Who Will Stop The Profitable Industry Of Junk Science?

"Should we believe the headline, “Drinking four cups of coffee daily lowers risk of death”? How about, “Mouthwash May Trigger Diabetes. . .”? Should we really eat more, not less, fat? And what should we make of data that suggest people with spouses live longer? These sorts of conclusions, from supposedly scientific studies, seem to vary from month to month, leading to ever-shifting “expert” recommendations. However, most of their admonitions are based on flawed research that produces results worthy of daytime TV.

Misleading research is costly to society directly because much of it is supported by the federal government, and indirectly, when it gives rise to unwise, harmful public policy.

Social science studies are notorious offenders. A landmark study in the journal Nature Human Behaviour in August reported the results of efforts to replicate 21 social science studies published in the prestigious journals Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015.

The multi-national team actually “conducted high-powered replications of the 21 experimental social science….One out of the four Nature papers and seven of the seventeen Science papers evaluated did not replicate, a shocking result for two prestigious scientific journals. The authors noted two kinds of flaws in the original studies: false positives and inflated effect sizes.

Science is supposed to be self-correcting. Smart editors. Peer review. Competition from other labs. But when we see that university research…are so often wrong, there must be systematic problems. One of them is outright fraud – “advocacy research” that has methodological flaws or intentionally misinterprets the results.

Another is the abject failure of peer review, which is especially prevalent at “social science” journals. The tale of three scholars who tested the integrity of journals’ peer review is revealing. They wrote 20 fake papers using fashionable jargon to argue for ridiculous conclusions, and tried to get them placed in high-profile journals in fields including gender studies, queer studies, and fat studies. Their success rate was remarkable: By the time they took their experiment public on [October 2nd], seven of their articles had been accepted for publication by ostensibly serious peer-reviewed journals. Seven more were still going through various stages of the review process. Only six had been rejected.

The articles were designed to be an easy call for reviewers to reject. For example, one dismissed “western astronomy” as sexist and imperialist, and made a case for physics departments to study feminist astrology or practice interpretative dance instead.

In the absence of outright, proven fraud or plagiarism, universities provide little oversight over their scientists, in contrast to industry where monitoring quality-control is de rigeur. Universities claim that peer review is sufficient, but as discussed above, in many fields, it is unreliable, or at best, spotty. The peers are in on the game. In a research-publishing version of The Emperor’s New Clothes, editors wink and nod if the researcher seems to be following the rules. And there are no consequences if a researcher’s findings are repudiated by others’ subsequent research. Their ultimate product is a published paper. The way the game operates is publish, get grants (thanks, taxpayers) and progress up the academic ladder."

https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2018/11/26/junk_science_has_become_a_profitable_industry_110810.html

No Such Thing As "Junk DNA"

"Scientists have once and for all swept away any notion of “junk DNA” by showing that that the vast majority of the human genome does after all have a vital function by regulating the genes that build and maintain the body.

Junk DNA was a term coined 40 years ago to describe the part of the genome that does not contain any genes, the individual instructions for making the body’s vital proteins. Now, this vast genetic landscape could hold hidden clues to eradicating human disease, scientists said.

Hundreds of researchers from 32 institutes around the world collaborated on the immense effort to decipher the hidden messages within the 98 per cent of the human genome without any genes and was thought, therefore, to have no function.

They have concluded in a series of 30 research papers published simultaneously today, in Nature, Science and other journals, that this so-called junk DNA is in fact an elaborate patchwork of regulatory sequences that act as a huge operating system for controlling the gnome.

Knowledge gained from this important insight, which has been largely hidden from view ever since the structure of DNA was revealed nearly 60 years ago, will prove critical to the future treatment of more than 400 diseases, scientists said.

Ewen Birney of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory in Cambridge and one of the leaders of the international ENCODE consortium said the work has demonstrated conclusively that more than 80 per cent of the genome works as a kind of control panel packed with genetic dials.

[...]

Deciphering the human genome revealed that less than 2 per cent of the 3 billion building blocks of human DNA actually consists of working genes. The ENCODE consortium has shown that the rest of the genome still has an active, biochemical function in the cells of the body.

“We see that 80 per cent of the genome is actively doing something. We found that a much bigger part of the genome - a surprising amount in fact - is involved in controlling when and where proteins are produced,” he said.

