Kenneth Surin & Impassibility (PhD Edit)

Danube, Budapest: Travel+Leisure & Facebook

Impassibility

Kenneth Surin (1982) writes that God is considered by some within orthodox Christian theology to be unable to experience pain or sorrow.

However, others concede that concluding God is impassible is a questionable view within traditional thought. Surin thinks that perhaps God limits his omnipotence by identifying with human suffering. Surin (1982: 97).

I conclude that God suffers but cannot alter his essential infinite and immutable nature.

Statically my PhD questionnaire survey results showed:

Question 17: God cannot suffer.

Seventy-two (33.8%) respondents chose ‘D’, while 78 (36.6%) respondents preferred ‘DS’. Therefore 70.4% of respondents reason that God suffers in some way. It can be deduced that many of these persons would assume God suffers simultaneously with his creation when they experience the problem of evil.

SURIN, KENNETH (1982) ‘The Impassibility of God and the Problem of Evil’, in Scottish Journal of Theology, Volume 35, Number 1, pp. 97-115. Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press.

SURIN, KENNETH (1986) Theology and the Problem of Evil, Oxford, Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Facebook: Thankfully, I cannot relate but I will state it seems easier to be lighter on the other side of the Atlantic...

Richard Swinburne (PhD Edit)

Wales, Facebook

Richard Swinburne (1998) notes that many theists and atheists, due to Plantinga’s (free will defence) work, have accepted the logical problem of evil has been eliminated, and yet the evidential problem remains. Gratuitous evil.

He explains that whether or not the logical problem has been eliminated depends on how it is defined, and this ends up being a debate between certain theists and atheists on what hypothetical state of affairs would mean that God does not logically exist.

Michael Peterson (1982) reasons that Plantinga’s free will defense is sound in regard to the logical problem of evil and can be used to show that God must allow gratuitous evil or deny human free will. Peterson thinks Plantinga’s defense does not succumb to gratuitous evil.

Philosopher Doug Erlandson (1991) writes that theist and anti-theist have been debating the problem of evil for centuries, and the basic differing philosophical assumptions made by the two groups means that the debate shall continue.

Within my PhD work and online I have taken a compatibilist theistic position contrary to that of Plantinga's incomaptibilism, although in agreement with Plantinga on holding to traditional, Biblical Christian theism.

I reason a Reformed theistic, compatibilism reasonably deals with the logical problem of evil and gratuitous evil and the evidential problem of evil; and is more reasonable than incompatibilism.

ERLANDSON, DOUG (1991) ‘A New Perspective on the Problem of Evil’, in Doug Erlandson PhD Philosophy, Reformed.org, Orange County, Covenant Community Church of Orange County. 

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

PETERSON, MICHAEL (1998) God and Evil, Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press.

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.

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.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (2000) Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

SWINBURNE, RICHARD (1998) Providence and the Problem of Evil, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Very Brief On Sikhism

Scotland-Facebook

From Ankerberg and Weldon that document Sikhism on page 429

The religions purpose is to 'foster universal brotherhood'. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999: 429).

Its founder is Guru Nanak (1999: 429).

The Scriptural source of authority is 'The Adi Granth' ('the original book'). (1999: 429).

Guru Nanak claimed divine inspirations as did many of the 'principal Sikh Gurus'. (1999: 429).

In regard to God, God is considered 'Ineffable (too great to be expressed in words, my addition), and 'One' (1999: 429).

Jesus is considered a human teacher. (1999: 429).

Therefore there would be a rejection of the Christian theology of Jesus as God and God the Son.

The Gospel of John, John 1, John 8 and I John as examples for Biblical reference.

In Sikhism, salvation is considered achieved by works through the guru's grace. (1999: 429).

Human beings are considered inwardly divine. (1999: 429).

Sin is 'ignorance; one primarily sins against the Nam (holy name of God) or against the gurus'. (1999: 429).

Satan is viewed as a Christian myth. (1999: 429). Death is 'ultimately inconsequential' (1999: 429).

Heaven and hell are temporal states or places. (1999: 429).

In my present work as a contracted corporate security officer to a trillion dollar, multi-national corporation, I have befriended two Sikh gentleman that appear to act and live consistently with the concept of 'universal brotherhood'.

