<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for THE MATTRIX</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.themattrix.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.themattrix.com</link>
	<description>i didn&#039;t say it would be easy. i just said it would be the truth.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:09:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Matthew 11: Come to Jesus by Dave Pilgrim</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2012/01/matthew-11-come-to-jesus/#comment-63</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Pilgrim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:09:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=869#comment-63</guid>
		<description>I needed to hear Matthew 11 this morning.  This book always helps my daily walk.  Thank you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I needed to hear Matthew 11 this morning.  This book always helps my daily walk.  Thank you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on God Alone Is Wise: A hymn of reflection upon Romans 16:25-27 by New Jerusalem: New words to an old tune &#124; THE MATTRIX</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2010/12/god-alone-is-wise-a-hymn-of-reflection-upon-romans-1625-27/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>New Jerusalem: New words to an old tune &#124; THE MATTRIX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:22:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=477#comment-49</guid>
		<description>[...] As I prepared last year to preach the final Sunday of the year, December 26, I stumbled across some stuff at Desiring God related to the text I would be preaching &#8211; Romans 16:25-27. John Piper had finished preaching through Romans a few years earlier and I found the transcript of his sermon on this text helpful. However, what really drew my attention was a hymn he had written, inspired by those verses, to the tune of &#8220;Hark, the Herald Angels Sing.&#8221; A little inspired, I took the two verses he penned and added two of my own. You can see the lyrics here. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As I prepared last year to preach the final Sunday of the year, December 26, I stumbled across some stuff at Desiring God related to the text I would be preaching &#8211; Romans 16:25-27. John Piper had finished preaching through Romans a few years earlier and I found the transcript of his sermon on this text helpful. However, what really drew my attention was a hymn he had written, inspired by those verses, to the tune of &#8220;Hark, the Herald Angels Sing.&#8221; A little inspired, I took the two verses he penned and added two of my own. You can see the lyrics here. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Benediction Upon 2010 (Rom 16:25-27) by God Alone Is Wise: A hymn of reflection upon Romans 16:25-27 &#124; THE MATTRIX</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2010/12/a-benediction-upon-2010-rom-1625-27/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>God Alone Is Wise: A hymn of reflection upon Romans 16:25-27 &#124; THE MATTRIX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=484#comment-48</guid>
		<description>[...] just said it would be the truth.   Skip to content HomeAbout MeClicksContact MeMy Sermons          &#8592; A Benediction Upon 2010 (Rom 16:25-27) RPMing the Bible in 2011 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] just said it would be the truth.   Skip to content HomeAbout MeClicksContact MeMy Sermons          &larr; A Benediction Upon 2010 (Rom 16:25-27) RPMing the Bible in 2011 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Best teams not to win it all&#8230; plus my Super Bowl pick by Derek Larsen</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2011/02/best-teams-not-to-win-it-all-plus-my-super-bowl-pick/#comment-43</link>
		<dc:creator>Derek Larsen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 23:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=519#comment-43</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m surprised to see my &#039;98 Vikings so low -- other lists have them at 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, and 2...have yet to see them lower than 3. 
&#039;69 and &#039;09 Vikings are on a lot of lists, too. Gotta respect the curse of the Norseman. ;)
Fun read!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised to see my &#8217;98 Vikings so low &#8212; other lists have them at 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, and 2&#8230;have yet to see them lower than 3.<br />
&#8217;69 and &#8217;09 Vikings are on a lot of lists, too. Gotta respect the curse of the Norseman. <img src='http://www.themattrix.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Fun read!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Happy to be a young earther by Michael</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2011/08/happy-to-be-a-young-earther/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 03:26:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=740#comment-42</guid>
		<description>Matt, 

You basically say that you and Hamilton reject the old-earth view because you both want “to interpret science and archeology from the biblical text rather than re-interpreting the biblical text in light of science and archeology.” 

One shouldn&#039;t reject an old-earth view because &quot;we can&#039;t/shouldn&#039;t let science tell us how to interpret the bible.&quot; To do so is disingenuous given that we already let science tell us some of what Scripture can and can&#039;t say. After all, we don&#039;t believe the earth goes around the sun because Scripture tells us this. We believe it because science has proven this to be the case. What&#039;s our motivation for taking some passages of scripture as &quot;phenomenal&quot; rather than literal? It seems to me that science helps us with this question.

So, one might reject an old-earth view because she thinks there is no science in support of it (which is, in my opinion, mistaken). However, accepting, without qualification, the principle that &quot;science can&#039;t/shouldn&#039;t tell us how to interpret the bible&quot; only lands one in a case of special pleading when that same person also accepts the idea that the earth goes around the sun. It puts one in the position of saying, &quot;Science CAN tell us that the earth goes around the sun and that the language in Scripture which suggests otherwise is merely phenomenal language. But! we CAN&#039;T let science tell us that the earth is old because...insert whatever excuse you like...&quot; I&#039;ve never understood why so many Christians oppose evolution.

Lastly, you seem to suggest that theologians only accept evolution as true (or likely true) because they&#039;re trying to &quot;save (I think you meant to say, &quot;save&quot;...?) face with the academy.&quot; This seems presumptuous. Why can&#039;t they accept it because they believe there is good evidence for it? 

I would like to hear what you have to say about this. 