Steve Connor, "Scientists debunk 'junk DNA' theory to reveal vast majority of human genes perform a vital function"

Understanding Biblical Forgiveness

          What are we to do when we experience persistent resentment toward others who have wronged us in some way? Anger is generally not an easy emotion to control and soothe. We have all been treated unfairly and unkindly at some point in time. Ridicule, mockery, and slander are things common to human experience. Sometimes people say and do things without intending to offend; others provoke intentionally. But what does it mean to offer forgiveness? Is it a necessary option? If forgiveness is possible, then it is important that we be reconciled with our family, friends, and even neighbors. Are we in an unwarranted way holding past grievances committed against us? Have we ourselves offended others? If we do not forgive, then that will cause further harm.

          The biblical definition of forgiveness means to not count an evil action against a guilty party. It means to not plot revenge against the offending person. It means to not hold any record of debt. Forgiveness involves the restoration of a person from banishment. It is an act of love and kindness. It is not deserved or earned. Forgiveness is an act of the will and done deliberately. Forgiveness of another person necessarily denotes a change in heart toward him. It involves not dwelling on our past situations. Furthermore, the forgiveness offered by God involves Him erasing our debt of transgressions committed against Him (1 John 1:7-9). The forgiveness that he offers is distinct from human forgiveness in that it involves the cleansing of our souls from sin.

          Contempt and hostility run contrary to forgiveness. They entail holding past misdeeds against the offending party and demand repayment in some way. Contempt and hostility insist on being right and having their own way at all costs. None of this is compatible with a forgiving heart. However, it does not require that we condone what has been said or done to us. Measures may still need to be taken, depending on certain variables. Cutting ties may certainly be a necessary safety precaution. Forgiveness is not incompatible with disciplinary action. We should strive for peace and resolution, if possible. Human forgiveness is conditional, namely in that wrongdoers should openly repent of their misdeeds (Luke 17:3-4). We can also overlook another person's misbehavior. To forgive means to cease showing malice or resentment toward another person for a mistake or offense.

          Unjustly withholding forgiveness to whom it is due can have drastic repercussions on both personal relationships and civilization on a large scale. If we allow anger to continually scorch our hearts, then we will only act bitterly and harm the people around us. It can take us to dark places that we never intended to go. It is wrong to not strive to live peacefully with other people (Ephesians 4:31-32; Hebrews 12:14-15). In fact, unchecked anger in and of itself is a defilement of our souls. A contentious relationship cannot successfully thrive because it closes the gates of compromise and shuts off any influx of reason. Consequently, situations are rendered unworkable. Conflict resolution cannot be made when no one listens to each other. An unforgiving heart will only hold on to its own subjective perception of reality, no matter how absurd. It is for this reason that opposing sides of an argument misrepresent each other. Forgiveness can be a simple solution with profound reverberations for the better in our lives.

          What if a man is unable to forgive himself for previously committed wrongs against others? For starters, self-forgiveness is not necessary. Forgiveness looks beyond itself and tries to console others. What ultimately matters is that we accept the forgiveness of God as provided through Jesus Christ. How we feel is irrelevant in this context. We should repent of our sins against God and each other. We should choose to forgive others, as God has chosen to forgive us for our trespasses against Him. It is not healthy for us to allow our emotions to prevent us from moving forward with our lives. We can assist the people who are struggling with the concept of forgiveness by simply making ourselves available listeners to those afflicted and by showing them gentleness. Forgiveness comes from the heart (Matthew 18:35). We should be inclined to forgive because God Himself has forgiven us. He will withhold mercy from people at the Final Judgment who did not themselves show mercy to others in this life.

          Forgiveness springs forth from love, which constitutes the foundation of Christianity. Forgiveness is the very root of the gospel. It is because Jesus Christ gave Himself up for our sins that God is able to reconcile us to Him. It is because of mercy that friendships can be restored. It is because of forgiveness that we are able to live well and die peacefully. Hatred is contrary to the principles of the gospel. If left unchecked, anger ruins our sanity. We must repent from the heart of our sins, and offer forgiveness to those who have offended us in some way and also repented. The withholding of forgiveness is a tragedy.

A Biblical Refutation Of Open Theism

          The online Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines open theism—also referred to as openness theology or free will theism—as follows:

          "Open Theism is the thesis that, because God loves us and desires that we freely choose to reciprocate His love, He has made His knowledge of, and plans for, the future conditional upon our actions. Though omniscient, God does not know what we will freely do in the future. Though omnipotent, He has chosen to invite us to freely collaborate with Him in governing and developing His creation, thereby also allowing us the freedom to thwart His hopes for us. God desires that each of us freely enter into a loving and dynamic personal relationship with Him, and He has therefore left it open to us to choose for or against His will."

