Recently, I read an article on Skeptico that presented an interesting example using dice. Skeptico says:
"Suppose someone is rolling a set of two dice. He rolls a double six- something with a one in 36 chance of happening. Which is more likely, that the person rolled a set of regular dice and just got lucky, or that he rolled a special set where both dice have just sixes on all faces? (Let's assume you can't see any but the sides that are on top.) You might think that since a regular set would produce a double six on only one out of 36 attempts, he is more likely to have rolled the trick dice with just sixes. But after a moment's thought you would probably realize that was wrong. With just one roll of the dice, you would have no way of knowing...."
He concludes this:
"No matter how many dice he rolled at once, or how high the apparent odds against it happening by chance you wouldn't know he was cheating by just looking at the results of one roll."
While I am not exactly sure of his point, Skeptico seems to be saying we cannot tell by just looking at this universe whether it was the result of lucky occurences or if it was manipulated to be the way it is. His conclusion is there's no way we can tell if our universe is the result of the action of a Higher Power.
Really?
I could take the same information and come to a different conclusion. Let me give my take on it. Your friend rolls two dice, (you don't see the roll, ok?) comes up to you and says, "Hey, I rolled two sixes!" To which you think, "Big deal." The odds, 1 in 36 are well within probability. But what if he rolled 5 dice and they were all sixes? The odds for that are much lower, (1 in 7776) and therefore more impressive. Anyone who has played Yahtzee knows the difficulty of rolling all sixes. What if your friend says he opened a bag of ten dice, dumped them on the table and they came up sixes. The odds now become 1 in 60,466,176. Would you believe him? Or secretly harbor a thought that he had skewed them in some way. Maybe he's (very) lucky. (Does he have any lottery numbers in mind?) With a bag of 25 dice the odds become 1 in 28,430,288,029,929,700,000. In case you didn't know, that is a very small probability. For them to show all sixes in a single roll would be, for all practical purposes, impossible.
The point I am trying to make here is that one part of his analogy is right. You would not be able to tell, from a single roll if the dice was manipulated or not. But you could be suspicious. As the number of dice increases so does the possiblity that something else is happening and an alternative explanation is needed.
We should consider that the universe is a lot more complicated than a pair of dice. It is more complicated than 10 or even 25 dice. In light of that knowledge the possible causes for our present reality narrow considerably. Either one has to believe that the universe somehow, someway, came into being in spite of impossibly small odds, or one must cling to a theory that cannot be proved (as in multiple universes) and therefore borders on religion, (Something believed with no cororobating evidence.) or (gasp) that something, or Someone manipulated it to be that way. A Creator, perhaps?
Link here: http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2010/04/fine-tuning-arguments.html.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Must Christianity be Accepted Without any Evidence?
I recently read an article from Skeptico titled "Atheism is Not a Religion". In this article there are a few statements I would like to comment on. As the article begins the author says this: "Religion must include something you have to accept on faith - that is, without evidence commensurate with the extraordinary nature of the belief." About the world religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Scientoloty...etc.) he says: "They are not based on fact or on any reasonable evidence commensurate with the claims they make." Further, when referring to evidence he states that the extraordinary claims of a particular religion should be reinforced with extraordinary evidence.
While I would agree that most religions are based on some sort of superstition or false belief, I would disagree that Christianity is without evidential merit. We all know that the premiere event for its foundation is the resurrection of Christ. Skeptico says this: "Of course, the resurrection of Christ, if it had actually happened, would be pretty good evidence for Christianity." However, he denies that there is any good evidence for the resurrection.
Really?
Let's illustrate the situation this way. Suppose your best friend comes up and excitedly tells you he has seen an extraordinary event. A miracle. "I saw it with my own eyes!" he says. What do you do? You can believe him, or not. The choice is yours. Soon after, another friend claims to have seen the exact same thing. Now what? You can still believe him (them) or not. What about three friends? Or four? At what point does the testimony of these people sway you? Of course you didn't see the miraculous event. You can steadfastly refuse to believe if you so desire. "I need real proof?" you say. What if this miracle was seen by dozens or even hundreds of people? Where is the threshold for belief? Is the testimony of multiple reliable witnesses good enough?
Let's expand this a little bit. Suppose all the people you know who witnessed this miracle became different in some way. We all know that personalities can change for the worse from (among other things) drugs and alcohol. But these lives are changed for the better. They are more honest than before, more happy, personable and caring. The change, they all say happened as a result of the miracle.
This is what we see with Christianity. People and not a few of them claim to have seen a living man who was publically executed and buried just a few days before. They were not superstitious pagans: they were Jews, adherents of Judaism. A few were highly educated. One notable disciple (Thomas) thought the others were delusional. "Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." A week later his concerns were met when he saw Jesus for himself. The various sightings occurred over a period of 40 days. Rarely did they happen to individuals. The largest appearance was to some 500 people.
What is the difference between my illustration and what happened two thousand years ago? Time. The questions we ask today are the same for both groups. Are they primary witnesses, like your friend or secondary ones. Are the various testimonies of the witnesses reliably consistent? What is the character of the witnesses? Is their testimony trustworthy?