The one Sikh gentleman I work with most has abandoned the turban but still holds to the religion while the other still wears the turban. Both seem very kind and concerned friends and human beings. The first gentleman has hosted me along with his wife on two occasions when I needed a place to sleep and stay in Vancouver for two days between a security course and work shifts.

Note, this does not change my core theology, philosophy and worldview in regard to soteriology.

I have had religious and philosophical discussions with both gentleman at off times at work when the public and other employees are not present.

I would at least somewhat agree with the Ankerberg and Weldon assessment, although my knowledge on the topic of Sikhism is limited and therefore I write a limited review.

Jesus would be viewed as a human teacher within Sikhism according to the text and I gather by my friends as well from our discussions.

The religious views of these two Sikh gentleman is basically agnostic as they pray to and believe in God but have both stated in regard to God, Scripture, Satan and satanic beings that no one knows the truth in reality.

In other words, Sikhism at least for these two gentleman is largely a cultural, ethnic, faith that is agnostic.

Blackburn states that agnosticism is the view that 'some proposition is not known, and perhaps cannot be known to be true or false.' Blackburn (1996: 10).

This definition from philosopher Blackburn in my opinion would largely sum up the religious and philosophical views of my two Sikh friends.

In regard to everlasting life for example, when I have discussed and stated the Christian position in support of everlasting life and that Christianity is supported by historical religious Scripture; John 3, I Corinthians 15, Revelation 20-22 as examples, my Sikh friends have leaned toward empirical scientific understandings only.

I am fully in support of empirical evidence and science but also support theological and philosophical approaches to finding truth.

My friends I reason would take an agnostic position on everlasting life as in reasoning anything is possible with God, but do not seem too hopeful.

ANKERBERG, JOHN AND JOHN WELDON (1999) Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions, Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House Publishers.

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

Religious Literature In Plain View

Bagan, Burma, Facebook-Travel+Leisure

Oxford states the secular is 1 'concerned with the affairs of this world; not spiritual or sacred'. 2 'not concerned with religion or religious belief'. 3. 'not ecclesiastical or monastic' 4. 'not bound by religious rule'. Oxford (1995: 1250).

This past Monday, I arrived back at my corporate employment in the security department, after the Easter break weekend.

A laminated 'Stations of the Cross' which appeared to be religious literature was located in the documents pile.

This literature was viewed by the corporate manager that reacted angrily to the senior security officer that had been working on the weekend asking why (paraphrased) this religious literature was out in the open in the documents pile when it should be in the closed desk drawer in the lost and found.

The corporate manager further noted (paraphrased) that we worked in a secular environment that was non-religious.

Interestingly, the corporate manager belongs to a famous, wealthy and corporate Nineteenth Century Christian restoration movement from the United States.

The senior security officer is Sikh and later asked me in private if the corporate manager was 'Anti-Christ'?

In my view, the corporate manager that has confessed his understanding of Jesus Christ to me previously at work was concerned with what would be perceived at the secular work site.

In the security department we do have some religious and philosophical dialogue among employees when not dealing with the public, but certainly the public and other departments are not involved in these discussions.

In other words, work is not mixed with personal views.

However, philosophically, what is the danger of someone from the public, a client, or another corporate department viewing religious literature from a corporate and secular perspective?

I reason that although there are many reasons that can be provided beyond the small scope of this limited post; a major reason is fear of offence.

A fear of offence in a major corporate place of business, a headquarters in Canada for a multinational corporation with over a trillion dollars in assets.

Therefore

Many in the Western world lack significant theological and religious education, formal or informal, and do not have the skill for any kind of rational conversation in regard to religion or philosophy of religion.

From the corporate perspective, Western society is secular and non-religious in general and their views need protecting.

Further

Although I can agree that the business context is not the context for religious and philosophical debate, I would reason that if the Western world had significant religious and philosophical education, such offence would not be as much of a concern in the corporate setting.

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

Legal But Ethical?

Europe Map-TalkSport-Hopefully more Euro travel is in my future...

Blackburn describes 'the philosophy of law' as concerning itself with questions in regard to the nature of law and the concepts that structure the practice of law. Blackburn (1996: 213). These include the definition of law and descriptions of models of the law that attempt to explain difficult and marginal cases.

Concepts that need understanding are the legal right of duty, of legal action and the place of concepts such as intention and responsibility; as well the nature of legal reasoning and adjudication.
Blackburn (1996: 213).