          This depiction of open theism offers an idealized vision of divine-human interaction, emphasizing themes of love, freedom, and collaboration. However, upon closer examination, the concept of God having imperfect knowledge of the future is not only heretical from a Christian perspective but also riddled with logical inconsistencies. It undermines key attributes of God, creating numerous theological problems that challenge the foundations of Christian doctrine.

          First, open theism calls into question God's omniscience, suggesting that He must learn the outcomes of human choices as they unfold. This idea starkly contradicts Scripture's portrayal of God as the one who knows the future perfectly. As Psalm 139:4 declares, "Before a word is on my tongue you, LORD, know it completely." Similarly, Psalm 139:16 affirms, "Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be." These verses highlight God's exhaustive knowledge of human actions, thoughts, and decisions—even before they occur.

          Furthermore, open theism implies that God could be mistaken about the unfolding of future events, jeopardizing His ability to achieve His divine plans. Isaiah 46:9-10 counters this notion with an emphatic declaration of God's sovereignty: "I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come." This passage underscores God's unparalleled knowledge of the past, present, and future, reinforcing His control over history's trajectory.

          The logical implications of open theism extend even further, casting doubt on the reliability of biblical prophecy. Jeremiah 1:5 provides a striking example of God's foreknowledge: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart." Similarly, Jesus’ prediction in Matthew 26:34, "Truly I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times," illustrates God's ability to foresee specific human actions with precision. These examples affirm that God's omniscience is integral to His nature and essential for the fulfillment of prophecy.

          Open theism also undermines trust in God's capacity to answer prayers accurately or guide humanity reliably. The Bible refutes this idea by declaring that God's comprehension is infinite: "Great is our Lord and mighty in power; his understanding has no limit" (Psalm 147:5). Additionally, Hebrews 4:13 states, "Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account." Such verses establish that God's knowledge encompasses all things, visible and invisible, leaving no room for uncertainty or error.

          Proponents of open theism may argue that their theology preserves God's sovereignty by emphasizing His relational nature. Yet, Scripture reveals that open theism does precisely the opposite—it diminishes God's glory and majesty. Isaiah 55:8-9 reminds us that, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," emphasizing the vast gulf between God's wisdom and human understanding. If God’s knowledge were limited as open theism suggests, He would be reduced to the level of the idols worshipped by pagans, powerless and fallible. Isaiah 41:22-23 vividly illustrates this contrast, inviting false gods to prove their worth—a challenge they cannot meet.

          Open theism presents an alluring but fundamentally flawed portrayal of God’s nature. It compromises His omniscience, sovereignty, and reliability, straying far from the biblical depiction of the God of infinite wisdom and power. The God of Scripture is not bound by uncertainty or limitations; He is the eternal, all-knowing Creator who governs the universe with perfect knowledge and authority.

"Animadversions Of A Synthetic Chemist"

Life requires carbohydrates, nucleic acids, lipids, and proteins. What is the chemistry behind their origin? Biologists seem to think that there are well-understood prebiotic molecular mechanisms for their synthesis. They have been grossly misinformed. And no wonder: few biologists have ever synthesized a complex molecule ab initio. If they need a molecule, they purchase molecular synthesis kits, which are, of course, designed by synthetic chemists, and which feature simplistic protocols.

Polysaccharides? Their origin?

The synthetic chemists do not have a pathway.

The biologists do not have a clue.

[...]

Those who think scientists understand the issues of prebiotic chemistry are wholly misinformed. Nobody understands them. Maybe one day we will. But that day is far from today. It would be far more helpful (and hopeful) to expose students to the massive gaps in our understanding. They may find a firmer—and possibly a radically different—scientific theory.

The basis upon which we as scientists are relying is so shaky that we must openly state the situation for what it is: it is a mystery.

Excerpts from James Tour

A List Of The Cultic Doctrines Of Mormonism

• Mormonism Upholds Belief In A Multitude Of Gods:

          -"In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it.... In all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods." Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, pp.308, 474.

• Mormonism Teaches That God Was Once A Man:

          -"God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man... I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form...like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man...He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on earth." Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 305.

• The God Of Mormonism Is Finite Like Man Himself:

          -"The universe is filled with vast numbers of intelligences, and we further learn that Elohim is God simply because all of these intelligences honor and sustain him as such...if He should ever do anything to violate the confidence or 'sense of justice' of these intelligences, they would promptly withdraw their support, and the 'power' of God would disintegrate - He would cease to be God." W. Cleon Skousen (Former BYU Professor & founder of Mormon-based National Center For Constitutional Studies), The First 2000 Years, p.355.
          -"The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's." Doctrine & Covenants 130:22
          -"If God possesses a form, that form is of necessity of definite proportions, and therefore of limited extension and space. It is impossible for Him to occupy at one time more than one space of such limits." James Talmage, Articles of Faith, p. 43.

