of physical laws that can yield life? </span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p>Which shows complete ignorance of the subject he attempts (with an epic FAIL) to criticize. He doesn't seem to grasp that if the constants are tweaked a bit there will be no elements to produce amino acids or any other molecules necessary for any kind of life.</o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p><br /></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p>Why is P.Z. so dumb? Because he can't grasp that fine-tuning is a metaphor. He is a afraid that it gives to much ammunition to the theists.</o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p><br /></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p>He reveals this when he doubles down on his stupidity:</o:p></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">I'm also always a bit disappointed with the statements of anthropic principle proponents for another reason. If these are the best and only laws that can give rise to intelligent life in the universe, why do they do such a lousy job of it?</span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Forgetting that, again, it's a metaphor, he is essentially making the irrelevant value statement that: <i>if there is a fine-tuner, why then he is an incompetent dolt.</i> We can ignore that criticism (which is metaphysics, not physics) and point out the obvious. The fine-tuning problem in no way, shape or form says that we are in the best possible universe for intelligent life. It says only that the habitability of our universe is sensitive to the constants,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p><br /></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">To summarize I think that, on blogs at
least, there is a massive case of Pot. Kettle. Black. when it comes to science
denialism. You can find many commentators bashing climate-change deniers out of
one side of the mouth while from the other side they spout the same denialist
unscientific tricks when it comes to the cosmic fine-tuning problem.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<hr />
<sup>1</sup> My own position on climate change is this: I am
a nuclear physicist. I have no expertise in the field of climate change. So
just like any other scientific argument that is out of my field, and for which
I have no time or interest to ramp up, I accept the scientific consensus.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have confidence that the checks and
balances inherent in science mean that, when you don’t know and can’t evaluate
on your own, it’s a good bet to accept the consensus view of in-field scientists.
Or stay quiet.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<sup>2 </sup>From a strategic viewpoint (and from a
theological one) the ID crowd is wrong to adopt a “low-probability implies god”
position. A low probability universe is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">exactly</i>
what the scientific community argues is to be expected in the multiverse.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Any multiverse theory is perfectly happy to acknowledge
that our universe is mind-boggling in its rarity. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the other hand, a “theory of everything”
with no free parameters (which isn’t going to happen, but let’s pretend) would
be on the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">other</i> end of the
probability spectrum (the constants would have unit probability) and, coupled
with sensitivity to those constants (fine-tuning) would make the best <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">prima facie</i> case for a designer. It
would mean that habitability was built into the fabric of space-time. Short of
God making a personal appearance, there is no better result that theists could
wish for. It always surprises me that the IDers do not see this.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<sup>3</sup> I find it useful to point out that ideas can
simultaneously be co-opted and distorted. Thus when genetics is co-opted for eugenics,
or statistics for bell-curve arguments, or Bayes’ theorem to comment on the
existence of a historical Jesus, or fine-tuning for supporting ID, it does <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> imply that those doing the co-opting
are using the ideas properly. Nor does it imply, in and of itself, that they
aren’t.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1814</o:Words>
<o:Characters>8619</o:Characters>
<o:Company>CNU</o:Company>
<o:Lines>210</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>75</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>10358</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>14.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<sup><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">4</span></sup><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> Susskind was asked
by Amanda Gefter at <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">New Scientist</i>: “</span><span style="background: white; color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">If we do not accept
the landscape [multiverse] idea are we stuck with intelligent design?”</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">
Susskind responded (rather clumsily, in my opinion): “</span><span style="background: white; color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I doubt that physicists will see it that way.
If, for some unforeseen reason, the landscape turns out to be inconsistent -
maybe for mathematical reasons, or because it disagrees with observation - I am
pretty sure that physicists will go on searching for natural explanations of
the world. But I have to say that if that happens, as things stand now we will
be in a very awkward position. Without any explanation of nature's fine-tunings
we will be hard pressed to answer the ID critics.</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">” I only bring this
up as an example of scientists using the fine-tuning problem as a motivation,
at least in part, for their multiverse research.</span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><sup>5</sup> The puddle argument (a sentient puddle observing just how perfect the universe (a pot hole) is for its existence, ergo god) is perhaps relevant for privileged planet debates (isn’t our planet just perfect for human life?) but <i>not</i> for cosmic fine-tuning which addresses the very building blocks (heavy elements) for <i>any</i> kind of life.</span></div>
Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-35652640909086483272014-01-07T14:10:00.000-08:002014-01-07T14:10:18.173-08:00Welcome to Christopher Newport University!A fantastic promotional video for CNU.<p>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/LCUaxgLJPwU" width="480"></iframe>Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-88100247684452671642014-01-07T10:34:00.003-08:002014-01-07T10:34:34.103-08:00Senegal. In August. It looks as if I'll be an instructor at the <a href="http://www.africanschoolofphysics.org/asp2014/">African School of Fundamental Physics</a> this summer. In Senegal. I am very, very excited.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGaRnt7j-jZwUgYv5C1Va_h6tsuP-Lb6U3G8RZRECwOGZ2987ks8_ncBh9cmETr9TP0x6tq2CVIAsiiZg6SZrsFXxr1LZ-MQkyyeUToMcydrhi7O8PfoYD8YUUihqCwkU-XokL6xpt7hNY/s1600/ASP2014_Poster.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGaRnt7j-jZwUgYv5C1Va_h6tsuP-Lb6U3G8RZRECwOGZ2987ks8_ncBh9cmETr9TP0x6tq2CVIAsiiZg6SZrsFXxr1LZ-MQkyyeUToMcydrhi7O8PfoYD8YUUihqCwkU-XokL6xpt7hNY/s320/ASP2014_Poster.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-33916491843695144922014-01-03T07:20:00.000-08:002014-01-03T10:01:20.068-08:00A physics problem and test of LaTeXLet's look at a problem accessible to students taking their first course in physics.
<p><i>An object is on a horizontal table, 1m from the edge. It is pushed so that it travels the 1m in 2s, then falls off the edge of the table. Is it likely that the object was on wheels?</i>
<p><b>Reasoning</b>: Let's imagine giving the object a push and it slides (no wheels). Let's compute the maximum coefficient of kinetic friction using the simple model of friction we learned. Let's also neglect another type of friction, air resistance (which would be much smaller than sliding friction.) Consistent with the problem description, the maximum friction would occur if the object just makes it to the edge before it falls off the edge. Mathematically we can say that the final speed is zero, or \( v_{f}=0\). We can then compute the initial speed to be
$$v_{avg} = \frac{1}{2}(v_{i} + v_{f}) = \frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t}$$
so, using \( v_{f}=0\) and \( \Delta x=1m\) and \( \Delta t=2s\),
$$v_{i}=2\frac{1m}{2s}=1m/s.$$
We can then get the acceleration:
$$a=\frac{v_{f}-v_{i}}{\Delta t}=\frac{-1m/s}{2s}=-\frac{1}{2}m/s^{2}$$
This acceleration, by assumption, is caused by kinetic friction. Here we have the simple case where the normal force is equal to the weight, so from \( F = -\mu_{k} N = -\mu_{k}mg = ma\) we get:
$$\mu_{k} = -\frac{a}{g} = \frac{0.5}{9.8} = .051$$
Looking at a table of coefficients of friction, we see that this is a very small value, in the range of lubricated metal or ice on ice. So it is a reasonable guess that the friction is so low that the object was rolling, not sliding.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-28188514152218228642014-01-02T07:01:00.002-08:002014-01-02T07:01:15.810-08:00Hey Al Mohler, read this!<blockquote>
But if you look in the first chapter of Genesis, you will there see more particularly set forth that peculiar operation of power upon the universe which was put forth by the Holy Spirit; you will then discover what was his special work. In the 2d verse of the first chapter of Genesis, we read, "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." <b>We know not how remote the period of the creation of this globe may be—certainly many millions of years before the time of Adam. Our planet has passed through various stages of existence, and different kinds of creatures have lived on its surface</b>, all of which have been fashioned by God. But before that era came, wherein man should be its principal tenant and monarch, the Creator gave up the world to confusion.</blockquote>
(Boldface added.)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0030.htm">That was written (and spoken)</a> by the greatest Baptist preacher of all time, Charles Spurgeon. In 1855.<br />
<br />
How we have fallen. How awful that we allowed ourselves to create a line in the sand where previously there was none. How we have made an enemy and a villain of science, which in Christian terms, is simply the study of God's general revelation--a complement (not a threat) to theology, the study of special revelation.<br />
<br />
Al Mohler, who has done so many great things at Southern, is, on this issue, a big part of the problem.
