Wednesday, April 01, 2009

PhD questionnaire graphs (the problem of evil)

PhD questionnaire graphs (the problem of evil)

Edited for an academia.edu entry on July 13, 2022

Anse-Couleuvre, France (photo from trekearth.com) 

Thanks, Charles! For the help with the graphs.

The following will be in the final copy of my PhD thesis. I shall email all those persons that I have on my list that assisted with the questionnaire. 


2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter 

The survey results and graphs do not exhaustively reflect the statistics, but I only presented the most relevant results. 

Two-hundred thirteen persons from various Christian churches worldwide were surveyed. I present the thirty-two most relevant in my view, to my work. 

Please note that it is very difficult contextualizing often complex philosophical theology questions in the form of questionnaire propositions. I realize there are many difficulties with this empirical theology approach, but it has served as providing a vehicle for PhD thesis originality. Please keep this in mind when commenting, but of course your take on a question may be different than mine. It can be like trying to pull teeth to have persons fill questionnaires out! Thank you! Russ 

Question 1  
Question 4  
Question 7  
Questions 8-10  
Question 11  
Question 12  
Question 13  
Question 14  
Question 15  
Questions 16  
Question 17  
Question 18  
Question 19  
Question 21  
Question 22  
Question 23  
Question 24  
Question 26  
Question 27  
Question 28  
Question 30  
Question 31  
Question 32  
Question 34  
Question 35  
Question 36  
Question 38  
Question 39  
Question 40  
Question 42  
Question 43  
Question 46  

I am hungry for pie now...

Bibliography: Some key references from my MPhil/PhD and website work

ADAMS, ROBERT. M (1996) ‘Theodicy’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

ANDERSON, RAY S. (2001) The Shape of Practical Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

AUGUSTINE (388-395)(1964) On Free Choice of the Will, Translated by Anna S.Benjamin and L.H. Hackstaff, Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall. 

AUGUSTINE (398-399)(1992) Confessions, Translated by Henry Chadwick, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

AUGUSTINE (400-416)(1987)(2004) On the Trinity, Translated by Reverend Arthur West Haddan, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 3, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia. 

AUGUSTINE (421)(1998) Enchiridion, Translated by J.F. Shaw, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia. 

AUGUSTINE (426)(1958) The City of God, Translated by Gerald G. Walsh, Garden City, New York, Image Books. 

AUGUSTINE (427)(1997) On Christian Doctrine, Translated by D.W. Robertson Jr., Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall. 

AUGUSTINE (427b)(1997) On Christian Teaching, Translated by R.P.H. Green, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BARNHART, J.E. (1977) ‘Theodicy and the Free Will Defence: Response to Plantinga and Flew’, Abstract in Religious Studies, 13, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

BAUER, W. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

BEEBE, JAMES R. (2006) ‘The Logical Problem of Evil’, in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Buffalo, University at Buffalo.

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

BLOCHER, HENRI. (1994) Evil and the Cross, Translated by David G. Preston, Leicester, InterVarsity Press.

BLOESCH, DONALD G. (1987) Freedom for Obedience, San Francisco, Harper and Rowe Publishers.

CAIRD, GEORGE B. (1977) Paul's Letters from Prison Paperback, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html 

CALVIN, JOHN (1540)(1973) Romans and Thessalonians, Translated by Ross Mackenzie, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1550)(1978) Concerning Scandals, Translated by John W. Fraser, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1553)(1952) Job, Translated by Leroy Nixon, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1554)(1965) Genesis, Translated by John King, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust.

CHOPP, REBECCA S. (1995) Saving Work, Louisville, Kentucky, Westminster John Knox Press.

COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

DAVIS, STEPHEN T. (1981)(ed.), Encountering Evil, Atlanta, John Knox Press. 

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

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

ESHLEMAN, ANDREW (1997) ‘Alternative Possibilities and the Free Will Defence’, in Religious Studies, Volume 33, pp. 267-286. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

FEINBERG. JOHN S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, 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.

FERRAIOLO, WILLIAM (2005) ‘Eternal Selves and The Problem of Evil’, in Quodlibet Journal, Volume 7, Number 2, April-June, Evanston, Illinois, Quodlibet Journal.

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.

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press. 
 
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. 

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.

