Theism and Deism

Wasdale, The Lake District, England (trekearth)

Theism and Deism

John S. Feinberg states that theism is literally the belief in the existence of God. The term may be recent and a counter to the seventeenth century terms deism and deistic and is used as the opposite of atheist. Feinberg (1996: 1080). Feinberg writes the term theist is used for religious believers and those who hold to certain philosophical and theological positions without necessarily being religious. Feinberg (1996: 1080).

Richard G. Swinburne explains that theism is the idea that there exists a God that is personal, without a body, omnipotent, omniscient, free, and the creator of the universe. Christians, Jews, and Muslims are all theists. Swinburne (1999: 562). Swinburne states that God is personal in theism as he acts intentionally to bring about purposes and has knowledge of all things. Swinburne (1999: 562-563).

M.H. Macdonald writes that deism describes an unorthodox religious view expressed among readers in the first half of the seventeenth century, most notably Lord Herbert of Cherbury. Macdonald (1996: 304). Deism is from the Latin for deus, in contrast, to theos from the Greek. Macdonald (1999: 304). Deism is different than theism and is connected to natural religion that thinks religious knowledge is gained through reason and not revelation or church doctrines. Macdonald (1996: 304). There is a belief in a supreme being, but this being is not directly involved in the affairs of his creation. Macdonald (1996: 304). Therefore, the revelation of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament would be denied as actually occurring, and the gospel and related doctrines would be denied. In agreement with Christianity, it would be an understanding of God as the first cause and the creator of universal laws. Macdonald (1996: 305). David A. Pailin, my brief former academic advisor, writes that deism is often in parallel to theism. Pailin (1999: 148).

In modern times deism is used to define a supreme being who is the ultimate source of reality but does not intervene in the natural and historical processes through revelation or salvific acts. Pailin (1999: 148). Pailin writes that the common use of the term ‘theism’ does not carry the same negative implications. Pailin (1999: 148). He explains that historically deism is not so much a set of doctrines, but a movement, largely British, that became popular in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Pailin (1999: 148). Many within deism will have doubts concerning concepts of supernatural religious doctrines, revelation and the authority of the Bible. Pailin (1999: 148). Pailin notes that some within deism desire to replace Christianity with a more ‘reasonable’ faith, and for others, it is an attempt to produce a more ‘reasonable’ version of Christianity. Pailin (1999: 149).

William J. Wainwright explains that deism understands true religion as natural, as opposed to supernatural religion. Wainwright (1996: 188). He writes that some self-styled Christian deists accept revelation although they argue that the content is the same as natural religion. Wainwright (1996: 188). Most deists reject revelation as fiction, but many reason that God has ordained that human happiness is possible through natural means that are universally available. Wainwright (1996: 188). Salvation, therefore, does not come via divine revelation. Wainwright (1996: 188).

Accepting that human nature is corrupt as described in Romans 1-3, it is very unlikely that the problem of evil would ever be solved but rather merely treated by humanity if deism is true. There would at no time be any solution for sin, death, and the problem of evil since the infinite, omnipotent God would not interfere with his creation and through the gospel regenerate and change individuals in order to eventually establish the Kingdom of God where the problem of evil does not exist. With a deistic universe seemingly sin, death, and the problem of evil continue to exist as long as humanity does. Deism seemingly does not offer any ultimate solution to the problem of evil.

Theists and deists are different and deists could only possibly be considered theists in a sense, as there is a shared belief in a first cause creator that has personal consciousness and purpose in creation. But, for the most part, academically, deists should not be considered theists.

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1996) ‘Theism’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

MACDONALD, M.H. (1996) ‘Deism’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

PAILIN, DAVID A. (1999) ‘Deism’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

SWINBURNE, Richard G. (1999) ‘Theism’. in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

WAINWRIGHT, WILLIAM J. (1996) ‘Deism’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.



Is this a new type of door-to-door pseudo-Christian cultist?

Antichrist

Castle Conwy, 2001

My friend from Manchester, England, Mr. Richard McIntosh recently interviewed Dr. Gary Habermas concerning the resurrection: 

http://www.garyhabermas.com/audio/2008-03_manchester_radio.mp3 

Richard's blog:

http://destructionofgog.blogspot.com/ 

I like Firefox as a second browser, but I find it frustrating that unlike Internet Explorer, it does not present my longer URL addresses properly. I need                                             to fix them almost every time I post as they are cut off! Eschatology is quite a complex topic and this blog article is merely a brief overview of one aspect. It is not exhaustive, nor is it primarily speculating on whom in particular, or what in particular, is the Antichrist. I remember when I was a child that a certain television teacher, that I will not name, kept indicating that the Antichrist could be King Juan Carlos of Spain, and that now seems quite unlikely as Carlos is an older man and seemingly not in charge of a major power block. So, we need to be intellectually cautious and respectful in our speculations. Strong lists the Antichrist four times from the New Testament, and the term Antichrists once. The references are from First and Second John. Again as with previous scans, this is a scan using a small scanner and a huge volume and so the scan is not perfectly straight. 