<br />
<br />
Digging in your heels on a young age should no longer be looked at as a quaint virtue. It is as harmful (probably more so) to Christianity as those who insisted, long after the case was settled, that our solar system was not heliocentric. Because the bible said so--or so they thought.<br />
<br />
Love God with all your heart, soul, and ... what was that other thing?... oh yeah, <i>mind</i>.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-29565656989039897912014-01-02T06:34:00.000-08:002014-01-02T13:43:14.499-08:00God and a counter-intuitive baseball statistic<br />
(A reprint from my previous blog--with a few mods.)<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
God and Baseball Statistics</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
In the six days of sports creation, God created sports successively closer and closer to the perfect divine image. To be precise:<br />
<br />
Day 1: Basketball (Intended for the <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+6:4&version=ESV">Nephilim</a>, to keep their minds off the daughters of men. Alas it didn't work, because the sport was too boring, the action constantly stopped by nitpicky fouls, and besides the daughters of men were <i>hawt</i>.)<br />
Day 2: Soccer<br />
Day 3: Real Football<br />
Day 4: Hockey<br />
Day 5: Baseball<br />
Day 6: NASCAR<br />
<br />
And on the seventh day he <i>watched </i>NASCAR. And it was very good. Except for Mark Martin hitting the wall in turn two.<br />
<br />
A "Sports Theodicy" is an attempt to explain the puzzle of where figure skating, gymnastics and Formula One Racing came from, since God had nothing to do with these. He is never the author of sports that are highly feminized.<br />
<br />
Though baseball is not the pinnacle of sports creation, it's darn close. And it has been given the special honor as the sport-most-holy in its conduciveness to statistical analysis.<br />
<br />
We all know about batting average (BA). If you don't—well in the words of that great American philosopher <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foghorn_Leghorn">Foghorn Leghorn</a>, <i>"I say, there's just something yech about a boy who don't, I say don't like baseball."</i> BA is simply the number of hits divided by the number at bats. By divine fiat the number of significant digits shall always be kept at three. Never two or four, and five is just out of the question. And thou shall omit the leading zero, lest thou be sentenced to be a <strike>Pittsburgh Pirate</strike> Houston Astro fan.<br />
<br />
So a player who has 207 hits in 611 at bats has BA of .339.<br />
<br />
Also by holy decree you shall multiply by 1000 before <i>saying</i> the BA. In the example above, you say "his average is three-thirty-nine" or, generically, "he is a three-hundred hitter." Surveys show that in the 1950s, 99.2% of all baseball fans could multiply by 1000 in their heads. In our advanced early 21<sup>st</sup> century era, thanks in no small part to all the money we have spent on education, 76% need a calculator to make the decimal point vanish.<br />
<br />
<h3>
The counter-intuitive <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px;">BABIP</span></h3>
A more interesting statistic is the batting average on balls in play (BABIP). For this statistic, you take the number of times the batter gets the ball in play, i.e., hits it into fair territory, divided by plate appearances. Strikeouts and home runs are excluded. Sacrifice flies, however, count as plate appearances. The formula is:<br />
<br />
BABIP = (H – HR)/(AB – K – HR + SF)<br />
<br />
where H is hits, HR is home runs, AB is at bats, K is strikeouts, and SF is sacrifice flies.<br />
<br />
By comparison, the regular batting average is given by:<br />
<br />
BA = H/AB<br />
<br />
The average BABIP is around .300. Usually, but not always, a hitter's BABIP is higher than his BA.<br />
<br />
Here is where things get interesting. If you are a general manager and your team needs a hitter, you generally snag the one with the highest BA. But suppose there are two players available with the same BA but different BABIP. For example:<br />
<br />
Bill Buckner: BA: .280, BABIP: .290<br />
Omar Moreno: BA: .280, BABIP .340<br />
<br />
Which would you take? The counter-intuitive answer: take Buckner, the hitter with the lower BABIP.<br />
<br />
Why?<br />
<br />
Because it turns out that to a good first approximation once a batted ball is in play <i>whether or not it results in a safe hit is random</i>. Does the ball go to where a defender ain't? So a BABIP <i>below </i>the average of .300 indicates a player who has, statistically speaking, been unlucky. His BA should be higher. Conversely a player whose BABIP is <i>higher</i> than .300 has been lucky. His BA is artifically high.<br />
<br />
Over time you expect the BA of a player with a high BABIP to drop, and the BA of a player with a low BABIP to rise.<br />
<br />
So take Bill Buckner. Send Omar Moreno to AAA.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-64174832251974980562014-01-02T05:02:00.000-08:002014-01-02T13:14:05.095-08:00The LHC Upgrade (and the Higgs)The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is shut down for an upgrade. The lab that detected the Higgs Boson (aka the poorly named "God" Particle) will increase its energy from 8 TeV (8×10<sup>12</sup> electron volts) to 14 TeV. The physics goals will be to progress "beyond the standard model." The discovery of the Higgs more or less completed the so-called standard model. It means that there is nothing left to work out in the framework model that physicists have hammered out over decades to explain most of the fundamental interactions—with the notable exception of gravity.<br />
<br />
Detecting the Higgs boson was a fantastic achievement and a spectacular confirmation of our understanding of fundamental physics. However—it was <i>so</i> expected that it was, in a way, boring. It would have been very interesting had the Higgs <i>not</i> been found where it was expected!
It is hoped that the upgrade to the LHC might result in new physics, physics not covered by the standard model. This might include detecting the next great unseen: dark matter. There is also anticipation that we will be able to start discerning among the different non-standard models that incorporate gravity.<br />
<br />
We'll see.<br />
<br />
As for the Higgs boson, <a href="https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BxVNlt-kWrEFYU81SFNveUxKRlk">here is a talk on the Higgs</a> that I gave to high school students in 2012. The goal was to try to explain, in very simple terms, how the Higgs field leads to mass. Maybe you'll find it useful.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-385482274643614782014-01-01T10:19:00.001-08:002014-01-01T10:24:45.498-08:00Social Justice and Anti-theismOne of the <a href="http://heb712.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-internet-atheistss-facts-o-fun.html">facts O' fun of internet atheism</a> is:<br />
<blockquote>
<b>9. The Universe is Atheio-centric:</b> This is the myth that Christians obsess over atheists, think about them all the time, are afraid of them, hate them, irrationally <span style="background-color: white; border: 1pt none windowtext; padding: 0in;">demand their respect, and tremble at the thought of their ridicule</span><span style="background-color: white;">.</span> The truth of course is that we <i>rarely</i> think of them, are <i>not</i> afraid of them, <i>don’t</i> hate them, and wish only that if they criticize us they do it intelligently or at least with humor. Dear Dawkins, the look we give you when you say <i>“if god invented everything, then who invented god?</i>” or <i>“religion ruins everything”</i> is not one of fear or hate or anger or puzzlement, it is a look of <i>boredom</i>. And no, we don’t obsess over you. When I hear atheists mentioned in church it is usually along the lines of <i>Christians need to behave better; our behavior should distinguish us from the atheist, but it doesn't.</i>
</blockquote>
As a direct result of the acceptance of this myth, many internet atheists have delusions of grandeur. They actually believe, strange as it may seem, that they can harm Christianity<sup>1</sup>. This is most humorously made manifest when one makes the claim that he/she is not merely an atheist and proceeds to puff himself/herself up by self-awarding the honorific <i>anti-theist</i>. The implication is clear. If you are anti something, you plan (or should plan) to take some action. The problem for the atheist is that, while they won't admit it, they are impotent. Only Christians can harm Christianity.