• Mormonism Teaches That Man May Become God:

          -"Here then is eternal life...to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all gods have done before you...To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of God." Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 306

• The God Of Mormonism Has A Wife Because He Was Once A Man:

          -"In the heaven where our spirits were born, there are many Gods, each of whom has his own wife or wives, which were given to him...while yet in his mortal state." Orson Pratt (Apostle), The Seer, p.37.
          -"This doctrine that there is a Mother in Heaven was affirmed in all plainness by the First Presidency of the Church." Bruce R. McConkie (Apostle), Mormon Doctrine.

• Mormonism Denies The Virgin Birth:

          -"Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers... Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father." Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pp. 547, 742.

• Mormonism Teaches That Jesus And Satan Are Brothers:

          -"The appointment of Jesus to be the Savior of the world was contested by one of the other sons of God. He was called Lucifer - this spirit-brother of Jesus desperately tried to become the Savior of mankind." Milton R. Hunter, The Gospel Through the Ages, p. 15

• The Jesus Of Mormonism Was Married:

          -"Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee - We say it was Jesus Christ who was married...whereby he could see his seed." Orson Hyde, Apostle, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 82.

• Mormonism Denies The Authority of The Bible:

          -"Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors-many plain and precious things were deleted, in consequence of which error and falsehood poured into the churches. One of the great heresies of modern Christendom is the unfounded assumption that the Bible contains all of the inspired teachings now extant among men." Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pp.82, 83

• Mormonism Says All Other Churches Are False:

          -"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; and those professors were all corrupt." Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith 2:19.
          -"This Church is the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth." Doctrine and Covenants 1:30.
          -"There is no salvation outside the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints." Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 670.
          -"All other churches are entirely destitute of all authority from God; and any person who receives Baptism or the Lord's Supper from their hands will highly offend God; for He looks upon them as the most corrupt of all people. Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the whore of Babylon." Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 255.

• Mormonism Says That Blacks Were Cursed:

          -"Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness, he became the father of an inferior race. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a black skin and have been denied the privilege of Priesthood and the fullness of the blessings of the Gospel." Joseph Fielding Smith (Prophet), The Way to Perfection, p. 102.
          -"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind." Brigham Young (Prophet), Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 290.
          -"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard t the African race? If the white man...mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p. 110.

• Mormonism Has A Council Of Gods:

          -"The head God called together the Gods and sat in grand council to bring forth the world... In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people. it." Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 348, 349.
          -"The contention in heaven was...Jesus said there would be certain souls that would not be saved; and the Devil said he could save them all, and laid his plans before the grand council, who gave their vote in favour of Jesus Christ. So the Devil rose up in rebellion against God. and was cast down, with all who put up their heads for him." Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 8

• How Mormons View The Final Judgment And Resurrection:

          -"No man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are." Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 289.
          -"If we get our salvation, we shall have to pass by [Joseph Smith]; if we enter our glory, it will be through the authority he has received. We cannot get around him." President George Q. Cannon, quoted in 1988 Melchizedek Priesthood Study Guide, p. 142.
          -"If we ask who will stand at the head of the resurrection in this last dispensation, the answer is Joseph Smith, the Prophet of God. He is the man who will be resurrected and receive the keys of the resurrection, and he will seal this authority upon others, and then they will hunt up their friends and resurrect them." Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 116.
          -"We are the only people that know how to save our progenitors, how to save ourselves, and how to save our posterity in the celestial kingdom of God; that we are the people God has chosen by whom to establish his kingdom and introduce correct principles into the world; and that we are in fact the saviors of the world..." John Taylor (Prophet), Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 163.

• Mormonism Teaches A Gospel Message Of Faith Plus Works:

          -"For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do. And, notwithstanding we believe in Christ, we keep the law of Moses, and look forward with steadfastness unto Christ, until the law shall be fulfilled." (2 Nephi 25:23-24)

          -"One cannot get into the kingdom of God upon the principle of faith alone, or repentance alone, or receiving the Holy Ghost alone. He will have to be baptized, go down in the water, and come up out of the water, and have hands laid upon him for the gift of the Holy Ghost. That is the procedure that was followed by the apostles of Christ. That is the procedure of the Church today. It is the only way." (Rudger Clawson, Conference Reports, October 1932, p.9)

          -"Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ." (Moroni 10:32)

          -"We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel." (Articles of Faith 1:3)

Testimony Of A Former Buddhist

True, some Buddhists purport to believe in a god, or in a realm of higher beings called devas. Others pray to statues of Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama). But, as a whole, Buddhism is not a theistic religion. It has a law—the law of karma—but no lawgiver.