My apologies. I cannot duplicate the information perfectly with my keyboard and so I use these scans, which are also imperfect. The above is from Strong (1986: 13). Strong's number 473 is noted as ἀντί, and therefore is anti, anglicised. Strong (1986: 13). The number 5547 is χριστός, which is Christ, which Strong's states is from 5548 which means the anointed, the Messiah, an epithet of Jesus. Strong (1986: 106). The beast from Revelation 11: 7 onward is figuratively described as θηρίον, which Strong defines as follows: The above is from Strong (1986: 47).

Robert Mounce is a well-known scholar on the Book of Revelation. In Revelation, the Antichrist is the beast and the enemy of the Church in the last days. Mounce states that this may be the beast of Daniel 7: 7. Mounce (1990: 225). David A. Hubbard writes that the term antichrist is found only in the Johannine letters. The concept is found in both Testaments and in intertestamental writings. Hubbard (1996: 55). Hubbard explains as Christ is not fully revealed in the Old Testament, the Antichrist is not either. Hubbard notes that in Daniel 7 the little horn symbolizes rebellion, and in eschatological terms seems to depict the defeat of God's final enemy, while Daniel 8 describes Antiochus IV who persecuted the Jews and their religion. Hubbard (1996: 55).

The description of the king of the north in Daniel 11 has helped shape the picture of the New Testament Antichrist, as he erected the abomination of desolation, exalted himself to a position of deity, and his helpless death points to Christ's slaying of the Antichrist. The beast from the sea in Revelation 13 points toward Daniel 7 and ties Daniel to the New Testament. Hubbard (1996: 55). In the Gospels of Matthew and Mark the abomination of desolation recalls Daniel's prophecy and this may be pointing to a single personality according to Hubbard. Hubbard (1996: 55). 

In Second Thessalonians, Paul describes the man of lawlessness and the lawless one (Second Thessalonians 2:3, 8-9). This man claims to be deity and according to Hubbard is not a pseudo-Messiah pretending to represent God, but a pseudo-God that viciously opposes all other religions. Hubbard (1996: 56). The Antichrist will do many amazing wonders with satanic power that will be attributed to God (Second Thessalonians 2: 9-10 and Matthew 24). Hubbard reasons that John, like Paul and Daniel, depicts a single Antichrist who demands personal worship. Hubbard (1996: 56). John adds to Paul's version by mentioning the false prophet, the second beast. This person will direct the political and religious workings of the Antichrist. Hubbard (1996: 56). If the Antichrist is a system as opposed to an actual person, the second beast, the false prophet, could also be an aspect of the system. Mounce writes that the beast has ten horns and seven heads. The ten horns are like Daniel's fourth beast from Daniel 7: 7. Ten kings come from the fourth kingdom. The seven heads can be connected to the seven-headed dragon of Revelation 12: 3. The number seven carries the idea of completeness. Mounce (1990: 250). The beast is given divine permission to rule for forty-two months. Mounce (1990: 254). The beast blasphemes God in a way similar to Antiochus in Daniel's day, and the Roman Empire in John's day. This means the Antichrist is likely a secular authority. Mounce (1990: 254). The beast will overcome the saints and put them to death, and this too will echo the times of both Antiochus and the later Roman Empire. Mounce (1990: 255). 

But, as Mounce points out, there is victory in martyrdom for Christians in this era. Mounce explains that the entire world will worship this beast, apart from those written in the Lamb's book of life and the beast will be a type of false Christ described in Matthew 24. Mounce (1990: 255). So, on this last point he appears to differ from Hubbard. To demonstrate how careful one should be in dealing with eschatology and the issue of the Antichrist, consider the following: Mounce notes that the preterist position understands the apocalypse from a first-century setting. The events and book of Revelation are not relegated to the future, but are understood to have occurred by the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, or the fall of the Roman Empire in AD 476. Mounce (1990: 41). Mounce explains that a major problem with this position is that the decisive victory over evil described in Revelation is not achieved. John views the overthrow of evil occurring with the defeat of Antichrist. Mounce (1990: 42). 

The futurist view is more common among scholars and understands that Revelation describes a final victory over evil. Some scholars regard everything after Revelation 4:1 as taking place in the future. But, Mounce sees this as problematic as the book still needs to be relevant for the first-century reader. Mounce (1990: 42). Mounce reasons that no single approach is sufficient. The preterist is correct that the book of Revelation must be understood in a first-century context. The futurist is correct that the book is centrally eschatological describing how this age will come to an end. Mounce (1990: 44). 

Mounce also explains the value of the historist approach which sees the importance of specific fulfilment in history. A problem which this view is that it is quite subjective in connecting certain historical events to Scripture. Mounce (1990: 42). 