GRIFFIN, DAVID RAY (1976) God, Power, and Evil, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

GUNDRY, ROBERT (1981) A Survey of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

HASKER, WILLIAM (1989) God, Time, and Knowledge, Ithaca, Cornell University Press. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (1993) ‘C. Robert Mesle, John Hick’s Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique’, in Philosophy of Religion, Volume 34, Number 1, pp. 55-56. Dordrecht, Netherlands, Philosophy of Religion. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (1994) ‘Can Philosophy Defend Theology?’, in Faith and Philosophy, Volume 11, Number 2, April, pp. 272-278. Wilmore, Kentucky, Asbury College. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2000) ‘The Problem of Evil in Process Theism and Classical Free Will Theism’, in Process Studies, Volume. 29, Number 2, Fall-Winter, pp. 194-208. Claremont, California, Religion Online. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2003) ‘Counterfactuals and Evil’, in Philosophia Christi, Volume 5, Number 1, pp. 235-249. La Mirada, California, Biola University. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2003) ‘Is Free-Will Theism Religiously Inadequate? A Reply to Ciocchi’, in Religious Studies, Volume 39, Number 4, December, pp. 431-440. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2007) ‘Peter van Inwagen, The Problem of Evil’, in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, Notre Dame, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. 

HENRY, CARL (1983) God, Revelation and Authority: Volume 6: God Who Stands and Stays, Waco, Word Books.

HICK, JOHN (1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library. 

HICK, JOHN (1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University. 

HICK, JOHN (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1993) ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press. 

HILLE, ROLF (2004) ‘A Biblical-Theological Response to the Problem of Theodicy in the Context of the Modern Criticism of Religion’, in Evangelical Review of Theology, Volume 28, Number 1, pp. 21-37. Carlisle, UK, Evangelical Review of Theology. 

HOWARD-SNYDER, DANIEL AND JOHN O’LEARY-HAWTHORNE (1998) ‘Transworld Sanctity and Plantinga’s Free Will Defence’, in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Volume 44, Number 1, August, Springer, Netherlands, Publisher International Journal for Philosophy of Religion.

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.

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. 

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 (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, WILLIAM W., CRAIG, C. BLOMBERG, AND ROBERT L. HUBBARD, JR. (1993) Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, London, Word Publishing. 

LAFOLLETTE, HUGH (1980) ‘Plantinga on Free Will Defence’, in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 11, The Hague, Martimus Nijhoff Publishers.

LEIBNIZ, G.W. (1710)(1998) Theodicy, Translated by E.M. Huggard Chicago, Open Court Classics. 

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. 

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1986) ‘The Problem of Genuine Evil: A Critique of John Hick’s Theodicy’, in The Journal of Religion, Volume 66, Number 4, pp. 412-430. October, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1991) John Hick’s Theodicy, New York, St. Martin’s Press. 

MESLE, C. ROBERT (2004) ‘Suffering, Meaning, and the Welfare of Children: What Do Theodicies Do?’, in American Journal of Theology & Philosophy, Volume 25, Number 3, September. Lamoni, Iowa, Graceland University.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

LIGHTFOOT, JOHN B. (1993) The Destination of the Epistle to the Ephesians in Biblical Essays, New York, Macmillan. The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee. 

PETERSON, MICHAEL (1982) Evil and the Christian God, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

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.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company. 

QUINN, PHILIP L. (1996) ‘Philosophy of Religion’, Robert Audi (ed.), in The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

ROTH, JOHN K. ‘Introduction’ (1892-1907)(1969) in The Moral Philosophy of William James, John K. Roth (ed.), Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York. 

ROTH, JOHN K. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.

RUETHER, ROSEMARY R. (1998) Introducing Redemption in Christian Feminism, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press.

RUSSELL, BERTRAND (1957)(1976) Why I am not a Christian, Simon and Schuster Inc., in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds.), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers. 

SPENCER, AIDA BESANÇON (1991) ‘Literary Criticism’, in David Alan Black and David S. Dockery (eds.), New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Burlington, Welch Publishing Company. 

TENNANT, F.R.(1906) The Origin and Propagation of Sin, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

TENNANT, F.R.(1930)(1956) Philosophical Theology, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies. 

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

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books. 

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2000) On Christian Theology, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. 

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2007) Wrestling with Angels, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids.

WOODWARD, JAMES AND STEPHEN PATTISON (2000)(2007)(eds.), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

WRIGHT, N.T., Colossians and Philemon, (1986)(1989), IVP, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids.