All of which leads us to an obscure anti-theist by the name Stephanie Zvan. <a href="http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2013/12/30/anti-theist-activism-is-social-justice-activism/#more-6430">She has a post</a> in which she states:
<br />
<blockquote>
However, I have to disagree with the idea that anti-theist activism isn't social justice activism.</blockquote>
She did not write that anti-theist activism (so scary!) isn't <i>sometimes</i> social justice activism--no she implies by her disagreement that anti-theist activism (whatever that is) is a subset of social justice activism.
If you think I have read too much into that quote, or didn't grant her license to be sloppy, she is much clearer in her closing sentence:
<br />
<blockquote>
While it’s possible for anti-thiest activism to be poorly done, or done for motives other than social justice, <b>anti-theist activism is one form, a necessary form, of social justice activism</b>. (Boldface added.)</blockquote>
I have friends in Uganda. The wife is a medical doctor. She operates a clinic for orphans. The husband does things like construction, well-digging, teaching etc. They have adopted two at risk Ugandan children--one severely disabled and who surely would have died without their intervention. They are Christian missionaries. To be a social justice warrior, according to Zvan, would necessitate being anti this couple, and by extension justice would be served by preventing them from continuing their work. I'm sure the orphans would be relieved that social justice was victorious and that anti-theism prevailed.<br />
<br />
Svan also writes about child abuse. We all can agree that its eradication is a honorable goal of those interested in social justice. But a reasonable person, I think, would understand that it is an honorable goal <i>regardless </i>of the religion or atheism of the advocate. But not Svan. She wants to show that the war against child abuse is housed in a tent that is not big enough for the theist. She writes (getting in a dig at Dawkins, who is an old white male atheist whose privilege is showing, but that's another story):
<br />
<blockquote>
Plenty of folks will flinch if I mention child abuse, thinking of Dawkins' facile pronouncements. But "Spare the rod, spoil the child" isn't just still quoted. It's a best-seller, even after leading to multiple child deaths.</blockquote>
Oops. She intended the aphorism "Spare the rod, spoil the child" as an example of a biblical authorization of child abuse. But if it comes from a gospel, it is <i>the Gospel According to Ben Franklin</i>, and Franklin <a href="http://atheistempire.com/greatminds/quotes.php?author=27">is claimed by the atheists</a>.<br />
<br />
Those damn atheists and their codified support for child abuse.<br />
<br />
By the way, the closest biblical quote is:
<br />
<blockquote>
Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him. (Prov 13:24)</blockquote>
Here discipline is likened to a shepherd and his rod--which was <i>not </i>used to beat the sheep but to nudge or push them in the right direction, toward safety.
It was that rotten atheist Franklin who advocated the type of child abuse that is based on the theory the character can be beaten into a child. That ain't on us!
<br />
<hr />
<sup>1</sup> Whether or not they can harm other religions is not for me to say nor to speculate upon.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-77673485870684048162013-12-31T11:14:00.001-08:002013-12-31T11:14:41.880-08:00Just in Time HomeworkThis past semester I tried something new. I was teaching two introductory physics classes, one the first semester course (taken by physics, math, chemistry and engineering students) and the other was the third semester course, taken by physics majors only.<br />
<br />
The traditional model is to give one assignment a week, or even every two weeks, with 10-15 problems.<br />
<br />
This time I gave a small assignment (3-5 problems) after every class, due the next class.<br />
<br />
I called this (but am not claiming to have invented the term) "Just in time" homework. The idea was that it would help/force the students to stay caught up.<br />
<br />
I think it worked. A larger than normal percentage of the students completed all or nearly all of the assignments. And on the student evaluations if they mentioned it (JIT Homework) at all, they mentioned it favorably.<br />
<br />
Next semester I am teaching an upper-level and a graduate level E&M class. It will be interesting to see if it works there as well.<br />
<br />
By the way, there is a trend to reduce the weight given to homework. I used to make it 30% of the final grade. It is down to 15% and may drop to 10%. The reason: the solution to every problem can be found online. Times change. We try to adapt.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-33857616318710299312013-12-31T10:55:00.004-08:002013-12-31T11:00:50.934-08:00PZ Myers is still an idiot<span style="font-family: inherit;">In his patented, tiny-balled-fists manner of whining, Myers is upset that some atheists have something nice to say about the new pope. He is fuming at the typical mild complement paid to Francis, which is some combination of these observations: Francis appears to be less conservative, to show more interest in the downtrodden, to be more inclusive, to be less harsh, to be less dogmatic, and to have shed many of the ornate trappings of his office.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />That will not do for the no-shades-of-gray lidless-eyed Myers. You are either with Myers or you are very wrong. <a href="http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/12/31/the-lesser-evil-is-still-evil/">Myers writes</a>:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #2c2b2b; line-height: 26.65625px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I’ll believe people who tell me that Pope Francis is different when I see him demonstrating that he actually understands the import of evolution, that there was no guiding influence, that humans are a product of chance and natural selection, and that we aren’t any more special to the universe than a sea slug. And the only thing that would demonstrate that is an open repudiation of all of Catholic doctrine, which I don’t quite see the Pope doing.</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Imagine the nearly unthinkable stupidity of such a statement. Forget about all the distinctives casual observers, including atheists, are noting in Francis's papacy. To Myers those do not constitute a real difference. Francis must capitulate totally on the question of evolution (and everything else) before he is at all different from his predecessors. It is really no different from Myers saying: <i>I'll believe the pope is different when he acknowledges that he is not a theist.</i></span><br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">I'll believe you are a different kind of Republican when you are a Democrat.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">I'll believe you are a different kind of American when when you renounce your citizenship.</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">etc.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I'll say this: Myers is a different kind of scientist.</span>Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-8067374928881329562013-12-31T08:25:00.000-08:002014-01-02T14:18:35.239-08:00Facts O' Fun UpdateA comment on this <a href="http://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2013/12/29/year-in-review-new-atheist-insights/">Shadow to Light</a> post has caused be to make an addition to the <a href="http://heb712.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-internet-atheistss-facts-o-fun.html">Internet Atheist Facts O' Fun</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>The Our Secretary (but not your Secretary) will Disavow Rule:</b><br />
Atheists have no leaders. Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, etc. are just famous people with intelligent, critical readers. At the very most, primarily as a courtesy, you might call them <i>fans</i>. But if, for example, Dawkins says or does something <strike>beyond the pale of atheist orthodoxy</strike> embarrassing, why it's all on him. Christians, however, have <i>leaders</i>. Pat Robertson, John Hagee, Ken Ham, just to name a few--these all are bona fide Christian leaders. If they say or do something embarrassing (when don't they?) it reflects on all Christians. Because they are Christian leaders and spokesmen and all Christians are their loyal followers and sheeple.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-39198189226586792922013-12-31T07:57:00.000-08:002013-12-31T07:57:11.510-08:00The Gospel according to EnochThe Old Testament is in some sense a collection of gospel hide-and-seek stories. You can find the gospel in places you don't expect it. (And of course there is the risk of "seeing" it where it was not intended--judge for yourself.)<br />
<br />