According to the Buddhist worldview, all beings accumulate karma based on their actions, and karmadictates their life circumstances. When a person dies, the karma accumulated in that lifetime (and all previous lives) determines his or her lot in the next life.

To many Buddhists, this means that a person born into a wealthy family has good karma, while someone who lives in a poor, disease-infested village would have accumulated negative karma.

Buddhists believe karma keeps one trapped in an endless cycle of death and rebirth (samsara), and the only way out is through enlightenment.

To become enlightened, one has to eliminate desire. Buddha taught that desire is the root of suffering; that it causes attachment, which leads to suffering, and in turn causes other beings to suffer. This produces negative karma. If one eliminates desire and stops causing suffering, one can become enlightened, as he had.

But, eventually, I began to question.

Who or what had set this law of karma in motion?

Who judged these beings’ actions and sentenced them to another life of pain?

Why were beings punished for actions they would be unable to remember?

Was desire always a bad thing? Wasn’t the desire for enlightenment still desire?

If so, how could one ever attain enlightenment?

So I strayed from the Buddhist path—the emptiness within me greater than before.

https://christiananswers.net/q-aiia/aiia-buddhism-harris.html

A Response To Catholic Nick On Imputation And 2 Corinthians 5:21

• Discussion:

           -Catholic Nick wrote an article in which he attempted to refute the standard "Protestant" interpretation of 2 Corinthians 5:21. He throws in a few diversions as to the meaning of Jesus being made sin and us becoming righteous. Excerpts from the author are cited in bold and followed with critical commentary: 

           "First, the text does not suggest we become righteousness in the same way Jesus becomes sin, i.e. by a double imputation, because Paul uses two different Greek words here, "made [sin]" and "become [righteousness]."

           Just because someone references Greek, does not mean that his argument is valid or convincing. There is nothing in the two different words that necessarily rule out imputation.

           If the Roman Catholic view of grace as infused into the soul is correct, then should we conclude based on 2 Corinthians 5:21 (i.e. "Christ was made sin") that the essence of Jesus was corrupted? Was evil infused into Christ?

           "Second, the curious phrase "made sin for us" cannot be presumed to include Christ's perfect obedience to the Law, especially since the Protestant says this phrase refers specifically to having our sins imputed to Christ."

           The phrase "made sin for us" in 2 Corinthians 5:21 should be understood to include both Jesus taking on our sins and His perfect obedience to God's Law. While some may argue that it only refers to our sins being placed on Him, this view misses a key point: Jesus had to be sinless and obey the Law perfectly to be the right sacrifice for our sins. His ability to bear our sins comes directly from His flawless life, making both aspects essential to the Christian understanding of salvation. Ignoring this connection separates His work and does not reflect the fullness of how He redeems us.

           "Third, the Bible never speaks of imputing sin from a sinner onto an innocent substitute, such that guilt is transferred from one person to another, so to say “made sin” refers to imputation has no Biblical basis whatsoever. Thus, Christ being “made sin” must be assumed to refer to something other than imputation."

           This point is invalidated because of the background of the Old Testament sacrificial system, which is all about the transfer of guilt. Look at Genesis 22, Leviticus 16, and Exodus 12. In all three instances, there is an innocent substitute provided. The lamb died in the place of a person, etc. Further, the very idea of forgiveness (i.e. not counting people's trespasses against them) is legal in nature.

           "Fourth, the meaning of “made sin” need not only refer to Imputation or Infusion, for that’s a false dilemma fallacy. The Church Fathers shed valuable light on what “made sin” refers to."

           The meaning of 2 Corinthians 5:21 is crystal clear. Jesus took our sin and gave to us His righteousness. We do not deserve His righteousness, anymore than He deserved to bear our punishment. That is the legal, binding transaction which takes place in the "court" of God. He has voluntarily paid an infinite sin debt on our behalf because of His love for us. He saved us because He is gracious. He is our sin offering.

           "Fifth, the context clearly explains the goal of God the Father sending His Son was to bring about our reconciliation, thus undermining the whole presumed forensic-imputation theme Protestants project onto verse 21."

           Why would a context speaking of reconciliation with God be inconsistent with a forensic-imputation theme? If we are to be reconciled with God, then it requires that the questions of sin, righteousness, and judgment be addressed. The text of 2 Corinthians 5:21 specifically addresses how man can be reconciled to God.