The benefits of the idealistic approach are that God can be seen as guiding the events. But, Mounce notes that the idealitic approach may lack a distinct consummation of events. Mounce (1990: 43). Its allegorical method tends to lessen the historical nature of future events. Mounce (1990: 43). W.R.F. Browning writes that the lawless one is expected before the Second Coming of Christ and has been identified with the Roman Empire and Nero. Beyond the historical dimension, Antichrist is a symbol for a final revolt against Christ, although the revolt is embodied in a historical person such as Judas Iscariot. Browning (1997: 17). By the use of Judas, I reason Browning means that the Antichrist will act as a representative of God and Christ, but in reality represents satanic powers. 

I reason North America, Western Europe, and the entire West, is heading toward moral collapse, without some type of revival, and although I am not an economist, an economic collapse seems possible since there is tremendous debt in some Western countries and loss of means of production to Asia in some cases. I have no idea when the Antichrist will arrive, but if we have moral collapse and economic collapse in the Western world, plus a very major disaster or disasters, such as nuclear war, I can see the Antichrist possibly arising in that situation. I reason billions of people largely ignorant of the Biblical God would worship a man and/or system with supernatural powers and the ability to temporarily solve many of the world's evils. The fact that this Antichrist will not be able to raise the long dead and provide persons with everlasting life will be a crucial sign that Almighty God is not represented by the Antichrist, but sadly I reason billions of persons will miss this truth in pursuit of temporal happiness, fulfilment, and survival. Sadly, the conclusion for these persons upon death is the lake of fire in Revelation Chapter 20. The lake may be described figuratively, but the idea of everlasting punishment is indicated in 20: 10.

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

HUBBARD, DAVID A.(1996) ‘Antichrist’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. STRONG, J. (1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.

Strong 500, page 13

Strong 2342, page 87

 

Fideism

Fideism 

Lake Como, Italy (photos from trekearth.com)

Fideism explained

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Amesbury, Richard (2022) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Fideism, Department of Philosophy, Stanford University.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fideism/

'The term itself derives from fides, the Latin word for faith, and can be rendered literally as faith-ism.'

'Fideism” is the name given to that school of thought—to which Tertullian himself is frequently said to have subscribed—which answers that faith is in some sense independent of—if not outright adversarial toward—reason. In contrast to the more rationalistic tradition of natural theology, with its arguments for the existence of God, fideism holds that reason is unnecessary and inappropriate for the exercise and justification of religious belief.'

According to R.K. Johnston, fideism is a term used by Protestant modernists in Paris in the late 19th century. It is often used as a pejorative term to attack various strands of Christianity as forms of irrationalism. Johnston (1999: 415). Fideists, following Kant, who noted that reason cannot prove religious truth are said to base their religious understanding upon religious experience alone. Reason is believed to be incapable of establishing faith's certainty or credibility. Johnston (1999: 415). Grenz, Guretzki and Nordling note that fideism states religious and theological truth must be accepted without the use of reason. Grenz, Guretzki and Nordling (1999: 51). An extreme form of fideism states that reason misleads one in religious understanding. Grenz, Guretzki and Nordling (1999: 51). Johnston explains that the concept of fideism has little value as most theologians would not deny the use of reason. The term fideism is useful when it describes an excessive emphasis upon the subjective aspects of Christianity. Johnston (1999: 415).

Fideism can serve as a useful term when describing the overuse of emotional and subjective experience in Christianity, other religions, and all philosophy in regard to religion. Whenever there is the use of blind faith without the significant use of reason, there is a form of fideism. In my mind, fideism in religious and even may I suggest, non-religious contexts, is one of the most dangerous philosophical approaches to embrace. 

In a religion context, in its mild form, it does not significantly use reason in developing theology and philosophy, and in its extreme form can lead to all kinds of ridiculous views without the use of reason and evidence from a variety of academic disciplines. Fideism is a reason why many cultists and false religionists, can strongly hold to intellectually weak philosophical and theological views which an educated open-minded religious or non-religious person can often debunk in a few moments. Fideism is a form of intellectual laziness and spiritual blindness which can keep persons from truth.

Concerning Kant

Kant explains in The Critique of Practical Reason that the noumena realm is the theoretical department of knowledge denied, while the phenomena realm is one’s own empirical consciousness. All positive speculative knowledge should be disclaimed for the noumena realm according to Kantian thought. Kant concludes the text by noting that the phenomena realm is the external realm where consciousness has existence. The noumena realm is invisible and has true infinity where Kant believes one can reason that contingent personality is dependent on the universal and necessary connection to the invisible world. Kant (1788)(1898)(2006: 100).

In a sense, I do not disagree with the Kantian view that the noumena realm is not empirically knowable. To be more precise, the noumena realm is not of physical matter. I readily admit that God as being spirit is not empirically or scientifically provable. Jesus stated that God is spirit in John 4:24 and therefore God is not of a material nature and cannot be proven by the use of matter, space, energy or scientific experiment. But in contrast to Kantian thought, I reason that God can reveal self to humanity. God can reveal the supernatural realm within the natural realm. Humanity can have reasonable faith in God.