It should be known that what I am going to give in condensed form has much scholarly support. Whole volumes have been written about these matters.
Let's take a look at Jesus' biographers. Matthew writes as a primary witness. His account is matter of fact and not laced with sensationalistic language. He gospel was almost certainly written before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and well within his lifetime. Also there are no competing writers for his Gospel. Every early tradition points to his authorship. Mark is a little different. He is named as a follower of Jesus, but not one of the Twelve. He may not have been a primary witness to all the events about which he writes. But we know from tradition that he was a companion of Peter. Peter was the most outspoken and well-known of Jesus' disciples. Essentially the Gospel that bears Mark's name is that of Peter. His Gospel is dated before 60 AD. John also writes as a primary witness. He was the longest lived of all the disciples and may have written his Gospel after 70 AD, but still within his lifetime. He died around 97-99 AD.
What about Luke? He was not Jewish and expressly states that he was not a primary witness. He was, however a reporter. His mission was to located the primary sources, find out what they had to say, and record that information. Luke's Gospel includes some episodes which are not in the others but can be traced back to primary sources. Luke also wrote the book of Acts as a continuation of his Gospel. Both of his books were written before 60 AD. We should note that Luke was an extremely accurate writer. His books have held up to the most careful scrutiny by archaeologists and historians.
What about the character of the witnesses? Does their testimony hold up? Actually - yes. Peter was the first to publically preach about the resurrection. He appeals to the crowd's knowledge of the events. (....you yourselves know....) A few days later he was on trial against a hostile jury and made the same appeal. (....this Jesus whom you crucified and God raised from the dead....) Peter's trial was less than two months after Jesus' crucifixion and only a few minutes walk from the tomb. It would have been pretty easy to refute his declaration. The suprising thing is that the prosecution could offer no evidence to the contrary. No one stood up and said. "Hey! You're wrong! This man is still dead!" In fact, no one in Jesus' time was able to refute the evidence. Instead they resorted to bribery or threats.
Clearly the evidence above does not square very well with that of the scientific kind. But what do you want? A neon sign in the heavens? If you are looking for some kind of goo you can take to a lab and use to reanimate dead matter - it simply does not exist and you will forever be disappointed. But if you can believe the testimony of reliable people who personally witnessed these events there is hope. The question I would like to ask: Is the evidence presented sufficient to believe they are telling the truth? You will have to answer for yourself. My answer is yes.
It's time to look more closely at the Gospel record.
(Link to Skeptico article: http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2009/06/atheism-is-not-a-religion.html )
While I would agree that most religions are based on some sort of superstition or false belief, I would disagree that Christianity is without evidential merit. We all know that the premiere event for its foundation is the resurrection of Christ. Skeptico says this: "Of course, the resurrection of Christ, if it had actually happened, would be pretty good evidence for Christianity." However, he denies that there is any good evidence for the resurrection.
Really?
Let's illustrate the situation this way. Suppose your best friend comes up and excitedly tells you he has seen an extraordinary event. A miracle. "I saw it with my own eyes!" he says. What do you do? You can believe him, or not. The choice is yours. Soon after, another friend claims to have seen the exact same thing. Now what? You can still believe him (them) or not. What about three friends? Or four? At what point does the testimony of these people sway you? Of course you didn't see the miraculous event. You can steadfastly refuse to believe if you so desire. "I need real proof?" you say. What if this miracle was seen by dozens or even hundreds of people? Where is the threshold for belief? Is the testimony of multiple reliable witnesses good enough?
Let's expand this a little bit. Suppose all the people you know who witnessed this miracle became different in some way. We all know that personalities can change for the worse from (among other things) drugs and alcohol. But these lives are changed for the better. They are more honest than before, more happy, personable and caring. The change, they all say happened as a result of the miracle.
This is what we see with Christianity. People and not a few of them claim to have seen a living man who was publically executed and buried just a few days before. They were not superstitious pagans: they were Jews, adherents of Judaism. A few were highly educated. One notable disciple (Thomas) thought the others were delusional. "Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." A week later his concerns were met when he saw Jesus for himself. The various sightings occurred over a period of 40 days. Rarely did they happen to individuals. The largest appearance was to some 500 people.
What is the difference between my illustration and what happened two thousand years ago? Time. The questions we ask today are the same for both groups. Are they primary witnesses, like your friend or secondary ones. Are the various testimonies of the witnesses reliably consistent? What is the character of the witnesses? Is their testimony trustworthy?
It should be known that what I am going to give in condensed form has much scholarly support. Whole volumes have been written about these matters.
Let's take a look at Jesus' biographers. Matthew writes as a primary witness. His account is matter of fact and not laced with sensationalistic language. He gospel was almost certainly written before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and well within his lifetime. Also there are no competing writers for his Gospel. Every early tradition points to his authorship. Mark is a little different. He is named as a follower of Jesus, but not one of the Twelve. He may not have been a primary witness to all the events about which he writes. But we know from tradition that he was a companion of Peter. Peter was the most outspoken and well-known of Jesus' disciples. Essentially the Gospel that bears Mark's name is that of Peter. His Gospel is dated before 60 AD. John also writes as a primary witness. He was the longest lived of all the disciples and may have written his Gospel after 70 AD, but still within his lifetime. He died around 97-99 AD.