In Genesis 5 we read:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text Gen-5-5" id="en-ESV-111">Thus all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, <span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-ESV-111D" title="See cross-reference D">D</a>)"></span>and he died.</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text Gen-5-5" id="en-ESV-111"></span><span class="text Gen-5-8" id="en-ESV-114">Thus all the days of Seth were 912 years, and he died.</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text Gen-5-8" id="en-ESV-114"></span><span class="text Gen-5-11" id="en-ESV-117">Thus all the days of Enosh were 905 years, and he died.</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text Gen-5-11" id="en-ESV-117"></span><span class="text Gen-5-14" id="en-ESV-120">Thus all the days of Kenan were 910 years, and he died.</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text Gen-5-14" id="en-ESV-120"></span><span class="text Gen-5-17" id="en-ESV-123">Thus all the days of Mahalalel were 895 years, and he died.</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text Gen-5-17" id="en-ESV-123"></span><span class="text Gen-5-20" id="en-ESV-126">Thus all the days of Jared were 962 years, and he died.</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span class="text Gen-5-23" id="en-ESV-129"><span class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; vertical-align: top;">23 </span>Thus all the days of Enoch were 365 years.</span> <span class="text Gen-5-24" id="en-ESV-130"><span class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; vertical-align: top;">24 </span>Enoch <span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-ESV-130H" title="See cross-reference H">H</a>)"></span>walked with God, and he was not, <span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-ESV-130I" title="See cross-reference I">I</a>)"></span>for God took him.</span></b> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text Gen-5-27" id="en-ESV-133">Thus all the days of Methuselah were 969 years, and he died.</span></blockquote>
Clearly Enoch must have been a good man. A pious man. A holy man. A righteous man. He alone escaped death. God just whisked him away; a rapture of one.<br />
<br />No, that is wrong. Not the conclusion, necessarily, but the reasoning. Enoch avoided death not because of his merit, but because it pleased God to show mercy. This does not mean the "and he died" majority was collectively lost, it simply means that God has decided to give us the gospel:<br />
<ul>
<li>Our fate, all of us is death</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>God will have mercy on some, and from our perspective it will be for no particular reason.</li>
</ul>
Why Enoch? Well, why <i>you</i>? Why <i>me</i>? We all, who are adopted children, are an Enoch.<br /><br />Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-62376803056966825232013-12-24T10:31:00.003-08:002013-12-24T11:35:03.865-08:00Pet Peeve du jour<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">My pet peeve today is about the restaurant chain <i>Panera Bread</i>. Its business model seems to be:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span>
<br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Slow service</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">High prices</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Bus your own table</span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
The annoying thing is that their business model seems to work.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
Another practice I find annoying in <i>Panera Bread</i>, or <i>Starbucks</i>, or any coffee shop: move your <span style="background-color: white; line-height: 16px;">derrière!<b> </b></span>Why, I've applied for mortgages faster than some people can get their coffee "just right." Get out of the way already!</span>Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-31073283035288438452013-12-24T10:16:00.001-08:002014-01-02T09:00:01.934-08:00A Short Lesson on the Mosaic Law<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<h3>
Introduction</h3>
<h1>
<o:p></o:p></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my mind there are three big theological debates.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo5; text-indent: -.25in;">
</div>
<ol>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">The Great Theological Debate is over the
doctrine of Justification. For the first millennium the Catholic Church pretty
much got it right. Then they started down the path of a complicated penitential
system which ultimately, in the view of the reformers, became the tail wagging the dog, and so a half a millennium
later we split over the issue.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">The Great “way too much energy has been spent
here” debate is over the end times. I’m not saying eschatology is not
important—I’m saying that it is not and should not be the line-in-the-sand issue many people take it
to be.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">The third debate is over the law. What Old
Testament laws are still in effect? The answer varies from none, not even the
10 Commandments to </span><i style="text-indent: -0.25in;">all</i><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;"> of them. This
is the greatest debate over the </span><i style="text-indent: -0.25in;">practical</i><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">
application of our salvation. This is tough.</span></li>
</ol>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">There is perhaps no part of divinity attended with so much intricacy,
and wherein orthodox divines do so much differ, as stating the precise
agreement and difference between the two dispensations of Moses and Christ.</i>
–Jonathan Edwards<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Today we’ll try to put the tiniest scratch on the surface of
the debate over the Law.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3>
</h3>
<h3>
Is God’s Law Absolute?</h3>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<sup><span style="color: red; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">3</span></sup><span style="color: red;"> “‘If
the anointed priest sins… he must bring to the LORD a young bull … as a sin
offering<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> </span>for the sin he has
committed. <sup><span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">4</span></sup> He
is to present the bull at the entrance to the tent of meeting before the LORD.
He is to lay his hand on its head and slaughter it there before the LORD. (Lev
4:3-4).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So here (and elsewhere) in the OT God commanded: <i>If the
people/priests sin, there must be an animal sacrificed.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Today sacrificing an animal to deal with sin would be an
abomination.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">What was moral has become immoral.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">What was right is now wrong.</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In this one case, at least, the law has <i>surely </i>changed—setting
the precedent that laws <i>do</i> change. The question of law-changing will not
be of the trivial yes/no end-of-the-story variety but: <i>which laws change?<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">God’s Law is
evidently <i>not</i> absolute in the sense that it never changes. Because it certainly does change. It is absolute in
the sense that there is no moral relativism: If at this time and in these
circumstances it is a sin for me to do <i>X</i>, then it is a sin for
anyone in the same time and circumstances to do <i>X</i>.</span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"><br /></span></div>
<h3>
More from Leviticus</h3>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<sup><span style="color: red; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">13</span></sup><span style="color: red; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"> “‘If a man has sexual
relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is
detestable. They are to be put to death;<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>(Lev 20:13)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">What can we say
about this law?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">•<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">It <i>is</i>
a commandment. It appears intended to stand for some duration (how long?).
God is not making an exception--it is not situational ethics. God is not
saying:<i> Do not summarily execute practicing homosexuals <b><u>unless</u></b>
they are flamboyant or corner the market on all the nice city apartments.</i> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">•<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">Furthermore
the commandment appears to be, arguably, <i>moral</i> in nature as opposed
to <i>civil</i> or <i>ceremonial</i>. A plain reading of Lev 20:13 is:<i>
Homosexual activity is immoral to the point of being an abomination. Kill them</i>. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">What do suppose the
most difficult criticism addressed to us from atheists is, concerning Lev.