WRIGHT, R.K.McGREGOR (1996) No Place for Sovereignty, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

54 comments:

  1. Cool...so that is what you came up with from all our comments..now that you layed out all the questions with all the pieces of pie i could think of lots of comments toward many of the different questions presented and how people have answered so strongly in some areas...i see lots of places where i agree or disagree but had not previously commented on!! :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, you were all little slices of pie.

    Thanks, Sherry.

    Russ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Somehow it did not load and I will have to come back another time

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks.

    I can relate to that problem at times with some sites. That is a reason I use three web browsers (Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and Safari), as sometimes a page will properly load on one browser but not another, for a time.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Somehow someone else took over my domain address. I have had to switch Night Writing in the Morning Light to a new name which is http://nightwritinglem.blogspot.com/

    I am still reconstructing. If you use the old name of www.nitewrit.net you will get some real estate site. I have nothing to do with this site or company.

    Larry E.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I am hungry for pie now...why?"

    Funny...but me too!

    "Please note that it is very difficult contextualizing often complex philosophical theology questions in the form of questionnaire propositions."

    So true! I found myself answering "yes", "no" and "not certain" to many of these questions depending on what is exactly meant by the question. :-)

    Question #28 is an interesting question. I like your stance of humanity being created "immature". As you know from my posts, I believe that "man" was created "perfect"...but as a type and, therefore, incomplete.

    It would be interesting to know the why of some of these answers, e.g., why does a person believe or disbelieve that God does not cause evil...or allow sin...or influence the actions of all people...or...etc.

    But again, as you suggested, the complexity of these questions make it difficult to have simple answers.

    Great work on all of this, Russ!

    Now I'm going to have some lunch...and some pie for dessert!:-)

    GGM

    ReplyDelete
  7. Larry, that is horrible.

    I hope that you can find help in getting your blog domain back.

    I pray the Lord will help with you with this issue.

    Russ

    ReplyDelete
  8. 'Question #28 is an interesting question. I like your stance of humanity being created "immature". As you know from my posts, I believe that "man" was created "perfect"...but as a type and, therefore, incomplete.'

    Well done, GGM;)

    Cheers!

    Russ

    ReplyDelete
  9. I can see you put a lot of work into that, Russ.

    I don't understand the Primary/Secondary/Tertiary Religious Labels graph. I don't understand what each of the numbers in each of the four categories represents.

    Interesting that 70% agreed that 'God is close to all persons"...similarly, many people think that everyone is a child of God, which is not true (everyone is a creation of God, but only the redeemed are His children).

    Interesting that 68% agreed that "God is beyond His creation." I assume that means 'God is distinct from His creation' since you already have a category for 'God separates Himself from His creation.'

    I see that 56% agreed that God is in all things, so I assume they interpreted this as 'God is involved in all things,' rather than a literal interpretation, i.e., the animist or Hindu idea that God exists in the rocks, in the trees, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks very much, Jeff.

    'I don't understand the Primary/Secondary/Tertiary Religious Labels graph. I don't understand what each of the numbers in each of the four categories represents.'

    For Catholic (example)
    213 sampled

    16 persons=(Catholic) Primary Religious Label
    12 persons=Secondary Religious Label
    10 persons=Tertiary Religious Label

    'Interesting that 70% agreed that 'God is close to all persons"...similarly, many people think that everyone is a child of God, which is not true (everyone is a creation of God, but only the redeemed are His children).'

    I agree that everyone is not a child of God as in the Biblical sense of a believer.

    God is immanent however, and so in a sense is close to all persons.

    It is a difficult question. I had an expert empirical theologian guide me to word these, and I personally do not like the wording much on some of the questions. But, he knows what he is doing for a British PhD.

    'Interesting that 68% agreed that "God is beyond His creation." I assume that means 'God is distinct from His creation' since you already have a category for 'God separates Himself from His creation.''

    God is transcendent. Yes.

    'I see that 56% agreed that God is in all things, so I assume they interpreted this as 'God is involved in all things,' rather than a literal interpretation, i.e., the animist or Hindu idea that God exists in the rocks, in the trees, etc.'

    Agreed, and another difficultly worded question.

    Cheers:)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hello Russ,

    That was great! You put a lot of time and effort into that i could tell. I love surveys that was fun!

