Brief Opine On Political Correctness

China+Viral Nova

THE CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY (1995) Della Thompson (ed.), Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Political correctness is from the Concise Oxford Dictionary: quote (noun) 'The avoidance of forms of expression or action that exclude marginalize, or insult certain racial or cultural groups'. Oxford (1995: 1057).

Two recent events have me pondering on 'political correctness'. Therefore the post.

Firstly, one of the online pastors I listen to preaching from a Biblical, yet somewhat fundamentalistic position, stated that a political correct position was basically, to paraphrase, always the wrong position.

However

Political correctness could follow societal and cultural norms that are against Biblical standards.

Example: Acceptance of abortion on demand or non-Biblical views of sexuality

Political correctness could follow societal and cultural norms that are in basic agreement with Biblical standards.

Example: Acceptance that murder is immoral

Therefore, perhaps at times a politically correct approach is basically correct and true.

I am not in agreement with the pastor's fundamentalistic position.

Secondly, in regard to a comment that a senior security officer made that was somewhat humourous at work. I will cite it and then state that he informed me he would be complaining to head office because of the work environment but would not mention 'Chinese' to corporate head office because it may be considered politically incorrect.

'It's like a Chinese prison camp!' (Senior security officer after I describe his corporate shift in a caged area with no chair and no autonomous washroom break for 12 hours)...

I posted this as a Facebook status update.

In regard to political correctness, the fact Chinese is mentioned in context has to do with the People's Republic Of China and its reputation as a totalitarian state and regime and its treatment of prisoners.

Wikipedia China

Quote

'Prisons Foreign experts estimate that in 2000, there were between 1.5 million and 4 million people in prison in China. China does not allow outsiders to inspect the penal system.[15]'

End quote

It can be reasoned out the context of the statement is the People's Republic of China.

It is not a representation of all Chinese persons. It has specific context.

Therefore, the comment is not offensive in a non-politically correct way against Chinese persons, but is rather satire comparing the totalitarian People's Republic of China to the Canadian Security industry.

The security officer stated the next night...

The same security officer tonight claimed to be gassed out of the parkade by demolition construction workers...

Telegraph

Brief On Omnipotence & Omniscience

Drina Gorge, Serbia_trekearth

PhD Edit

Mill rejects Christianity[1] and traditional Christian doctrine concerning omnipotence.[2]  Mill’s deity is similar to the ‘Platonic Demiurge’ and this deity simply develops matter from preexisting chaos and therefore would not only be limited in power but also finite in nature.  Mill supports a concept of a first cause as in a series of events[3] but this leaves the nagging question and problem of what was the cause of the Demiurge?  An infinite eternal God can be understood as the first cause not needing a cause. A finite deity, although admittedly logically possible, requires further explanation. If the being is not revealed through Scriptural revelation, it is a God of primarily philosophical speculation and requires further elaboration on the part of Mill in regard to, for instance, why humanity should believe in and follow this type of deity, assuming that there is not a greater, infinite, eternal first cause that would necessarily exist behind that being.

October 21, 2014

Further

I take a Biblical, Reformed view that God causes and wills all things. It is demonstrated that God has sovereign control of creation from Genesis to Revelation as eternal God.

God, therefore would have complete omnipotence. God would be the first cause.

God would also have omniscience in regard to future events.

However, for balance, even if in reality somehow philosophically and theologically, God cannot be logically omniscient, as in the future cannot be known by an infinite, omnipotent being; God as first cause would cause the future along with secondary causes, and therefore the results would be the same.

Therefore, I hold that God does have omniscience, but even if God does not, God being infinite and omnipotent is still ‘virtually omniscient’ and still able to predict the future in Scripture and bring about eschatological events.

God certainly would be able to control the secondary causes, and each requires a primary cause.

A secondary cause having significant moral freedom as long as not forced or coerced to commit thoughts, acts, actions.

