Category: Uncategorized

I saw a bit of a 50’s period piece today. It was Mona Lisa Smile, a movie about Wellesley College girls starring Julia Roberts. After seeing a few minutes of byplay between Kirsten Dunst – the defender of the traditional women’s roles – and the heroine iconoclast Roberts, I was left with the very great desire to engage in a public debate with the writers, or at least the director.

The story follows progressive art history teacher Katherine Watson (Julia Roberts), who is starting a new job at the most conservative school in the Northeast. She must battle against the wills of her students (including Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles and Maggie Gyllenhaal ) whilst proving herself to the stuffy faculty….

Ultimately, “Mona Lisa Smile” isn’t written for today’s audiences. In this liberated world we have today, preaching against the conservative 1950’s “Leave it to Beaver” attitudes seems pointless. Too many strawmen are used to illustrate the “Stepford Wives” behavior of the characters, which left me feeling uninspired.

I happen to have dated a few Wellesley girls back in the day, as did Big Chilly and a few other friends, and it’s too bad that the movie didn’t explore what actually happened in the decades after those poor oppressed girls of Wellesley were liberated. Sure, perhaps they’re only using their physics degrees to teach courses about Queer Theory in Indian Film instead of using them to estimate the weight of the pork roast after they complete their “highly charged” erotic educations – despite the furious response to the infamous Rolling Stone article, not even the President of the college dared to deny its basic accuracy – and maybe the world really doesn’t need another few hundred lawyers and social scientists, but what’s the matter with a sub-replacement birth rate anyhow. We can always import more third worlders, right? Look how well it’s working for England!

Anyhow, the movie was interesting timing considering the subject tomorrow’s column.

Cedarford tries to equate Islamic apologetics with the Christian sort:

1. Despite dozens of centuries of scientific learning, the Book describes the lessons for living life better than any other system. That is why so many believers need only follow the Book’s teachings to enrich their lives. And why so few of our true believers are top scientists. Even our famous mathematicians began agnostic and only embraced faith after their most creative years were done.

This is arguably as true as my statement, but only because life under Sharia is societally healthier and more robust than modern secular culture. See Europe for details; there’s a good reason why childless Europeans have to import Muslims in order to prop up their decaying societies and not the other way around.

2. Despite attempts by Godless scholars, truth after truth has been scientifically revealed. Journeys, events, cities…described exactly as the Book says. As time goes by, the certitude that every word of The Book is literally true rises.

Of course, I gave several historical examples and could have provided dozens more to support my assertion. This one is baseless. When science has attempted to directly challenge the Bible, it has usually turned out to be wrong. As for the most famous counterexample, it’s worth recalling that the Ptolemaic system was not Biblical, it was the modern science of its day.

Ironically, the entire ancient timeline as recorded by secular science is likely wrong because one eminent archeologist equated a certain pharoah with the wrong Biblical pharoah. So, we currently have a situation where secular archeologists are arguing that the Biblical record is mythical based on one Christian’s apparently incorrect interpretation of a single Biblical character.

3. The Book is magnificently written, with the best poetry – surely the authorship was inspired by the One God. Who said this? VD? No, just a typical Muslim commenting on the Koran.

Note that I was content to allow a secular writer or poet to make judgment, as indeed many have, imitation being the most sincere form of appreciation. The Book, on the other hand, is was laid out according to length; try that with any book of fiction or non-fiction and see how it reads. Michel Houellebecq is not the only author to be deeply disappointed with its literary quality.

TNT wants a more precise answer:

Listen, either you can offer the name of a genius (160 IQ or higher) who is a xtian, or you can’t.

So far you haven’t.

I’m not interested in debating with you how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or how long a day is, or whether domestic animals were created before humans were there to domesticate them, or whether plants were growing on earth before the sun was in existence.

I’m only interested in the existence of a genius (160 IQ or higher) who is a Christian.

I suspect the reason no one offered any names initially is because they were uncertain of your criteria. Anyhow, I know at least two. The 31st Marine Corps Commandant General Charles C. Krulak and my friend and occasional partner-in-crime Big Chilly. Both have IQ’s north of 160 and both are devout Christians. And while I have never had occasion to ask Dr. Gregory Boyd, the author of LETTERS FROM A SKEPTIC and pastor at Woodland Hills Church, about his IQ, he likely possesses one that meets your requirements. I will ask him the next time I speak with him.

I suspect the problem is that while one often knows that an acquaintance is intelligent, one may not know precisely how intelligent. Unfortunately, as you rightly suspected, I’m on the south side of 160 myself. This gives Big Chilly, who qualifies for 999, no end of amusement. “Do you need me to explain that to you?” However, there are one or two blog regulars here, one definitely a Christian, who I suspect are 160-plus.