20:13?</span> I would say it is this, from a comment on an atheist blog:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<i>If you really want to see the
most honest adaptation of what the bible and Christianity really stands for, go
to [Fred] Phelps<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The criticism here is not the common criticism that we are homophobic. It is more subtle. The criticism is that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">we don’t call for their
execution.</i> The criticism is that we are all “cafeteria Christians,” picking
à<span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span>la carte the verses
we like while ignoring the ones that are inconvenient. We are being told: <i>if you actually followed your bible, you'd be even more hideous than you are now.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
How do we answer such a critics? If we believe the bible is
the word of god why <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">don’t</i> we follow
Lev. 20:13? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To understand the different views on the law it is necessary
to set in place a framework. That framework depends on your systematic
theology.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3>
Three Systematic Theologies</h3>
<h1>
<o:p></o:p></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We quickly introduce three systematic theologies—the first
two (Dispensationalism and Covenant) are well known and prosperous. The third,
(New Covenant), is a fledging movement gaining a head of steam, mostly among
Reformed Baptists. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now you may say: “not me, I’m none of those, and I detest
labels.” To which I say “phooey.” Unless you are totally self-taught in a
vacuum you <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">have</i> been influenced by
teachers who were schooled either in either dispensational or covenant
theology.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3>
Dispensationalism</h3>
<h2>
<o:p></o:p></h2>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">The essence of Dispensationalism, <b>is the distinction between Israel
and the Church</b>. This grows out of the dispensationalists' <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">consistent employment of normal or plain
interpretation</b>, and it reflects an understanding of the basic purpose of
God in all His dealings with mankind as that of glorifying Himself through
salvation and other purposes as well. </span>-- Charles C. Ryrie, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Dispensationalism Today</i><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Three points unique to Dispensationalism</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ol>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">A clear and utter distinction between Israel and
the Church</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">A commitment to an as-literal-as-possible
hermeneutic</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">A complex end-times view including the Rapture
and an earthly millennial kingdom where Christ rules and God’s attention
returns to the Jews.</span></li>
</ol>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom: 10.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<h3>
Covenant Theology</h3>
<h2>
<o:p></o:p></h2>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From the Westminster Confession:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<b>The first covenant </b>made
with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam… upon
condition of perfect and personal obedience.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
Man, by his fall, having made
himself incapable of life by that covenant, <b>the Lord was pleased to make a
second, commonly called the covenant of grace; </b>wherein He freely offers
unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ…<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<b>…There are not therefore two covenants
of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various
dispensations. (WCF Chapter 7)<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paraphrased: <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">There is
one (and only one) overarching covenant of grace in place from the time of the
fall.</b> This same covenant is manifested differently at different periods in
redemptive history.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<h3>
New Covenant Theology</h3>
<h2>
<o:p></o:p></h2>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NCT Views the OT and NT periods as “type <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">v.</i> realized” or “old <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">v.</i> new and better.” That is, old laws
(Mosaic) <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">v.</i> new and better (Sermon on
the Mount); old priesthood (Aaronic) <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">v.</i>
new and better priesthood (Jesus’) and the old covenant <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">v.</i> the new and better covenant. In some sense it is intermediate
between Dispensational and Covenant theology.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3>
Commonality</h3>
<h2>
<o:p></o:p></h2>
<div class="MsoNormal">
All views should be regarded as Christian. All views arrive
at the same place: resurrected saints of all ages living in a new heavens and a
new earth.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3>
Continuity in the three frameworks</h3>
<h1>
<o:p></o:p></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The three theologies differ on how much continuity they
ascribe to redemptive history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This
turns out to be important.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Classic Dispensationalism</u> emphasizes change
(discontinuity) with its (typically) seven distinct dispensations:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 18.0pt; margin-bottom: 3.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 11.0pt .5in; text-autospace: none; text-indent: -.5in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Innocence</span></b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;">—Pre-fallen Man <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 18.0pt; margin-bottom: 3.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 11.0pt .5in; text-autospace: none; text-indent: -.5in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Conscience</span></b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;">—From the fall to the flood <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 18.0pt; margin-bottom: 3.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 11.0pt .5in; text-autospace: none; text-indent: -.5in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Government</span></b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;">—From the flood until the
Abrahamic Covenant <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 18.0pt; margin-bottom: 3.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 11.0pt .5in; text-autospace: none; text-indent: -.5in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Promise</span></b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;">—From Abraham until Moses <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 18.0pt; margin-bottom: 3.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 11.0pt .5in; text-autospace: none; text-indent: -.5in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">5.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Law</span></b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;">—From the institution of
Mosaic Law until Calvary <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 18.0pt; margin-bottom: 3.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; mso-pagination: none; tab-stops: 11.0pt .5in; text-autospace: none; text-indent: -.5in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Cambria; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">6.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Grace</span></b><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;">—From the cross until the
Millennial Kingdom (we are here!)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #1a1a1a; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">7. <b>Millennial Kingdom</b></span><span style="color: #1a1a1a; font-size: 13.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">—</span></span><span style="color: #1a1a1a;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">1000 year
reign of Christ</span><span style="font-size: 13pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Covenant Theology</u> is the most continuous in that it
views the old and new covenants merely as different administrations of a single
covenant of grace. Continuity is stressed by Covenant Theologians.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Thus the spectrum is bounded by the highly discontinuous
Dispensationalism and the highly continuous Covenant Theology.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>New Covenant Theology</u> takes an intermediate position,
viewing Christ’s ministry, culminating with the resurrection, as a single large
discontinuity between the old and new.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Roughly (crudely) speaking we can view this graphically:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVfANvwTiQaFGYPya5KMznmRKr14Mzsa8UI-mM3CymaJJZ5fpU_d15B-iwQqHl58mCwvI1zG36BX0Geg5u928oDM1y4zISOYTw_rVx-suEVidTl-Ln3urP9ln7RDCBFBpcI2EiOhmlm2Ty/s1600/continuity.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="220" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVfANvwTiQaFGYPya5KMznmRKr14Mzsa8UI-mM3CymaJJZ5fpU_d15B-iwQqHl58mCwvI1zG36BX0Geg5u928oDM1y4zISOYTw_rVx-suEVidTl-Ln3urP9ln7RDCBFBpcI2EiOhmlm2Ty/s320/continuity.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<h1>
</h1>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></h3>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;">What Laws are still in effect?</span></h3>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Verse wars are inconclusive. For every<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span style="color: red;">"Do
not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come
to abolish them but to fulfill them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>(Math 5:17)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span style="color: red;">For he
himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh
the dividing wall of hostility <b>by abolishing the law of commandments
expressed in ordinances</b>, that he might create in himself one new man in
place of the two, so making peace, (Eph. 2:14-15).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
or a<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<b><sup><span style="background: white; color: red;">12 </span></sup></b><span style="background: white; color: red;">For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a
change in the law as well. (Heb. 7:12)</span><span style="color: red; font-family: Times;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hmm. If Matt 5:17 does not mean that the laws are not void,
what <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">does</i> it mean?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Law and/or the Prophets is what Jesus would have called
the Old Testament. Notice that including “prophets” and using “fulfill”, the
same Greek word used throughout the NT to indicate <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">fulfilled prophecy</i>, and not the word used to indicate obeying laws
