At a TriCity Church bible study of Philippians, the following verse was provided in regard to the Christian walk and the need for thankfulness by the follower.
Philippians 4: 6
English Standard Version (ESV)
6 do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.
Courson theologically connects staying at a place of joy in Christ with staying in prayer. (1292). In context he explains that prayer here is being in communication with God, while supplication is prayer made for specific requests. (1292).
Ephesians 5: 20 also came to mind.
Ephesians 5:18-21
English Standard Version (ESV)
18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, 19 addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, 20 giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Courson opines that the believer will be blessed and productive when giving thanks to God for all things in Christ. (1256).
In the last few month especially, I have focused on Matthew 6 and living one day at a time. I attempt to live a day at a time as far as problems are concerned, and I make certain that I focus on past and present blessings, which are substantial.
From a Reformed perspective (and personally my PhD/MPhil research forward) it can be understood that God wills all things as a primary cause, whether by perfect or permissible, divine will. Being thankful during suffering, especially, can be difficult. Biblically a believer needs to trust in the sanctification process as an aspect of salvation (Romans 6-8).
COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.
My friend John and I briefly discussed the concept of viciousregress on the phone last night, along with more typical subjects.
(I do not just talk theology/philosophy for those of you opining. If I was a betting man, which I am not, I would bet more than one person has stated that this is all I talk about, as fact.)
Last night on the phone, I referenced in brief, the three examples below.
A god, is caused by a god, is caused by a god, is caused by a god, ad infinitum, is an infinite regress. It is a vicious regress, because it does not solve its own problem and requires a first cause, without a cause.
(In philosophy of religion, the first cause, can be considered what is necessary and exists by necessity. From a biblical perspective this is Almighty God, infinite and eternal.)
A choice is caused by a choice, is caused by a choice, is caused by a choice, ad infinitum, is an infinite regress. It is a vicious regress, because it does not solve its own problem and requires a first cause, without a cause.
(Human choice is traced back to human nature. Human nature is traced back to its creator, God, that has infinite, eternal nature and will/choice.)
Time is caused by time, is caused by time, is caused by time, ad infinitum, is an infinite regress. It is a vicious regress, because it does not solve its own problem and requires a first cause, without a cause.
(If there is an infinite distance between Maple Ridge and Vancouver, one will never arrive in Vancouver.)
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).
An example of a benign regress is infinite numbers both plus and minus, as they in reality represent conceptualized things as opposed to being real things. 'Problem' solved.
Therefore:
Based on my philosophical reading and Blackburn's explanation, it can be deduced that philosophers would debate whether a particular vicious regress is illogical and whether it is using a logical fallacy.
Further:
An argument can be logical and not sound, as sound arguments are not the only valid arguments but are those where 'all the premises are true'. (1997: 35).
Whether or not a particular vicious regress, and the examples I raised, are illogical and using a logical fallacy in the sense of invalid argument is of secondary importance. It is of primary importance when a vicious regress is not reasonable and does not solve its own problem and is fallacious as in faulty reasoning. That is the case with my three examples, I reason.
Bradley (371) mentions that it is not illogical, and not a vicious regress that each act of free choice is caused by another act of free choice. I agree that it is not necessarily illogical, but disagree that the argument as described is not a vicious regress.
McSween, British Columbia: trekearth.com
BLACKBURN, S. (1996) ‘Regress’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
BRADLEY, RAYMOND D. (1996) ‘Infinite Regress Argument’, in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.
WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.
Chapter Two: The Appeasers
Mr. Wallace opines that America is making the same mistake that the Allies made with Nazi Germany prior to World War II; that is appeasement. (15). The Allies did not match the Nazi Germany military buildup and were not prepared for war. (15).
The author reasons that Islam, like Nazi Germany, both 'preach a supremacy doctrine'. (15). Both movements favour a totalitarian system. Dissidents are killed and the Jewish people are opposed in both movements. (15). The appeaser is working from a weaker position, whereas the bully, by being appeased, can become strong enough to defeat the appeaser. (15-16).
---
I can agree that Quranic Islam is seeking to dominate other worldviews.
I reason that because of this very faulty State/Religion government model, Jihad/Holy War can easily be at times interpreted and implemented with varied degrees of force and coercion. This has been done throughout the history of Islam.
