To Mike the Canadian Atheist: That Rock is Dead

* Obama Ascended in Corrupt Illinois: without spot or blemish. And no, of course he didn't talk to Democratic Governor Blagojevich about Obama's Senate replacement! Didn't you know that? Per ABC News' Jake Tapper, "Asked what contact he'd had with the governor's office about his replacement in the Senate, President-elect Obama today said "I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening."  But on November 23, 2008, his senior adviser David Axelrod appeared on Fox News Chicago and said something quite different... "I know he's talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them." And the Fox News Chicago video showing the quote "is no longer available" says the ABC site.

* BEL's Producer Ray Graybar: calls in to talk about one of the BEL highlights for the year!

* That Rock is Dead: Bob Enyart replies to a Canadian atheist.

Atheist Mike: "Hey Bob, is your own example of a rock living or dead? And yes or no, have you stopped murdering kittens yet?"

My answer:

* a rock is not living.
* a rock that is a fossil is dead in the most common definition of the word (Webster's 1st def: no longer alive)
* a typical rock (not a fossil) is inanimate and thus dead (in Webster's 3rd def: inanimate, not endowed with life)
* a rock is "dead" by other usages: dead as a doornail, devoid of life, etc.

Mike, I realize that you thought my question, is a rock alive or dead, was somehow difficult to answer because it was not previously alive, but that would be the case if I were acting like a lawyer and being a pain in the neck and didn't want to help further the discussion. So, if someone asks me if a rock is living or dead, as an analogy to determine if a fetus is living or dead, I would say: the rock is not living; a fetus, amoeba, bacteria, plant, is alive. You see, I think this is easy.

You ask: have I stopped murdering kittens, yes or no. I'll demonstrate how easy it is to handle even biased questions if one is not trying to be evasive nor afraid of the truth.

Have I stopped murdering kittens? I answer:
No. Then add, as Ilana could have clarified any answer she gave: I never started. And besides, you can murder a person, but not a tomato, a fly, nor an animal. You can kill them, because they are living. You can't murder them, because they're not people. And while we're at it, you can't even kill a rock, because it's not alive, but you can break it.

Atheist: "Trying to bait people into accepting the assumptions present in your loaded questions is dishonest and antithetical to actual debate. I'm not saying I agree with this woman, but at least she wasn't stupid enough to fall for Bob's cheap tricks."

Mike, I could better reply to this if you told be what you think my hidden assumptions are. My rather obvious argument is that you can't win an objective debate about whether it should be legal to terminate it until you explain what "it" is; and if you are talking about intentionally terminating a fetus, it would be helpful if you can say what a fetus is, and answer whether it is alive or not. What are the hidden assumptions behind this?

Atheist: "On another note...Bob has such a slimy, smug, indirect style of speaking, it baffles me how this small group of people finds him charismatic enough to be brainwashed into vile things. Most cult leaders are at least charming."

Mike, this is the part of your criticism that seems most plausible. Of course, when people strongly disagree with one another, they tend (you do, and I do) to see the worst in the other person. On the other hand, my flesh (pride, selfishness) can certainly make me smug, and I need to see that when it happens, and guard against it. Regarding your accusation of me using an "indirect style of speaking," yikes! Of the thousands of insults heaped on me over 17 years on the air, I think that's the first I've heard of this! Quite a few of my opponents would say the exact opposite, and in fact we've joked over the years that the media never has to misquote me to make me look bad: they just repeat what I say, and it's so far out of their worldview, that it usually comes across worse than something they could make up. Indirect? Huh.

Again Mike, call the show sometime!

-Bob Enyart

BEL Indiana Seminars: Bob Enyart is coming to Indiana, Goshen in the evening of Jan. 29th and Indianapolis on Saturday January 31st, to present a brand new BEL Seminar titled Hermeneutics: Tools for Studying the Bible. Learn how to use tools of interpretation as you study the Bible. And as importantly, Bob will discuss the principles involved for prioritizing these hermeneutics and how to decide which tool to use in which instance. You'll love it! Click for more info and to register please call 1-800-8Enyart!

Today's Resource: When you get Michael and Debi Pearl's best-selling short book, To Train Up a Child, from BEL, you For many years now, whenever anyone orders this book from BEL, we send with it an audio-taped message from Bob Enyart titled Tyrant Dad!