or commandments) does not quite fit with the viewpoint that this passage means:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Do not think I have
come to abolish the laws. I have come to perfectly obey them.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But it <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">does</i> fit
with the interpretation:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Do think I have come
to set aside the Old Testament. I have come to fulfill its prophecies.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So this viewpoint is that Jesus is emphasizing that he is
not some unforeseen God, but <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">exactly the
Messiah predicted by the OT</i>. He has come to fulfill the prophecy.<br />
<br /></div>
<h2>
But I say unto you</h2>
<h1>
<o:p></o:p></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The heart of the debate comes in The Sermon on the Mount, when
Jesus teaches of tension between his teaching and either a) an improper
understanding of the Mosaic law or b) the actual Mosaic law. Here we read:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span class="woj"><b><sup><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">21 </span></sup></b></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">“You have heard that it was said <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">to </b>those of old,</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable
to judgment.’</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><b><sup><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">22 </span></sup></b></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">But I say to you..<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span class="woj"><b><sup><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">27 </span></sup></b></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">“You have heard that it was said,</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">‘You shall not commit adultery.’</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><b><sup><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">28 </span></sup></b></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">But I say to you that</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">everyone who looks at a woman with
lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><b><sup><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"><o:p></o:p></span></sup></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">“It was also said,</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him
give her a certificate of divorce.’</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;"> </span></span><span class="woj"><b><sup><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">32 </span></sup></b></span><span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">But I say to you that everyone who
divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit
adultery..<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="woj"><span style="color: black; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">We need to look at
how the three theologies deal with this tension.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">Dispensational
View<o:p></o:p></span></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Consistent with its approach, Dispensationalism views the
Mosaic Law as applying to biblical Israel, while the Sermon on the Mount is the
new rule of life for the millennial kingdom, and Paul’s teaching is the rule of
life for the church. (They do not deny that the Sermon on the Mount is
profitable for the church). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are then differences of opinion as to whether Paul
teaches that the Ten Commandments are still binding, or whether they have be
abrogated. But that is a question and debate regarding <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">what</i> is Paul teaching; there is agreement that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">his</i> teaching (whatever it might be) and not Jesus’ is what is binding
for the church.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Covenant View<o:p></o:p></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here Covenant Theology struggles a bit to maintain its
commitment to continuity. Its solution is to break the law into three types:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ol>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">ceremonial (what the priests did)</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">c</span><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">ivil (crimes and punishment in a theocracy) and</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">moral (the Ten Commandments)</span></li>
</ol>
<div class="MsoNormal">
All Covenant Theologians assert that the ceremonial laws
were nullified. All Covenant theologians agree that the moral laws are still in
effect. However there is disagreement on the issue of the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">civil</i> laws. Mainstream Covenant Theologians contend that these laws
are also nullified. But another group argues that they are not—that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">only</i> the ceremonial laws are out. This
group, known as theonomists (or reconstructionists) advocates the establishment
of a Christian theocracy that institutes the civil laws including the death
penalty.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Because the moral law continues, Covenant Theology views the
Sermon on the Mount as a clarification of the Ten Commandments and/or a
correction of pharisaical distortions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are two major problems with the Covenant view:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ol>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">The bible does not speak of three types of laws.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">It doesn’t appear that Jesus is correcting the
Pharisees. For one thing, he quotes the 10 Commandments exactly: You have heard
it said you shall not comment adultery. This is exactly what is written on the
stones. Where is the bad teaching that he is correcting? In Matt. 23 Jesus uses
the construct “Woe to you scribes and Pharisees” seven times.</span><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;"> </span><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">He is not shy about calling them out. If he
is correcting the Pharisees in the Sermon on the Mount, where is the “woe to
you..” that we might expect?</span></li>
</ol>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Recognizing the lack of evidence that Jesus is correcting
pharisaical distortions, some Covenant theologians argue that v21, <span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">You have heard that it was said <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>to</u> </b>those of old</span></span>, <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>should actually be translated <span class="woj"><span style="color: red; font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">You have heard that it was said <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>by</u> </b>those of old</span></span>. The common translation (<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">to</b>) seems to refer to Moses’ teaching
the ancient Israelites—which seems to pit Jesus’ teaching against Moses’, while
the latter, less accepted translation (<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">by</b>)
allows for the interpretation that men of old (but not Moses) had already been
distorting the commandments. It is hard not to imagine this as a clumsy way to
prop up a viewpoint.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">New Covenant View<o:p></o:p></span></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In stark contrast to both Dispensationalism and Covenant
Theology, NC views all Old Testament law, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">including
the Ten Commandments</i>, to be nullified. The replacement is the law given by
Christ in the Sermon on the Mount with details provided in the Pauline corpus.
This is consistent with the New Covenant prescription of Old, the New and
Better:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184;">
<tbody>
<tr style="mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
Old<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-left: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
New<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">There is an old covenant,</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">There is a new and better
covenant,</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">administered by an older
priesthood (Aaronic),</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">administered by a new and
better priesthood (Jesus),</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">In an old temple,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">In a new an better temple
(Jesus),<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 4; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">with old laws (Mosaic)</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 221.4pt;" valign="top" width="221"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">with new and better laws (The
Sermon on the Mount)</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">The New Covenant View has the feature that it
is consistent with the view that the OT uses types (foreshadowings) to point to
the reality more fully revealed in the NT. It also has the advantage that is
language, in every case, is in the text, where things “three types of law” and
“one overarching covenant” must be inferred.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">Here is the same story graphically:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><span style="font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-latin;">Dispensationalism:<o:p></o:p></span></u></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPHbY87CQqylchI9lg00DuqJrWhX9zQ38aBaqQ2z0oQQzgIrXzT3fJrCDk6UXLOn91LBRZ3HKvTmCrG9wGksQrhnJan556X2Ax5wlFB5lTSXJ9R5-UT2ZVaFUWNrYD552SLsMJOWQR7fYM/s1600/disp2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="181" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPHbY87CQqylchI9lg00DuqJrWhX9zQ38aBaqQ2z0oQQzgIrXzT3fJrCDk6UXLOn91LBRZ3HKvTmCrG9wGksQrhnJan556X2Ax5wlFB5lTSXJ9R5-UT2ZVaFUWNrYD552SLsMJOWQR7fYM/s320/disp2.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Covenant Theology:<o:p></o:p></u></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLT9PajpD26aO8-CPqbLEYRK6lTb18ps-NY4TWV4FmCWOeoBE_J6lzCpaRYQ1YIwTykI5K_JZxozIGJ7_y_ARYbqDaUf8dtiz0GoLu-5v6cqkg1nYeheYrqgqsz3gs3SRqPDeZcBLnbQyj/s1600/coven2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="209" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLT9PajpD26aO8-CPqbLEYRK6lTb18ps-NY4TWV4FmCWOeoBE_J6lzCpaRYQ1YIwTykI5K_JZxozIGJ7_y_ARYbqDaUf8dtiz0GoLu-5v6cqkg1nYeheYrqgqsz3gs3SRqPDeZcBLnbQyj/s320/coven2.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>New Covenant:<o:p></o:p></u></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhv2B8SNw4C8VXE2sH-YMpKIzleo2kcl87ouW_7umVidj0W3No1vfbr9agsC3XZsZSSLBfH4DWAvmPHiAcM2-PJDSE85CqGNM1m4vu0ZGHS0urYJk7457jL7oBcClOQ02WkHdaywfsuAdya/s1600/nc2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhv2B8SNw4C8VXE2sH-YMpKIzleo2kcl87ouW_7umVidj0W3No1vfbr9agsC3XZsZSSLBfH4DWAvmPHiAcM2-PJDSE85CqGNM1m4vu0ZGHS0urYJk7457jL7oBcClOQ02WkHdaywfsuAdya/s320/nc2.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<h3>
</h3>
<h3>
Back to Leviticus</h3>
<h1>