Blackburn primarily defines ethics as the study of concepts within practical reasoning which includes ideas concerning good, right, duty, obligation, virtue, freedom, rationality, and choice. Blackburn (1996: 126).

Not synonymous terms although the law does relate to ethics.

Approximately three years ago my disabled, deaf via hemorrhage Mother had been in the local hospital for a major surgery and quite possibly obtained sepsis poisoning, sepsis delirium, with the lengthy hospital stay.

As she arrived home, the mental effects become increasingly apparent and when there was an incident with a utility, it was not handled very well and there was a water leak.

A flood occurred which left her condominium undamaged, but damage occurred to the complex common area.

At the time I did research on my Mother's behalf, homecaring for her, and was informed by her insurance company that the condominium was 'fully insured'.

When I spoke to the Strata President, I was informed on two occasions that my Mother may be found liable and responsible for the water damage to the common area.

I was agreeable, attempting to follow the law and to be ethical and stated that on my Mother's behalf I would wait for word from the Strata on how the incident needed to be handled legally and ethically.

Three years later, my Mother receives aggressive letters from a law firm demanding financial payment for what initially with the first letter, I was not certain what the context was, other than it was Strata related.

It was ambiguous.

I was not sure if it was for unpaid Strata fees, which did not exist, or perhaps the letter had something to do with the incident three years earlier.

I had deduced and had discussed with other complex owners that Strata insurance covered the damage done in common areas and this insurance was paid by Strata fees.

I reasoned this was why we had not heard any further news from the Strata.

But as it turns out, although the Strata may have insurance, that regardless of the financial amount that was covered by the damage to the common area, the amount of money, or a certain amount of money, the Strata pays out is reclaimed by taking legal action against the liable condominium owner.

When we first received the letters from the law firm, I went to the Strata President that denied any involvement in causing the letters from the law firm, passing me on to the larger association which is an association of several local Strata which our Strata complex is a member.

This representative firmly stated that the association of local Strata had nothing to do with the legal action taken against my Mother in court.

In other words, our Strata was avoiding the responsibility for actions taken and committed.

Therefore, it appears at least in British Columbia that a home owner is in a better and more reasonable position buying a house than a condominium, because when one purchases a house the homeowners insurance would cover water damage and fire and related to the building.

As it would with condo insurance with the inner dwelling.

However, if a neighbour's house is damaged by the same flood or fire and related it should be covered by its own homeowners insurance and the insurance companies should work out the liability issues.

In the case of condo insurance it covers only the individual condo and the owner would have to legally repay the Strata for insurance costs.

This is philosophically not a good and reasonable deal for condominium owners.

I paid the large bill Wednesday to the Strata and the legal firm Wednesday on behalf of my Mother.

Legally, the Strata and legal firm may have followed the law, but ethically I have concerns.

My Mother was not notified by her own Strata of the impending legal action. In other words, prior to.

My Mother was not provided with an option of paying the bill minus the court action and legal fees.

Therefore, the bill was significantly higher adding the cost of removing the lien.

My Mother was not given any option of making monthly payments. This is a very harsh way to deal with a disabled senior citizen on a fixed income.

There was no intellectual openness to any negotiating by the legal firm, despite emails from my Mother and then myself.

The lien placed on the property meant that if full payment was not made further legal action would be made to place the condominium for sale.

The condominium owner is also billed for these further legal fees regarding sale.

If I was not here living in the upstairs part of the condominium, caring for my Mother, needless to state she would have been removed from the premises.

Legal, at least in regards to the court, but very questionable ethically, on some points.

A good friend of mine that deals professionally as a manager with mentally disabled persons, stated that the Strata may have discriminated against my Mother by taking this legal action against her while she was in the state of sepsis delirium.

A reasonable point.

I, in the future will have no interest in purchasing a condominium, at least in British Columbia. Better to have a slightly higher mortgage with a detached home and be 'fully insured' or at least philosophically reasonably insured.

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

Update

May 2, 2015

I received an email Friday from our condominium insurance company stating they paid the Strata in regard to the damages. I had contacted the insurance company on the issue again at the time I wrote this post.

I am looking for confirmation of double payment to the Strata.

I will therefore now see what takes place.

Basicata, Italy-Facebook-Travel+Leisure