More radicals outside than inside

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

More radicals outside than inside

The book review continues... 

Chapter Three: The Reformers

Mr. Wallace opines that there exists today, in the media, Islamic reformers that are trying to promote the fantasy that Islam is a religion of peace. (23).

Wallace reasons that American leaders, politically favour this palatable form of Islam. (23). The author states that these political leaders have not done the required research into the Islamic scripture to even know if Islam is indeed a religion of peace. (23).

I can agree that the majority of persons in the Western world, have no significant education in religious studies and philosophy. These would include politicians...

Mr. Wallace explains that orthodox Muslims view these reformers as heretics (24), blasphemers (24), that have changed the message of Allah from the Qur'an. (24). Wallace opines that many radical Islamists can cloak themselves as reformers, for a time while living in America. (24).

And/or in the West, I would reason.

It has been opined in this review series that radical Islam has at least some significant similarities in regard to views on Jihad and Holy War, to Quranic Islam:

October 19

Quran.com 9:29

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

'Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.' 

In regard to Qur'an 9. 29 according to Nigosian states, quote in part: 'Fight against those who believe not in God, nor in the last day, who prohibit not what God and his Prophet have prohibited, and who refuse allegiance to the true faith.' (448).

Again, as I have basically stated within my review series, a radical Islamic view of Jihad/Holy War, or even the similar orthodox Islamic view on Jihad/Holy, is by no means the likely view to be embraced by liberalized, westernized Muslims. Muslims that have left Islamic countries for Western ones, are in the majority, more likely to further embrace Western secularism and liberalized Islam, than radical and/or conservative forms of Islam.

Those that are radicalized within Islam; those that are conservative and orthodox within Islamic, will largely remain located within Islamic nations.

In regard to Islam and the Western world, it could be stated that there would be:

More radicals outside than inside.

NIGOSIAN, S.A. (1994) World Faiths, New York, St. Martin’s Press.

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

Christianity and the Enlightenment are not completely antithetical (PhD Edit)

Canada.ca 2017

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

MPhil, Bangor University, 2003: The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives 

Hille explains that considerations on evil and the existence of God led to a criticism of Christianity and religion in Europe in the Eighteenth century and to some degree earlier. Hille (2004: 22).

The Eighteenth century was when Leibniz’ book Theodicy, Leibniz, G.W. (1710)(1998) was published as was previously noted, and this era of history was when much of the modern debate concerning the problem of evil and theodicy began. Hille (2004: 22). 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. Hille (2004: 22).

Veith explains that this age of reason features scientific discovery, and the rejection of much of revealed religion in favour of a reliance on reason. Veith (1994: 32-33). It was thought for a time that science could explain all of existence. Veith (1994: 32-33).

The term ‘Enlightenment’ refers to the philosophical movement among seventeenth and eighteenth century Western intellectuals. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 44-45). Enlightenment thinkers tended to reject external sources of knowledge and elevated human reasoning. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 44-45). Biblical doctrines were therefore under suspicion. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 44-45). In contrast, the Bible records these revealed events and they are perceived through faith for significance. Pailin (1999: 505).

Lindsell would support a traditional understanding of Biblical revelation where he states that through special supernatural revelation in Scripture, Jesus Christ is revealed to selected persons. Lindsell does not believe that a human being can be saved outside of this revelation. Lindsell (1976: 17). Grenz and Olson point out that the Enlightenment understanding of reason would no longer allow the Church to be the sole teacher of Bible and Christian doctrine. Grenz and Olson (1992: 21). Individuals with the use of reason would need to question Church teaching. Grenz and Olson (1992: 21).

Modernity was the dominant worldview heavily influenced by the Enlightenment. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 79-80).

Individual church members and attendees understanding of Scripture and theology is an integral part of modern evangelical thought, and this can be traced back to Enlightenment thinking, and to some degree the Reformation. Christianity and the Enlightenment are not completely antithetical, as they are both modernist philosophies which overlap at points in their pursuit of truth. Veith (1994: 43). Veith writes that in the late twentieth century these views have been replaced by post-modernism, which has less emphasis on absolute truth. Veith (1994: 19). This is not to state that post-modernism completely sets aside the concept of truth, but post-modern philosophies are often less dogmatic in approach than ones from the modern era.

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

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

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

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.

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

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

Boxing Day, but not in the USA

Rio De Janeiro at night: Sort of Christmas like...

Boxing Day, but not in the USA

Ultimate History Project.com

Cited

'In Ireland it is called Lá an Dreoilín, (The Day of the Wren) or Stephen’s Day. In England it is Boxing Day. On the Isle of Man, it is Laa'l Steaoin (Stephen’s Feast Day). Traditionally celebrated on December 26th, this is a day of customs ancient and modern; strange and ordinary.

As an official holiday, Boxing Day is actually of comparatively recent origin: Queen Victoria included December 26th in the Bank Holidays Act passed by the British Parliament in 1871.

The fact that it became an official holiday (a day when all banks are closed) at a time when the British Empire included Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, and Canada explains why it is celebrated in most parts of the British Commonwealth. The Republic of Ireland, which gained its independence from Britain in 1921, continues to celebrate the day as a bank holiday but does not use the term Boxing Day.'

