The (Unadjusted) Gospel

I just heard that a bunch of pastors and theologians—Baptists and Calvinists by the look of them—met together this week to reaffirm the Gospel.  I read through the site, but couldn’t find anything that tells me what exactly they were affirming, which is actually kind of surprising, although I’m not surprised at much anymore.

Coincidentally, this morning a friend sent me a link to the this:

Lutheran Toast
A Lutheran Toast

It seemed oddly appropriate.

On the Impossibility of Mulltiple Universes and Realities

Since LOST, Fringe and Star Trek (not to mention Obamacare) have everybody talking about multiple universes and realities, I thought this post by Cornelius Hunter was timely (and besides, it’s a good read).

It got me thinking:  If there are universes out there where every potentiality is a reality, then there must be universes where evolution happened the way “science” believes it did.  There are also universes, then, where it didn’t.  There must be universes, then, where there is not only a God, but a God which created the world in 6 days (and others in which He created the world in six “periods” of indeterminate length).

I, however, fail to accept that there are any universes in which Calvinism is true; the premise of multiverse theory is that the realities must have potentiality in the original universe. (It’s a joke … think about it.)

If multiverse theory is correct, this means that:

  • Ours may not be the original universe, but a “splinter” reality only moments old. How would we know?
  • If the God of one universe is, in fact, infinite, omnipotent and omnipresent, then He is outside of all universes.
  • If an omnipotent God exists in one universe, then He must exist in all universes.
  • Atheism, then, is not a potential reality in any universe.
  • There are no universes in which God does not exist.
  • If there is a God in one universe, the potential for universes in which evolution and atheism are true ceases to exist.
  • Multiverse theory would seem to collapse with the potential that God exists.
  • Therefore, it seems that multiverse theory has failed, leaving only this universe in which God exists.

So, in the event that multiverse theory is correct, multiverse theory is impossible.

It would seem, that multiverse theory is either incorrect, or impossible.  What does this mean for LOST, Fringe and Star Trek?

The Post Post

Today I was reading yet another blog post talking about post-evangelical Christianity, and I realized just how sick I am of things being “post.”    All the time I’m hearing post-Christian, post-evangelical, post-conservative, postmodern, post-American, postnasal – I mean, what’s up with that?  It’s ridiculous.  Seriously, why does everything have to be post-something-else?  Why can’t it simply be what it is?  It’s a pain in the posterior; it’s enough to make a person go postal.

“Post,” apparently, is the  préfixe du jour, which is kind of ironic when you think that it’s a prefix that means “comes after.”  But, that’s the wonder of the English language.  Words – especially stupid words – do seem to come in and out of vogue; someone will use an odd word, and all of a sudden everyone is using it.  Years ago, I remember such a word was “diametrically,”  as in “diametrically opposed.”  Like “post,” it’s a word that really didn’t have to be used. I mean, how opposed to something do you really have to be? But, for a few years it seemed that no one was merely opposed to something, everyone was “diametrically opposed.”  And, like “post,” it didn’t really say anything about what anyone was, just what they weren’t.

If something is “post,” then it’s over; it no longer exists, it’s dead. Or, worse than that, it’s postmortem, after dead.  Dead is what it is.  If you’re worried about after dead, then you’ve got problems; post-traumatic stress, perhaps.

Being post is a lot like being a-something, like asymmetric, or perhaps asymptomatic.  Or an atheist, which is also all the rage now.  One of the reasons, I think, that atheists have such a hard time organizing is that they aren’t necessarily for anything, and they don’t necessarily have any shared beliefs; what they have is a shared unbelief.  Which, I guess, is a lot like being post something. The posts also have a hard time organizing, because, let’s face it, they’re simply too late.  They’re not only not for something, they’ve missed it – the ship has already sailed.

Why aren’t there any pre-anythings?  Wouldn’t it better to be a little early, rather than being late, or simply being not?   I guess that’s what prophets are – those who are pre-something.  Prophets are good people to have around – even the name is positive: pro-phet.  We don’t seem to have any of those guys around anymore. But, that’s a subject for another post.