<o:p></o:p></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<b><sup><span style="color: red; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">13</span></sup></b><span style="color: red; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"> “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as
one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to
be put to death;<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(Lev 20:13)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, how do you answer our critics?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Dispensational answer</u>:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It varies. The typical response is that it that
the law is for a bygone dispensation. The Sermon on the Mount is the new Jewish
law for the millennium. Paul gives the law for the church, and that law does
not call for the death penalty. So no, we should not<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>execute homosexuals.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Covenant Answer:</u> This is a civil law. So either a) it
is still in effect and <u>should</u> be enforced (theonomic viewpoint) or b)
the civil laws along with the ceremonial laws are nullified. But in any case the
10 commandments are still binding.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>New Covenant Answer</u>: The Old Testament Law, it its
entirety, has been replaced by a new and better law, from Christ, the perfect law
giver. This is not an insult to Moses any more than Christ’s priesthood is an
insult to Aaron or the New Covenant is an insult to the Old. The Sermon on the
Mount does not reinstitute the death penalty for various sins—so no, we should
not execute homosexuals. Jesus himself encountered people whose crimes were
capital offenses under the Mosaic law—including those in adultery and blasphemers—and he
never called for a death penalty. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my opinion, the New Covenant view on the law is the most consistent with scripture.</div>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>2642</o:Words>
<o:Characters>12552</o:Characters>
<o:Company>CNU</o:Company>
<o:Lines>306</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>109</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>15085</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>14.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
table.MsoTableGrid
{mso-style-name:"Table Grid";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-priority:59;
mso-style-unhide:no;
border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;
mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-border-insideh:.5pt solid windowtext;
mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<span style="font-family: Cambria; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: "MS 明朝"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br clear="all" style="mso-special-character: line-break; page-break-before: always;" />
</span>
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5641414793254980732.post-76127123727127719422013-12-24T09:49:00.001-08:002014-06-21T04:13:03.497-07:00The Internet Atheist Facts O' FunMy first post is a repost from my old blog. If you've seen it before, then you'll know who I am. If you haven't seen it before--then you won't. But you might like it anyway.<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: center;">
<b>The Internet Atheist Facts O' Fun</b></h3>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>1. The Law of the Converts:</b> Every atheist who claims to have been a devout Christian <i>was.</i> Every Christian who claims to have been an atheist, <i>wasn't.</i></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>2. The Pharyngulyte Corollary to the Law of the Converts:</b> The more the atheist's deconversion was due to encountering someone similar to a Revrun' Mike, a prototypical Baptist minister who wears a white suit, chews tebaccy, routinely preaches on evilution and miscegenation, and instructs young children (under six, when they're impressionable) with explicit images of unimaginable torture in hell (which they must color in Sunday School), the more <i>credible</i> and <i>weighty</i> is the testimony.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>3. The Law of the Biblical Knowledge:</b> Atheists in general know more about the bible than Christians—who in fact only read certain parts of their so-called holy book.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br />
<b style="font-family: inherit;">4. Atheist Biblical Inerrancy:</b><span style="font-family: inherit;"> Internet atheists have a form of biblical inerrancy which goes like this: </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">The King James Version of the bible mentions unicorns. Therefore, ipso facto, quid pro quo, </i><span style="color: black;"><i style="font-family: inherit;">quod erat demonstrandum, the biblical writers believed in mythical one-horned horses<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: normal;">—</span> guess they missed Noah’s boarding call, ha ha!! </i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> Any attempt to go back to the biblical Hebrew to investigate the word, or to suggest that the KJV translators, four centuries ago, might have used </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">unicorn</i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> as something different than the modern picture of a mythical creature is, of course, heresy. All biblical text and translations (the older the better) must be </span>interpreted<span style="font-family: inherit;"> without concern for the possibility of </span>anachronism<span style="font-family: inherit;">.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /><b>5. The Law of the Biblical Scholars:</b> Atheist biblical scholars are credible because they have no agenda. Christian biblical scholars lack credibility because they have an agenda.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /><b>6. Jack Chick Developed Our Curriculum Myth:</b> This is the <i>certain</i> knowledge among many internet atheists that we get our kindergarten Sunday School materials from Jack Chick. That we send four-year-olds off to class and they return with nicely colored pictures (stay in the lines, Billy-Bob, like your sister/cousin/aunt Billie-Bob did!) of sinners in hell screaming in agony—dancing in flames while being skewered by ferocious demons. And there, lording over the entire scene, Satan is laughing, and saying: “it all started when they were bad children who sassed their mammas!” And not just Satan, the picture also shows saints in heaven laughing and thoroughly enjoying the punishment of the damned! Why, we keep the Crayola factory running day and night with our insatiable demand for red, orange and yellow crayons.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><b style="font-family: inherit;">7. Stay in the Closet Rule:</b><span style="font-family: inherit;"> One of the verses at the fingertips of every internet atheist is Matt. 6:6:</span><i style="font-family: inherit;"> <span style="color: red;">But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.</span></i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> (Oh noes, where dat come from?) The atheist apologist will plunk this gotcha verse down knowing we never read it (see #3. The Law of the Biblical Knowledge.) It will be applied to any instance of public prayer in this manner: </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">Stupid christoidjits don't even read their own babble! </i><span style="font-family: inherit;">No nuance is permitted. It cannot be, as the context suggests to some, that this is a reference to personal petitions and confession, not corporate prayer. And of course the fact Jesus himself prays in public (e.g., Matt 19:13, Luke 3:31, esp. John 17) as do the apostles on numerous occasions (Paul, alone, more than 20 times) must </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">never</i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> be interpreted that maybe, just maybe Matt. 6:6 is </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">not </i><span style="font-family: inherit;">a blanket prohibition of all praying in public. For Dawkins's sake, may it never be! No, these counter-examples are only allowed to be applied to the theory that babble is full of inconsistencies.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span><br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>8. The Super-duper Paul of Tarsus View</b>: Atheists often attribute the Apostle Paul with powers far beyond what Christians grant. To wit: it is often suggested that he a) did not exist. And yet in spite of not actually being real he managed to b) usurp Christianity, creating an entirely new religion quite different from that taught by Jesus—who by the way probably did not exist either. And c) Paul managed, while not existing, to steal Christianity —through the use of forged letters. Remarkable! In a nutshell the "super Paul" view is that two people who never existed created two distinct religions (fraudulently). Then later fools, who believed in both of these non-entities, merged their contradictory teachings into a franken-religion.</span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<b>9. The Universe is Atheio-centric:</b> This is the myth that Christians obsess over atheists, think about them all the time, are afraid of them, hate them, irrationally <span style="background-color: white; border: 1pt none windowtext; padding: 0in;">demand their respect, and tremble at the thought of their ridicule</span><span style="background-color: white;">.</span> The truth of course is that we <i>rarely</i> think of them, are <i>not</i> afraid of them, <i>don’t</i> hate them, and wish only that if they criticize us they do it intelligently or at least with humor. Dear Dawkins, the look we give you when you say <i>“if god invented everything, then who invented god?</i>” or <i>“religion ruins everything”</i> is not one of fear or hate or anger or puzzlement, it is a look of <i>boredom</i>. And no, we don’t obsess over you. When I hear atheists mentioned in church it is usually along the lines of <i>Christians need to behave better; our behavior should distinguish us from the atheist, but it doesn’t.</i> And really—try to remember that you are not as famous as you think—the real world is not the internet. My church is made up of educated people—lawyers and NASA engineers, teachers and shipbuilders. I suspect I am the only person in the church who has heard of PZ Myers, even though he is “so famous” that Sam Harris (now of him we have heard, and also Dawkins, but who is this Myers? Who is this Coyne?) correctly dubbed him the “<a href="http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/wrestling-the-troll">shepherd of internet trolls</a>” and the purveyor of a “odious blog.” That demonstrates a certain internet notoriety—but in the real world it translates to a big fat zero. We wouldn't be afraid of you even if we knew you--which we don't.<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>10. The Law of the Useful Idiots:</b> Dime-a-dozen atheist Religious Studies professors such as Hector Avalos at Iowa State are useful. Just don't let them know that when we're in charge the first thing on the chopping block will be Religious Studies Departments. <sup>1</sup></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>11. The Law that Blind Faith is The Ultimate Christian Virtue:</b> Christians are never told to think, only to accept without thinking. Using your brain, they are taught, is not sporting. Those pesky Bereans are <i>never</i> a model for actual Christians. And never mind that those praised for their faith in the Faith Hall of Fame (Hebrews 11) had no need for blind faith since they spoke to God, demanded proof of God, and witnessed miracles. (This is also known as the <a href="http://www.thinkingchristian.net/">Tom Gilson</a> is Neither Law.)</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>12. The Law of Bright Darkness: </b>The <i>worse</i> the behavior of a Christian, the more <i>honest</i> the Christian is. For example, <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/04/phelps_cult_to_protest_mcmille.php#comment-2476757">this comment</a> from a reader on Ed Brayton's blog:</span></div>