Peter D. Klein’s notes in the article Certainty, the idea that a proposition is true and certain if there are no legitimate grounds whatsoever for doubting it. Klein (1996: 113). This is a reasonable concept, and I support the similar idea that a proposition is certain if there are no counter propositions that are superior. The existence of God therefore would never be 100% certain to finite human beings, but would always be certain to the infinite God. God could reasonably be understood as philosophically certain as long as arguments that supported God's existence were true beyond any reasonable doubt, and/or the arguments for God were superior to those opposing them. Christian arguments for God would primarily come from revealed Scripture and secondarily would come from philosophy and the use of theistic, philosophy of religion.

Certainty within a Christian worldview, is not 100% absolute certainty. Absolute certainty would require infinity and infinite knowledge, which only God has in nature and attributes. But in my view, Christianity is reasonably certain, as key premises for the Christian worldview are both internally and externally consistent. In other words, Christianity can be stated to be of reasonable certainty, especially when the Biblical manuscripts, and Christian theology, are internally consistent and historically true. At the same time, Christianity is reasonably certain when the external premises/arguments, and/or propositions in opposition are inferior. Christianity would therefore be internally and externally consistent and therefore could be stated to have reasonable certainty.

Bibliography

AMERIKS, KARL (1999) ‘Kant, Immanuel’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

FLEW, ANTONY, R.M. HARE, AND BASIL MITCHELL (1996) ‘The Debate on the Rationality of Religious Belief’, in L.P. Pojman (ed.), Philosophy, The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.

FLEW, ANTONY AND A.MACINTRYE (1999) ‘Philosophy of Religion’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press. 

GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

GUYER, PAUL AND ALLEN W, in KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

HUME, DAVID (1779)(2004) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Digireads.com/Neeland Media LLC, Lawrence, Kansas. 

JOHNSTON, R.K.(1996) ‘Fideism’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan. http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co. http://philosophy.eserver.org/kant/critique-of-practical-reaso.txt 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

KLEIN, PETER D. (1996) ‘Certainty’, in Robert Audi, (ed), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

KLEIN, PETER D. (1998, 2005). ‘Epistemology’, in E. Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, London, Routledge. 

MACKIE, J.L. (1955)(1996) ‘Evil and Omnipotence’, in Mind, in Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, and David Basinger (eds.), Philosophy of Religion, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

MACKIE, J.L. (1971)(1977)(2002) ‘Evil and Omnipotence’, in The Philosophy of Religion, in Alvin C. Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press. 

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (2005) The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis. 

WITTGENSTEIN, LUDWIG (1951)(1979) On Certainty, Basil Blackwell, Oxford. 

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Fideism 

Revised and reformatted version placed on academia.edu on 20240629

 

The power of positive linking (The joy of commenting)

Trekearth, Greenich

The power of positive linking, the joy of commenting...or not.

It has been very encouraging the past year with gaining new readers, commenters, and links. I have been gaining more than losing and so the Lord is helping my blogs to progress. Thank you to all my readers, commenters and links with this site and satire and theology.

A blogger can remain primarily within his or her own denomination or group and write a very good blog. I have stated this before, but I will state it again, unless one is quite well-known in his or her field in which he or she is blogging, he or she needs to network with others on-line, or risk basically writing an on-line journal that only a few persons ever read. As it is, even with a very modest roughly 50 unique blog links between my two blogs, it is still difficult to write articles that receive significant attention. Some desire only to have a small blog and that is not wrong.

These are some of my thoughts:

Blog trolls should not be tolerated, and I apologized for involving readers with my latest troll's comments and then deleting all the related troll incident comments. I allowed the blog troll's comments from a person that likely knows me in person and is a Facebook friend. I allowed the comments in order to easily counter the primarily false things stated about me, which were presented in the form of a personal attack. This type of controversy is good for blog traffic as satire and theology had its best day of traffic so far, but I think the negative environment overall puts me in a bad mood and creates unnecessary speculation concerning the troll on the blog. From now on I will likely deal with a troll's comments without publishing a personal attack.

Taking blog trolls out of consideration, on my blogs and related links, we primarily debate issues in a good spirit. On my blogs there have recently been discussions concerning my PhD topic of free will and determinism, and also the topic of singleness. These topics are controversial and have been discussed on both of my blogs as one can see if one searches through the archives. Please remember, I am not trying to offend anyone, but please be open-minded and not overly defensive. If you disagree with me, that is fine and state your case if you desire. There is no point in us ignoring each other, or arguing on and on concerning issues of disagreement when we usually agree and can offer each other much needed blog support. We can state our case and disagree on secondary issues as Christians, agreeing on essentials in Christ. As for my non-Christian links, I will never attempt to force my theological views on anyone, and we can simply agree to disagree on the topic of Christianity and feel free to challenge me respectfully, and once again there is no point ignoring each other, or in arguing on and on, as we can state our case in one or maybe two discussions and move on.