I’m tired of all the posts; in fact, I’m against them.  I guess you could say I’m apostalic, railing against the posts. So, don’t talk to me about postmodernism or postevangelicalism.  If you are too late to be something, I don’t want to hear about it.

I am “The Architect”

I am “The Architect” – at least according to Carl Jung and Isabel Myers-Briggs.  I ran across an online Jung Typology Test, aka the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Assessment.  Being the test I took this time didn’t refer to Myers-Briggs, I’m guessing it’s a cheap imitation.  However, my results were consistent with one I took a dozen years ago.

I am, still, an INTP, along with folks like Descartes, Pascal, William James, Einstein, Bob Newhart and Rick Moranis.  We “architects” are, according to the site, only 1% of the overall population, which makes us a scarce resource, and therefore more valuable than the average person.  It also makes us a minority, which means we should be getting special treatment.  The fact that neither of these are true means that either the information is questionable, or that the public needs to be better educated. The fact that I am analyzing this proves that I am indeed an INTP.

Someone by the name of Joe Butt has written a profile of the INTP personality type, in which he writes

INTPs are relatively easy-going and amenable to almost anything until their principles are violated, about which they may become outspoken and inflexible. They prefer to return, however, to a reserved albeit benign ambiance, not wishing to make spectacles of themselves.

A major concern for INTPs is the haunting sense of impending failure. …

Anyone who’s read this blog or my comments on other blogs knows that this is pure crap, but what else could you expect from someone named Joe Butt.  He also writes

INTPs and Logic — One of the tipoffs that a person is an INTP is her obsession with logical correctness. Errors are not often due to poor logic — apparent faux pas in reasoning are usually a result of overlooking details or of incorrect context.

Of course, he’s provided absolutely no support for this conclusion, an obvious but poor attempt at an argument from authority.  And listen to this:

Knowing the Truth is enough for INTPs; the knowledge that this truth can (or could) be demonstrated is sufficient to satisfy the knower. “Cogito, ergo sum” expresses this prime directive quite succinctly.

How arrogant.  I really don’t need him to tell me anything.  Seriously…

Someone who is not named “Butt” has written a nicer overview of the INTP, otherwise known as the architect:

For Architects, the world exists primarily to be analyzed, understood, explained – and re-designed. External reality in itself is unimportant, little more than raw material to be organized into structural models. What is important for Architects is that they grasp fundamental principles and natural laws, and that their designs are elegant, that is, efficient and coherent.

Architects are rare – maybe one percent of the population – and show the greatest precision in thought and speech of all the types. They tend to see distinctions and inconsistencies instantaneously, and can detect contradictions no matter when or where they were made. It is difficult for an Architect to listen to nonsense, even in a casual conversation, without pointing out the speaker’s error. And in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage. Architects regard all discussions as a search for understanding, and believe their function is to eliminate inconsistencies, which can make communication with them an uncomfortable experience for many.

Ruthless pragmatists about ideas, and insatiably curious, Architects are driven to find the most efficient means to their ends, and they will learn in any manner and degree they can. They will listen to amateurs if their ideas are useful, and will ignore the experts if theirs are not. Authority derived from office, credential, or celebrity does not impress them. Architects are interested only in what make sense, and thus only statements that are consistent and coherent carry any weight with them.

Okay, I seriously think I need to rename this blog, except that people would think I liked to design buildings, or that it was a reference to the character in The Matrix.  I’m not quite that delusional.

Seriously, I do think that the Myers-Briggs test is pretty accurate in many things, and this information can be useful.  It can also be used to justify behavior, which it shouldn’t.  I’ve always thought that it was most important in pointing out where you were most likely to fail… but, that’s probably just that impending sense of failure talking.

INTPs and Logic — One of the tipoffs that a person is an INTP is her obsession with logical correctness. Errors are not often due to poor logic — apparent faux pas in reasoning are usually a result of overlooking details or of incorrect context.