    Tamela:)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Cheers, Tamela.

    That is the tip of the iceberg as far as this PhD work is concerned.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  13. By placing the results of the questionares in pie form made it very easy to see the results of each question in percentages. Very well done Russ, this is another great section to your PhD!

    -Hi to Pie-

    ReplyDelete
  14. Cheers,

    I suppose I could have put them in cake form (if such a program existed), but I reason that would have made readers too hungry and I would like them to take some time to comment before heading to the fridge.

    ReplyDelete
  15. great graphs and research... it'd be interesting to see how the demographics (age,gender,denomination,etc) map out to your last set of questions on theology...

    ReplyDelete
  16. God is transcendent. Yes.

    I found this interesting, from Wikipedia: Transcendence (philosophy):

    "The first meaning, as part of the concept pair transcendence/immanence, is used primarily with reference to God's relation to the world and is particularly important in theology. Here transcendent means that God is completely outside of and beyond the world, as contrasted with the notion that God is manifested in the world. This meaning originates both in the Aristotelian view of God as the prime mover, a non-material self-consciousness that is outside of the world. Philosophies of immanence such as stoicism, Spinoza, Deleuze or pantheism maintain that God is manifested in and fully present in the world and the things in the world."

    Compared to Wikipedia: Transcendence (religion):

    "In religion, transcendence is a condition or state of being that surpasses physical existence and in one form is also independent of it. It is affirmed in the concept of the divine in the major religious traditions, and contrasts with the notion of God, or the Absolute, existing exclusively in the physical order (immanentism), or indistinguishable from it (pantheism). Transcendence can be attributed to the divine not only in its being, but also in its knowability. Thus, God transcends the universe, but also transcends knowledge (is beyond the grasp of the human mind). Although transcendence is defined as the opposite of immanence, the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Some theologians and metaphysicians of the great religious traditions affirm that God, or Brahman, is both within and beyond the universe (panentheism); in it, but not of it; simultaneously pervading it and surpassing it."

    "Christianity

    Christians pick up on the historical dynamism of the future-oriented plan of the Old Testament and follow the immanent workings of the transcendent God in the story of Christ. They too believe that God's existence is ontologically distinct and fully independent of the material universe, and yet that He interacts directly with it. As with the Jews, this distinction is articulated in the notion which some believe to be unique to the Semitic religions: creation. Theologians thus have the onus of showing how God can still be regarded as infinite, although there exists, through creation, something that He is not, but which does not thereby limit Him. Thomas Aquinas, for instance, argued that although after creation there are more beings (plural) than before, there is still no more being (singular), because all that exists other than God shares in the one being of God, although in a particularized way. Jesus Christ is believed to be the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, but incarnate in the humanity received corporally from the Virgin Mary and a divinely-created human soul.[I think I would disagree with the idea of Jesus having a created human soul, but I don't know enough to be absolutely sure.] Thus, transcendence and immanence interpenetrate in an exceptional manner in the Christian faith, practice and theology. The mysterious and paradoxical nature of Christ provides a bridge between the infinite Deity and finite man."

    Anonymous said...

    By placing the results of the questionares in pie form made it very easy to see the results of each question in percentages. Very well done Russ, this is another great section to your PhD!

    -Hi to Pie-


    I agree!

    ReplyDelete
  17. 'great graphs and research... it'd be interesting to see how the demographics (age,gender,denomination,etc) map out to your last set of questions on theology...'

    Thanks very much, Lon. As noted, the material presented in not exhaustive and neither are the calculations I completed.

    However, from my PhD, here are my age results.

    Question 2: Age.

    The age group with the highest percentage and valid percentage was the ‘under 25’ group, with 29 ( 13.6%) respondents, followed closely by the ‘25 to 29’ group with 28 (13.1%) respondents. The next group was ‘35 to 39’ year olds with 27 (12.7%) respondents, followed by ‘30 to 34’ year olds with 24 (11.3%) respondents. It is interesting that the four youngest age groups were 50.7% of my total respondents. Are young persons more likely to fill out a questionnaire? Statistically there is a general decline in respondents as the age increases. The two groups with the lowest respondents are the ‘70 to 74’ and ‘75 and over’ groups, that together total 13 (6.1%) respondents.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Thanks, Russ... "evil survey" sounds odd, but yes, I did see it an enjoyed mulling over the results. Thanks for coming by the blog (you are disciplined about doing so and I will gladly return the favor).