<blockquote>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">If you really want to see the most honest adapation [sic] of what the bible and Christianity really stands far if you follow the most literal interpretation of the bible, go to Phelps.</span></div>
</blockquote>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>13. The I-Say-Therefore-I-Am Law: </b>Questioning the sincerity of self-identified Christians such as Fred Phelps (or the Big H—-you know, that guy with the funny little mustache) is immediately dismissed as a No True Scotsman Fallacy. The definition of a Christian is: "anyone who claims they are a Christian."</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>14. <i>You are a credit to your race exception</i> to the</b> <b>I-Say-Therefore-I-Am Law:</b> Any self-identified Christian who sufficiently diverges from the atheist ideal of a Christian is an "outlier" and not a True Christian<span style="background-color: white; color: #444444; line-height: 16px;">™</span> in the same sense that, say, Fred Phelps is.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /><b>15. Atheist "No it's not sauce for the gander" exemption from the I-Say-Therefore-I-Am Law:</b> Anyone questioning the atheism of an inconvenient self-proclaimed atheist is granted blanket immunity from the No True Scotsman Fallacy. It's only fair.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>16. The <i>Ipso Facto</i> No Atheist Is That Bad Law:</b> Stalin and Mao were not atheists. They were demigods of the religions <i>Stalinism </i>and <i>Maoism</i>. We know this because mass murder on such a scale can only be committed by religionists.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>17. The Law of "When Ken Ham is right, he is <i>really</i> right!:</b> YECs like Ken Ham are the dumbest jackasses in the world. Except when they interpret Genesis One. For that single chapter in the bible they are exegetical savants. Any Christian who disagrees is a cafeteria Christian.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>18 The <a href="http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/">Coyne </a>Corollary to the Law of Ken Ham:</b> Ken Ham is also correct in his claim that modern science and Christianity are incompatible.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>19. The Law that Logical Proofs regarding God are like Diodes</b>: All logical proofs for God are trivially wrong<sup> 2</sup>. However, the construction:</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">P1: <i>God is omnipotent.</i></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">P2: <i>God is omnibenevolent</i>.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">P3: <i>Human suffering exists.</i></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">C1: <i>Therefore P1 and/or P2 is wrong.</i></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">C2: <i>Therefore God does not exist.</i></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">is bulletproof.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>20. The Law of the Atheist Hermeneutic: </b>The most important verse in the bible is "Judge not, lest ye be judged." This means that Christians cannot judge Fred Phelps (for example) to be apostate. How dare they! As for the verses that follow (don't give what is holy to dogs, pearls before swine,--verses that would seem to <i>presuppose</i> judging) as well as the verses which seem to indicate how they are to judge (by their fruit) —and also those verses that describe excommunication—which again presupposes judging--well for Christians to bring those up is disingenuous. And not very sporting.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>21. The Ruby Tuesday Law: </b>The second most important passage in the bible is</span></div>
<blockquote>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."</span></div>
</blockquote>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">This means that the only reason Christians don't call for stoning of blasphemers or condone slavery is that they are <i>cafeteria</i> Christians. Arguments that this passage means anything other than "All Levitical Laws are still in effect" are to be dismissed as evasive. Be prepared to dismiss summarily alleged counter-arguments such as:</span><br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Je<span style="font-family: inherit;">sus encountered blasphemers and didn't call for their stoning. </span></span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Jesus upgraded the law in the Sermon on the Mount. (To, effectively, not "What Would Jesus Do?" but "What Would Jesus <i>Think</i>?")</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">A phase transition occurred on the cross--it wasn't just an interlude after which things returned to normal.</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Jesus violated Levitical rules on the handling of lepers and the Sabbath. </span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Jesus claimed he was Lord of the Sabbath and that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Peter has a vision telling him to ignore the Levitical food laws. </span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">The church's first council, recorded in the Book of Acts, voided the sacrosanct law regarding circumcision.</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">In the Old Testament animal sacrifices were commanded. In the New Testament their use for the same purpose would be an abomination.</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Consider this passage concerning Jesus the new High Priest: <i>For when there is a change in the priesthood, <b>there is necessarily a change in the law as well.</b></i> (Hebrews 7:12).</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Consider this passage about Jesus:<i> </i></span><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility <b>by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances</b>, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so </span>making peace, (Eph. 2:14-15)</i></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">All these are but red herrings. The full force of the Old Testament law—a law intended for a nation that no longer exists—is still in effect, and only honest Christians like Fred Phelps admit it. All others are cowardly hypocrites.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>22. The Law of Small Miracles:</b> All theists believe in the mother-of-all-miracles: that the creative force behind the universe is God. Some such theists (e.g., His Vomitousness, The Bishop John Shelby Spong) are <s>useful</s> tolerable because while they quietly accept this big miracle, they loudly poo-poo what are by comparison itty-bitty miracles, like Jesus walking on water.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>23. Irrefutable Proof that Miracles can't happen:</b> Miracles, by definition can't be explained by science. Everything can be explained by science. Therefore miracles can't happen. Because they can't be explained by science. Therefore science and religion are incompatible.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>24. The Law of Axiomatic Incompatibility:</b> Science is how we know what we know. Science demands experimental testing. Nothing is exempt from this requirement. Except for The Holy of Holies: The Incompatibility of Science and Religion. It has no observable effect. Nobody has ever designed an experiment that demonstrates the incompatibility. But nevertheless it's true axiomatically. Like <i>A = A</i>.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>25. The "We Know" axiom:</b> This is a more general case of the Law of Axiomatic Incompatibility. This is a common favorite of internet atheists, as the use of the “we know” axiom is another method that has the advantage of precluding the need for evidence or rational debate. Anything that “we know” is simply—<i>true</i>. You might read, for example, “<i>we know</i> that most of Paul’s letters are forgeries.” (<a href="http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2011/12/31/pastor-explains-the-proper-role-of-women/#comment-52032">Here is a typical example</a> of this kind of argument.)</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>26. Up to 30,000 and counting:</b> This is a composite myth that is usually stated something like: <i>There are 30,000 Christian sects each one claiming to know the absolute truth.</i> (<a href="http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/02/27/i-read-the-regal-standard-so-you-dont-have-to/comment-page-1/#comment-276158">Here is a typical example</a>.) First of all there are not 30,000, but <a href="http://helives.blogspot.com/2003/11/200000-protestant-denominations.html">more like 800</a>. The 30,000 comes in part from things like counting independent Baptist churches as separate sects, even though their theology is indistinguishable. Secondly, very few of these sects, only a few on the lunatic fringe, claim to be inerrant. Hell, most people do not agree with every jot and tittle in their <i>own</i> church’s doctrine statement, let alone claim their church has sole ownership of the “absolute truth.” Of course atheists have <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/01/why-are-you-an-atheist/">their own stratification</a> (where the mouth-breathers are "dictionary atheists" and those who can offer a spirited defense of their atheism are True Atheists<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #222222; line-height: 16px;">™. </span> And they even sprouted a brand new denomination, <a href="http://atheismplus.com/">Atheism-Plus</a>, with its own iconography and wiki. But that's different. We know.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<b style="font-family: inherit;">27.</b><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><b style="font-family: inherit;">The Our Secretary (but not your Secretary) will Disavow Rule: </b><span style="font-family: inherit;">Atheists have no leaders. Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, etc. They are just famous people with intelligent, critical readers. At the very most, primarily as a courtesy, you might call them </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">fans</i><span style="font-family: inherit;">. But if, for example, Dawkins says or does something </span><strike style="font-family: inherit;">beyond the pale of atheist orthodoxy</strike><span style="font-family: inherit;"> embarrassing, why it's all on him. Christians, however, have </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">leaders</i><span style="font-family: inherit;">. Pat Robertson, John Hagee, Ken Ham, just to name a few--these all are bona fide Christian leaders. If they say or do something embarrassing (when don't they?) it reflects on all Christians. Because they are Christian leaders and spokesmen and all Christians are their loyal followers and sheeple.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
</div>
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<br />
<hr />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><sup>1</sup> In a broken-clock sort of way, on this I am in agreement.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><sup>2</sup> See footnote 1.</span></div>
Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.com0