Cited

'The name Boxing Day embodies the confusion surrounding the origins of the holiday. Samuel Pepys hinted at its origins when he recorded his diary entry for December 19th, 1663: “Thence by coach to my shoemaker’s and paid all there, and gave something to the boys’ box against Christmas.”

Almost fifty years later, Jonathan Swift complained,

By the Lord Harry, I shall be undone here with Christmas boxes. The rogues of the coffee-house have raised their tax, every one giving a crown, and I gave mine for shame, besides a great many half-crowns to great men’s porters”.'

Cited

'By the nineteenth century, Boxing Day, rather than Christmas or the days preceding it, became the day on which these tradesmen and in particular, postal workers were given boxed gifts or monetary tips in thanks for their services.'

Cited

'WHY ST. STEPHEN?

At the same time, it is no coincidence that Boxing Day falls on the Feast of St. Stephen. While there are several different saints named Stephen, December 26th is the Feast day of Stephen, Proto-martyr.-- Stephen appears in The Acts of the Apostles as one of seven men named to help ensure that the distribution of alms to widows in the early Christian church is done fairly.

Eventually, Stephen preached a sermon taking the people to task for poor behavior: they responded by stoning him to death. As the first Christian martyr he holds an important place in the church calendar. He is frequently depicted with a stone in one hand and the palm of martyrdom in the other.

Stephen embraced the gospel in opposition to religious leaders in Acts 7

Most importantly however, he is associated with the giving of alms and the locked boxes kept in churches for donations. These boxes were traditionally opened on St. Stephen’s day and the money distributed to the needy.

The connection of December 26th with poor boxes provides another plausible explanation of the term "Boxing Day."'

Cited

Whether through the box used to collect the money or the box used to house the wren, the day had also become inextricably mixed up with Boxing Day.

'However Boxing Day came to be, it has become a holiday of rest, relaxation, and time with family and friends for those who recognize it.

Today, Boxing Day is a day on which sporting events, shopping, and eating a second feast take precedence over giving tips and hunting birds.

Time: December 26, 2013

From this classic American source:

'If you’re looking for something that explains the origins of Boxing Day, well, you’re not going to find it here. The day-after-Christmas holiday is celebrated by most countries in the Commonwealth, but in a what-were-we-doing-again? bout of amnesia, none of them are really sure what they’re celebrating, when it started or why.

The best clue to Boxing Day’s origins can be found in the song “Good King Wenceslas.” According to the Christmas carol, Wenceslas, who was Duke of Bohemia in the early 10th century, was surveying his land on St. Stephen’s Day — Dec. 26 — when he saw a poor man gathering wood in the middle of a snowstorm. Moved, the King gathered up surplus food and wine and carried them through the blizzard to the peasant’s door. The alms-giving tradition has always been closely associated with the Christmas season — hence the canned-food drives and Salvation Army Santas that pepper our neighborhoods during the winter — but King Wenceslas’ good deed came the day after Christmas, when the English poor received most of their charity.'

Cited

'Boxing Day has been a national holiday in England, Wales, Ireland and Canada since 1871. For years in which the holiday falls on a weekend, the celebration is moved to make sure workers still get a day off (except in Canada, where it remains Dec. 26), but since visits to Grandma and other family obligations are fulfilled on Christmas, there isn’t anything left to do on Boxing Day except eat leftovers, drink and watch TV. Just as Americans watch football on Thanksgiving, the Brits have Boxing Day soccer matches and horse races. If they’re particularly wealthy or live in the country, they might even participate in a fox hunt.'
---

Yes, I just watched part of an English Premier League, football match, today.

But boxes are taken out in America today, too, even though there was an American Revolution and the United States of America is independent from the United Kingdom.

So these reasonably academic presentations have demonstrated that there is more to Boxing Day than my childhood tradition of taking my empty toy boxes to the trash on December 26.

A different kind of Reformation

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

The book review continues... 

Chapter Three: The Reformers

Mr. Wallace opines that many (In the Western world) are attempting to reform Islam as a 'kinder', 'gentler' religion. (21).

He explains that this revised Allah is a fictional god of people's imagination, not in agreement with the Qur'an. Certain people do not like the judgmental Allah that is war-like. (21). Mr. Wallace reasons that Islam cannot be reformed. As example, an orthodox, Quranic Islam interpretation, should not ignore the (later) verses from the Qur'an that are more militant and cling to the earlier more peaceful passages from the Qur'an.

A reminder of the theory of open-ended verses within Islam:

October 24 2017

Religion of Peace

Quote

'Does the Quran really contain over a hundred verses promoting violence? The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Quran are open-ended, meaning that they are not necessarily restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.

The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God. Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence.

Islam apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally don't stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology. Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.'

End citation

'Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. '

This worldview approach by liberalized, Western Muslims will often reinterpret Allah, the Qur'an and the Sunnah through a reformed view. I tend to agree with Mr. Wallace that this will not be orthodox Islam, but at the same time I do not see the growth of Western Islamic population leading to a serious threat of radical Islamic rule in any Western country. It is theoretically possible, but does not seem likely to occur.

I am open to future correction, but as noted in this review series, I see secularism as the prominent Western worldview for now and decades in the future.

Islam in the West may very well pass all forms of Christianity in population.

London: metrouk2.files.com

Logically impossible: Fatal condition

LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy)

The continuation of text review:

Key symbols

≡df = Equivalence by definition
: = Equal (s)
ε = Epsilon and means is
⊃ = Is the same as
⊨ is Entails
˜ = Not
∃ = There exists
∃! = There exists
∴ = Therefore
· = Therefore
< = Is included
v = a logical inclusive disjunction (disjunction is the relationship between two distinct alternatives).
x = variable
· = Conjunction meaning And
0 = Null class cls
= Class int
= Interpretation
---

Langer explains that a proposition can only be known via another proposition. (183). Implication is a relation that only holds among propositions. (183). Propositions are regarded as postulates. (185).

A postulate needs to belong to the system, in the language of that system.
A postulate should imply further propositions of that system.
A postulate should not contradict any other accepted postulate, or any other proposition implied by another postulate. (185).

In other words, symbolic logic requires non-contradiction within its system in a universe of discourse.

Requirements

Coherence: Every proposition in the system must cohere to the established conceptual structure. (185). It must be in coherence with the rest.

Contributiveness : A postulate should contribute and have implication. (185-186).

Consistency: Most important states Langer (186). Two contradictory propositions (or premises) cannot contradict each other in a system. (186). The inconsistent is logically impossible. It is a fatal condition. (186). It is not logic at all. (186).

Independence: Postulates should be independent from each other. (186). If a proposition is deductible from a postulate already provided, then it is a theorem, a necessary fact, not another assumption. (186). Something provable in a theorem would be error to include as a postulate. (186).

I would reason that within philosophy there would be plenty of debate on what is a proposition/premise within systems and what would be a theorem.

Langer explains that when a theorem needs elucidation, any proposition  implied by another proposition as granted and proved within a system is a theorem. (186-187).

Within a biblical, system and universe of discourse...

Gd = God

(∃! Gd)

God exists. Would be viewed as necessary and a theorem.

Within an atheistic, system and universe of discourse...

˜ (∃! Gd)

God does not exist. Would be viewed as necessary and a theorem.

Noted: Some atheists would state they do not know if God exists, and not definitely that God does not exist. But my example stands as valid. Some atheists do fit within my proposition.

Further

Sc = Scripture

(∃! Sc) ⊨ (∃! Gd)

Scripture exists entails God exists.

From a Christian worldview, revealed, supernaturally inspired Scripture entails that God exists.

The Wright Answer (PhD Edit)

Squidooit.com: Clarksville, TN

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

MPhil, Bangor University, 2003: The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives

Wright reasons the problem of evil can be solved in a straightforward manner by proposing that God predestines evils to occur for a particular purpose. Wright (1996: 197).

Persons do not have an answer back for God. Wright (1996: 197).

This comment from Wright is accurate from a Reformed perspective. I can interject and state that academically solving the logical and gratuitous problems of evil by tying them back to God is an ultimate intellectual solution, but there are still practical ramifications to deal with, such as why certain evils occur.

The fact that a sovereignty theodicy can logically and reasonable solve its problem of evil, does not mean that suffering often comes with an explanation. This is where practical and empirical theology can be very helpful when they offer practical assistance to those suffering under the problem of evil.

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

James: Double-minded revisited

Now

James 1: Double-minded from May 2013

James: 1: 8

a man two-souled unsettled in all the ways of him
anhr diyucoV akatastatoV en pasaiV taiV odoiV autou 

From the May, 2013 article: 

T. Carson writes that from James 1: 5-8 wisdom is a great theme of the text and that God does give generously and without finding fault to persons, but they must ask in faith and without doubt otherwise as a doubter one is like a double-minded man (person) unstable, a drunken person, and like a tossing ship in the sea. Carson (1986: 1537).

Barclay adds that a person such as this is as one with two souls, or two minds inside. As if one believes and trusts in God and the other does not. It is as if a civil war is going on inside of such a person. Barclay (1975: 46).

Being double-minded is to have two minds in regard to God. However, for example, if one has terminal cancer and prays for healing through medical intervention and/or supernatural healing, one would likely realize that God probably will not answer the prayer with healing in this life. So this is a form of doubt. But that person demonstrates faith and belief that God could and might provide the healing and that God is benevolent regardless of what God wills, based on his Scripture, related theology and even philosophy. This would not be double-minded thinking. Double-minded thinking would be to not consistently trust in God and turn to God and therefore doubt that God would answer prayer in times of trial, including when one would hypothetically have terminal cancer.

December 19, 2017

Courson writes in regard to James 1: 5-8 that if one lacks wisdom, he/she should ask God in faith, and God will give it to him/her. (1515). It is wise for the person that has a 'civil war' (Barclay) within the spirit/mind to ask God that double-mindedness be set aside, for instead a mind set upon Christ.

This way, when something is requested via prayer (James 4: 3), it is done with Christ-like motives and not from abundantly sinful motives. The believer in the body, has a tainted nature until the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15) but can be filled and guided with the Holy Spirit. Courson explains that many do not have his/her prayers answered (4: 3) because prayer should be more concerned with asking for the Lord's will for a life, than requesting a blessed life from human standards. (1527).

Bauer references the use of double-headed people in James 4:8.

δίψυχοi

From Strong's 1374

δίψυχοi δίψυχος, διψυχον (δίς and ψυχή), double-minded.

4: 8

oi 

You double-minded. Plural.

1: 8

ος

Double-minded man. Singular.

Both are in the nominative, describing the subject. Adjectives.

Bauer explains that these double-headed and more literally double-minded people stagger helplessly here and there without thoughts of doubt and hesitation (4:8) (201). This is a doubter in James 1: 8 (201).

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press. 

CARSON, T. (1986) ‘James’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

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

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

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

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

Superstition? (PhD Edit)

Media.timeout.com: NYC 2017

Superstition?

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

MPhil, Bangor University, 2003: The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives

David Hume (1779)(2004) discusses the danger of traditional superstition in religious presentations,[1] and doubtless a reasonable, open-minded, philosophical approach from a theist would be far more helpful within a theodicy.  He also warns against theistic claims of being able to adequately understand the Supreme Being, if there is one.[2] 

This Being’s attributes would be ‘incomprehensible’[3] and it basically impossible for the theist to understand the nature of this being.[4]  If Hume is correct,[5] constructing a theodicy would be largely meaningless.  To counter this problem, Biblical Revelation would be required in order that God reveals self in context of the issue of theodicy.[6] 

December 18, 2017

The historical manuscripts from the Hebrew Bible and New Testament documents, academically within the field of Religious Studies and related, connect to historical reality in a reasonable, realistic way, even if with supernatural aspects, that fictional mythological and superstition does not. If all or part of the Scripture is fabricated history, this would have to academically proven as a reasonable possibility or fact.

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

GUTMANN, JAMES (1845)(1936) ‘Introduction’ in SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.

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.

SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.

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

---

[1] Hume (1779)(2004: 7).

[2] Hume (1779)(2004: 21-27).

[3] Hume (1779)(2004: 21).

[4] Hume (1779)(2004: 21).

[5] Hume (1779)(2004: 21).

[6] Blocher (1994: 84). German philosopher F.W.J. Schelling’s philosophy is noted within the ‘Introduction’ in Of Human Freedom to include the idea that God’s revelation is ‘a genuine metaphysical necessity.’ This is in the context of understanding what is ‘morally necessary’ concerning God. Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxxvi).  

Sceptical on Restoration Movements

Coquitlam: Flickr

Sceptical on Restoration Movements

Seems to me that no post New Testament era Christian movement is exactly the same theologically as the biblical original (yes that includes evangelical).

The Protestant Reformation had a considerable biblical basis with Martin Luther and John Calvin, and others that attempted to stay true to Scripture in context. This is also true in the off-shoot Anabaptist movement, such as with the Mennonites.

Millard Erickson explains that systematic theology draws upon the entire Bible and does not exegete texts in isolation. Erickson (1994: 21). It attempts to analyze and understand Scriptural teachings in a harmonized way. Erickson (1994: 21). He makes it clear that Biblical doctrines may not necessarily be maintained precisely with the same form of expression as they were in Biblical times, and notes philosophical truth can be found from other sources. Erickson (1994: 37).

Within my Christian faith, theology and philosophy, I have been sceptical of restoration movements arising from the nineteenth century. With many of these movements there is over-speculation and a lack of hermeneutical approach that will lead to contextual analysis of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament and reasonable, sound, theology based on the Scripture within the Bible.

  

The video

Cited

'During the Second Great Awakening of the early 19th Century, a parallel movement in England produced the innovative eschatological scheme known as Dispensationalism, the creation of John Nelson Darby. This movement was widely popularized in American through James Brooks and his most famous protege, C.I. Scofield. For more free resources, please visit www.brucegore.com.'
---

Presentation includes

The Second Awakening era featured speculation on the Second Advent of Christ
Briefly on the origin of the Jehovah's Witnesses
Briefly on the origin of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Briefly on the origin of Dispensatiionalism
Briefly on the origin of Rapture theology

In regard to 'the great disappointment' from Adventists and like of October 22, 1844; these followers that identified as biblical Christians, should have known better. A reasonable contextual evaluation of Scripture would have led to a theology that abandoned date setting and instead would take the words of Jesus Christ plain literally, as context demands. Jesus Christ stated that no one knows when the second advent will take place (Matthew 24, Mark 13). The Church is to be ready for the second coming without assuming when the event will occur.

False predictions on the second advent lead to further error of a theology of Christ's invisible second coming. The second coming is to be physically, empirically observed:

Matthew 24: 30 from the New American Standard Bible:

"And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory.

See also 2 Thessalonians 2 which implies a physically returned Jesus Christ.

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.

Favouring Democracy over Tyranny

Favouring Democracy over Tyranny

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

The book review continues...

Chapter Two: The Appeasers

Barbary Pirate Wars

Mr. Wallace opines that America has tried appeasement with Islam previously. (18). He lists some historical examples of political dealings between America and Islamic nations and reasons that the appeasement of Islam only delays inevitable war. (18-19).

However, I would opine that at this time in history with the United States of America having the most powerful military in world history, this makes the NATO alliance the most powerful on the planet. Accepting the existence of Islamic terrorism which includes suicide attacks as a tool of terror, it is still true that the power of the United States of America and NATO does deter an Islamic nation from making war.

I stated in the last review of this text in regard to Shariah, dated December 8:

'An argument that inevitably this will expand to cover criminal law, or all laws of a nation, if there is an Islamic majority (or significant minority) in population, depends on one reasoning that Westernized Muslims in Western countries will embrace Shariah, as opposed to secularism and secular law. Shariah law and Islam is definitely and definitively very religious and Western secularism is (of course) definitely and definitively secular.

At this point, I do not see the West in any form becoming anything other than more secular, but I am open-minded....

Again, as noted in previous reviews, time will tell.'

Driving home from work last evening, I listened to Fortress of Faith, which is Mr. Wallace's fifteen minute radio broadcast (KARI: Blaine, Washington). He made an informative and interesting presentation on (paraphrased) why Islam cannot accept democracy.

Within Christianity and Islam, he noted philosophical concepts of first (God) and second (The created) causes. 'Cause' is often discussed on this website, in the context of theodicy, the problem of evil, free will and determinism. Mr. Wallace listed (paraphrased) laws of nature as a secondary cause. I agree and also have noted that human beings and angelic/demonic beings can also serve as rational secondary causes.

Also within his presentation he provided (paraphrased) an estimation that eight out of ten (80%) of Muslims that immigrate to America would like to be free from Islamic political dictatorship and tyranny, even if still holding to the religion.

If we allowed for a number less that 80% for the rest of Western world with Islamic immigration, it could be reasoned the number will still be over 50%. If these types of deductions are correct, and Mr. Wallace supports the first one, I reason that even if a Western country develops a majority of Islamic population or significant minority, it is reasonable premise to suggest that these Muslims, in majority, will politically embrace democracy as opposed to an Islamic religion-stare model.

A premise that most within Islam that immigrate to the West, favour and will favour, secularism over radical Islam, is a cumulative premise in support of an argument that the main worldview embraced in the Western world will continue to be secularism. At least in this present era and for the foreseeable future.

Is God Misunderstood? (PhD Edit)

I was invited to a Willingdon Church drama last night. Kool, two-tier set.

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

MPhil, Bangor University, 2003: The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives

Philosopher Theodore P. Rebard (1996) states that the logical problem of evil exists since God is omnibenevolent  and omnipotent, and writes critics can view the logical problem as meaning that if God cannot end evil, he is not omnipotent, and if he can prevent evil and does not, he is not omnibenevolent or all loving. Rebard (1996: 1). Greek philosopher Epicurus was known to have made a similar statement.  Epicurus (341-270 B.C.)(1949: 80). Rebard concludes that God either does not exist or is misunderstood.  Rebard (1996: 1).

It should also be stated that the problem of evil is not only an intellectual problem, but as R.K. McGregor Wright (1996) notes, a great deal of moral and emotional freight goes along with the problem of evil. Wright (1996: 178). He connects this to the fact that many philosophers have viewed the problem of evil as a disproof of God. Wright (1996: 178).  

Throughout my Wales, PhD (2010), I explained that God has been largely misunderstood and, although Biblical revelation, theology, and philosophy do not provide an exhaustive and absolutely conclusive answer to the logical problem, there are reasonable solutions to the difficulty of evil existing within God’s creation.

As a moderate conservative that holds to Reformed theology, I reason that the atoning and resurrection work applied to believers in the eventual culminated Kingdom of God is the ultimate remedy for the problem of evil. I must be clear: theodicy is not the remedy to the problem of evil, but a speculative, and in my case, Biblically based attempt to explain how God deals with evil in his creation. In similar fashion, practical and empirical theology  do not offer solutions to the problem of evil, but are theological disciplines which assist persons to understand how evil is comprehended and dealt with in the Christian community and in society at large.

Even with the understanding that God and Christ will eventually save the world from evil (Mounce (1990: 369-397)), and that this can be explained in ways through theodicy, does not mean that I or any theologian or philosopher can always provide specific reasons and answers for each instance of evil and suffering in creation. I can approach my theodicy presentation with confidence, but should always possess great humility. Although I do not side with critics that doubt that theism can be squared with the evil that takes place in this world, I fully admit that in many cases of evil and suffering, only God has a comprehensive understanding of what is occurring, and why it is occurring.

Therefore, theists and atheists from various perspectives are all left with degrees of ignorance in regard to the problem of evil. No person can fully understand evil and the suffering that results in every case. Theists and atheists are therefore left with using reason, and in the case of the Christian theist, the Bible to work out theories concerning the problem of evil.

---

EPICURUS (341-270 B.C.)(1949) in Overcoming Evil from the German translation, Von der Ueberwindung der Furcht, Zurich, Von der Ueberwindung der Furcht.

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

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

REBARD, THEODORE P. (1996) ‘The Problem of Evil Revisited’, in Catholic.net, North Haven, Connecticut, Christian Philosophy, Catholic. net.http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Faith/1112-96/philos1.html

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

Scientism II

Standard.co.uk: London 2017

Last night, I discussed with a friend on the phone, his (paraphrased) online course on early Christianity from a secular University. The teaching includes premises which are skeptical of the claimed supernatural, revealed origins of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament.

I opined (paraphrased) that much of this was rooted in worldviews of empiricism, scientism and naturalism. I had been educated in regard to aspects of empiricism and naturalism while studying for my bible school and seminary degrees in Canada, well before my interaction with them with the theses research degrees in Wales-England.

Oxford Science

Empiricism: 'Denotes a result that is observed by experiment or observation rather than by theory.' (287). I view this as a legitimate academic approach in reasonable contexts.

Stanford Dictionary of Philosophy

Cited

'These philosophers aimed to ally philosophy more closely with science. They urged that reality is exhausted by nature, containing nothing “supernatural”, and that the scientific method should be used to investigate all areas of reality, including the “human spirit” (Krikorian 1944; Kim 2003).'

'So understood, “naturalism” is not a particularly informative term as applied to contemporary philosophers. The great majority of contemporary philosophers would happily accept naturalism as just characterized—that is, they would both reject “supernatural” entities, and allow that science is a possible route (if not necessarily the only one) to important truths about the “human spirit”.

Even so, this entry will not aim to pin down any more informative definition of “naturalism”. It would be fruitless to try to adjudicate some official way of understanding the term. Different contemporary philosophers interpret “naturalism” differently. This disagreement about usage is no accident. For better or worse, “naturalism” is widely viewed as a positive term in philosophical circles—few active philosophers nowadays are happy to announce themselves as “non-naturalists”'
---

Interesting definition and explanation from Stanford. In writing and discussion I have focused more on the terms 'empiricism' (nothing wrong with that view in itself) and the extreme position of scientism.

Scientism November 2014

Blackburn

Scientism: A pejorative term for the concept that only the methods of natural science and related categories form the elements for any philosophical or other enquiry. Blackburn (1996: 344).

From Oxford Dictionary

Scientism: 1 a a method or doctrine regarded as characteristic of scientists b the use of practice of this. 2 often derogatory, an excessive belief in or application of scientific method. Oxford (1995: 1236).
---

A person holding to scientism may abandon the need for a contextual evaluation of Scripture and the revealed word of God in regard to origins and creation; instead embracing scientific explanations alone.

As a moderate conservative Christian of Reformed and Anabaptist traditions, I reason there is a need for openness to scientific truths, as in being open to inductive scientific evidences and the use of empiricism.

For the sake of a reasonable, balanced academic approach, the entirety of worldview should be never be reasoned at the expenses of Biblical revelation and theological and philosophical deductive evidences within the academic disciplines of biblical studies, theology and philosophy of religion.

Scientism should be academically rejected.

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

OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE (2010) Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

Wimp.com

An empty class

VanDusen Botanical Garden 2017

LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy)

An empty class

The continuation of text review: 

Key symbols

≡df = Equivalence by definition
: = Equal (s)
ε = Epsilon and means is
⊃ = Is the same as
⊨ is Entails
˜ = Not
∃ = There exists
∃! = There exists
∴ = Therefore
· = Therefore
< = Is included
v = a logical inclusive disjunction (disjunction is the relationship between two distinct alternatives).
x = variable
· = Conjunction meaning And
0 = Null class
cls = Class
int= Interpretation

Previously

The universe class is not the same as the universe of discourse. In other words the universe of discourse contains the universe class. The universe class does not contain the universe of discourse. (170).
---

Generalized System of Classes

This review has progressed where we are now at the point in the textbook where philosopher, Langer explains that we have passed from a system of individuals and predicates, such as a class of white houses (wt) and a class of brick houses (bk). (171).

This leads to a system of certain classes < = Is included as in houses = white houses and brick houses. (171). Etcetera, including red houses (rd), green houses (gn), wood houses (wd).

This means that in any universe whose elements are classes there is one class having the logical properties of 'the class of no houses'. (172). This is also known as an empty class, and this class is included in every class of the universe. (172).

Langer explains that in each universe there is one 'greatest class' which is analogous to 'the class of all houses'. (172-173). This includes every class is the universe. (173). Langer means in this context, the universe of discourse for symbolic logic.

Therefore, for any class, there is at least one class 0 included.
Therefore, for any class, there is at least one class 1 included.

(∃0) (a) : 0 < a
There exists at least one class 0 that for any class a, 0 is included in a. (173).

(∃1) (a) : 0 < a
There exists at least one class 1 that for any class a, 1 is included in a. (173).

0 represents there is a class of no houses in this universe of discourse.
1 represents there is a class of houses in this universe of discourse.

This specific system. (173).

For any Universe of discourse, such as K (houses) whose elements are classes contains a 0 and a 1.(173). There are houses and non-houses. There are Christians and non-Christians, there are Canadians and non-Canadians, etcetera.

(∃!) (cr)  : 0 < cr

There exists at least one class 0 that for any class cr (Christians), 0 is included in a.

There is a class of no Christians, in this universe of discourse.

(∃!) (cr)  : 1< cr

There exists at least one class 1 that for any class cr (Christians), 1 is included in a.

There is a class of Christians, in this universe of discourse.

More common sense from Dalrock

Tonight: Forty minute round trip walk to and from Christmas party.

Dalrock blog

Devouring a lifetime of courtship. Posted on December 8, 2017

Cited

'I’ve written in the past about women’s complaints that men aren’t meeting their expectations for courtship, and why it is entirely rational for men to either withdraw from traditional courtship altogether or limit and carefully target their courtship expenditure. Women have (as a group) greatly expanded the period of time they expect men to court them.'

I would reason that many Christian men are not dating or courting Christian women, because it is not considered rationally a good deal. This even while considering the Biblical theology from 1 Corinthians 7 and 2 Corinthians 6, as examples, if one is so theologically inclined.

Cited

'But what about her imagined future husband? Will it be worth the wait for him? If she’s 53 and still hasn’t found him yet, he’ll probably be in his 50s or early 60s by the time they marry. Will 30-40 years of courtship all be worth it to marry a woman who is too old to have children, a woman who spent her youth building her career while forming and dissolving romantic attachments with a parade of other men? Was it really God’s plan for him to spend 40 years wandering in a sexual desert, buying an endless string of unserious and ever more demanding women dinner (and more), to ultimately marry a woman in her 50s?'

Many Christian men may have not given up on dating and marriage by this time, but they will be significantly discouraged by the philosophical fusion of feminism and evangelical Christian culture with a little bible (maybe) in the typical female romantic relationship philosophy.

Cited

'As a sign of our age, not one of the 98 reviews currently on Amazon.com points out how ridiculous it is for a never married woman in her fifties to offer herself as a husband hunting role model.'

Agreed.

Marriage strike paradox. Posted on November 8, 2017

Cited

'What we are seeing instead is women continuing to push out the age of marriage. As they are doing this, they are changing the signal young men receive regarding how to be sexually successful. Beta Bucks (BB) used to be a very effective strategy for an 18 year old young man. He might have to wait a few years, but he could see the plan working for his 3-5 year older bother and his friend’s older brother. Now a young man would have to look to men 10-15 years older to see examples of the BB model finally paying off. Meanwhile, they see the Alpha F**** (AF) model working all around them. AF gets rewarded, and BB is not only not rewarded for a decade or more, but our whole society (especially Christians) despises husbands and fathers, the epitome of the BB model. This is a very powerful message, and an unmistakable one.'

I do not view husbands and fathers as being despised in the Metropolitan Vancouver and Fraser Valley evangelical Christian culture.

But, yes, the extroverted men would tend to do better in the dating and marriage department. Sadly, whether someone is an extrovert or introvert has nothing to do with Biblical character.

Personality over character, in many Western, Christian romantic relationships, as I have mentioned previously. This shows how little depth many evangelicals have today in the romantic choices they make.

Cited

'Not surprisingly, we are starting to see fewer men working hard to signal BB status in their late teens and early 20s. When the party girls suddenly decide they aren’t that kind of girl, they still find nearly all of the would be BB men are willing to marry, but many of these men haven’t done the preparation needed to really fulfill the role. They can no more go back and spend their teens and 20s on education and career advancement than the 30 ish career gal can go back and dedicate her most attractive and fertile years to her husband. Many of the men they find have instead been working like women. Also, the men who did well in the AF paradigm and are eventually inclined (and prepared) to marry aren’t going to prefer aging career gals. They are the ones with options, and the prettiest marriage seekers have the best shot with them. This means the women who waited too long to marry are stuck with terrible prospects. Choosing last always sucks, but men’s rational response to women’s anti-BB signal means it sucks much more now than it did in the past.'

'When the party girls suddenly decide they aren’t that kind of girl, they still find nearly all of the would be BB men are willing to marry, but many of these men haven’t done the preparation needed to really fulfill the role. '

Yes, many of these men would lack dating and romantic relationship experience.

'They can no more go back and spend their teens and 20s on education and career advancement than the 30 ish career gal can go back and dedicate her most attractive and fertile years to her husband.'

 I spent my twenties on career advancement in academia, but the second point is problematic and true.

'Also, the men who did well in the AF paradigm and are eventually inclined (and prepared) to marry aren’t going to prefer aging career gals. They are the ones with options, and the prettiest marriage seekers have the best shot with them. This means the women who waited too long to marry are stuck with terrible prospects. Choosing last always sucks, but men’s rational response to women’s anti-BB signal means it sucks much more now than it did in the past.'

I can agree than many extroverted men are not going to be prefer aging women. The same for many introverted men. I do reason that many men will still prefer romantic relationships with a close age difference. But this will be the men that will tend not to desire children.

That is not me.

'but men’s rational response to women’s anti-BB signal means it sucks much more now than it did in the past.'

The rational response being non-participation, unless a suitable Christian young woman is met. I am not stating that many rational Christian men will be anti-social (nor should they be), but the reasonable Christian male will not invest in what does not seem rational to do.

Shariah

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

The book review continues...

Chapter Two: The Appeasers

Shariah Courts In The UK

Mr. Wallace explains that these courts began in the United Kingdom in September, 2008. (16). The author writes that the British appeased Islam by adding Shariah to the British legal code. (16). The courts are limited to family civil law for now, but Mr. Wallace opines that inevitably with the rise of Islam this will lead to being expanded to criminal cases. (16).

I will agree with Mr. Wallace that in principal, I do not philosophically support the concept of a group of people in a Western nation being ruled by their own laws. (16). In my opinion, religious rules and law should not be sanctioned by the state, but should be administered internally within the state support of freedom of religion in Western democracies.

For example

I am a member of Northview Community Church and its second church plant, TriCity Church. If I break a rule required for membership, it is my view that for a reasonable separation of church-state, any church discipline with me should be administered via the church and not in any way by a state government. But again, I support freedom of religion via the state.

For Islam, I am opposed to state sanctioned Shariah Law, but support the right of Islam to rule internally. The modern West, unlike traditional Islam, does not have the religion-state unity and this should be maintained within Western society and law.

I am consistent, I would not support the sanctioning of Reformed, Christian law and courts by Maple Ridge, British Columbia or Canada either...

If that would occur in some fantasy alternative world!

Why, you ask?

I do not trust politicians and bureaucrats, or religious leaders, within a sinful, fallen realm, to accurately and reasonably administer theonomy (Biblical and/or religious law) within theocracy. (Religion-State rule).

Jesus Christ stated his Kingdom was not of this world (John 18), and I support theocracy when ruled by the perfect and holy God.

This demonstrates a consistent religious philosophy as opposed to an axe to grind with Islam.

The UK's Independent Fact Checking Charity

Quote

'Are there 'Sharia courts' in Britain?

While there are undoubtedly lots of different councils and tribunals dealing with Sharia principles, they aren't courts of law. Most are Sharia 'councils' set up to make decisions on purely religious matters, although there are some bodies that mix Sharia principles with legally binding arbitration. But none can overrule the regular courts.

Sharia councils

Getting married for the purposes of your religion doesn't necessarily mean you are married in the eyes of the state.

Equally, the paperwork required for a civil divorce needn't be recognised by your religion. For this reason, many Sharia councils exist to issue Islamic divorce certificates, and give advice on other aspects of religious law. They're often attached to mosques.'
---

As noted, principally, I do not support separate religious courts...

'But none can overrule the regular courts.'

This demonstrates a limitation to these courts.

An argument that inevitably this will expand to cover criminal law, or all laws of a nation, if there is an Islamic majority (or significant minority) in population, depends on one reasoning that Westernized Muslims in Western countries will embrace Shariah, as opposed to secularism and secular law.

Shariah law and Islam is definitely and definitively very religious and Western secularism is (of course) definitely and definitively secular. At this point, I do not see the West in any form becoming anything other than more secular, but I am open-minded....

Again, as noted in previous reviews, time will tell.

A Vicious Regress V: Intelligences

Facebook/Google+

A Vicious Regress V: Intelligences

The second video is long, but very informative.

The first video is shorter.  Latter-day Saint theology, in his scholarly and informed opinion holds that intelligences and matter are alone eternal.

However, nearer to the end of the first video, Dr. White states (paraphrased) that some Mormon apologists postulate that an infinite number of gods, exist. Based on the implication earlier in the video of the law of eternal progression, this law does connect to a concept of infinite gods.

I am not expert on The Church of Jesus-Christ Latter-day Saints, but having studied the nature of God within my United Kingdom MPhil/PhD studies (1999-2010 and prior in British Columbia) with theodicy, the problem of evil, free will and determinism, I do have some significant expertise in regard to the nature of God, philosophically and theologically.

In my opinion, an infinite number of gods, would reasonably require an infinity to eternally progress. How could there be an eternal progression of gods in a finite amount of time (Not necessarily solar time, but the point stands)?

Therefore, for those Latter-day Saints apologists that hold to the existence of an infinite number of gods, it is more reasonable that this an aspect of the infinite and eternal, as opposed to the finite.

But, if this occurred in an infinite timeless state, in my view this would rule out any concept of progression; these infinite gods would simply be infinite gods. There is no progression from point a to point b.

There is the problem of more than one infinite entity. Reasonably, only one infinite, limitless being could exist.

Further

This would fall into the category of vicious regress. Contrasted with a reasonable view of the Trinitarian God which as infinite and eternal 'Is'. There is no progression and no regress or progress.

Cited from my archives

LDS Temple April 2010

Vicious Regress October 2006

Matthew J. Slick notes that the Latter-day Saints' idea of Gods, which originated with Joseph Smith, teaches an infinite regression of causes. Slick (2006: 1). Each God came into existence from a previous God, and this has gone on in an infinite past. Slick (2006: 1). There cannot be an infinite regression of Gods because this would require an infinite amount of time which would not allow us to arrive at the present.

In contrast the idea of the Christian Trinity is that God has always existed and existed prior to time and therefore God has not lived for an infinite amount of time. God created time, but existed in a timeless state prior to the creation of time, space and matter.

In the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Simon Blackburn discusses ‘infinite regress’ and mentions that this occurs in a vicious way whenever a problem tries to solve itself and yet remains with the same problem it had previously. Blackburn (1996: 324). A vicious regress is an infinite regress that does not solve its own problem, while a benign regress is an infinite regress that does not fail to solve its own problem. Blackburn (1996: 324). Blackburn writes that there is frequently room for debate on what is a vicious regress or benign regress. Blackburn (1996: 324).

In The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, William Tolhurst writes that a vicious regress is in some way unacceptable as it would include an infinite series of items dependent on prior items. A vicious regress may be impossible to hold to philosophically, or it may be inconsistent. Tolhurst (1996: 835). 

BLACKBURN, S. (1996) ‘Regress’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

SLICK, MATTHEW J. (2006) 'A logical proof that Mormonism is false', Meridian, Idaho, Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry, http://www.carm.org/lds/infinity.htm

SMITH, JOSEPH (1844)(2006) ‘Sermon by the Prophet-The Christian Godhead-Plurality of Gods’, History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 473-479. http://www.utlm.org TOLHURST,

TOLHURST, WILLIAM (1996) 'Vicious Regress', in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.