MILL, JOHN STUART (1789-1861)(2003) Utilitarianism and On Liberty, Mary Warnock (ed.), Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.

MILL, JOHN STUART (1825-1868)(1984) Essays on Equality, Law, and Education, John M. Robson (ed.), University of Toronto Press, Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

MILL, JOHN STUART (1833)(1985)(2009) Theism: John Stuart Mill, The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume X - Essays on Ethics, Religion, and Society, Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

MILL, JOHN STUART (1874)(2002) The Utility of Religion, London, Longman, Green, and Reader.

MILL, JOHN STUART (1874)(1885)  Nature the Utility of Religion and Theism, London,

Longmans, Green and Co. 

---

[1] Mill (1874)(2002: 16). 

[2] Mill (1833)(1985)(2009: 24).

[3] Mill (1833)(1985)(2009: 7). 

Necessary & Contingent (Brief From PhD)

Hallstatt, Austria-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

An infinite eternal God can be understood as the first cause not needing a cause.

Karl Barth explains within The Doctrine of Creation that the essence of God himself is eternal, he is before time, above time and after time. Barth (1932-1968: 67).

Note: This eliminates the need for the ‘Who created God?’, question. God is.

God’s essence is eternal and necessary (logically must exist), and the finite universe is temporal and contingent (not necessary). Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 191 Volume 1). God as a necessary being is therefore the cause of contingent creation.

Frame reasons God is the creator and the Lord of the beginning of history. This occurs within his eternal plans. Frame (2002: 389).

Within this view God is the implied first cause that exists necessarily prior to everything else. Pojman (1996: 596).

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of the Word of God: Volume 1, Part One, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark. 

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of Creation: Volumes 1 and 3, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark.

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of God: Volume 2, First Half -Volume, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark. 

FRAME, JOHN M. (1999) ‘The Bible on the Problem of Evil: Insights from Romans 3:1-8,21-26; 5:1-5; 8:28-39’, IIIM Magazine Online, Volume 1, Number 33, October 11 to October 17, Fern Park, Florida, Third Millennium.

FRAME, JOHN M. (2002) The Doctrine of God, P and R Publishing, Phillipsburg, New Jersey.

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

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Vancouver, recently

Secular Community

Facebook

Secular Community

My friend Jason suggested I review the video below, that he showed me on 

 

Free Will

Mr. Campolo was a Christian Evangelist.

It is noted that as a teenager Mr. Campolo was an atheist, but experienced persons being nice and loving from the Christian community via high school. Mr. Campolo was eventually pressured to believe in Christ, and later found out he was apparently targeted because he was deemed to be a good potential evangelist.

Biblically there is to be preaching and proclamation of the gospel message in order to make disciples (Matthew 28), but here with this story I see a common evangelical, evangelistic error. Placing too much emphasis on human free will in the salvation process and I do not agree with targeting.

John S. Feinberg, who has written extensively on the concepts of free will and determinism, explains incompatibilism is defined as the idea that a person is free in regard to an action if he or she is free to either commit, or refrain from committing the action. There can be no antecedent conditions or laws that will determine that an action is committed or not committed.

Therefore, there be no antecedent condition, including God, that would predetermine believe in Christ, therefore a person must accept the atoning and resurrection work on their own, although they can be guided with this view but not simultaneously influenced or determined.

In contrast, P.S. Greenspan writes that compatibilism holds to free will and determinism being compatible. Greenspan (1998: 1).

Louis P. Pojman, defines compatibilism as the concept that an act can be entirely determined and yet be free in the sense that it was done voluntarily and without compulsion. Pojman (1996: 596).

Feinberg explains that compatibilism does not allow for coercion or force, but holds that God, or some outside force, can simultaneously determine with the use of persuasion, that an action will or will not take place. Feinberg (1986: 24). Feinberg writes that certain nonconstraining conditions could strongly influence actions, in conjunction with human free will performing these actions. Feinberg (1994: 60). With this viewpoint, there will be no contradiction in stating that God would create human beings who were significantly free, unconstrained, and yet committed actions that God willed. Feinberg (2001: 637).

W.T. Stace (1952)(1976) explains that moral responsibility is consistent with determinism in the context of soft determinism and requires it. Stace (1952)(1976: 29). If human actions are uncaused then reward or punishment would be unjustified. Stace (1952)(1976: 29). Stace reasons that there must be at least some human cause within human actions to make them morally responsible acts. Stace (1952)(1976: 30).

Salvation is given by grace through faith by God through the atoning and resurrection work of Christ unto good works. (Ephesians 2). Ephesians 1 making it clear God chose those in him (4) in Christ (5).

Ephesians 1: 3-6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before [a]Him. In love 5 [b]He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the [c]kind intention of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

God chooses and predestines those who believe. Yes, he uses human agencies which would include preaching and teaching, but Christians should not be pressure persons as if a human decision, as secondary agents, secondary causes (decisions) is what saves them. They are saved by God.

Within the salvation process, God as antecedent, as first cause, acts and then human belief occurs, persons not forced or coerced. It is not a matter of libertarian free will.

One would not believe without being chosen and regenerated, but it is a significant intellectual, moral understanding as in not being forced or coerced. I labelled it limited free will in my doctoral work.

Myth

Transcendental experiences are discussed in the video and then it is noted that Christianity is of fairy tales and myths.

Oxford divines myth as traditional narrative usually involving supernatural or imaginary persons and other embodying popular ideas on natural or social phenomena. It can also be a widely held, but false notion. A fictitious person thing or idea. Oxford (1995: 900).

In contrast, the Hebrew Bible and New Testament is religious history. There are different degrees of literalness, but it is not meant to be taken as mythology. Therefore if the Scripture was demonstrated as untrue, it would be false religious history, but was certainly never intended as mythology.

According to Elwell in regard to New Testament Greek Manuscripts as Christianity is being referenced in this post:

Papyri Cataloged 127 Uncial Mss. Cataloged 318 Minuscule Mss. Cataloged 2, 880 Lectionaries Cataloged 2, 436

Total 5, 761 (Numbers in all categories inch up periodically with new discoveries) German numbers from 1994 and 2011 are accessed.

Over 5, 000 manuscripts, part or all, presenting the New Testament as religious history, not myth, or fairy tale.

First Cause

Even if the Hebrew Bible and New Testament documents could be proven historically false, this in my mind would in no way by default demonstrate the likelihood of secularism, atheism or agnosticism as correct views.

First cause still being a major problem.

As matter is finite and cannot be its own cause as this would cause a vicious regress, it requires a cause beyond matter and time, which is also finite. One also cannot have a vicious regress of time or the present time would never be arrived. Philosophical arguments for first cause do not prove the existence of the Biblical God but can serve as parallel truth to the creation story of Genesis 1.

Deism, in my mind is a far more likely alternative to Christianity than a non-theistic view, although I fully believe in the Biblical texts. Although Deism does not accept a God that reveals self it still accepts the God of first cause.

Community

In regard to purpose and mission, a secular, atheistic, agnostic community could I suppose rival Christian community. On a personal level, over the years I have found offline and online that at times non-Christians and sometimes non-religious persons have been better friends to me than Christians.

No question.

I reason this often occurs because of Christian fundamentalism, theological differences and at times culturally, socially driven reasons which drive barriers between Christian people when in reality Christians should be loving one another John 15 and all those that are their neighbour, Matthew 22, Mark 12. These barriers should be dealt with but this requires potential change by all sides involved, and so often the supposed easier route is the route of non-change. People in the Church wrongly at times support one another in this and nothing changes.

But, a secular mission does not provide a hope of everlasting life as does the hope of the gospel (John 3, Revelation 21-22). Any meaning gathered in this temporal life will be lost.

As far as meaning is concerned, the following does not on its own demonstrate God's existence or everlasting life. 

Premise 1: Strictly speaking, there is no scientific, empirical evidence for everlasting life.

Premise 2: The deduction is made that Donald Trump being a billionaire receives a life quality rating of 9/10. 

Premise 3: The deduction is made that the male drug addict on Main and/or Hastings Street in Vancouver receives a life quality rating of 1/10.

Premise 4: Both of these men shall die and since they cannot take their physical body or any of their material possessions with them their life quality ratings will drop to 0/10.

Neither person can take any of their earthly success with them because they are unconscious and dead and all that exists physically is their remains.

Premise 5: Trump's life will likely provide a superior legacy to that of the drug addict and some will at least enjoy Trump's legacy, and perhaps some will enjoy the legacy of the drug addict but as the centuries and millennia go by the legacy of both men will fade.

Even with Trump's legacy all persons that enjoy his life work will die and not consciously remember Trump or experience his impact.

Conclusion: Human life is not substantially meaningful, if permanently terminated. 

Outside of this argument may I state that the Christian understanding is that the Bible provides a historically based theology of meaningful everlasting life for believers through the atoning work and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christ was empirically viewed by followers in his resurrection form although everlasting life itself has not been empirically, scientifically demonstrated. The culmination of the Kingdom of God would provide repeated verifiable scientific evidence of everlasting human life.

Noted that God and the spiritual realm by nature cannot be empirically observed and proved. Therefore if God and the supernatural was true, academic means of finding truth such as philosophical and theological would have to be used.

Concise Oxford Dictionary (1995), Oxford, Clarendon Press.

ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.

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.

GREENSPAN, P.S. (1998) Free Will and Genetic Determinism: Locating the Problem (s), Maryland, University of Maryland. http://www.philosophy.umd.edu/Faculty/PGreenspan/Res/gen2.html 

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

STACE, W.T. (1952)(1976) Religion and the Modern Mind, in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers.

The Christian Church And Social Evils

Photo: Wales, trekearth.com

The Christian Church And Social Evils 

I slightly edited sections from my PhD and added material. This shows my perspective written in a moderate liberal to liberal secular department at Wales by a Christian moderate conservative.

Churches are Losing the Battle Against Social Evils

The societal move from modernity to post-modernism would demonstrate that the Church is in many cases losing the battle against social evils because of decreased influence.[1]  However, the Christian Church is a very large, multi-faceted group of smaller churches and it would take a major academic study outside of the depths of this one (my PhD), to conclusively answer this question, but cultural trends point towards a decline of influence of the Christian Church in the Western world.[2]  Hal N. Ostrander (2004), Chair of the Religion & Philosophy Division at Brewton-Parker College in Washington State,[3] writes that in today’s post-Christian era and society, Christians will face cultural and intellectual challenges to the faith.[4]  The Church is in a defensive position where it needs to defend a faith, not accepted by most in Western society.[5] 

Church Attitudes are Influenced by Society    

Elaine Graham (2000)(2007) writes that in a post-modern age of uncertainty,[6] many of the foundations of Western society are dissolving.[7]  Graham reasons there needs to be new ways of looking at Christian practice and the understanding of Divine reality[8] which feature the use of empathy and solidarity with others.[9]  For some on the liberal, progressive side of  Christianity, secular society can perhaps offer some practical, theological improvements to the historic faith.[10]  Therefore this question may be answered with agreement and yet viewed as a positive occurrence.[11]  Traditionalists such as Lindsell, will view any move within the Christian Church away from Biblical teaching as a negative (my view as well).[12]  Lindsell provides the opinion that many Christian institutions have slowly over time moved away from orthodox, Biblical theology and have gone astray.[13]  Some from the conservative perspective, who answered this question in the affirmative, may view secular influence on the Church as leading it into error.[14] 

A philosophical explanation in regard to the problem of evil may solve intellectual problems, but may not assist with many of the everyday consequences of evil. This is where pastoral care and practical theology is important. It is important and essential for the Biblical, Christian Church today to remain just that, Biblical with the proper use of context and academic tools. Prayer, fellowship, witness and mission also being vital. 