Btw, if you&#039;re looking for a good reads on this issue, I recommend these pieces: 
1. http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/whos-intolerance-which-indoctrination/
2. http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/choosing-between-science-and-theology/
3. http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/science-and-faith-a-word-to-the-christian-community-part-2/

Best, 
Michael</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt, </p>
<p>You basically say that you and Hamilton reject the old-earth view because you both want “to interpret science and archeology from the biblical text rather than re-interpreting the biblical text in light of science and archeology.” </p>
<p>One shouldn&#8217;t reject an old-earth view because &#8220;we can&#8217;t/shouldn&#8217;t let science tell us how to interpret the bible.&#8221; To do so is disingenuous given that we already let science tell us some of what Scripture can and can&#8217;t say. After all, we don&#8217;t believe the earth goes around the sun because Scripture tells us this. We believe it because science has proven this to be the case. What&#8217;s our motivation for taking some passages of scripture as &#8220;phenomenal&#8221; rather than literal? It seems to me that science helps us with this question.</p>
<p>So, one might reject an old-earth view because she thinks there is no science in support of it (which is, in my opinion, mistaken). However, accepting, without qualification, the principle that &#8220;science can&#8217;t/shouldn&#8217;t tell us how to interpret the bible&#8221; only lands one in a case of special pleading when that same person also accepts the idea that the earth goes around the sun. It puts one in the position of saying, &#8220;Science CAN tell us that the earth goes around the sun and that the language in Scripture which suggests otherwise is merely phenomenal language. But! we CAN&#8217;T let science tell us that the earth is old because&#8230;insert whatever excuse you like&#8230;&#8221; I&#8217;ve never understood why so many Christians oppose evolution.</p>
<p>Lastly, you seem to suggest that theologians only accept evolution as true (or likely true) because they&#8217;re trying to &#8220;save (I think you meant to say, &#8220;save&#8221;&#8230;?) face with the academy.&#8221; This seems presumptuous. Why can&#8217;t they accept it because they believe there is good evidence for it? </p>
<p>I would like to hear what you have to say about this. </p>
<p>Btw, if you&#8217;re looking for a good reads on this issue, I recommend these pieces:<br />
1. <a href="http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/whos-intolerance-which-indoctrination/" rel="nofollow">http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/whos-intolerance-which-indoctrination/</a><br />
2. <a href="http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/choosing-between-science-and-theology/" rel="nofollow">http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/choosing-between-science-and-theology/</a><br />
3. <a href="http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/science-and-faith-a-word-to-the-christian-community-part-2/" rel="nofollow">http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/science-and-faith-a-word-to-the-christian-community-part-2/</a></p>
<p>Best,<br />
Michael</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The obligatory college football season opening predictions post by Allen</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2011/09/the-obligatory-college-football-season-opening-predictions-post/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>Allen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 16:08:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=757#comment-41</guid>
		<description>GO NOLES!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>GO NOLES!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Happy to be a young earther by Dr. James Willingham</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2011/08/happy-to-be-a-young-earther/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. James Willingham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=740#comment-39</guid>
		<description>In the sixties I took notes on Henry M. Morris and John C. Whitecomb&#039;s The Genesis Flood.  I was amazed at the depth and value of what they had done.   While there were problems, their critics have not told the truth about what they did.  And the fact that the present day scientifc method has flaws in it was not generally known then.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the sixties I took notes on Henry M. Morris and John C. Whitecomb&#8217;s The Genesis Flood.  I was amazed at the depth and value of what they had done.   While there were problems, their critics have not told the truth about what they did.  And the fact that the present day scientifc method has flaws in it was not generally known then.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Book Review: &#8220;The Legacy of the King James Bible&#8221; by Leland Ryken by Matt Privett</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2011/03/book-review-the-legacy-of-the-king-james-bible-by-leland-ryken/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Privett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:35:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=657#comment-26</guid>
		<description>I moved about 2-1/2 hours north when coming from Louisville to Dayton and, while I knew it was more common up here, the prevalence of the KJV has surprised me. I have no qualms with anyone who prefers the KJV. I have serious qualms with those who prefer it while bashing other solid translations and those who prefer them. In reaction to those types of people we have a tendency to react against the KJV. Ryken does a good job of putting forth the excellent qualities of that translation while admitting that he himself does not read from it first anymore. A worthy read.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I moved about 2-1/2 hours north when coming from Louisville to Dayton and, while I knew it was more common up here, the prevalence of the KJV has surprised me. I have no qualms with anyone who prefers the KJV. I have serious qualms with those who prefer it while bashing other solid translations and those who prefer them. In reaction to those types of people we have a tendency to react against the KJV. Ryken does a good job of putting forth the excellent qualities of that translation while admitting that he himself does not read from it first anymore. A worthy read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Book Review: &#8220;The Legacy of the King James Bible&#8221; by Leland Ryken by Allen</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2011/03/book-review-the-legacy-of-the-king-james-bible-by-leland-ryken/#comment-25</link>
		<dc:creator>Allen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:19:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=657#comment-25</guid>
		<description>Sounds like a good an interesting read. Working in a book store there rarely is a day that goes by that someone doesn&#039;t say something about the superiority of the KJV and atrocity of modern translations. I can respect the guys who like the KJV for the Greek text, but just those that insist that its the only liable and oldest translation, its tempting to give a lecture. If I get the chance I&#039;ll pick it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like a good an interesting read. Working in a book store there rarely is a day that goes by that someone doesn&#8217;t say something about the superiority of the KJV and atrocity of modern translations. I can respect the guys who like the KJV for the Greek text, but just those that insist that its the only liable and oldest translation, its tempting to give a lecture. If I get the chance I&#8217;ll pick it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What happens to babies that die? by Matt Privett</title>
		<link>http://www.themattrix.com/2010/11/what-happens-to-babies-that-die/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Privett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 21:57:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themattrix.com/?p=411#comment-24</guid>
		<description>Feel free to use the article. Thanks for the comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Feel free to use the article. Thanks for the comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