What about Luke? He was not Jewish and expressly states that he was not a primary witness. He was, however a reporter. His mission was to located the primary sources, find out what they had to say, and record that information. Luke's Gospel includes some episodes which are not in the others but can be traced back to primary sources. Luke also wrote the book of Acts as a continuation of his Gospel. Both of his books were written before 60 AD. We should note that Luke was an extremely accurate writer. His books have held up to the most careful scrutiny by archaeologists and historians.
What about the character of the witnesses? Does their testimony hold up? Actually - yes. Peter was the first to publically preach about the resurrection. He appeals to the crowd's knowledge of the events. (....you yourselves know....) A few days later he was on trial against a hostile jury and made the same appeal. (....this Jesus whom you crucified and God raised from the dead....) Peter's trial was less than two months after Jesus' crucifixion and only a few minutes walk from the tomb. It would have been pretty easy to refute his declaration. The suprising thing is that the prosecution could offer no evidence to the contrary. No one stood up and said. "Hey! You're wrong! This man is still dead!" In fact, no one in Jesus' time was able to refute the evidence. Instead they resorted to bribery or threats.
Clearly the evidence above does not square very well with that of the scientific kind. But what do you want? A neon sign in the heavens? If you are looking for some kind of goo you can take to a lab and use to reanimate dead matter - it simply does not exist and you will forever be disappointed. But if you can believe the testimony of reliable people who personally witnessed these events there is hope. The question I would like to ask: Is the evidence presented sufficient to believe they are telling the truth? You will have to answer for yourself. My answer is yes.
It's time to look more closely at the Gospel record.
(Link to Skeptico article: http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2009/06/atheism-is-not-a-religion.html )
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Episode 6: Candidate of the Apocalypse
Flashback: September 2010
Charles' campaign manager was cautiously optimistic. While things were going pretty well so far-the numbers told him they were still way behind. There was simply no way that Charles could speak to enough people face to face and pull it off. But all was not lost. He did have a couple of ideas about using social networks and other means to spread the word. This helped a lot. There must be some (future) point of critical mass when everything they were working toward must explode or else simply fade away. The problem was he didn't know when, or if, this point could be reached. But they must go on. At every meeting Charles gave him some time to talk about the importance of networking and how this could become something which had never happend before in history, an online campaign made up entirely of like-minded people whose reach could be more pervasive than either, or both parties together. He was driven to see if this could be accomplished and was constantly busy looking for the best and most efficient ways to communicate between them and their supporters.
It was the middle of the afternoon and Charles was in a radio interview. He had already spoken to two groups this morning and would have another before flying back late tonight.
The radio host asked, "And what do you say when people ask about your qualifications?"
"Well, I am over the age of 35. I am a natural born citizen and have lived here continuously for over 14 years. So I do meet the minimum requirements to run. But what people usually mean by this kind of questions is; do you have the right educational credentials, or do you have some kind of experience in government. I do have a University degree. Not from Yale or Harvard like some of our Presidents have. On the other hand, aren't these the very ones who have put us in the mess we're in? OK, so having an education at the right school isn't enough. Secondly, I owned a business for some 15 years. I was good at it. I negotiated prices, delivery schedules and all kinds of other things in the course of running that company. I had to know when to delegate and when the decision fell on me. Every decision was made with care because they affected my people and their jobs. How is this different from negotiating for a particular bill, or some kind of trade agreement? It's only a matter of scale. Also: One great advantage the President has is access to the best and brightest in the country. They can provide expertise that he may lack. That's what the cabinet and advisors are for. I plan on tapping into that knowledge pool when it comes to makinig decisions." Last of all, we hear a lot of people saying that we need to send some kind of message to Washington. Wouldn't electing someone like me be the biggest message of all?"
"And that's why you are running what is truly a grassroots campaign."
"Exactly. I've set things up so that I must be invited to come and speak. If my message does not resonate with them, then the offers will simply go away."
"And on that note, how many speaking engagements do you have right now?"
"More than I can handle. As a matter of fact we've had to up our minimum crowd request from fifty people to a hundred. And we still have more calls every single day."
Outside the studio Charles found several reporters assembled and waiting. This was a first and he politely held another question and answer session. Soon he felt his campaign manager pulling on his sleeve. They were going to be late. Time to go.
The next place happend to be at a gym. Charles found himself at the center of a friendly and supportive crowd. He wound up exercising between questions and comments. Some were political but a lot them were about his workout routine. His personality really meshed with them. Toward the end one guy said, "You know at some gyms they have a time when you can some in and workout naked!" "I would never workout naked," Charles replied with a twinkle in his eye, "For two reasons. First it's too distracting. Second, I don't want to draw a crowd." Everyone laughed and Charles had to move on.
