No Fun League

Speaking of stupid, it’s not just limited to the authorities in Boston.

The issue came to light Thursday when the Star reported that the NFL had told Fall Creek Baptist Church in Indianapolis that its plans for a Super Bowl watch party in front a big screen TV would be illegal. How dumb is this? The reason they claim is that the Nielsen ratings don’t count large gatherings. But the NFL makes an exception for sports bars.

Hmm… Could it be because the biggest advertisers are beer companies? And those companies don’t care about the exact Nielsen numbers – they know that there’s a huge audience for the NFL and they are willing to pay… I somehow doubt that the NFL would have to charge less for their ads if people watch the Super Bowl at church. Especially because they’re going to at least get some (probably a fair amount actually) of bad publicity out of this… There has to be a more satisfying solution. Or they’re just dumb. More from the AP at Sports Illustrated.

I’m worried…

That Dark Helmet was right:

Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb — Dark Helmet, *Spaceballs*

Seriously, could the authorities in Boston be any more stupid? And now they have to press on, even though they sound increasingly ridiculous:

“It’s clear the intent was to get attention by causing fear and unrest that there was a bomb in that location,” Assistant Attorney General John Grossman said at their arraignment.

theistic value of atheism

Here’s a fascinating take on the current mini-wave of atheist literature (by Dawkins, et al) that’s come out recently. The author describes a series of challenges of atheism to theism – and shows how these can be used to strengthen a theist’s position, and faith. For example:

Virtuous atheists actually have a stronger claim to real goodness than virtuous Christians, Jews, or Muslims, because there can be no taint of cupboard love in their obedience to the moral law. They do not believe in a reward for goodness, and thus must love goodness for its own sake. The challenge to religious people is that they ought to do the good as if there were no afterlife, no heaven, no reward. God does not get a reward for all the good things he does, and if we are supposed to become as much the image of God as we can, as we are told in the scriptures, then we should seek out that life of love and service that is its own reward.

The author of the piece is also the author of a book called Natural Religion. It looks a little far-out, and I have not read it, but the description sounds like an interesting insight into the different ways truth is manifest.

do as I say…?

I generally like Bono, and think that he makes many persuasive arguments when it comes to third-world indebtedness. Interestingly though, while advocating more tax money go to relieve poverty, U2 has [relocated](http://www.slate.com/id/2152580/?nav=tap3) part of its business to avoid Irish taxes. Generally I don’t see a problem with legally avoiding taxes, but in light of Bono’s activism it seems like hypocrisy to me. From the article:

>[Bono said] “Holding children to ransom for the debts of their grandparents … that’s a justice issue. Withholding life-saving medicines out of deference to the Office of Patents … that’s a justice issue.”

>And relocating your business offshore in order to avoid paying taxes to the Republic of Ireland, where poverty is [higher than in almost any other developed nation](http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/youth/republic_of_ireland)?

Bono’s hypocrisy seems even more naked when you consider that Ireland is a tax haven for artists. What U2 should do to be morally consistent is announce that they are taking all the money saved in taxes and spending it directly on aid to Africa. Doesn’t help Ireland too much, but it’s ones right to have priorities… (and right now the priority of self is painfully apparent).

Hat tip to [Instapundit](http://instapundit.com/archives/033713.php).

the ‘frozen chosen’?

The dynamics of church rise and fall have always been interesting to me. I think it’s a portal the gives a look into deeper societal trends. Apparently there’s a sort of [renaissance](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15320763/site/newsweek/) happening in mainline denominations:

>The difference between them and a conservative, evangelical megachurch is that the megachurch says, “This is the tradition and there’s one interpretation”–where tradition is like a statue in a museum that you’re never supposed to touch. In the new mainline churches, tradition is more like the clay from which you make the statue.

This sounds similar to some things that Rob Bell has said, and some of the things that are discussed in the article sound very ‘emergent’ as well. I think there is definitely a deeper tradition of scholarship to draw on in mainline protestantism (N.T. Wright is an Anglican) and in catholicism. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the future. Clearly the American religious experience is light years away from the European one. We probably will not see the death of mainlines here like Europe essentially has.

is there a wrong to write?

A recent Washington Post [article](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001475_2.html) describes the continuing decline of penmanship in society, and asks whether it is worth it or not. I think that this is an interesting question. Most writing that people will do in school, college, or business is on the computer. But is there value in learning how to write? Maybe:

>When adults are given the same composition written in good handwriting and poor handwriting, “they still give lower grades for ideation and quality of writing if the text is less legible,” [Vanderbilt University professor Steve Graham] said.

Do we hold an innate bias against looking at ugly compositions? Or maybe a learned bias? If we do, is that same bias existent when comparing a poorly-formated typed and printed document to a well-formated one?

I don’t know, but I think that people do have a natural attraction to what is beautiful.

As for me, my writing was atrocious (I devolved to a sub-legible manuscript sometime in Junior High). I wanted to improve it, so I bought [this](http://smithhand.com/index.html) remedial handwriting system a while ago, and it has helped some. I generally write cursive now, but it’s not beautiful yet. I lost steam a while ago on the system, so I need to get back on the wagon!

Fact-checking “Everything is Spiritual” 7/7/06

I’ve compiled a list of scientific errors/misunderstandings from the ‘Everything is Spiritual’ talk on 7/7/06, based on the notes that I took. I want to emphasize that I have the utmost respect for Rob and what he does. At the same time, I feel strongly about accuracy and the implications of a single voice disseminating information without critique. I think that this is inline with the spirit of his book Velvet Elvis too. So, I’m saying this to be constructive!

Impressions of ‘Everything is Spiritual’ 7/7/06

I think that Brent did a great job of capturing the essence of the talk in his review. I was going to do a complete play-by-play, but instead I just want to make a couple of comments and observations.

First off, the group of friends I traveled to Sacramento with comprised two pastors/seminary students, two people with PhDs from the Media Lab at MIT, and myself, freshly done with my Aero/Astro PhD at Stanford. So needless to say, we’re a tough crowd.

the whiteboard

For anyone who’s interested, here’s what the whiteboard looked like at the end of the “Everything is Spiritual” talk…

Brent’s review of ‘Everything is Spiritual’

What follows is a review from my friend Brent of the July 7, 2006 Everything is Spiritual talk

7-7-06

We joined the vanpool to Sacramento to hear Rob Bell speak at the Crest Theater. I appreciate his effort to take his work into a new venue, even if only the same people found their way there.

He spoke for nearly two fast hours, using a large white board and a simple set of board skills.

Rob started “In the beginning,” which is a creative place to start, even if he regularly finds himself at the foundations of everything. “In the beginning Elohim,” God, and His Spirit, are present and His Word separates light from dark, sky from water, land from sea for three days, and in the following three days brings forth sun and moon, birds and fish, animals and humans from the earth and sea and sky that He has spoken into being.