Critics have pointed out that much of the Qur'an has open-ended verses in regard to Jihad meaning that they are not necessarily restrained to an historical context. Radical forms of Jihad and aggressive martyrdom could be conceivably reasonably interpreted within today's Islam, for today's world.
Mr. Wallace does have some reasonable concerns...
However:
Nazi Germany was a national, political, movement under one umbrella.
Islam is a worldwide movement under many umbrellas.
My work has documented that those such as the Islamic Supreme Council of America, officially take a more moderate position in regard to Jihad/Holy War, claiming it was and is for primarily defensive purposes. Will there be a large enough, and more importantly powerful enough combined Islamic political and military force to overthrow the Western World, including the United States?
At this point in history, I state there is not and this seems doubtful to occur any time soon. Frankly, Islam is not even in what I would consider one of the four most powerful political, military blocks in the world. Those being:
I am not intellectually persuaded or convinced that any united form of Islam will challenge one of these power blocks, any time soon. Some may reason that Western Europe will fall to Islam, but will its Muslim residents be more like radical Islamists or liberalized, secularized Muslims? This is not certain enough to formulate the likely rise of an European Islamic Empire.
Germany, trekearth.com: More colour than previous version. I like the contrast!
Enlightenment & the Seventh-day Adventist Church An educational video and brief, non-exhaustive notes. About the author from You Tube
'Bruce W. Gore, M.A., J.D., has offered educational materials for those interested in the Christian faith for about 40 years. He served on the adjunct faculty of Whitworth University in Spokane, Washington for over 30 years, while maintaining a private practice in trial law. His informal and relaxed style, combined with rich content, have made Bruce a popular lecturer, teacher, and preacher, for many years. Bruce offers educational materials in Bible, history, and theology from the perspective of the Reformed Tradition, but his even-handed approach to his topics have made him popular with many from a variety of other traditions as well.
Bruce is now retired, but continues to develop and upload material of help to many, and it is his firm hope that you will find these presentations a blessing and encouragement!'
Enlightenment
Mr. Gore opines that within Western society there were new ways of thinking in the 19th century.
I would add that this is the Enlightenment era:
Colin Brown described the Enlightenment as follows:
The Age of Enlightenment (German Die Aufklarung) covers roughly the eighteenth century. It is sometimes identified with the Age of Reason, but the latter term covers both the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Although the Enlightenment had some of its roots in seventeenth century rationalism, the ideas which characterize the Enlightenment went far beyond the rationalism of Descartes, Spinoza, and the thinkers of their time. Brown (1996: 355).
My former and brief academic adviser at the University of Manchester:
David A. Pailin, of Manchester University, stated (paraphrased):
The Enlightenment’s criticism of the authority of tradition led to increasing secularization in attitudes and ideas. Nature is seen as an ordered whole rather than as a stage for divine interventions and supernatural happenings. So far as religious beliefs are concerned, claims to revelation are acceptable only when they are rationally justified and their contents subject to reason’s judgement. Biblical stories and accepted doctrines are not immune from criticism.
Works like Bayle’s Historical and Critical Dictionary and Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary highlight the faults of revered figures and the questionability of standard doctrines. Historical and literary investigations into the Bible develop. Reports about miracles, especially that of the resurrection, give rise to considerable discussion. There is great hostility to priestcraft and suspicion of ecclesiastical pretensions to guide human understanding. Pailin (1999: 180).
Liberalism Mr. Gore reasons that this was a response within Enlightenment thinking. This embraced naturalistic ways of looking at Christianity, which was in contrast, traditionally and biblically, supernatural.
He mentions concepts of Deism that developed in this era.
Mysticism
As well concepts of mysticism and new thought such as Unity (Unity Church) and Christian Science came into being.
I would add that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also came into existence in the 19 century.
The Second Great Awakening Mr. Gore states that Christian Millennialism arises.
Ellen G. White (1827-1915)
Mr. Gore explains that White was influenced by Finney (1792-1875) in regard to prophetic, post-millennial, social concerns and Miller (1782-1848) in regard to prophetic, pre-millennial and social concerns. White's views became prophetic, pre-millennial, with social concerns.