However, someone in the crowd recorded that little quip and in a few days it became a minor YouTube hit. Rather than hurting Charles' campaign there was an upswing in numbers. His manager just shook his head. "Who is this guy?" he thought.
That very afternoon Charles received an invitation to appear on a local morning talk show. The topic of discussion they said would be the economy and how to address it. Charles agreed.
But it was a trick.
Charles' campaign manager was cautiously optimistic. While things were going pretty well so far-the numbers told him they were still way behind. There was simply no way that Charles could speak to enough people face to face and pull it off. But all was not lost. He did have a couple of ideas about using social networks and other means to spread the word. This helped a lot. There must be some (future) point of critical mass when everything they were working toward must explode or else simply fade away. The problem was he didn't know when, or if, this point could be reached. But they must go on. At every meeting Charles gave him some time to talk about the importance of networking and how this could become something which had never happend before in history, an online campaign made up entirely of like-minded people whose reach could be more pervasive than either, or both parties together. He was driven to see if this could be accomplished and was constantly busy looking for the best and most efficient ways to communicate between them and their supporters.
It was the middle of the afternoon and Charles was in a radio interview. He had already spoken to two groups this morning and would have another before flying back late tonight.
The radio host asked, "And what do you say when people ask about your qualifications?"
"Well, I am over the age of 35. I am a natural born citizen and have lived here continuously for over 14 years. So I do meet the minimum requirements to run. But what people usually mean by this kind of questions is; do you have the right educational credentials, or do you have some kind of experience in government. I do have a University degree. Not from Yale or Harvard like some of our Presidents have. On the other hand, aren't these the very ones who have put us in the mess we're in? OK, so having an education at the right school isn't enough. Secondly, I owned a business for some 15 years. I was good at it. I negotiated prices, delivery schedules and all kinds of other things in the course of running that company. I had to know when to delegate and when the decision fell on me. Every decision was made with care because they affected my people and their jobs. How is this different from negotiating for a particular bill, or some kind of trade agreement? It's only a matter of scale. Also: One great advantage the President has is access to the best and brightest in the country. They can provide expertise that he may lack. That's what the cabinet and advisors are for. I plan on tapping into that knowledge pool when it comes to makinig decisions." Last of all, we hear a lot of people saying that we need to send some kind of message to Washington. Wouldn't electing someone like me be the biggest message of all?"
"And that's why you are running what is truly a grassroots campaign."
"Exactly. I've set things up so that I must be invited to come and speak. If my message does not resonate with them, then the offers will simply go away."
"And on that note, how many speaking engagements do you have right now?"
"More than I can handle. As a matter of fact we've had to up our minimum crowd request from fifty people to a hundred. And we still have more calls every single day."
Outside the studio Charles found several reporters assembled and waiting. This was a first and he politely held another question and answer session. Soon he felt his campaign manager pulling on his sleeve. They were going to be late. Time to go.
The next place happend to be at a gym. Charles found himself at the center of a friendly and supportive crowd. He wound up exercising between questions and comments. Some were political but a lot them were about his workout routine. His personality really meshed with them. Toward the end one guy said, "You know at some gyms they have a time when you can some in and workout naked!" "I would never workout naked," Charles replied with a twinkle in his eye, "For two reasons. First it's too distracting. Second, I don't want to draw a crowd." Everyone laughed and Charles had to move on.
However, someone in the crowd recorded that little quip and in a few days it became a minor YouTube hit. Rather than hurting Charles' campaign there was an upswing in numbers. His manager just shook his head. "Who is this guy?" he thought.
That very afternoon Charles received an invitation to appear on a local morning talk show. The topic of discussion they said would be the economy and how to address it. Charles agreed.
But it was a trick.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Episode 5: Candidate of the Apocalypse
A few questions for our candidate.
Year: 2036 November
It took a few days to take down and clean up after the Festival. But the next time school met the teacher continued his story.
Flashback: August 2010
Charles was having a meeting in Spokane, Washington at a Holiday Inn. The room was full with people standing around the walls. He was dressed well but casually in a dark blue turtle-neck and jeans. He finished his introductory remarks then grabbed the mike and stepped into the crowd to take questions. The first came from an older man sitting near the back.
"Are you going to take away my Social Security?"
"Well! I can see you're not going to allow me any warm up questions!" (laughter)
Charles' voice grew soft. "I do not intend to take anybody's Social Security away. But we would be foolish to admit that there are no problems with it as it stands right now. If we take a look at the history of the program we would see that it has never lived up to the promises made about it. Ever. Today most people will not get the money out of the system they've put in. Yet at the same time the financial demands made on our country are increasing. This system could very well bankrupt the United States unless something is done soon."
"But what can be done?" A voice asked.
"I guess that's the million dollar question. Or, since we're talking about the government - the trillion dollar question. If the system is going to remain solvent three things must happen. If only one or two are done it will not work.
First, there must be an overhaul of the current tax code. We must exchange the IRS for something better. (cheers) We have the second highest corporate tax system in the world. It is unfair and stifling to business and people. Now, I really do not care a lot about which tax system we enact, that would be something to talk to your representatives about. Many have proposed some kind of flat tax. I'm personally in favor of what the call the Fair Tax. It doesn't quite matter too much as long as the rates are loooow. He drew out the last work to the smiles of the audience.
