Do Christians need to obey Old Testament laws?

I found this question via FriendlyAtheist, who shared this big pdf file (poster size, but only 1.6Mb), with a list of questions, each answered in various ways in different parts of the Bible, and a graphic showing links between the different areas where the different answers occur.. To my title question, the poster shows:

gen 17:19, exo 12:14, 17, 24, lev 23:14, 21, 31, deut 4:8-9, 7:9, 11:1, 11:26-28, 1chron 16:15, ps 119:151-2, 119:160, mal 4:4, mat 5:18-19, lk 16:17 ≠ lk 16:16, rom 6:14, 7:4, 6, 10:4, 2cor 3:14, gal 3:13, 3:24-25, 5:18, eph 2:15, col 2:14
Those of us who don't know all the verses need a convenient way to look them up, like http://bible.cc I've linked two of the sample verses, above. I like the parallel view, showing each verse in 15 popular English Bible translations.

Continue ReadingDo Christians need to obey Old Testament laws?

NOMA is a Myth?

A FaceBook friend just shared a post called The Myth of Separate Magisteria that argues that Steven Jay Gould's premise of Non-Overlapping Magisteria is flawed. He argues,

"One might as well say that conflict arises between men and women only when they stray onto each other’s territories and stir up trouble. Science produces discoveries that challenge long-held beliefs (not only religious ones) based on revelation rather than evidence, and the religious must decide whether to battle or accommodate secular knowledge if it contradicts their teachings.

I usually claim NOMA when pressed on whether Science can disprove God. The realms of revelation vs. evidence can be kept separate as long as religion keeps stepping back as verifiable research claims ever more territory. Scientific understanding will keep stepping on religions skirts until the faithful stick to claims that can only be held on faith, and stop claiming "truth" about things for which there is contradictory evidence. God is a fuzzy and non-falsifiable idea. Science will never disprove God. But it has disproved most of what the Bible claims about God's involvement in nature, the Earth, and the Universe. So these ways of looking at the universe do overlap, until such time as the weaker one bows out of the territory. As with the flat Earth, the Sin theory of gravity, the God's Pillars principle of Earthquakes, God's Wrath principle of extreme weather, the Geocentric universe, the Young Earth, and so on.

Continue ReadingNOMA is a Myth?

Getting Science Under Control

After the election of 2008, we fans of the rational and provable had high hopes that government may give as much credence to the scientific process and conclusions as to the disproved aspects of philosophies promulgated by churches and industry shills. We watched with waning hope as a series of attempts to honor that ideal got watered down. But at least it was an improvement. But the 2010 election quickly reveals a backlash. Those whose cherished misunderstandings had been disrespected for the last couple of years now will have their day. As Phil Plait says, Energy and science in America are in big, big trouble. He begins,

"With the elections last week, the Republicans took over the House once again. The list of things this means is long and troubling, but the most troubling to me come in the forms of two Texas far-right Republicans: Congressmen Ralph Hall and Joe Barton."

He goes on to explain why. It comes down to them being proven representatives for Young Earth and fossil fuel interests, doing whatever they can to scuttle actual science by any means necessary. Especially where the science contradicts their pet ideas. Barton has published articles supporting climate change denialism. His main contributors are the extraction industries. Hall has used parliamentary tricks to attempt to scuttle funding for basic research. The Democrats offered to compromised by cutting funding, and he refused in hopes that the whole bill would fail. It passed. Then Hall publicly called Democrats on the carpet for using tricks to fatten the bill by the amount that they offered to cut. The Proxmire spirit lives on.

Continue ReadingGetting Science Under Control

Tea Party: Emerging Force, or Farce?

I stumbled onto this new book, Underdogma. Reviewers say

“Underdogma is the first great Tea Party book. All Tea Party Patriots should read Underdogma.”

and

“Underdogma is the Rosetta Stone for our time’s most portentous puzzle: Why do so many in this country — including some in leadership positions — abhor our national greatness and seek to diminish it at every turn?"

The premise is basically that America is doomed by naysayers, and the roots go back the the Garden of Eden. As long as those wacko liberals insist on not-bullying the rest of the world, and allowing the have-nots to have a say in policy, we are doomed. So I wonder if this is truly the way those people think, or is this a political version of Poe's Law? Will they soon declare a political party of tea? Or will they simply continue to subvert conservatism with this toxic pablum, as they did in the recent election?

Continue ReadingTea Party: Emerging Force, or Farce?

How to Frame Republican Fiduciary Behavior

I wouldn't mind the "Tax and Spend" label on Democrats, if only the Democrats were capable of framing the apparent policy of Republicans: They are the "Dine and Dash" party. They come into office, most recently with a budget surplus. They cut taxes for those most able to pay, strip away regulations, and spend ridiculously. They finally get the boot, leaving huge debts. Then they castigate Democrats for proposing methods of cleaning up the mess, and complain that they failed before programs are even expected to show results. So the next time you hear "Tax and Spend", reply with, "As opposed to Dine and Dash?"

Continue ReadingHow to Frame Republican Fiduciary Behavior