Mr. Gore reasons that White became more famous for her social concerns than for her being one of the founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
He discusses that as a youth, Ellen G. White (Harmon at the time) had a serious head injury. Soon afterwards as life went on she would have visions, that she interpreted as being a Christian, spiritual experiences. In her youth, Ellen and her family were part of the Millerite movement, which was an Adventist movement.
Joseph Bates wrote a pamphlet written by an Adventist that connected Christian Sunday worship with the mark of beast from Revelation. This influenced White.
Some Theology Points White focused on an histortist approach to Revelation.
Annihilation is held to and not hell and everlasting punishment within SDA theology.
It holds to Sabbatarianism, dogmatically.
---
In contrast, I would note, the Apostle Paul writes against the Judaizers (In Galatians in particular). Hebrews 8: forward discusses that there is a new covenant.
Sabbatarians will disagree with the dismal of this core doctrine of theirs, but the Apostle Paul appears to support Christian Liberty on the matter:
Colossians 2:16-17
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
16 Therefore no one is to [a]act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath [b]day— 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the [c]substance [d]belongs to Christ.
Footnotes:
Colossians 2:16 Lit judge you
Colossians 2:16 Or days
Colossians 2:17 Lit body
Colossians 2:17 Lit of Christ
The Sabbatarian argument that it is not the Hebrew Bible 'Sabbath' being discussed here seems a desperate one. I do not think that in light of Judaizers, Paul would make such a comment unless it had a clear meaning of Sabbath day. Based on Wright's commentary I would reason that the Hebrew Bible literal Sabbath day was an aspect of the shadow of the things to come in Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 13: 10). Wright (118-119).
Romans 14: 5 is also not helpful for a Sabbatarian position:
5 One person [c]regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, [d]does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God. 7 For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself; 8 for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
For balance, a professor of mine, in my mind, correctly criticized me for working seven days a week while working on my Bachelor's degree. By taking the written Mosaic Law and applying in it Jesus Christ, spiritually, I do now take a day of rest, but within liberty, not legalism. It is usually Sunday, as long as employment will allow and I do strongly push for this to occur.
In principal, I do reason that a day of rest, set aside for the Lord (Church and related, often) is a very good thing for the Christian believer.
So, for clarity, I do not have an 'axe to grind' with a biblical concept of a day of rest. I follow it, but within a new covenant and not old covenant, context.
---
Mr. Gore explains that Seventh-day Adventism uses hyper-speculation with eschatological theology although he stated that they were Christian believers. This would be debated within the Church. A major concern I have with this movement is the elevation of what should be a secondary issue, the Sabbath, to the level of a primary issue. According to Mr. Gore, orthodox SDA views would exclude non-Sabbatarians from the Kingdom of God. This is serious error and cultic theology.
Please excuse my satirical side, but I do attempt to attend Northview Community Church (megachurch) service Saturday nights and then the TriCity Church (church plant), Sunday mornings.
BROWN, C. (1996) The Enlightenment, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
PAILIN, D.A. (1999) Enlightenment, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
WRIGHT, N. T. (1986)(1989) Colossians and Philemon, Grand Rapids, IVP/Eerdmans.
Strong's Concordance
eimi: I exist, I am
Original Word: εἰμί
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: eimi
Phonetic Spelling: (i-mee')
Short Definition: I am, exist
Definition: I am, exist.
Cited
1510 /eimí ("is, am") – in the present tense, indicative mood – can be time-inclusive ("omnitemporal," like the Hebrew imperfect tense). Only the context indicates whether the present tense also has "timeless" implications. For example, 1510 (eimí) is aptly used in Christ's great "I am" (ego eimi . . . ) that also include His eternality (self-existent life) as our life, bread, light," etc. See Jn 7:34, 8:58, etc.
Cited
'1. to exist;
a. passages in which the idea of the verb preponderates, and some person or thing is said to exist by way of distinction from things non-existent:'
Cited
'πρίν Ἀβραάμ γενέσθαι, ἐγώ εἰμί, John 8:58'
---
before Abraham became (was) I am
John 8:58
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham [a]was born, I am.”
Footnotes:
John 8:58 Lit came into being
Bauer mentions within the definition εἰμί: 'be, exist of God', in regard to 8: 58 (223)...
Of Christ, before Abraham was, I am. (223). It is listed in a present tense, as in Jesus Christ is eternal.
BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
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.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
The late, Dead Sea Scrolls scholar, Dr. Peter Flint, was my professor at Trinity Western University. He suggested that within academia the term Hebrew Bible was to be preferred to the common term, Old Testament. I attempt to use the term Hebrew Bible within academia where reasonable.
I have documented online that I do not hold to a 'Flat Bible' biblical hermeneutic. I agree with what I was taught at Columbia Bible College and Trinity Western University that there is a new covenant (Hebrews) that replaces the Mosaic covenant of the Hebrew Bible (Exodus). This means that within Christian academia for me, my work within the New Testament has been more vast than my work within the Hebrew Bible. Learning the new covenant has taken priority.
I have taken New Testament Koine (common) Greek, but have not taken Biblical Hebrew. Typically, my academic tutors in the United Kingdom had studied academic Greek but not Hebrew. It needs to be understood that a British/European Theology/Philosophy PhD requires multiple discipline research which is a focus significantly different than studying Biblical Hebrew.
Within my MPhil/PhD theses work in the United Kingdom/Europe. I was required to do significant research on Genesis and the theological concept of the fall.
Besides my MPhil/PhD work with Genesis, I also completed a review of the book of Job as a key theodicy text.
At Columbia Bible College for my Bachelor of Arts degree, I did take Old Testament Survey, the Pentateuch (Torah) and some individual books. At Trinity Western University/Canadian Baptist Seminary, I did complete a course on Psalms.
However, much of my more recent Hebrew Bible learning is done through academic blogging and very much so through online sermon listening and online bible listening.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
In 2014, prior of course to my current 2017 review of this textbook as far as graphic text images, I had written a section on Old Testament Apocrypha from the same book. For 2017, now that I have access to the better graphics from this textbook, I will provide an updated version.
Theological issues such as consistency with established doctrines within the Hebrew religious community are key issues in separating these texts. Even if a certain text should in reality be considered part of the Hebrew Bible, which is not my view, at least it is extant to read. I do have a version.
For me, the existence of the Old Testament Apocrypha is not a worrisome theological problem. As I have noted, via scholarship, I believe in the divine inspiration and inerrancy of original biblical manuscripts. I do not reason the originals were maintained by some supernatural divine, 'force field', they are not hidden in a vault somewhere, although there is theological accuracy in the copies. If somehow there is an (a) historical error in the Hebrew Bible canon, it is not a faith/philosophy killer. There has been consistent biblical theology presented within religious history.
'Encountering informs that some 'modern Bibles include a third section called the apocryphal/deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament.
These were written after the last Old Testament prophet (Malachi, ca 430 BC), mainly between about 200 BC and AD 100.' Elwell (2013: 4).
But, although important and valuable religious history is contained, many within scholarship reason these works lack divine authorship in contrast to accepted canonical Scripture and therefore are distinguished from the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible and New Testament.
Jesus and the apostles (and associates) did not quote from the apocrypha Elwell (2013: 4) and therefore this is an important lack of seal of approval in regard to divine authority. And I would add, there is a lack of approval and acceptance in regard to authorship and divine inspiration and guidance.
Browning explains that after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD Judaism was maintained by rabbis in the Pharisaic tradition and the apocrypha was not accepted. Browning (1997: 20). However, Christians for the most part accepted a longer list of Old Testament canon which led to the Roman Catholic Church labelling the apocrypha as deuterocanonical at second level in contrast to protocanonical at first level. Browning (1997: 20).
At the Reformation, Protestants reverted to a shorter canon, (closer to a Hebrew model) in part because of possible hints of purgatory being detected as doctrine in 2 Maccabees and also in Tobit it was claimed that the doctrine of justification by works existed. Browning (1997: 20).
The Church of England keeps the apocrypha for life and instruction of manners but not as Scripture. Browning (1997: 20).
BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
29 Let no [a]unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification [b]according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear.
Footnotes:
Ephesians 4: 29 Lit rotten
Ephesians 4: 29 Lit of the need
Ephesians 4: 29
English Standard Version (ESV)
29 Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.
Ephesians 4:29
King James Version (KJV)
29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain
Reverend Courson takes a theological perspective on Ephesians 4: 29: He opines that one can always tell which kingdom a person is in from his/her speech. (1253). The language of the kingdom of darkness and death is that of complaining and murmuring, fault-finding, cynicism, cursing and corrupt communication. (1253). In contrast, speech within the kingdom of God speaks graciously, with kindness and thanksgiving. (1253).