That is a moot point if the second requirement does not happen. We're talking about spending. Let me give an example for you. If took the previous administration some 6 years to increase spending by a trillion dollars. The present administration's first act was to increase spending by some 800 Billion! By now they have spend over a trillion and a half. (That's new spending, mind you.) As a nation we are in more debt in terms of dollar amount and as a percentage of our gross national product than at any time in our history, even World War II.
Now, I believe that if progress is made on the first two they will go a long way toward solving the problems we are in and help Social Security. We are also in need of taking a sober practial look at that program and make changes. And do you know what? Several good ideas have been put forward which merit consideration. I've got a couple of web sites here on the screen for you to check out.
What I am not going to do is blow smoke at you, like some are doing or ignore the problem like most are doing. It will be addressed."
"Can you tell us something about your life sir?"
"Certainly. I was born and raised in far off Virginia and pursued my higher education at the College of William and Mary. I started grad school at the University of Virginia but never finished. The reason for that was a death in the family, a very close uncle of mine. He had recently started a delivery company with one truck and three customers. I dropped out of school to take over the company. Sixteen years later we had 15 trucks; I had added about a truck a year and by then the company was a medium-sized regional distributor with over a hundred clients. At that point I sold the company and basically, retired. By the way, the company existed for another eight years before it was absorbed into another, larger company.
After I retired I moved to the Midwest and spend the first ten years or so travelling around this great nation of ours. I've never been much for world travel, not that we didn't do a bit of that too. About 5 years ago I started another company selling truck accessories online. I guess I can't really get around my love for trucks! Two years ago I became part owner of a local gym."
"What do you think is the most important quality in a candidate?"
"First and formost is character. I would place that even higher than some sort of educational requirement. We've all seen Presidents that were supposed to be very smart and highly educated and yet they didn't do so well. Others, less educated did more. But every President has had situations in which he had a choice between doing the politically expedient thing or the right thing."
Afterward, Charles stayed to meet people, shake hand and talk. One guy came up and said, "I run a gym too, do you have time for a quick workout?" He did have time and agreed. It was a refreshing change since his schedule had been so tight recently. Before long he had to start refusing offers, or work out several times a day.
At about the same time a politcal operative in Washington discovered his web site and scanned the contents. He was immediately dismissed as a hack, but someone to watch.
Flashforward: 2036
The class was so engrossed in listening it took a few moments to acknowledge the ringing bell. The days were getting shorter and colder now. The students filed out quickly, shouting and talking to each other as they went while the teacher stood, trembling at the front of the class. A moment later the coughing began.
Year: 2036 November
It took a few days to take down and clean up after the Festival. But the next time school met the teacher continued his story.
Flashback: August 2010
Charles was having a meeting in Spokane, Washington at a Holiday Inn. The room was full with people standing around the walls. He was dressed well but casually in a dark blue turtle-neck and jeans. He finished his introductory remarks then grabbed the mike and stepped into the crowd to take questions. The first came from an older man sitting near the back.
"Are you going to take away my Social Security?"
"Well! I can see you're not going to allow me any warm up questions!" (laughter)
Charles' voice grew soft. "I do not intend to take anybody's Social Security away. But we would be foolish to admit that there are no problems with it as it stands right now. If we take a look at the history of the program we would see that it has never lived up to the promises made about it. Ever. Today most people will not get the money out of the system they've put in. Yet at the same time the financial demands made on our country are increasing. This system could very well bankrupt the United States unless something is done soon."
"But what can be done?" A voice asked.
"I guess that's the million dollar question. Or, since we're talking about the government - the trillion dollar question. If the system is going to remain solvent three things must happen. If only one or two are done it will not work.
First, there must be an overhaul of the current tax code. We must exchange the IRS for something better. (cheers) We have the second highest corporate tax system in the world. It is unfair and stifling to business and people. Now, I really do not care a lot about which tax system we enact, that would be something to talk to your representatives about. Many have proposed some kind of flat tax. I'm personally in favor of what the call the Fair Tax. It doesn't quite matter too much as long as the rates are loooow. He drew out the last work to the smiles of the audience.
That is a moot point if the second requirement does not happen. We're talking about spending. Let me give an example for you. If took the previous administration some 6 years to increase spending by a trillion dollars. The present administration's first act was to increase spending by some 800 Billion! By now they have spend over a trillion and a half. (That's new spending, mind you.) As a nation we are in more debt in terms of dollar amount and as a percentage of our gross national product than at any time in our history, even World War II.
Now, I believe that if progress is made on the first two they will go a long way toward solving the problems we are in and help Social Security. We are also in need of taking a sober practial look at that program and make changes. And do you know what? Several good ideas have been put forward which merit consideration. I've got a couple of web sites here on the screen for you to check out.
What I am not going to do is blow smoke at you, like some are doing or ignore the problem like most are doing. It will be addressed."
"Can you tell us something about your life sir?"