    I know the feeling of accomplishment and relief to bring years of research and writing to completion (at least this stage of completion). So, I celebrate your own journey as well.

    Robert

    ReplyDelete
  19. Interesting results. It puts into perspective what general opinions and mind set is for diff people. And it was interesting to note where my answers are within the minority, hehehe. This is great work done Russ! It was interesting to see the education level groups-surprised me too. Kudos!!! --tandy

    ReplyDelete
  20. Cheers, Robert.

    I am glad you are succeeding as well.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  21. Tandy,:)

    Thanks for both your blog and questionnaire participation and it was good to see you when you were visiting the Lower Mainland..

    Russ;)

    ReplyDelete
  22. Very interesting study.. Let me know more about this...

    ReplyDelete
  23. I really like how the graphs look, you did a great job.

    I think I told you before that it would have been nice if the questions had a place for us to add our thoughts to better explain why we said what we said, or even ask questions. well over all it's a job well done. rick b

    ReplyDelete
  24. Cheers, Rick.

    My friend Charles did an excellent job showing me how to put the graphs together.

    Please feel free to add various comments on the questions.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Russ. Interesting to read the replies re your blogs. I know how much work you put into the study and thesis, and it did turn out pretty Great - and will be EVEN BETTER after you finish with all the fixings! Excellent work almost Doc.
    Mom"

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thank you, Mom.

    I am half way through my PhD photocopy binders that are each filled with writings that have me ponder.

    Love,

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  27. Russ,

    That "U.S. Crash" video is alarming, though not altogether new information. It seems that the fulfillment of Revelation may be starting to happen right before our eyes.

    What are your thoughts on Mrs. Obama putting her arm around the Queen? Our local (liberal) newspaper said it was a great thing, and talked about how great it was that the two got along together so well. However, I'm told by some who watched it happen on TV that the Queen stepped back and gave Mrs. Obama the dirtiest look.

    ReplyDelete
  28. So far two people have told me that the Queen had an "How dare you!" expression on her face when Michelle Obama put her arm around the Queen. However, I'm also told (and my Internet research seems to confirm this) that the U.S. is claiming that the Queen put her arm on Michelle first, and that they are trying to cover up the facts, and arguing in Michelle's defense. Most of the photos I'm seeing now are from the rear, so that you can't see her expression. My Internet research also revealed that the Brits were initially shocked.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Great post Russ! Most interesting survey. re: BHO, The Lib press will keep on fawning over their "messiah" until every thing he has touched goes to total garbage, and then blame reality for not being cooperative with his policies. Putting the least competent people on the planet in charge of a business system that's already failing due to the sincere "help" from that same bunch who are now there to make it better, while they double taxes and quadruple the money supply (thus, of course, once the banking sector has multiplied that "stimulus" five times again through loans) so the money we have after income taxes is worth twenty times less at the store before we start paying sales, vat, and hidden payroll, inspection, fuel, and road use taxes with our purchases at the store is sure to build a solid economy and consumer confidence. Oh, yeah- and if I don't believe all that I probably keep my sheets on a coat hanger, right?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hi, Russ. Interesting survey results. I've been away from blogging for a while, so if I would have had a chance to participate, I missed out.

    I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought some of the questions were poorly worded. I thought about a third of them (not exaggerating, here!) were too ambiguous to make the results meaningful. 13-18 are good solid string of them.

    15, for example, could mean "God is omnipresent" or "Everything is part of God". The former is a traditional Christian belief that I strongly agree with, while the latter is more like a New Age pantheisthic doctrine, which I wholeheartedly reject. The split in the responses on that one could be due to this dicotic interpretation of the question, instead of being based on people's genuine opinions.

    I think 18 is a trick question: In every sense of the word, evolution refers to genetic changes, as living things reproduce, and says nothing about the origin of life. So, life itself, no matter what side of the fence the people surveyed were on, cannot be a product of evolution.

    I do think the pie charts were a great way to represent the data, though! I hope my PhD thesis (in computer engineering) won't be THIS much work, when my turn comes!!!

    ReplyDelete
  31. All the videos I've found on the Internet so far look to be edited. They cut away from the front view just before Michelle puts her arm around the Queen, and cut to a view from behind, after they already have their arms around each other.

    But I did find this:
    "BUT the queens reaction was tandamont to someone stepping in dog poo."