But at the same time, love is essential for those in society that do not agree with Christian views, as in loving one’s neighbour (Mathew 22, Mark 12, Luke 10) and so disagreements with Christian worldview, secular and other on social issues should be handled in a loving and not overly confrontational or overly politicized manner. 

The call to make disciples in Matthew 28 in the world, which includes other worldviews, such as secular, continues even while there are very significant issues and differences at times in the area of social issues. 

GRAHAM, ELAINE (2000)(2007) ‘Practical Theology as Transforming Practice’, in James Woodward and Stephen Pattison (eds.), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

LNDSELL, HAROLD (1976) The Battle for the Bible, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

OSTRANDER, HAL N. (2004) ‘Defending the faith in a post-Christian era’, in The Christian Index, Duluth, Georgia, The Christian Index. http://www.christianindex.org/206.article 

VEITH, GENE EDWARD, JR. (1994) Postmodern Times, Wheaton Illinois, Crossway Books. 

---

[1] Veith (1994: 27-46).

[2] Veith (1994: 27-46).  Ostrander (2004: 1).

[3] Ostrander (2004: 1).

[4] Ostrander (2004: 1).

[5] Ostrander (2004: 1).

[6] Graham (2000)(2007: 106).

[7] Graham (2000)(2007: 106).

[8] Graham (2000)(2007: 106).

[9] Graham (2000)(2007: 106).

[10] Graham (2000)(2007: 106).

[11] Graham (2000)(2007: 106).

[12] Lindsell (1976: 185).

[13] Lindsell (1976: 185).

[14] Lindsell (1976: 185).  

---

Divine Tension

Conwy, Wales

Divine Tension

From my PhD work on empirical theology; an interesting point made in regard to the tension between divine omnipotence and divine love. 

Additional 

Expiation: The idea that sin is covered over, through Christ’s death on the cross, his atoning work. The debt of sin is cancelled. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 50). 

Propitiation: The atonement offering that turns away God’s wrath. Christ’s atoning work serves as propitiation. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 96). 

PhD Edit

Related to this issue, according to van der Ven, is the tension between divine omnipotence and divine love.[1] Christ is seen as both a representative of the divine judge,[2] and the expiatory sacrifice and sufferer for humanity.[3] Expiation is the idea that Christ’s atoning death covers sin in believers and cleanses followers from corruption, according to Erickson.[4] Professor van der Ven is wise to suggest that an empirical analysis of how the ideas of God’s justice and love work together would be useful.[5] Understanding these concepts may be a struggle to many within the Church that are suffering, and ministers and leaders need to be aware of these difficulties in order to be of greater assistance.[6] 

 ________________________________________ 

[1] van der Ven (1993: 161). 

[2] van der Ven (1993: 161). Mounce (1990: 365-366). 

[3] van der Ven (1993: 161). 

[4] Erickson (1994: 811).

[5] van der Ven (1993: 160).

[6] van der Ven (1993: 159).

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. 

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. Pocket Dictionary Of Theological Terms (1999) Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (1993) Practical Theology, Translated by Barbara Schultz, AC Kampen, Netherlands, Kok Pharos Publishing House. 

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (1998) God Reinvented?, Leiden, Brill.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (2005) ‘Theodicy Items and Scheme’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud University, Nijmegen. 

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (2006a) ‘Dates of Nijmegen authors’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud University, Nijmegen. 

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (2006b) ‘Symbols versus Models’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES, PAUL VERMEER, AND ERIC VOSSEN (1996) ‘Learning Theodicy’, in Journal of Empirical Theology, Volume 9, pp. 67-85. Kampen, The Netherlands, Journal of Empirical Theology. 

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES AND ERIC VOSSEN (1996) Suffering: Why for God’s Sake? Grand Rapids, Eerdmans.