"Certainly. I was born and raised in far off Virginia and pursued my higher education at the College of William and Mary. I started grad school at the University of Virginia but never finished. The reason for that was a death in the family, a very close uncle of mine. He had recently started a delivery company with one truck and three customers. I dropped out of school to take over the company. Sixteen years later we had 15 trucks; I had added about a truck a year and by then the company was a medium-sized regional distributor with over a hundred clients. At that point I sold the company and basically, retired. By the way, the company existed for another eight years before it was absorbed into another, larger company.
After I retired I moved to the Midwest and spend the first ten years or so travelling around this great nation of ours. I've never been much for world travel, not that we didn't do a bit of that too. About 5 years ago I started another company selling truck accessories online. I guess I can't really get around my love for trucks! Two years ago I became part owner of a local gym."
"What do you think is the most important quality in a candidate?"
"First and formost is character. I would place that even higher than some sort of educational requirement. We've all seen Presidents that were supposed to be very smart and highly educated and yet they didn't do so well. Others, less educated did more. But every President has had situations in which he had a choice between doing the politically expedient thing or the right thing."
Afterward, Charles stayed to meet people, shake hand and talk. One guy came up and said, "I run a gym too, do you have time for a quick workout?" He did have time and agreed. It was a refreshing change since his schedule had been so tight recently. Before long he had to start refusing offers, or work out several times a day.
At about the same time a politcal operative in Washington discovered his web site and scanned the contents. He was immediately dismissed as a hack, but someone to watch.
Flashforward: 2036
The class was so engrossed in listening it took a few moments to acknowledge the ringing bell. The days were getting shorter and colder now. The students filed out quickly, shouting and talking to each other as they went while the teacher stood, trembling at the front of the class. A moment later the coughing began.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Skeptic's Arguments Leave Something to be Desired
Some years ago a Reverend by the name of Wilson Paley came up with an argument for God that went this way. He wrote:
"In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there: I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there forever: nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given.... There must have have existed, at some time and at some place or another, an artificer or artificers, who formed (the watch) for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction and designed its use....." (William Paley, Natural Theology)
Charles Darwin cast doubt on Paley's watch argument. It was known at the time that the blood supply for the retina comes out in front of the photoreceptors, and so each eye has a blind spot. This, and other supposed flaws observed in nature caused him to discount a Creator:
"Although I did not think much about the existence of a personal God until a considerably later period of my life, I will here give the vague conclusions to which I have been driven. The old argument of design in nature, as given by Paley, which formerly seemed to me so conclusive, fails now...."
The weakness of Darwin's argument can be seen if it is applied to the watch rather than the eye. Let's say the timepiece is found on a beach exactly as in Paley's illustration. It is taken to s self-proclaimed expert who, after some examination throws it out. He has seen a flaw. "The spring is weak!" He declares. This could not have been designed or made by anyone! It must be the result of random forces. This is nothing more than a collection of molecules known as 'watch'.
And this is supposed to be persuasive? What about all the other parts? The gears meshing perfectly with all the others, the tiny screws which hold the various parts together, the jewels strategically placed to reduce wear, the case being just the right size and depth, the glass front which allows the workings can be seen, markings on the face placed so they will be crossed by the hands in regular intervals; these intervals coincide with minutes and hours. There are more but I'm sure you get the point. The presence of flaws does not negate design or specific manufacture.
We know quite a bit more about the eye today than in Darwin's era. Every discovery shows with greater clarity how marvelous it is. We should also recognize that the 'flaws' Darwin suggested were only his opinion. Sure there is a blind spot in our eyes, but it is strategically placed to be in the overlapping field of the other eye. We never notice it. There may be a perfectly good explanation for the blind spot we do not yet understand. And considering the operating conditions under which the eye performs - it is an amazingly good design.
Paley's conclusion is an obervation that no skeptic has been able to refute effectively:
"Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature; with the difference, on the side of nature, of being greater or more, and that in a degree which exceeds all computation."
How true.
"In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there: I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there forever: nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given.... There must have have existed, at some time and at some place or another, an artificer or artificers, who formed (the watch) for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction and designed its use....." (William Paley, Natural Theology)
Charles Darwin cast doubt on Paley's watch argument. It was known at the time that the blood supply for the retina comes out in front of the photoreceptors, and so each eye has a blind spot. This, and other supposed flaws observed in nature caused him to discount a Creator:
"Although I did not think much about the existence of a personal God until a considerably later period of my life, I will here give the vague conclusions to which I have been driven. The old argument of design in nature, as given by Paley, which formerly seemed to me so conclusive, fails now...."
The weakness of Darwin's argument can be seen if it is applied to the watch rather than the eye. Let's say the timepiece is found on a beach exactly as in Paley's illustration. It is taken to s self-proclaimed expert who, after some examination throws it out. He has seen a flaw. "The spring is weak!" He declares. This could not have been designed or made by anyone! It must be the result of random forces. This is nothing more than a collection of molecules known as 'watch'.
