Qwantz.com Takes on the Straw Man

I recently stumbled upon a very interesting and weird comic strip called Dinosaur Comics. The graphics never change (yet still amuse me every time), only the words. One strip I saw today I felt was apropos for posting here for three reasons:

1. You learn about a logical fallacy.
2. It pokes fun at people who debate each other on the Internet. (Who, me?)
3. It achieves 1 and 2 in a funny way.

So without further ado, say hello to T-Rex, Dromiceiomimus and Utahraptor!

Security

"For many people, money is their security." I heard a sermon on the radio the other day in which the pastor uttered this phrase. It got me to thinking. His point was that God should be our security, not money. After all, what is money? It’s just another version of “stuff”. If I just have enough stuff, then I’ll be fine. That sounds ludicrous even as I type it. I say I don’t believe it, but then again…Stuff is tangible. I can see and touch the things I own. God is spiritual; my knowledge of him is not empirical. Maybe that’s why idols were so prevalent in the Old and New Testaments. You could have this tangible thing, this piece of “stuff”, sitting on the shelf. Where’s God? Oh, he’s right over there, chillin’ in the corner.

I think that’s one reason why God commands us to give away the first portion of our income, why He wants us to give sacrificially. It forces us to decide where we will find our security—God or money. I looked at the amount we’ve given away for the year a few weeks back. Let me tell you, that figure would look awfully good in my savings account, with a baby on the way. Or it could have paid off a significant portion of debt. Or I could have invested it, started a college fund or any number of other things. But instead, we gave it away. The world would tell me that I am foolish, and I would probably agree with them. But then again…We still make ends meet every month. All the bills get paid in spite of the basic mathematical rules that tell me we won’t make it this time. Most importantly, I am happy. With every tithe check, I sign away my control over my money. I sign away the pressures of worrying about having enough. I become a steward of God’s money. If He wants me to pay all of my bills, then He makes sure that happens. If He wants me to be able to provide for my family, then He can do that, too. All I have to do is "manage the estate".

“For many people, money is their security.” That’s a battle I have to fight continually. Every payday, I face the decision: Will I write the check out this time? Will I let God be my security? Or will I hold on to my money--cling to my “stuff”?

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." Matthew 6:24-25,32-33

Dangerous Mood - Keb' Mo'

This installment of Culture Corner was an obvious choice.  I had been trying to profile a song by this particular artist for a while, but I couldn't decide on which one.  As soon as I heard "Dangerous Mood", though, I knew this was the song to introduce Keb' Mo' to the Tiger.

Keb' Mo' exemplifies the slow, southern blues style pioneered by Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters, and pretty much everyone Kenny Wayne Shepherd visited back in 2004.  His skills on the guitar are amazing.  He doesn't have the sheer speed a la Chris Duarte, but every note he plays is filled with emotion--his guitar tells its own story, lyrics notwithstanding.  He also brings a deep, soulful voice to his masterful guitar playing.  He has that one-two knock-out punch that most of us only dream of possessing.  

And remember, if you enjoy this song half as much as I do, then I had twice as much fun as you.

The Big Bad Wolf

The best Christmas present I ever received was given to me by my wife last year.* It was the book Philosophical Foundations of a Christian Worldview by J.P. Moreland and William Lane Craig. (Why yes, I am a nerd; how could you tell?) It is a great introduction to philosophy by two of the best Christian thinkers today. One of the best features of the book is that each chapter contains a reference list of additional, more in-depth resources. As I was perusing these bibliographies last night, I came across http://www.philcristi.org. This is the website for the Evangelical Philosophical Society (EPS), which is "an organization of professional scholars devoted to pursuing philosophical excellence in both the church and the academy." I have not had the chance to perform and in-depth review of this website, but I have linked to it on this blog for that purpose. I have managed to read one particular article, however, which I felt was definitely blog-worthy. It is an article entitled "The Big Bad Wolf, Theism and the Foundations of Intelligent Design: A Review of Richard Dawkins', The God Delusion" by Peter S. Williams.