    ReplyDelete
  32. 'That "U.S. Crash" video is alarming, though not altogether new information.'

    Agreed.

    'However, I'm told by some who watched it happen on TV that the Queen stepped back and gave Mrs. Obama the dirtiest look.'

    The media here showed the Queen placing her arm around Mrs. Obama first. It made them out to be 'buds', interestingly, recently UK radio which I listen to online has been discussing the question of the monarchy. Perhaps the two issues are related. The Queen may be looking for good public relations and the Obamas are huge celebrities.

    'However, I'm also told (and my Internet research seems to confirm this) that the U.S. is claiming that the Queen put her arm on Michelle first...'

    This is what the media's imagery here appeared to show.

    'But I did find this:
    "BUT the queens reaction was tandamont to someone stepping in dog poo."'

    Interesting.

    Thanks very much, Jeff.

    ReplyDelete
  33. 'Great post Russ! Most interesting survey.'

    Thanks, Dr. Robert.

    're: BHO, The Lib press will keep on fawning over their "messiah" until every thing he has touched goes to total garbage, and then blame reality for not being cooperative with his policies.'

    You make me smirk.:) Very good.

    'Putting the least competent people on the planet in charge of a business system that's already failing due to the sincere "help" from that same bunch who are now there to make it better, while they double taxes and quadruple the money supply (thus, of course, once the banking sector has multiplied that "stimulus" five times again through loans) so the money we have after income taxes is worth twenty times less at the store before we start paying sales, vat, and hidden payroll, inspection, fuel, and road use taxes with our purchases at the store is sure to build a solid economy and consumer confidence.'

    Yes, the new US stimulus debt is scary and seems over done.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  34. 'The split in the responses on that one could be due to this dicotic interpretation of the question, instead of being based on people's genuine opinions.'

    Yes, a problem with empirical theology/surveys is LACK OF CONTEXT.:)

    'I think 18 is a trick question: In every sense of the word, evolution refers to genetic changes, as living things reproduce, and says nothing about the origin of life. So, life itself, no matter what side of the fence the people surveyed were on, cannot be a product of evolution.'

    I never did like the wording of this, but my advisor did. However, some moderate to extreme liberals within the Church will see life as resulting from evolution via God. I agree the God is the originator of life. If there is evolution it is not macro, but micro, meaning species only evolve within their own species and God originally created certain species which evolved over time. For example, human beings could be postulated to have evolved into different 'races', but I totally reject Biblically or scientifically any notion that human beings were ever anything other than human.

    Thanks, Greg.:)

    ReplyDelete
  35. If there is evolution it is not macro, but micro, meaning species only evolve within their own species and God originally created certain species which evolved over time. For example, human beings could be postulated to have evolved into different 'races', but I totally reject Biblically or scientifically any notion that human beings were ever anything other than human.

    Cool, I fully agree to that!

    "In "Expelled," which debuted last March in theaters, [Ben] Stein makes the case that Darwin's theory of evolution has become ingrained as the orthodoxy in the scientific community and that anyone offering a critique of the teaching has been punished or ostracized. The film highlights a number of educators and scientists who have been ridiculed, denied tenure or even fired in some cases for supporting Intelligent Design or challenging Darwinism."

    "In press conferences promoting his movie, Stein has argued that the theory of evolution is partially responsible for the eugenics movement, the rise of Nazi Germany and the Holocaust.

    It has only been a couple of months since Stein withdrew his name as the University of Vermont's commencement speaker because of complaints about his views on evolution. According to the Burlington Free Press, the school's president claimed that he received hundreds of emails opposing the invitation and criticizing Stein's views as "affronts to the basic tenets of the academy." Stein defended his views in an email to the Burlington Free Press, saying the controversy was "laughable" and stating "I am far more pro-science than the Darwinists. I want all scientific inquiry to happen, not just what the ruling clique calls science."
    from: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Blog/Default.aspx?id=482204

    ReplyDelete
  36. Is it expected that your thesis advisor would have such an influence on your work, even down to the wording of some of these questions, when you didn't agree with his opinion? Sorry; I don't mean to sound like I'm picking apart your well-thought-out survey. :) You clearly spent a lot of time on it, and the results are definitely interesting.