And this is supposed to be persuasive? What about all the other parts? The gears meshing perfectly with all the others, the tiny screws which hold the various parts together, the jewels strategically placed to reduce wear, the case being just the right size and depth, the glass front which allows the workings can be seen, markings on the face placed so they will be crossed by the hands in regular intervals; these intervals coincide with minutes and hours. There are more but I'm sure you get the point. The presence of flaws does not negate design or specific manufacture.
We know quite a bit more about the eye today than in Darwin's era. Every discovery shows with greater clarity how marvelous it is. We should also recognize that the 'flaws' Darwin suggested were only his opinion. Sure there is a blind spot in our eyes, but it is strategically placed to be in the overlapping field of the other eye. We never notice it. There may be a perfectly good explanation for the blind spot we do not yet understand. And considering the operating conditions under which the eye performs - it is an amazingly good design.
Paley's conclusion is an obervation that no skeptic has been able to refute effectively:
"Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature; with the difference, on the side of nature, of being greater or more, and that in a degree which exceeds all computation."
How true.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Candidate of the Apocalypse
Episode 4: Year 2036 Mid October
A Long Awaited Party
School had been on hiatus for about a week now. Everyone was busy making final preparations. The crops had been harvested and stored even earlier than last year. But that was not the reason for the current activity. After the townspeople finished their last minute assignments they gathered along the westward road, waiting and talking excitedly. Around noon they heard the hooves. Voices followed. In a few minutes a parade of wagons drawn mostly by horses swept by to the shouts and applause of the townspeople. The Fall Fair had now begun.
Victorville was nestled in a valley of the San Gabriel Mountains about 50 miles from old Los Angeles. In the former days highway 15 ran through town, around the Mojave Desert and eventually to Las Vegas. The road had not disappeared, but it's once smooth pavement was cracked and broken. Teams of workers, when they could be spared from other duties, worked hard to clear and repair the damage.
Because of the mighty tectonic shifts at the end of the Great Darkness, Victorville was now one of the western most towns in California. It stood only a few miles from the new cost. From here the traveller turned either north or south. Today the road hosted a menagerie from near and far. Out of the south came a contingent from nearby Lucerne Valley. Citizens of eastward Barstow had started the day before, travelling late into the night, camping under the stars before setting out at the sun's first light. They arrived first. Later, a band from far off Bakersfield arrived. It had taken some three days for them to get here. They came up the northward road with heavily laden wagons drawn by four horses each. The various parades lasted all afternoon with stragglers continuing to arrive into the night.
As the Great Darkness came to an end, the survivors that crawled out from the wreckage realized they had to literally start over again. Now, some sixteen years later the survivors were enjoying a semblence of prosperity. Craftsmanship was coming into its own. The roads were used more often. Not by cars, mind you. The old rigs were all gone, and refineries had not been repaired as of yet. A few vehicles, those whose parts were not plundered for other use, were kept in decent repair against the day when fuel could be developed.
Festival Week. It was time to meet people and renew friendships struck from previous fairs, do a little bartering and gather news from far off places. Everything from crops to clothing was enthusiastically swapped. Victorville excelled in all manner of hand crafts. And their apple orchards were held in high regard by all.
Once the initial greetings and parties had subsided it was time for the various trades to meet with their counterparts to discuss and plan. The teacher was no different. He met with the others to talk about the art of teaching and exchange things of great value; books. It was he who originally found some books in an abandoned home and started the collection that is the school library. It was not very big. Most of the entries were of the romance and pulp fiction type, but scattered among them could be found some literary masterpieces as well as some college textbooks. He longed for some fresh material, expecially since most of his students had already read the entire library more than once.
He and the others were in general agreement about the curriculum. His was put into question only because he was discussing the conditions that led to The Great Darkness. They were concerned he might in some way be glorifying those days. Teacher shook his head. Why glorify something that led to the destruction of every nation on earth except one? No. His one and only aim was to inculcate in his students an awareness of the dangers so they could be avoided.
Evening fell and the growing darkness was filled with smoke and the smell of cooking food. Laughter, song and lively conversation continued far into the night.
A Long Awaited Party
School had been on hiatus for about a week now. Everyone was busy making final preparations. The crops had been harvested and stored even earlier than last year. But that was not the reason for the current activity. After the townspeople finished their last minute assignments they gathered along the westward road, waiting and talking excitedly. Around noon they heard the hooves. Voices followed. In a few minutes a parade of wagons drawn mostly by horses swept by to the shouts and applause of the townspeople. The Fall Fair had now begun.
Victorville was nestled in a valley of the San Gabriel Mountains about 50 miles from old Los Angeles. In the former days highway 15 ran through town, around the Mojave Desert and eventually to Las Vegas. The road had not disappeared, but it's once smooth pavement was cracked and broken. Teams of workers, when they could be spared from other duties, worked hard to clear and repair the damage.
Because of the mighty tectonic shifts at the end of the Great Darkness, Victorville was now one of the western most towns in California. It stood only a few miles from the new cost. From here the traveller turned either north or south. Today the road hosted a menagerie from near and far. Out of the south came a contingent from nearby Lucerne Valley. Citizens of eastward Barstow had started the day before, travelling late into the night, camping under the stars before setting out at the sun's first light. They arrived first. Later, a band from far off Bakersfield arrived. It had taken some three days for them to get here. They came up the northward road with heavily laden wagons drawn by four horses each. The various parades lasted all afternoon with stragglers continuing to arrive into the night.
