UFC 59: Reality Check

UFC 59 is tonight and I can't wait. This one will draw a record crowd, as it takes place at Arrowhead Pond in Anaheim, CA. This is the first UFC in California, since the state just recently lifted its ban on MMA events being held there.

The crowd will be huge; so will the fights. Here are my picks.

1. Tim Sylvia vs. Andrei Arlovski

This is the main event, a heavyweight title match between the current champ (Arlovski) and a hungry contender in Sylvia. These two fought in February 2005 also, with Arlovski making it look easy with a submission win. I think it'll be a different story this go around. Sylvia is in his best shape ever and has a renewed striking arsenal. He has flexibility, speed, and savvy that he didn't have before he began training with Billy Rush. Arlovski is no doubt awesome, but everyone is beatable. This guy has had a long winning streak, but it's gotta end some time. I take Sylvia by second round knockout.

2. Tito Ortiz vs. Forrest Griffin

This is the fight I'm most anticipating. We'll see Griffin take on his first big-time opponent since his appearance on The Ultimate Fighter show. Ortiz makes a historic comeback, as he's been away from the company for about a year. I think this will be a far closer fight than most will admit. Griffin has better hands than Ortiz and I think is equal in size and strength. I even give the submission skills advantage to Griffin. The problem is Tito's takedowns. Most fighters can't stop him from taking them down and pounding on them. Forrest will battle fiercely, but I don't think he'll be able to counteract Tito fully. I'll pick Ortiz by decision.

3. Nick Diaz vs. Sean Sherk

Another great fight with two awesome fighters. Sherk is a champion wrestler with great strength and conditioning. Diaz is well-rounded: a good boxer and great at jiu-jitsu. Diaz will be vulnerable to Sherk's takedowns, but I have a feeling he'll be able to pull the fight out despite that. His back is against the wall with two straight losses recently. He has too much heart and fighting IQ to let this one go. I think he'll overtake Sherk with his superior submission ability. Diaz by submission in the 3rd.

4. Evan Tanner vs. Justin Levens

An interesting bout with newcomer Levens against the renowned veteran Tanner. Tanner, like Diaz above, is in a tough spot. He's lost two in a row and needs this to stay in the UFC ranks. He's got great grappling and submissions with average standup. Levens apparently is a ground-n-pound guy mainly who has a great record with some great fights under his belt. I think Levens's first time in the Octagon will be too nerve-wracking though. Those jitters along with Tanner's skills and experience will be overwhelming. Tanner by ref stoppage, 2nd round.

5. David Terrell vs. Scott Smith

This is like the Tanner-Levens fight in that it showcases a newcomer in Smith, who actually defeated Levens for the WEC light heavyweight belt recently. Smith has great power in his hands and can defend submissions very well. Terrell is an awesome jiu-jitsu practitioner with some good standup (especially kicks). This is a bit of toss-up. But Terrell's previous appearance in the Octagon seemed to indicate he's psyched out on the big stage. He'll get beat up by Smith's superior hands. Smith by knockout in Round 2.

6. Jason Lambert vs. Terry Martin

Martin is undefeated except for a fluke loss against James Irvin in his first UFC appearance. He's a great wrestler with good boxing. Lambert is an excellent technician who also has good hands and his generally well-rounded. I haven't seen much of either of these guys fight, but from what I hear, I'll take Lambert by decision.

7. Karo Pariysan vs. Nick Thompson

Parisyan is a judo great who brings an unorthodox style of judo throws, submissions, and ground-n-pound to the Octagon. It always seems like he should get beaten, but he always ends up with wins and is in fact a top 10 fighter at welterweight. Thompson is allegedly a tough fighter who I believe is well rounded, though I've never seen him fight. I'll take Pariysan by decision.

8. Pe de Pano vs. Jeff Monson

These two are rivals from their professional grappling days. Apparently, they vastly dislike one another. Monson is a very good wrestler with great strength. He has okay standup and a very good chin (as shown against Chuck Liddell). Pe de Pano is a jiu-jitsu expert with awesome submissions. He also showed some ground-n-pound skills against Frank Mir. Ultimately, I think Monson will beat him with a mix of punches on the feet and pounding/grappling on the ground. Monson by ref stoppage, 3rd round.

9. Thiago Alves vs. Derrick Noble

I know little about Noble and have never seen him fight. I believe he is mostly a submissions guy with decent striking skills. Alves is also mainly a submissions fighter who can mix it up a little on his feet. These two met before with Noble taking it by rear naked choke. This time I think Alves will strike back. Alves by submission, 2nd round.

Secular Totalitarianism

At the beginning I said there were Personalities in God. I will go further now. There are no real personalities anywhere else. Until you have given up your self to Him you will not have a real self. Sameness is to be found most among the most "natural" men, not among those who surrender to Christ. How monotonously alike all the great tyrants and conquerors have been: how gloriously different are the saints. -- C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

Such were the words of the famed Oxford don. Lewis recognized a fact that can be found by any Christian living in the workaday world. It's ironic that secularists who resist Christian belief or at least resist dedication to a Christian life do so often on the grounds of "freedom." Allegedly, Christianity or "religion" is akin to a Communist tyranny: it will control you and place you in line with the rest of the conforming crowd; any sense of self-governance or freedom to "become who you are" (or want to be) evaporates.

But, as Lewis alludes, quite the opposite seems true. In observing secularism among my own peer group I find precisely the monotony Lewis speaks of. Irreligious lives are all quite alike: work, go home, get drunk at the bar/club, go back home. This is a pattern not isolated to a chosen few: every non-Christian I know in this demographic does the same thing -- cyclically. Not only that, but they dislike/disrespect those unwilling to do likewise. It is they who want to make the rest of us conform to a strictly non-Christian agenda. Secularism is a jealous god and a blatantly cruel one at that.

The Christian path is quite distinct. Christ gives us the very freedom we need to find our true purpose and fulfillment in life. It seems true that God intends all of us to do something to serve He and His Kingdom. But it is in this common purpose where variety and uniqueness peak. Think, for example, of the great Christian philosophers (Ockham, Duns Scotus, Craig), musicians (Handel, Cowper, Keaggy), or missionaries (Livingstone, Carey, Mother Theresa). All alike in their goals to serve Christ; all vastly different in their abilities, feats, and testimonies. Locating ourselves with Him presents the opportunity to discard the totalitarian pressures of the secular world bidding us to become sheep in the secular herd. The godless monotony is over; we can take the road and adventure that God has planned for us to ultimately advance His cause and advance our potential in Him -- experiences that are unique and invigorating for us all.

Wanchick vs. Carrier: Final Statements

Finally, my exchange with Richard Carrier comes to a close. The final statements for both of us were posted on April 4. See also the "Final Assessment" section on the debate website. That contains the biographies of the four judges and explains how and when their final judgements will be given. Right now, their statements are scheduled to appear April 18.

In brief summary, I was a bit surprised at how the debate went. I thought I came out with far stronger, better formulated arguments. Carrier often presented premises without justification and used fallacious inferences. There were some things I'd change about my own presentation if I had the chance, but I was happy with it in the end.

I think I earned a solid victory, but it'll be interesting to see what the judges have to say.