Pragmatically, too much disagreement and debating makes blogging too much of a chore and is too time consuming. As a Christian in a type of ministry, I present my case to Christians and non-Christians and leave it for persons to ponder on. At the same time, I can ponder on the points of others and may change my mind in the future.
If we write-off a blog because we have a significant disagreement with it, although we usually are in agreement, we are hurting our own networking blog cause, and it is very tough to find readers, commenters, and links as already noted.

In my mind, thekingpin68 is a more important blog than satire and theology, however, about half of my readers appear to disagree, including two of my former pastors. Some find thekingpin68 too academic, and others find satire and theology too ridiculous and/or too hard-hitting. The traffic for both blogs is basically identical and satire and theology receives a few more comments and thekingpin68 has a few more links. For those of you that only like one blog that is fine, but I offer my other blog as a link. I have no intention of setting up the program with Blogger that lists blogs and the most recent article, although thank you to those of you that have my blogs listed that way. As long as one of my blogs is listed as a permanent link on your blog I will link you back, provided your blog is not anti-Christian or very objectionable in my view. Many do not use the actual names of my blog in linking me and that is fine. I am stating that I do not have to be on your main links list, but I would like to visible in order to willingly link you back. I am not really concerned if I am in one's featured top list or whatever. The two blogs really feature the same controversial worldview, and both are presented respectfully. I will link with respectful Reformed Christians, non-Reformed Christians and non-Christians under the guidelines I just mentioned.

In regard to comments, I already spend twenty hours or so on blogging per week. I refuse to 'reinvent the wheel' and therefore unapologetically at times do cut and paste previously posted material and will place it in comments. I do not have the time and energy to retype out assertions, arguments and information over and over again and will have even less time to do this as a professor, and when I am looking for work as a professor. It is quite time consuming researching and writing my own blog postings on thekingpin68 and satire and theology, plus commenting for my blog links, and commenting on newly found blogs that I might wish to link with in the future. Thanks for understanding.

Here are some more terms:

With social research methods and statistics:

Validity: A concern with the integrity of the conclusions that come from a piece of research. It usually refers to measurement validity. Bryman (1999: 545). Measurement validity is the degree to which a measure of a concept truly reflects the concept. Bryman (1999: 541).

Within philosophy:

Validity: In its primary meaning it is whether arguments are valid or invalid according to whether conclusion follows the premises. Premises and conclusions themselves are not valid or invalid, but are true or false. Blackburn (1999: 389). From my reading, an argument is considered valid as long as it does not have a true premise and false conclusion. A valid argument can have a true premise and true conclusion, false premise and false conclusion and a false premise and true conclusion. An argument can have more than one premise.

So, one can have these valid combinations:

tt

ff

ft

But not

tf

This is stated in The Elements of Reasoning written by David A. Conway and Ronald Munson on page 34.

Premise: Bloggers can blog primarily within their own group.
Premise: Bloggers can primarily avoid web networking.
Conclusion: This will likely result in a small blog.

I am not stating a small blog is necessarily bad, or that a large blog is necessarily good.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BRYMAN, ALAN (2004) Social Research Methods, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.









Thank you!

http://satireandtheology.blogspot.com/2008/07/happy-little-
semiautomatic-assault.html


Jeff Jenkins sent me this photo of me and an unnamed woman. I do not know who she is but she seems to want to have priority in the photo.

These are my terms

Vestruskaftafellssysla, Iceland (photo from trekearth.com) 

Please do not take the posting of this article as a sign that the previous article is closed for discussion, and please leave comments on the latest two articles if you so wish. My MPhil and PhD theses work has included the study of philosophical theology, philosophy of religion, Biblical studies, empirical theology, social research methods and statistics. 

Empirical theology: Leslie J. Francis explains that an element of practical theology is the use of empirical data. Francis (2005: 1). William Dean reasons that empirical theology begins with a particular speculative view of life, which in turn leads to the use of the empirical method. Dean (1990: 85-102). Clive Erricker, Danny Sullivan and Jane Erricker comment that empirical theology questions how theology relates to social sciences. Erricker, Sullivan and Erricker (1994: 6-7). Empirical theology is better known in Europe and the British Isles than in North America, but consists of using social research methods and statistics to come up with empirical data concerning theological concepts. My MPhil and PhD theses both contain the use of questionnaires and sections which include statistical analysis of the data. Interestingly, I have found that within philosophy of religion and social research/statistics the same terms are sometimes used, but not with the exact same meanings. This can make remembering terms tricky, as for my work I need to remember some terms in two contexts, and occasionally more. 