Courson appears to place more emphasis on the dangers of ungodly spiritual speech as opposed to being mostly concerned with swearing and cursing. This is not to excuse swearing and cursing, but the state of the spirit/mind of the person, regenerated or not, will influence communication. A corrupted nature, not regenerated, opposed to God will lead to more negative spiritual language, not guided by the Holy Spirit.
The regenerated person may at times, in frustration and/or habit, for example, swear or curse and yet still be guided by the Holy Spirit. But, the Scripture is clear that the Christian should use clean speech. The process of obtaining clean speech can be an aspect of God sanctifying the Christian within salvation.
Foulkes reasons that the Apostle Paul is writing against that which is deceitful (143), but that one is to avoid bad language. (143). The Greek word σαπρός (Sapros) basically means 'rotten'. It is worthless and rotten language that can spread among people. (143). It spreads rottenness. (143).
Strong's Concordance
sapros: rotten, worthless
Original Word: σαπρός, ά, όν
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: sapros
Phonetic Spelling: (sap-ros')
Short Definition: rotten, useless, corrupt
Definition: rotten, useless, corrupt, depraved.
George E. Harpur explains that Ephesians 4: 29 is writing against evil speech.
Additional: For context, Harpur explains that from 4: 25 to 5: 2, the text is contrasting the walk of the non-Christian to the Christian. Evil is compared to virtue. (1437).
COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.
FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press.
HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Burlington, Welch Publishing Company.
WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.
Chapter One:The Fantacizers Cont.
In the section of the book 'A Mistake We Can't Afford' on pages 12-13, Mr. Wallace writes that Europe made a mistake when dealing with Hitler (12). This would be from 1933 until the beginning of World War II in 1939. This mistake would be appeasement and not realizing the reality of imminent war.
The author reasons that Islam declared war on the West fourteen hundred years ago and this needs to be acknowledged. (12). Mr. Wallace is very critical of then President Obama for not publicly acknowledging that Islam is indeed at war with the Western world. (12).
From reviewing this book so far, I have reasoned that orthodox Islam, as does radical Islam, does hold to forms of Jihad and Holy War.
I documented that although both orthodox and radical forms of Islam hold to Jihad/Holy War, the orthodox interpretation in many cases, with Islam in the Western world, is that Jihad is for defensive purposes. I will take the Islamic Supreme Council of America at their word that Jihad is primarily defensive. In other words, that is their scholarly interpretation.
I am going to attempt to not judge motives.
As cited in previous articles, in regard to Jihad/Holy War from World Religions textbooks.
Nigosian writes that this is 'combativeness'...or rather being engaged in combat against 'pagans' or opponents is called jihad, meaning holy war. (448). The goal is not primarily religious, as in conversion, but the goal is political control over societies. (448). In order to rule with the principles of Islam, in other words, Islamic law.
Nigosian's definition allows for defensive Jihad, but also a more aggressive form of Jihad could also be interpreted here. To rule other societies by Islamic law is certainly beyond defensive Jihad.
Lewis M. Hopfe admits that one of the most controversial aspects of Islam is 'Jihad' (Holy War). Hopfe (1987: 419). Pagans he writes may have been forced to convert but Jews and Christians and others were free to worship and they chose. Hopfe (1987: 419). It is admitted by Hopfe that there is a Muslim doctrine that one must do battle for God. Hopfe (1987: 419).
Hopfe's definition too could view Jihad as defensive, but also it aggressively protects the interests of the religion through military force. Force and coercion is beyond the scope of defensive Jihad.
I reason that because of this very faulty State/Religion government model, Jihad/Holy War can easily be at times interpreted and implemented with varied degrees of force and coercion. This has been done throughout the history of Islam.
Critics have pointed out that much of the Qur'an has open-ended verses in regard to Jihad meaning that they are not necessarily restrained to an historical context. Radical forms of Jihad and aggressive martyrdom could be conceivably reasonably interpreted within today's Islam, for today's world.
Therefore, I can reason that any forms of Islam, Quranic Islam in context, and also those citing the Sunnah, that interpret Jihad/Holy War and martyrdom in a politically and theologically aggressive manner are indeed enemies of Western society.