As for the historical examples with whom you take issue, I don’t see how it’s possible to dismiss Newton given his writings and interest in eschatology. He may not have been, as you say, a Biblethumper, but that is no requirement to be a follower of Jesus Christ. Would you consider me to be a Biblethumper? I don’t think so, but I claim to be a Christian nevertheless.

TNT raises a solid point:

Anyone who can believe the bible is anything but a bad book of poetry can believe absolutely ANYTHING. I once challenged some xtians on a blog to provide evidence of a modern xtian genius – my point being that they are exceedingly rare – if not non-existent….

For all of the sense that Vox makes in discussion of most subjects, I have not resolved this one. How can Vox (or any intelligent xtian) truly believe the Noah’s ark fable, Jonah’s 3 day bath in stomach acid (with nary a rash), the trip Ezekiel made on the flying, burning chariot, (pulled by a flaming, flying horse), or the silliness of Genesis, where the plants on earth were burning for eons before the sun was created?

First, let me point out that for over two decades, I felt exactly as TNT did. For the most part, the Christians I knew were anti-intellectual idealogues, interested only in that which confirmed their beliefs. I was too young, naive and surrounded by Christians to realize that this is the normal state of all humanity at the time.

First, true geniuses of any kind are extremely rare. But considering who the Nobel Laureates have been over the last thirty years, I doubt you’d find more than one or two geniuses in the lot. I can only speak for my discipline, economics, and I can assure you that most of the prize winners in economics are dedicated to economic theories that are not only demonstrably incorrect, but require far more blind faith than the Bible ever could.

The truths of the Bible that I found ultimately convincing were two-fold. One, it stunned me then and it stuns me still that the life advice from an ancient book should prove to be markedly superior to that of experts operating with the benefit of two thousand years of additional human experience and the scientific method. The very notion sounds absurd, and yet anyone who is paying attention well knows that it is true.

Second, as an armchair historian, it is fascinating to see how the scientific “proofs” that the Bible is errant have continued to fall by the wayside over the years. Once, it was common to cite the mythical Assyrians as an obvious falsehood, now you can read the chronicles of their kings on the Internet, a people as psychotically savage as the Bible had reported. Then it was the nonexistent Hittites, until the excavations at Tel-Amarna chronicled their war with Egpyt which climaxed with the Battle of Kadesh.

We know so little about that which surrounds us – we still can’t even find 90 percent of it – that I consider the assumption that we have not yet understood or been able to detect the supernatural to be far more logical than to assume that it does not exist. I never, ever, expected to see clones in my lifetime, and yet I can drop $50k and get my dog cloned.

What it boils down to is intellectual humility and faith, I suppose. The Bible describes the world that I see and understand much better than do scientists who argue that life is accidental and morality does not exist with one breath then make morality-based pleas to save the environment with the very next. Perhaps some of them are geniuses, I don’t know. I do know, however, that one should never make the mistake of confusing intelligence for wisdom.

One final note. The Bible is masterfully written. Ask any accomplished writer or poet. It is also demonstrably solid historical document. On those grounds alone, it would be a book well worth respecting, regardless of your religious faith.

Jesus Freak Larry reviews THE WAR IN HEAVEN on Amazon:

AN ABOMINATION

I’ve never seen a bigger load of crap than this before. This author has no spritual sense at all. He wrote about some low-life 16-year-old kid is supposed to be the “key” to storming the Gates of Heaven. First of all the Gates of Heaven would be guarded better than anything else and it is. Second of all JESUS CHRIST is the only key to Heaven. And also this man can’t possibly claim to be a “Christian” if he writes about the Gates of Heaven being stormed and he also uses quotes from some evil Heavy-Metal rock bands. Parents I strongly suggest you don’t allow your children read this if you want them to keep on the right path. That’s all I have to say.

I hope this guy hasn’t tried to read the new Harry Potter. His head might explode right on the spot. And that crazy Lewis guy – he said animals can talk and EVERYONE knows they don’t. In case you’re wondering why some Christian writers seem strangely determined to hide all signs of their faith deep within their fiction where almost no one can detect it, this sort of thing is one of the reasons.

Anyhow, if you’ve read TWIH or TWIS and haven’t reviewed them yet on Amazon, I’d encourage you to do so. It really does help, as publishers do check out these things. And be honest; there’s nothing wrong with criticism as long as it’s got some foundation in sanity and addresses the text, not the author.

Just in case you’re interested, THE WRATH OF ANGELS is still on for publication by Pocket Books next spring, and I may have an announcement about a new fantasy trilogy that will be published by a new publisher in the next month or so.

From Mogambo:

John Crudele of The New York Post reports that “American Auto Association calculates that gasoline prices have risen 21.5% since this same time last year. But the government swears gas prices are only 6.9% higher over the year.” What a discrepancy! The upshot is “That little trick alone saved the CPI from being 0.53% points higher.”