As the Great Darkness came to an end, the survivors that crawled out from the wreckage realized they had to literally start over again. Now, some sixteen years later the survivors were enjoying a semblence of prosperity. Craftsmanship was coming into its own. The roads were used more often. Not by cars, mind you. The old rigs were all gone, and refineries had not been repaired as of yet. A few vehicles, those whose parts were not plundered for other use, were kept in decent repair against the day when fuel could be developed.
Festival Week. It was time to meet people and renew friendships struck from previous fairs, do a little bartering and gather news from far off places. Everything from crops to clothing was enthusiastically swapped. Victorville excelled in all manner of hand crafts. And their apple orchards were held in high regard by all.
Once the initial greetings and parties had subsided it was time for the various trades to meet with their counterparts to discuss and plan. The teacher was no different. He met with the others to talk about the art of teaching and exchange things of great value; books. It was he who originally found some books in an abandoned home and started the collection that is the school library. It was not very big. Most of the entries were of the romance and pulp fiction type, but scattered among them could be found some literary masterpieces as well as some college textbooks. He longed for some fresh material, expecially since most of his students had already read the entire library more than once.
He and the others were in general agreement about the curriculum. His was put into question only because he was discussing the conditions that led to The Great Darkness. They were concerned he might in some way be glorifying those days. Teacher shook his head. Why glorify something that led to the destruction of every nation on earth except one? No. His one and only aim was to inculcate in his students an awareness of the dangers so they could be avoided.
Evening fell and the growing darkness was filled with smoke and the smell of cooking food. Laughter, song and lively conversation continued far into the night.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Spiritual Capitalism
"But whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." (John 4:14)
These words were uttered by Jesus to an anonymous woman who lived in the city of Sychar, Samaria. They represent a very important truth about God's purpose. He is not content with simply providing salvation for us. He wants our spiritual lives to be rich and engaging.
Jesus pressed his disciples to come here in spite of some silent misgivings on their part. There was friction between Jews and Samaritans. The woman put voice to those concerns in her answer to Jesus' request for water. He ignored her and immediately began some metaphoric comments comparing water from the well to the Spirit of God. She didn't get it. But Jesus persisted and soon the conversation came around to the heart of the matter. The woman said: "I know the Messiah cometh-when he comes he will declare unto us all things." Jesus' reply was succinct, "I that speak to you-am He!" The truth of that statement hit the woman like a bolt of lightning.
She hurried away, past the recently returned disciples. Minutes later she was back-followed by the entire town! In that short span of time she convinced them someone special was at the well. They begged him to stay, which he did. Two days later they approached the woman and said, "Now we believe, not because of your speaking, but because we have heard for ourselves, and know that this is indeed the savior of the world."
How was it possible for this woman to create such a reaction? Because the Spirit that Jesus mentioned comes instantly into the believer with unlimited power. This is Spiritual Capitalism.
Spiritual Capitalism is the direct result of a right relationship with God. It is powered by Grace and brings freedom to our souls. What is most interesting is that there is some relationship between soul and body we of the earth-bound variety do not fully understand. God however, does. Jesus did not preach to the woman, nor did he present her with a list of things to do. He gave her no instructions and no laws. She did what came naturally out of a full heart.
And the results were electrifying.
These words were uttered by Jesus to an anonymous woman who lived in the city of Sychar, Samaria. They represent a very important truth about God's purpose. He is not content with simply providing salvation for us. He wants our spiritual lives to be rich and engaging.
Jesus pressed his disciples to come here in spite of some silent misgivings on their part. There was friction between Jews and Samaritans. The woman put voice to those concerns in her answer to Jesus' request for water. He ignored her and immediately began some metaphoric comments comparing water from the well to the Spirit of God. She didn't get it. But Jesus persisted and soon the conversation came around to the heart of the matter. The woman said: "I know the Messiah cometh-when he comes he will declare unto us all things." Jesus' reply was succinct, "I that speak to you-am He!" The truth of that statement hit the woman like a bolt of lightning.
She hurried away, past the recently returned disciples. Minutes later she was back-followed by the entire town! In that short span of time she convinced them someone special was at the well. They begged him to stay, which he did. Two days later they approached the woman and said, "Now we believe, not because of your speaking, but because we have heard for ourselves, and know that this is indeed the savior of the world."
How was it possible for this woman to create such a reaction? Because the Spirit that Jesus mentioned comes instantly into the believer with unlimited power. This is Spiritual Capitalism.
Spiritual Capitalism is the direct result of a right relationship with God. It is powered by Grace and brings freedom to our souls. What is most interesting is that there is some relationship between soul and body we of the earth-bound variety do not fully understand. God however, does. Jesus did not preach to the woman, nor did he present her with a list of things to do. He gave her no instructions and no laws. She did what came naturally out of a full heart.
And the results were electrifying.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)