This based on radical Islamic worldviews which are against Western democratic society, the Christian Church, and other opposing worldviews, including those within Islam that show some significant moderation. This type of Islam violently opposes any and all opposing worldviews.
HOPFE, LEWIS M. (1991) Religions of the World, New York, Macmillan Publishing Company.
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.
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
Primitive concepts, terms and relations, within symbolic logic are not explained, but are simply 'taken for granted'. (167). These meanings are provided by interpretation only in the context provided. (167). The symbols for houses and related is an example as these symbolic interpretations. (167).
For clarity, philosopher, Langer writes that there is a new context assumed. (167). In this context the formal context has elements which are certain classes. (168).
Let us note that Langer adds another symbol: cls, which is the usual symbol for class.
From page 168:
K= int (interpreted) as class of houses
B = int (interpreted) as class of brick houses
W = int (interpreted) as class of white houses
-B = int (interpreted) as class of not-brick houses
-W = int (interpreted) as class of not-white houses
B x W =int (interpreted) as class of white brick houses
---
0 = int (interpreted) as class of no houses
I = int (interpreted) as class of all houses
On page 170, Langer states that a very important point is that there is a difference between:
K = The universe of discourse (Is this context established by Langer)
&
I = The universe class
Langer warns against identifying the universe of discourse with the greatest class that is within it. (170). Langer explains that the error of equating the universe of discourse with the universe of class, was made by John Venn is his Symbolic Logic of 1881. Langer instead reasons that I does not equate with K, but rather I is an element within K. (170).
My equations
˜ (I ⊨ K)
The universe class does not entail the universe of discourse.
˜ (I ⊃ K)
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.
In regard to the engineer, that I stated should be teachable, but his theology, denied that God was infinite, reasoning that God had made promises is his Scripture, therefore making self-finite. Two friends have opined that I was right to admonish him for this theological error and his unwillingness to be taught.
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
---
Classes as 'primitive concepts' in a system
Philosopher Langer expresses the idea that there are clear and economical propositions that express the entire system with a few symbols. (166). This rests on a tedious process of translation and re-translation. (166).
Most that have been following this review, which is alternated with other articles, will likely agree that learning symbol logic is indeed tedious!
It has been billed by Langer as (paraphrased) an academic alternative to more confusing syntax language, but in reality, in my humble opinion, only a few academic types in philosophy and mathematics will find learning symbolic logic helpful.
Even so, as my PhD (Wales) was in Theology and Philosophy of Religion, it is useful to learn more symbolic logic than the little amount I did during writing my British theses. At the same time, there are some good lessons to learn in regard to logic and reason from Philosopher, Langer.
Langer states that classes are not empty. They are not zero. (166). A class in not 0 = null class.
(∃! wt) : ˜ (0)
There exists white houses equals not null class. White houses are a class.
Symbolic logic requires a formal context in order for anything to be stated. (166-167). A great difficulty is that the typical reader will not grasp the context of symbolic logic, and/or especially in a 2017, Western context, which is in general, distinctly non-philosophical, even have the desire to attempt to learn the context of any symbolic logic.
Primitive concepts, terms and relations, within symbolic logic are not explained, but are simply 'taken for granted'. (167). These meanings are provided by interpretation only in the context provided. (167). The symbols for houses and related is an example as these symbolic interpretations. (167).
The author writes that to avoid ambiguity with literary grammar and syntax. words are replaced in symbolic logic with arbitrary symbols. (52).
Having reviewed now nearly half of this textbook, I can grant that technically, Langer's premise could be correct, I suppose. Symbolic logic could be more clear than literary, grammar and syntax.
However, practically, even most academics are more familiar with syntax language than symbolic logic, and it is an understatement to write that this will not change any time soon.
Today: Cleaned and upgraded gas fireplace and also four new SUV tires.
WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.
Chapter One:The Fantacizers Cont.
In Equal Opportunity Destroyer, the author states that Islam not only wars with Christianity but also with any worldview (my term) that does not submit to Muhammad's God, Allah. (8).
Mr. Wallace opines that Jihadist groups such as ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hammas and Hezbollah, to name a few, truly represent Islam. (9).
The author then quotes the seven blessings of Shahid (10). These are eternal rewards for dying as an Islamic martyr. (10).