Here are two examples: 

Empiricism: Bryman mentions the classic and philosophical use of the term, which I have found in philosophy and philosophy of religion. This a general approach to reality, which suggests knowledge is only knowable through sense experience. Other forms of knowledge would not be acceptable. Bryman (2004: 7). Bryman then defines the term more specifically in regard to social research and statistics and states that ideas must be subjected to testing before they can be considered knowledge. This would be considered an accumulation of facts. Bryman (2004: 7). Empirical theology would view findings from questionnaires as at least possible actual theology, and some would consider the findings equal with Scripture. I have rejected this approach and still reason that theological deductions based on Scripture are more important in developing doctrine than are findings from questionnaires. Although questionnaires can be helpful in discerning the theological mindset of those surveyed, as God has inspired his Scripture through historical persons his theological views take precedence as truth over any contrary views found statistically. Empirical theology can point out weaknesses in how theology is perceived and presented. My findings for both my MPhil and PhD theses demonstrate that Reformed views concerning God and his sovereignty in regard to the problem of evil are not properly understood within the majority of the Christian Church. 

Positivism: Blackburn writes that within philosophy this view holds that the highest or only form of knowledge can be known through sensory perception. This is a version of empiricism. It focuses on optimism from the hopes of science and originated in the 19th century and relates to evolutionary and naturalist theory. Blackburn (1996: 294). Bryman writes that within social research and statistics, positivism advocates the use of methods of natural sciences for the study of social reality and beyond. This concept can include only knowledge confirmed by the senses. Bryman (2004: 11). Logical positivism, which is also known as logical empiricism, accepts empiricism, but also allows for the power of formal logic to describe the structures of permissible inferences. Blackburn (1996: 223). Richard A. Fumerton explains that some positivists have allowed for the idea that a proposition can be meaningful if it is likely to be true. Fumerton (1996: 445-446). Fumerton notes that a strict positivism leads to a rejection of religious and moral philosophy. Fumerton (1996: 445). A view that combines the need for empiricism as a method of finding truth and allows for non-empirical rational philosophical propositions that are also considered a form of truth, because the rational philosophical propositions are logical and cannot be reasonably contrasted by superior counter propositions, would be a view that would work with a Christian worldview. Perhaps a form of logical positivism could offer this reasonable compromise position between empirical science and related views and philosophy of religion and theology. 

Rationalism is the view that unaided reason can be used in finding knowledge without the use of sense perception. Blackburn (1996: 318). Christian theology uses philosophical reasoning, and a priori knowledge in deducing the existence of God, and this could be considered a form of rationalism and some logical positivists could accept rationalism in conjunction with an acceptance of empirical science. A priori knowledge can be known without the use of sensory experience in the course of events in reality. Blackburn (1999: 21). A posteriori knowledge can be known through the use of some sensory experience, and if something is knowable A posteriori it cannot be known A priori according to Blackburn. Blackburn (1996: 21). I realize the Francis link now appears dead, but I used the information from the page within my PhD. 

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

BRYMAN, ALAN (2004) Social Research Methods, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

DEAN, WILLIAM (1990) ‘Empirical Theology: A Revisable Tradition’, in Process Studies, Volume 19, Number 2, pp. 85-102, Claremont, California, The Center for Process Studies. http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=2791. 

ERRICKER, CLIVE, DANNY SULLIVAN, AND JANE ERRICKER (1994) ‘The Development of Children’s Worldviews, Journal of Beliefs and Values, London, Routledge 

FRANCIS, LESLIE J. and Practical Theology Team (2005) ‘Practical and Empirical Theology’, University of Wales, Bangor website, University of Wales, Bangor. http://www.bangor.ac.uk/rs/pt/ptunit/definition.php. 

FUMERTON, RICHARD A. (1996) ‘Logical Positivism’ in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

   

From your present close-up view this is Albert Einstein, however, from further away this becomes Marilyn Monroe, although not exceptionally clear. Please try looking at this picture from the other side of the room. 

The following are the portions of an article that specifically relates to my situation. http://www.aafp.org/afp/991115ap/2279.html 

Obstructive sleep apnea is a significant medical problem affecting up to 4 percent of middle-aged adults. The most common complaints are loud snoring, disrupted sleep and excessive daytime sleepiness. Daytime sleepiness and fatigue is a major problem for me. I have had it my entire life. Patients with apnea suffer from fragmented sleep and may develop cardiovascular abnormalities because of the repetitive cycles of snoring, airway collapse and arousal. Although most patients are overweight and have a short, thick neck, some are of normal weight but have a small, receding jaw. I have a thick short neck and a receding jaw of 12 mm. Because many patients are not aware of their heavy snoring and nocturnal arousals, obstructive sleep apnea may remain undiagnosed; My sleep apnea was not diagnosed until I was 36 years old. ...therefore, it is helpful to question the bedroom partner of a patient with chronic sleepiness and fatigue. Polysomnography in a sleep laboratory is the gold standard for confirming the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea; however, the test is expensive and not widely available. 