Although I have not read Dawkin's book, it is obvious that Williams has, and meticulously. In his lengthy review (15 pages, but I would urge you, if interested, to read all of it), Williams dissects Dawkin's arguments for atheism and naturalism and against theism and the Intelligent Design theory. Williams gives a very fair critique. Not only does he point out areas of weakness, but he also points out areas in which Dawkins is right on the money. Probably the most interesting point found in the review is Dawkin's support of Intelligent Design as a scientific theory. Of course, Dawkins does not agree with it, but he does state that if an intelligent designer did leave marks of design in the universe, such marks would be subject to scientific scrutiny in theory, if not in fact. Dawkins also correctly notes that certain scientific disciplines such as archaeology already employ the concepts of Intelligent Design--the problem comes when those concepts are introduced into biology. Williams rightly praises Dawkins for this understanding, while also critiquing him for poisoning the well by "tendentiously talking about 'Phillip E. Johnson who leads the creationist charge against Darwinism in America' and 'creationist Michael Behe.'"

Williams goes on to discuss many other aspects of the book, and for time's sake I cannot repeat them all here. His review is, however, a great read for one interested in understanding better the philosophy that lies behind modern science.

*I expect to receive a much better present this year, though.

Dihydrogen Monoxide - Penn and Teller

My mom forwarded this video to me this past week. I immediately knew that I had to post it, since it so accurately describes my own view on "saving the environment". Penn and Teller's adept social commentary shows the dangers of 1) being so consumed by a cause that the ends justify the means and 2) not educating oneself properly.

I actually did this same thing back in college. I posted a petition outside my dorm room as a joke, and I even got a few signatures--including the RD, who signed his name along with a message instructing me to take it down. (I'm pretty sure he thought it was funny, though.)

Enjoy!

Come Alive - Foo Fighters

When Jesus had crossed over again in the boat to the other side, a large crowd gathered around Him; and so He stayed by the seashore. One of the synagogue officials named Jairus came up, and on seeing Him, fell at His feet and implored Him earnestly, saying, "My little daughter is at the point of death; please come and lay Your hands on her, so that she will get well and live." And He went off with him; and a large crowd was following Him and pressing in on Him...

...They came from the house of the synagogue official, saying, "Your daughter has died; why trouble the Teacher anymore?" But Jesus, overhearing what was being spoken, said to the synagogue official, "Do not be afraid any longer, only believe." And He allowed no one to accompany Him, except Peter and James and John the brother of James. They came to the house of the synagogue official; and He saw a commotion, and people loudly weeping and wailing. And entering in, He said to them, "Why make a commotion and weep? The child has not died, but is asleep." They began laughing at Him. But putting them all out, He took along the child's father and mother and His own companions, and entered the room where the child was. Taking the child by the hand, He said to her, "Talitha kum!" (which translated means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!"). Immediately the girl got up and began to walk, for she was twelve years old. And immediately they were completely astounded.

Change? Ya Got Change, Mister?

I am fairly apolitical, but even rather apathetic souls like me notice politics every now and again, whether we want to or not. In case you forgot, there is a presidential election this fall, and I live in Denver, home to the 2008 Democratic Convention. So I pretty much can't escape politics, no matter how hard I try. (And I try hard.) So since I can't escape it, I will write a rare blog on the subject.

My curiosity was piqued when I heard on the radio that a few days ago, both Obama and McCain gave campaign speeches, in which they used the word "change" a combined 57 times. As I recall from past elections, this is not atypical. Every candidate wants "change". My amorphous curiosity began to formulate into a thought as a result of a discussion I had in class this morning on the difference between change and transformation. Change can be good or bad, directed or undirected. Change is inevitable. In some sense, it just is. Transformation, however, involves change for a purpose. It is based on values; it is always directed. Transformation doesn't just happen.

This put the current election "change propaganda" into a bit clearer light for me. Both major candidates want change. What do they want to change? Does Obama want to paint the White House pink? Does McCain want to raise taxes on llama sales? I'm sure you politics junkies out there know much more than I do, but I submit that the only major change either candidate wants is to have the word "President" before his name and not Bush's. Do they really want change, or will they keep 99% of the status quo, because the status quo brought them into power and keeps them there?

Neither candidate will question the validity of an economy that requires a "working poor" class to survive. Neither candidate will abolish the IRS and mandate that congress stop spending $13,000 for a toilet seat. Neither candidate would say, "Welfare isn't working--so we're going to phase it out and get out of the way of charities and religious trying to help the less fortunate." Neither candidate will say, "America needs to repent of its sin and return to the God of the Bible." Whether you agree with the above statements or not (and I will not allow arguing over the specifics; they are merely examples with which I myself may or may not agree), these are examples of real change.

But why would these men really challenge the system that brought them this far?