And it is not just about gas, as he goes on to write, “Despite all you’ve read, the government thinks housing is only 2.2% higher over the past year. Others, including the National Association of Realtors, calculate that housing is up at least 12.5%.”

In short, your government has screwed things up royally, but instead of fixing the problems they caused, they prefer to lie about it.

There’s really no reason to pay attention to the mainstream economists any more. Their analytical efforts are so hopelessly compromised by the increasingly delusional statistical data that even if their models were perfect – which they aren’t – the garbage being fed into them guarantees garbage coming out on the other end.

Jason Whitlock takes on 30 years of feminist propaganda:

Why do I bring this up?

Because for a long time, the myth has existed that female sports reporters are able to conduct themselves inside a male team’s locker room more professionally than men could do inside a women’s locker room. And that’s stupid.

I repeat: A woman’s sexual moral values can be just as low as a man’s.

Male reporters, generally speaking, don’t have unfettered access to women’s locker rooms. The reason is simple and obvious: For the most part, we’re perverted scum. We couldn’t handle it. Turned loose inside a locker room with Serena and Venus Williams and Maria Sharapova and Anna Kournikova bouncing in and out of showers … well, deadlines would be missed. All hell would break loose.

Women don’t belong in male locker rooms.

This should be interesting. He’s absolutely right, of course. And why is it that men aren’t allowed in women’s locker rooms anyhow? Surely they can be just as professional as women, I mean, to suggest otherwise would be sexist!

Peter King writes on Sports Illustrated:

Evidently Mike Shanahan Is A Learned Man

Books spotted on the bookshelf in coach Mike Shanahan’s office:

1. Tuesdays with Morrie, by Mitch Albom.

2. Purpose-Driven Life, by Rick Walker.

3. Seabiscuit, by Laura Hillenbrand.

4. Plan of Attack, by Bob Woodward.

5. A Good Walk Spoiled, by John Feinstein.

6. Finding the Winning Edge, by Bill Walsh.

7. The Winner Within, by Pat Riley.

“What did you think of ‘Seabiscuit’?” I ask.

“Haven’t read it,” Shanahan says. “Saw the movie. Really liked it.”

“You’ve got to read the book,” I say. “It’s better. One of the best sports books ever.”

I am proud to say that I have none of these books and have read none of them, as with the exception of Seabiscuit they all strike me as books for the semiliterate. Someone did give me a Mitch Albom book once, but I managed to pass it off on someone else who was actually interested in it.

To think that a man once had to read and write Latin and Greek to be considered learned. This is progress?

Yet another government theft is justified:

In a twist on this summer’s Supreme Court decision allowing a Connecticut city to seize private land and turn it over to developers, a New Jersey appeals panel has OK’d the taking of property from developers to assure the area remains as open space.

The decision by the three-judge state court, handed down Tuesday, allows the township of Mount Laurel, N.J., to take a 16-acre tract from developer Michael Procacci and his company, Mipro Homes, which planned to build 23 homes on the land.

So, if you remember the reasoning behind the Kelo case, government needs to be able to steal land from private land owners in order to collect more taxes. But the appeals panel is ensuring that a government can steal land because it wants to collect fewer taxes.

The central point has nothing to do with the various reasonings, of course. Those are just rationalizations meant to obscure the fact that the courts – government agencies – are trying to make sure that a government can do whatever it wants whenever it wants, for whatever reason.

This is not your grandfather’s America.

Frank Gaffney writes on NRO:

In fact, we have no choice but to fight the Islamofascists with every means at our disposal. This will require, among other things, engaging the American people far more fully in the war effort than they have been to date. In fact, it is time to put the country on a war footing. Elements of such an approach should include the following:

In fact, we have a plethora of choices, moron. This sort of sloppy rhetoric annoys the smack out of me. Notice how “every means at our disposal” not only doesn’t include turning Saudi Arabia into a glass desert, but barely has anything to do with the prosecution of the war itself.

Here’s this Clausewitz reincarnate’s suggestions, seriously:

Support the troops.

Oh, that will make ALL the difference in the world. People all around the country are supporting them, as anyone who follows the milblogs knows.

Help secure the homeland.

No, this isn’t what you think. In neocon parlance, “helping secure the homeland” means interpreting the sacrfice your civil liberties as your civic duty and spying on your neighbor.

Enhance energy security.

I thought the war WASN’T about oil. And if dependence on Saudi oil is one of the keys to winning the struggle, isn’t the close, manly friendship between George Delano and King Abdullah indicative of a rather more serious problem?

Stop underwriting terror.

Strangely, Frank doesn’t bring up the billions of dollars sent directly to terrorist organizations and terror-sponsoring states.

And that’s it. Do those four things and we’ll win… it’s a good thing this is only a struggle because with yahoos like this running things, we are so going to lose….