2009-02-05

White points to a new book by Ehrman which supposedly will reveal the contradictions in the Bible. White writes, "does anyone else find the trajectory of his works over the past few years to be rather...interesting? For someone who was absolutely dead set against debating a theological topic, since theology and history are separate things, and Ehrman's conclusions about theology are just "his opinion," why are his last two titles so very...theological?" Ehrman Redux

From Challies: Here is a list of the ten nations where Christians face the most severe persecution. Not surprisingly, more than half of them are predominantly Muslim. '09 Persecution List

Phillips points to a statement where Jimmy Carter Carter Hamas with Christians who (unlike Carter) actually believe in the Bible. "He equates murderous cultists who think it virtuous personally to murder individual Jews and all Jews so as to wipe out the nation, with Christians who love the Jew named Jesus, believe in the Torah (including Deuteronomy 18:15-22), and (unlike Carter) actually believe in all of the Bible." Worse yet, Carter is speaking to an unbelieving Jew.  Former President Jimmy Carter, may be growing older, but

Hays has some thoughts on just-war theory: He shows how the criterion of the immunity of non-combatants, if held absolutely, results in incoherence. This principle prevents any action in not only the case of terrorists using civilians as human shields, but also in the case where they threaten their own population in the event of retaliation. In other words, this would mean that it is immoral for a nation to defend itself, since all the terrorists have to do is threaten their own people to make it immoral. In the interests of sparing the lives of enemy civilians, you expose your own civilians to annihilation. But why should one set of civilians be totally immune while another set is subject to total annihilation, promoting both genocide and the immunity of noncombatants? The enemy could murder your people with impunity in this case. The terrorists are twice guilty: a) It’s blameworthy for the original provocation (an unprovoked attack). b) It’s also blameworthy for exposing its civilians to needless harm by using them as human shields. Moreover, if just-war theory entails unilateral disarmament, then just-war theory is self-contradictory, for just-war theory was predicated on the right of self-defense. Aquinas also articulated the double effect doctrine, where your intention isn't to kill but to defend with what is necessary, and this vindicates the act of self-defence. Moral extortion in time of war

Hays writes about how Obama has a narrow window of opportunity to succeed, since congressional elections are in two years. That and he's committed himself to difficult tasks, like closing GITMO in a year, with no where to put detainees. Obama's narrow window of opportunity

"A senior adviser to Iran’s president says dialogue with the US will succeed only if the Obama administration accepts Tehran’s right to have a nuclear programme." http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6c33dd74-f2eb-11dd-abe6-0000779fd2ac.html

1.1 Trillion is a lot. And it might not help. How Much Is $1.1 Trillion-