Home sleep studies are less costly but not as diagnostically accurate. Treatments include weight loss, nasal continuous positive airway pressure and dental devices that modify the position of the tongue or jaw. Upper airway and jaw surgical procedures may also be appropriate in selected patients, but invasiveness and expense restrict their use. (Am Fam Physician 1999;60:2279-86.) Obstructive sleep apnea is caused by repetitive upper airway obstruction during sleep as a result of narrowing of the respiratory passages. Patients with the disorder are most often overweight, with associated peripharyngeal infiltration of fat9 and/or increased size of the soft palate and tongue.10 Some patients have airway obstruction because of a diminutive or receding jaw that results in insufficient room for the tongue. These anatomic abnormalities decrease the cross-sectional area of the upper airway. Decreased airway muscle tone during sleep and the pull of gravity in the supine position further decrease airway size, thereby impeding air flow during respiration. Initially, partial obstruction may occur and lead to snoring. As tissues collapse further or the patient rolls over on his or her back, the airway may become completely obstructed. 

Whether the obstruction is incomplete (hypopnea) or total (apnea), the patient struggles to breathe and is aroused from sleep. Often, arousals are only partial and are unrecognized by the patient, even if they occur hundreds of times a night. The obstructive episodes are often associated with a reduction in oxyhemoglobin saturation. I have been recorded to lose my breath 20-30 times in 1.5 hours for up to 45 seconds. Nonsurgical ApproachesWeight loss is the simplest treatment for obstructive sleep apnea in obese patients. Even a modest 10 percent weight loss may eliminate apneic episodes by reducing the mass of the posterior airway. Unfortunately, however, this treatment option is usually not successful because only a small fraction of people can permanently lose weight. Moreover, success may be limited if patients also have anatomic deficits in the jaw. 

This is my current major problem. The government health plan appears to be willing to cover the cost of moving the maxilla and mandible jaw bones ahead 12 mm, but will so far not cover the $8, 000 in orthodontic costs needed. I would need to wear braces for approximately a year to move the teeth forward 12 mm in order to then have the jaw bones moved. 

CPAP treatment is used in most patients who have obstructive sleep apnea. With CPAP, the patient wears a snugly fitting nasal mask attached to a fan that blows air into the nostrils to keep the airway open during sleep (Figure 9). Because most people sleep with their mouth closed, the mouth usually does not have to be covered, but a chin strap can be used if necessary. Sneezing and rhinorrhea are mild but common complications of CPAP but can usually be alleviated with steroid nasal sprays. Some patients develop dry mucus membranes from the continuous positive air flow. This problem may be reduced by humidification. Another frequent problem is dermal irritation from the mask rubbing the face. Dermal irritation is most commonly reduced by changing the mask size or trying a different kind of mask. Perhaps the biggest problem with CPAP therapy is noncompliance. Frequently, patients use the machine for only a few hours a night or a few days a week. Sneezing, nasal discharge and dryness sometimes result in noncompliance, but CPAP failure may also be caused by perceived discomfort, claustrophobia and panic attacks. Patients with more severe apnea and debilitating daytime sleepiness are often more compliant, because they are motivated by the prompt reversal of their symptoms. The cost of a CPAP machine is substantial (usually around $1,000) but is covered by most insurance carriers. 

My surgeon informed me that 70% of persons do not continue to use CPAP. It does not work well for me as the mask is uncomfortable and the air pressure is very hard to relax with, in fact I need to loosen the mask significantly and turn the pressure to low. I can sleep with a bit of air blowing onto my face, but can rarely sleep with breathing the air back into a mask that is tight to my face. I therefore loosely wear the mask. 

Younger patients and those who cannot tolerate CPAP may be candidates for surgical intervention to alleviate obstructive sleep apnea. Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP) involves the removal of part of the soft palate, uvula and redundant peripharyngeal tissues, sometimes including the tonsils. This procedure is often effective in eliminating snoring; however, it is not necessarily curative for obstructive sleep apnea, because areas of the airway other than the soft palate also collapse in most patients with this sleep disorder. Patients who undergo UPPP must be hospitalized for a few days. Furthermore, they may experience the annoying complication of nasal regurgitation of liquids following the removal of palatal tissues. 

I have had the UPPP and nasal reconstruction and tip reduction surgeries performed with limited results. 

LYLE D. VICTOR, M.D.,is director of the sleep disorders center at Oakwood Hospital, Dearborn, Mich., where he is also program director of the transitional-year residency program. In addition, he serves as clinical associate professor of medicine at the University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, and the Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit. Dr. Victor received his medical degree from Mount Sinai School of Medicine of the City University of New York. 