    We totally see eye-to-eye on evolution. :) The evidence is clear that living things do adapt to their changing environment, over time. It even makes sense that God would imbue His creation with this ability, so that it will continue to thrive. But the only views I generally see presented in the media, are the two extremes: man-from-primordial-soup with no God vs. God made everything as it is today, with nothing in-between.

    I even read an argument that used the fact that God said everything He created was "very good", to prove that there could have been no death in Eden, and hence no dead animals to make fossils, until the flood. Plausible, but maybe grasping at straws a little.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Thanks, Jeff.

    From my reading and personal experience, politics is often a negative aspect of academics.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  38. Thanks, Greg.

    A real large negative with the UK system is that in my case I did everything I was told by two qualified advisors, and yet they have no say in my final grade. Two examiners of different educational backgrounds, not empirical theologians like my advisors, come in and demand a different type of thesis.

    I therefore now follow their instructions to pass in final terms.

    'I even read an argument that used the fact that God said everything He created was "very good", to prove that there could have been no death in Eden, and hence no dead animals to make fossils, until the flood. Plausible, but maybe grasping at straws a little.'

    Yes, this debate has been discussed on thekingpin68 and satire and theology.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  39. "Two examiners of different educational backgrounds, not empirical theologians like my advisors, come in and demand a different type of thesis."

    Oh, yeah, like THAT's fair! I feel for you, man! But, hey, at least it's almost over! Hang in there!

    ReplyDelete
  40. I am not an economist, but I am very concerned about the US printing all of this extra money and pumping it into a shaky financial system. It will be our children who will suffer from this debt over load.
    -Scrooge-

    ReplyDelete
  41. Interesting that 47% are still in the dark about election and predestination, although the number is growing it seems. Most of the other results seem to be in line with common thought.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Mr. Scrooge, you and Mr. Grinch should work together and write a book.

    Good points.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Thanks, Rick.

    'Interesting that 47% are still in the dark about election and predestination, although the number is growing it seems. Most of the other results seem to be in line with common thought.'

    Also besides Question 35, telling are the results of Questions 22 and 26. Much of the soft-determinism/compatibilism aspect of Reformed thought was rejected in both my PhD and MPhil surveys. I conclude in my PhD that it is not being adequately taught within Reformed organizations.

    My MPhil survey can be found with the entire thesis in January 2006 archives.

    Rick, much appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  44. wow, these are really fascinating. Funny how different everyone's ideas are despite presumably reading the same Bible...

    ReplyDelete
  45. Russ,

    Related to the problem of evil, ever since that heart-pounding very loud explosion of glass when someone tried to break through my front door 3 nights ago at 11:30 PM, I have now purchased an aluminum baseball bat and have hidden martial arts weapons in strategic places around the house. Even though my cousin says that nunchaku are no match against a gun, and I agree, I would rather injure a burglar/intruder with a bat or martial arts weapon, and have them writhing on the floor or unconscious, than kill them with a gun. True, you could kill them with a bat, and you could also only shoot them in the leg with a gun, but I think it's easier to avoid killing them using a bat, nunchaku, kali stick, knife, steel cobra, etc., than it is if you use a gun. I would feel very uncomfortable shooting someone, and much more likely to hesitate, than if I used a bat or martial arts weapon. And, no matter what my cousin says about the current laws in Florida, I would still fear the possibility of going to prison if I killed an intruder with a gun. Besides, there is more and more talk of the government taking away all guns from citizens. And the law has often not been on the side of those who try to protect their own homes, but has too often been on the side of the criminal instead. So, although I am now much more serious about self-defense and protecting my home against intruders ever since that attempted break-in, I still would not want to kill anyone. I would really, really hate to have that on my conscience. And, if I am killed, I know I will merely go home to Heaven.

    ReplyDelete
  46. 'And, no matter what my cousin says about the current laws in Florida, I would still fear the possibility of going to prison if I killed an intruder with a gun. Besides, there is more and more talk of the government taking away all guns from citizens. And the law has often not been on the side of those who try to protect their own homes, but has too often been on the side of the criminal instead.'

    Good thinking.

    That is an intelligent thesis, Jeff, thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I finally managed to see it all and I have one word only ...... WOW ...... What a fantastic study and also some very entertaining discussions here.

    ReplyDelete
  48. 'I finally managed to see it all and I have one word only ...... WOW ...... What a fantastic study and also some very entertaining discussions here.'

    Thanks very much!

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete