International Conference on Historic Premillennialism

The sessions from Denver Seminary's International Conference on Historic Premillennialism are now available to stream or download. All of the presentations are worth a listen, but I would especially recommend listening to Dr. Blomberg's three talks in which he presents the case for Historic Premillennialism against its three main competitors within evangelicalism: Postmillennialism, Amillennialism, and Dispensational Premillennialism. If none of those words make sense to you, make sure you start with Blomberg's first talk because you'll get a brief introduction to what in the world this stuff is even about. After each session the presenter took questions from the audience, and that was interesting too (I'm assuming they are included in the recordings, but I haven't checked to make sure yet).

There are seven sessions in all:

Plenary Speech 1: Dr. Craig Blomberg

"Why We Don't Have to Wait for the Great Commission to be Fulfilled Before Christ Returns: The Problems with Postmillennialism"

Session 1: Dr. Sung Wook Chung

"Who are the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11: An Integration of Western and Asian Proposals"

Session 2: Dr. Bruce Demarest

"What Did the Early Church Believe About the Tribulation?"

Session 3: Dr. Rick Hess

"The Seventy Sevens of Daniel 9: A Time Table for the Future?"

Session 4: Dr. Andrew Dearman

"Transformations of Jerusalem in the Bible"

Plenary Speech 2: Dr. Craig Blomberg

"The Need for a Millennium Beyond This Present Age: The Anticlimax of Amillennialism"

Plenary Speech 3: Gary Hoag (Delivered for an ailing Dr. Craig Blomberg)

"Inappropriately Privileging Israel: Why Historic Premillennialism Trumps Dispensationalism"

Swine Flu

The real cause of the swine flu epidemic.

$100 million: A visualization

I hope you're not sick of videos. I really don't want to be a "post every you-tube video you ever see" kind of guy. But I liked this one. Plus, if you're a visual learner, this will help you tremendously.

Singin' your order at Taco Bell

Here's a video that I found on a friend's blog. It's hilarious.

Blomberg lectures will be available soon!

For those of you who have been dying to hear Dr. Blomberg lecture ever since I started posting about him, you're in luck.

This weekend I'm attending a conference on campus on Historic Premillennialism, at which Dr. Blomberg is the plenary speaker (he's giving three lectures over a couple of days). The whole conference is being audio-recorded and will be posted on the Denver Seminary website at some point next week. When it's there I'll let you know where to find it.

Now, I understand that you'd have to be especially nerdy to listen to three 1.5-hour lectures on historic premillennialism (many of you probably don't even know what that means... but the first lecture will explain it to you -- I didn't really know until after that), let alone four other lectures from people you've never heard of. But if you ARE interested, it'll be available for you.

That's all.

Miss California, Perez Hilton, Same-Sex Marriage, and Unbelievable Stupidity

As far as I can tell, these are the facts: In the Miss USA pageant on Sunday night one of the two finalists, Miss California, was asked by gay celebrity/gossip blogger and judge Perez Hilton, "Vermont recently became the 4th state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think the other states should follow suit? Why or why not?" (that's pretty close to word-for-word)

Miss California responded something similar to, "In my family, the way I was raised, I think that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anyone, but that's what I believe."

Miss California did not win. She was the first runner-up to Miss North Carolina.

After the competition was over, Hilton posted a video blog on his website where he let out his anger and frustration over Miss California's response. He was "shocked" at her answer. He apparently couldn't believe that she would forget that her job is to inspire women. This morning Julie Chen of the Early Show interviewed Hilton. He said that he thought she should have been better prepared for that question. He pointed out that her job is not to be a politician. When asked how she could have answered differently without lying about her convictions, he said that she could have answered something like, "As Miss USA I would be thrilled to be a role model and an inspiration for women, and I'm glad that the states can decide that issue for themselves."

I'm quite certain that I don't even need to point out the complete and utter stupidity that has come out of Hilton in this case, but I will.

WHAT?!?!?! Are you serious, Mr. Hilton? You asked a yes or no question. Those kinds of questions have two possible answers: "yes," and "no." That's like asking, "Do you like bananas? Why or why not? What?! You don't!? Holy Cow?! How can you be so silly? Don't you realize you represent your state and you're supposed to be an inspiration to people throughout the country?"

He claimed he was upset because she shouldn't have tried to be a politician, yet his proposed answer (the one she should have given) was basically, "I'd like to avoid that question, so I'm glad it's a state issue," which is precisely the answer a politician would give.

Other critics of Miss California have expressed disappointment because she shouldn't have brought religion into her response. Every bit as stupid. Plenty of non-Christians are opposed to same-sex marriage. In fact, a majority of Californians who voted on Proposition 8 are opposed to it. If anything, she should be commended for voicing an unpopular opinion (at least, if you pay attention to the liberal news media) that corresponds to that of the state she represents.

I don't really know anything about Miss California, and this is not really the kind of story that usually comes across my radar, but our local news reported it this morning while we were getting ready to leave, and then the Early Show had the interview I mentioned above... and it got my blood boiling a little bit. I just have the hardest time being okay with rampant stupidity. That's why I wrote about it. Not because I care as much as it might seem.

Tweet tweet

I twitter. I mean, I don't really twitter often. I should say I have a twitter account. And I occasionally post "tweets" on it (though it'd be funnier if they were called "twits").

I haven't really got the twitter bug, though. I mean, I don't really understand how exciting and fun it is. Maybe I just don't have enough random things to say throughout the day. Maybe if I were a really funny person, or if I had a really interesting day-to-day life then I'd understand how amazingly fun twitter is. Instead I have to manufacture things to say. Every couple of days or so I try to think up something to post. Which is really pretty stupid. And when you sign up for Twitter, it gives you the option of having Twitter send you a text message if you haven't posted anything in 24 hours. In other words, if you go a full day without informing the world what you're up to, they'll gently nudge you with a text message that apparently says something like, "Hey, moron, you signed up for this thing where you're supposed to keep the world in the loop with what's going on in your life. It's been 24 hours since you informed us. Have you fallen off the grid? Are you in the hospital or something? What in the world is keeping you from tweeting?"

Anywho... maybe someday I'll get the hype.

Bart Ehrman

I don't know how he does it.

Ben Witherington, a prominent New Testament scholar, has a blog that I (try to) read regularly. He often writes reviews for books and movies which I often find very helpful. Lately he's been writing a review of Bart Ehrman's newest book, Jesus, Interrupted. For those of you who don't know, Ehrman is a textual critic who went to seminary and was once bound for ministry, but his studies led him to the decision that the Bible really is not trustworthy. He's now a skeptic, not a believer, and he writes prolifically about all the problems with the Bible specifically, and Christianity more generally. Think of him as a sort of Dan Brown, only with an education.

Anyway, my point isn't to talk about boring New Testament scholarship per se. I just want to point out the ridiculously long review of his book Ben Witherington has written... and I'm not sure he's done yet. So far his review has come in the form of five different "parts" (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, and part 5), and each one is super long. I began to read the first one thinking, "I'd like to hear what he has to say about this book." I read for about twenty minutes and then realized I was about 1/4 of the way through... and that was just part 1. Over the next few days he wrote parts 2-5. I don't know if he's done yet, either. It's possible that Witherington's review of the book is longer than the book itself.

If you're bored, a nerd, and have lots of time on your hands, read it! Also, here's a hilarious interview that Stephen Colbert did with Ehrman.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Bart Ehrman
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor NASA Name Contest