I could quit theology and get a job working out 4-8 hours a day and I would lose some weight, but the fatigue related results of sleep apnea would remain. As I just told my Dad, I have absolutely no intention of quitting theology as a profession.:)

The dangers of sentimental theology II

Campo Del Moro, Spain (photo from trekearth.com)

This is my first attempt at writing an article earlier than the posted date. This is supposed to post July 1 at 00: 00: 01. This is a revised version of a previous article I wrote on this blog. I view this article as one of my more important ones and have thought that it needs more feedback. I have therefore reposted it with some changes in the hope that with my slightly increased readership more persons will find the article valuable and worth pondering on. The previous article was 'The danger of sentimental theology' and this is 'The dangers of sentimental theology'.

The last few years I have thought more about death than previously. I am not obsessed with the subject, but part of my focus with the Christian faith, and Christian theology, within the problem of evil and theodicy, is attempting to understand in some ways, what exists beyond death. In the last few years a few people that I have known have died, where as in previous times the only deceased persons I had known were my grandparents. I had lost pets to death, which is difficult, but it is not the same as losing a person to death for which one has had personal conversations on more than one occasion.

Scientifically and empirically (by use of the senses) it appears that human beings die and all that is left are physical remains. Some religions and religious persons believe in an existence of the human spirit that exists after death. In the media, and at funerals it is said sometimes that the person that has passed away has gone to a better place. This is speculative, assumed and hoped for, since the departed was usually and seemingly a good person, humanly speaking. This appears to be sentimental theology, and by that I mean theology that is primarily driven by feelings, that is speculative and lacks a significant use of reason that can be supported by historically based religious revelation. Please note, I am not stating that all theological speculation is lacking the significant use of reason. The naturalist can dismiss this sentimental theology on empirical grounds. Simon Blackburn defines naturalism as generally a view that nothing resists explanation from methods of natural sciences. A naturalist will therefore be opposed to the concept of mind-body since it allows for the possible explanation of human mental capacity outside of science. Blackburn (1996: 255). Henry Clarence Thiessen explains that naturalists reject the idea of God and view nature as self-sufficient and self-explanatory. Thiessen (1956: 32).

A Christian theist such as myself can reason that the person that has died was morally imperfect as we all are, was part of, and affected by, the problem of evil, did not receive direct communication from God normally, and likely not at any point, prior to death. From this there is not an obvious reason to realistically, and reasonably assume that a person that has passed away goes to a better place within a speculative theistic model which lacks historically based religious revelation. Within a speculative theistic model, I would reason that if a person lives an earthly temporal life apart from direct communication with God, then it is reasonable to assume that if God does grant everlasting life, it will not be some type of heaven in God’s presence, and therefore not necessarily a better place.

Biblical Christianity is not dependent on sentimental theology. Millard Erickson writes that natural theology deduces that God can be understood objectively through nature, history, and human personality. Erickson (1994: 156). But, it should be stated that although natural theology can perhaps bring a person to a limited knowledge of God, it does not provide revealed information concerning salvation or everlasting life for human beings.

Erickson explains that Biblical revelation views God as taking the initiative to make himself known to followers. Erickson (1994: 198). This would be a more effective way than natural revelation as God reveals personal things about himself through his prophets, apostles, scribes, and of course Jesus Christ, who is both God and man. It can be reasoned that this revelation is documented in the Bible with persons that are historical and not mythological. Thiessen writes that God revealed himself in the history of ancient Israel. Thiessen (1956: 33). God is presented as personally appearing to chosen persons in the Hebrew Bible through dreams, visions and directly. Thiessen (1956: 34). Thiessen explains that miracles were also noted to occur within the Hebrew Bible, miracles being unusual events that were not a product of natural laws. Thiessen (1956: 35). The Hebrew Bible and New Testament present historical persons that experienced the supernatural God and supernatural occurrences. Some will accept the historicity of these persons, but deny the supernatural aspects of the Bible, but according to the New American Standard Bible presented by Charles Caldwell Ryrie and the Lockman Foundation, approximately 40 authors wrote the Biblical texts over a period of approximately 1600 years. Ryrie (1984: xv). Not all these persons knew each other and yet spoke of the same God that revealed himself progressively over time. The atoning work and resurrection of Christ was documented and discussed by several historical authors within the New Testament and through this work everlasting life is provided to followers of Christ. The book of Revelation describes the culminated Kingdom of God in Chapters 21-22.

The New Testament provides information about the historical Jesus Christ and his followers in historical setting and this gives much more credibility for theology concerning the concept of life after death in the presence of God, than does sentimental theology which denies or twists the concepts of Scripture in order to fit some type of speculative theistic hope for everlasting life which is devoid of the significant use of reason and revelation. This is a dangerous way to approach God and life, as there is not convincing evidence for believing that God will provide a departed person with meaningful everlasting life, outside of revelation from God explaining by what means he would bring a person that has passed away into his presence forever, and/or place them in a better place.

There are many spiritual dangers associated with sentimental theology which include false hopes, and false theology. The ultimate danger is being wrong about God, and not receiving his everlasting grace and mercy.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

RYRIE, CHARLES, CALDWELL (1984) The New American Standard Version Bible, Iowa Falls, Iowa, World Bible Publishers.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.