Debt & Romans 13: 8

Capri, Italy-Facebook, Travel+Leisure

In regard to the subject of financial 'Debt', reviewing Nelson's Three In One Bible Reference Companion, Romans 13:8 is provided as example.

From the New American Standard Version:

Romans 13:8

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8 Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves [a]his neighbor has fulfilled the law.

Footnotes: Romans 13:8 Lit the other New American Standard Bible (NASB) Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation Romans 13:8 in all English translations

Nelson's Three-In-One Bible Reference (1982), Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Writing on 13: 8...

Cranfield comments that 'Christians are to leave no debts, no obligations to their fellow-men undischarged.' Cranfield (1992: 326).

Mounce: 'The Christian is to allow no debt to remain outstanding except the one that can never be paid off-''the debt to the love one another''.' Mounce (1995: 245).

A key in regard to financial debt with the verse is the 'Owe nothing to anyone', although overall within Christian faith, theology and philosophy, love of course is central.

As a student I had many years to be frugal and conservative with my income and to prayerfully consider money and now have quite a strong theological and philosophical objection to debt.

I dislike being in debt to corporations and to governments. My British Columbia and Canada loans being bank, provincial and national loans,

Within the laws of British Columbia and Canada, as certain time has passed, I am presently negotiating far more beneficial financial terms student loans terms for the present and future.

I personally have no interest in new vehicle payments and unless one owns a luxury vehicle or high-end sports car, I view a new vehicle as generally a depreciating asset and would prefer to pay cash for a quality used import vehicle, probably Japanese, that could last ten, twenty or even thirty years.

A house, townhouse or condominium as an investment could appreciate and rise in value but I would not wish to be 'house poor' with a large mortgage, but of course would like to live in a quality home and not in a 'shack'.

It seems good and reasonable to have significant cash savings and the ability to travel to Europe for cultural activities, football tours and a holiday from work.

Travelling to the United States, Asia and other Continents also is reasonable for similar reasons.

It is also good and reasonable to have significant money to give to the Church and the poor, for example.

Romans 13: 8 is good and reasonable is regard to financial debt.

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

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

Nelson's Three-In-One Bible Reference (1982), Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

 

Professor David A. Pailin (PhD Edit)

Trekearth.com: Manchester University

Preface

Although I earned my PhD thesis research degree at Wales, Trinity Saint David at Lampeter, preceded by my MPhil thesis research degree at Bangor University, I briefly previously worked at Manchester University and my advisor was Professor David Pailin.

I lived in Manchester for my most of my stay in the United Kingdom. I did visit the campus at Wales on other visits and like Wales very much.

As discussed in articles previously, the Professor I had agreed to work with was away for a year and the two Professors that had advised me were not supportive of my Reformed views in regard to God and the problem of evil.

As the environment was totally negative from the start, by their creation, I reasoned I was not going to succeed under the political circumstances and I tried to transfer to an affiliated Christian college for the same sanctioned Manchester University PhD.

An academic board was informed I could (supposedly) not do the work required and it was blocked.

Admitting life is not black and white; I will admit that my brief time with Professor Pailin did demonstrate he did have an Encyclopedia like knowledge of philosophy of religion, which I do respect.

By God’s grace, I soon did the academic work required on two occasions with MPhil and PhD theses at Wales.

Potential employers within academia have informed me on many occasions that based on my Curriculum Vitae, even though I am not the right fit for the position offered that my credentials within Theology and Philosophy of Religion are very impressive.

I may or may not find the right fit as far as employment, as my fields of expertise are limited; but case closed, the argument is over, I have the same level British PhD that Manchester offered.

Defence/Defense versus Theodicy

I reason Professor Pailin was correct in stating that the academic defence versus theodicy difference was minimal, contrary to what I read from Alvin C. Plantinga, although I found Plantinga's work very useful in my MPhil and PhD research.

I came to this conclusion myself as both approaches largely speculate in regard to the problem of evil, as human beings have finite knowledge, in comparison to God’s infinite knowledge, although a theodicy is expected to be more robust and dogmatic.

I cautiously embedded a theodicy within my PhD relying on Bible, philosophical theology and philosophy of religion.

Process Theology

David A Pailin (1999) explains that within some process theology approaches, God’s existence may be viewed as absolute, necessary and unchanging. However, God’s character can change and is determined through interaction with his creation. Pailin postulates that God’s character can change, as he loves his creatures. Pailin (1999: 469)

In my view, the divine nature does not have a physical body that can be altered, changed or die, as in John 4:24 where Jesus stated that God is spirit. God does not change as infinite.

Enlightenment

Pailin (1999) writes that since the Enlightenment era, the traditional propositional view of revelation has widely, but not completely, been replaced by the understanding that divine revelation comes through events. Pailin (1999: 505).

Enlightenment thinkers tended to reject external sources of knowledge and elevated human reasoning. Biblical doctrines were therefore under suspicion.

Deism

Pailin, defines deism as coming from the Latin word deus and parallels the Greek which is theos. 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).

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

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

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

River Taff, Wales, trekearth

William Hasker: Theodicy Versus Defence (PhD Edit)

Saint Lucia-Facebook: Travel+Leisure

William Hasker (2000) within Process Studies explains that the problem of evil has been written about more in the last ten years than the other theistic proofs put together,[1] and the trend continues.[2]  

In his (2007) review of Peter van Inwagen’s book The Problem of Evil, he explains that a theodicy, unlike a defence, attempts to state the true reasons why evil exists[3] in a creation and world ruled by God. Theistic and Christian theodicy are therefore largely a response to initial Seventeenth, and primarily Eighteenth century and forward, secular criticisms of the theology and philosophy of God within religion and Christianity.

According to Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, and David Basinger (1996) Augustine was one of the first writers to comprehensively deal with the problem of evil,[4] and so it would seem important for me to review his approach in my United Kingdom, PhD.

2015 Note

During my research I found that a key exemplar, Alvin C. Plantinga held to a similar view in regard to theodicy versus defence as Hasker and Plantinga provided a defence. 

However, although I earned my PhD at Wales, I briefly previously worked at Manchester and my advisor, Professor David Pailin, I reason was correct in stating that the defence versus theodicy difference was minimal. 

I came to this conclusion myself as both approaches largely speculate in regard to the problem of evil, as human beings have finite knowledge, in comparison to God’s infinite knowledge, although a theodicy is expected to be more robust and dogmatic. 

I cautiously embedded a theodicy within my PhD relying on Bible, philosophical theology and philosophy of religion.

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. 

PETERSON, MICHAEL, WILLIAM HASKER, BRUCE REICHENBACH, AND DAVID BASINGER (1996)(eds.), ‘Introduction: Saint Augustine: Evil is Privation of Good’, in Philosophy of Religion, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

---

[1] Hasker (2000: 194-208).

[2] Hasker (2000: 194-208).

[3] Hasker (2007: 1).

[4] Peterson, Hasker, Reichenbach, and Basinger (1996: 231).