It was reported in the hadeeth of al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’di Karb that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
“The martyr (shaheed) has seven blessings from Allaah: he is forgiven from the moment his blood is first shed; he will be shown his place in Paradise; he will be spared the trial of the grave; and he will be secure on the Day of the Greatest Terror (the Day of Judgement); there will be placed on his head a crown of dignity, one ruby of which is better than this world and all that is in it; he will be married to seventy-two of al-hoor al-‘iyn; and he will be permitted to intercede for seventy of his relatives.”
According to another report, the martyr has six blessings from Allaah. According to other reports (the number is) six, or nine, or ten.
(Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, who said it is a hasan hadeeth. Also narrated by Ibn Maajah in al-Sunan, by Ahmad, by ‘Abd al-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf, by al-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer, and by Sa’eed ibn Mansoor in al-Sunan).
--
Shaykh Waleed al-Firyaan'
---
In this book review so far, in balance, I documented that although both orthodox and radical forms of Islam hold to Jihad/Holy War, the orthodox interpretation is that Jihad is for defensive purposes.
The Islamic Supreme Council of America states:
'WHAT JIHAD IS'
'The Arabic word "jihad" is often translated as "holy war," but in a purely linguistic sense, the word " jihad" means struggling or striving.'
'In a religious sense, as described by the Quran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (s), "jihad" has many meanings. It can refer to internal as well as external efforts to be a good Muslims or believer, as well as working to inform people about the faith of Islam.'
'If military jihad is required to protect the faith against others, it can be performed using anything from legal, diplomatic and economic to political means. If there is no peaceful alternative, Islam also allows the use of force, but there are strict rules of engagement. Innocents - such as women, children, or invalids - must never be harmed, and any peaceful overtures from the enemy must be accepted.
Military action is therefore only one means of jihad, and is very rare.'
Comparing the hadeeth of al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’di Karb text to the explanation from the Islamic Supreme Council of America; I will take the Islamic Supreme Council of America at their word that Jihad is primarily defensive. In other words, that is their scholarly interpretation.
I am going to attempt to not judge motives.
Mr. Wallace points out that this section (the hadeeth of al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’di Karb from my Islamic source) is not in the Qur'an, which is assumed to be the words of Allah (11), whereas this section is in the Sunnah and is the words and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad. (11). Both are considered Scripture in Islam. (11). Both are used in determining Islamic law/Sharia. (11).
The state/religion context of Islam is problematic. The original intent of the hadeeth of al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’di Karb text may have been more aggressively militaristic, as in implying that the Muslim needed (needs) to be willing to be a martyr because dying for the state, in a military conflict equates to dying for Allah and the Prophet. Because Jihad exists in a state/religion context, it could also be interpreted that there are very significant eternal rewards for aggressive martyrdom (as opposed to passive martyrdom).
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
I studied revival only briefly in my Christian, BA and MTS degrees.
The New Testament mentions Christians as being (for example and not exhaustive):
Born again (John 3)
Regenerated (Titus 3: 5)
Justified by grace through faith (Romans 1-8, Galatians, Titus 3)
Sanctified (Romans 6-8, 1 Corinthians 6)
In a new covenant (Luke 22, Hebrews 8: forward)
Having the mindset of Christ by the Spirit of God (Romans 8)
It seems to me that a changed worldview from that of a non-believer to that of a biblical (New Testament in particular) believer would also be a key result of legitimate and true Christian revival.
From my PhD work, John Hick did support Universalism within his soul making theodicy.
PhD, University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter, 2010: Theodicy and Practical Theology
If there was little or no evidence from an individual’s life of a disposition towards God while they were alive, Phillips in Davis (2001: 58); then why should it be accepted that there will be a change in attitude after death? Phillips in Davis (2001: 58). The philosophical assumption of universalism appears very speculative on Hick’s part. Hick in Davis (2001: 51).
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
HICK, JOHN (1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library.
HICK, JOHN (1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University.
HICK, JOHN (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.
HICK, JOHN (1993) ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.
HICK, JOHN (1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press.
HICK, JOHN (1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.
HICK, JOHN (1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press.
PHILLIPS, D.Z. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.
PHILLIPS, D.Z. (2005) The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis.
The nail or like that punctured my tire today. The tires were scheduled for replacement, Tuesday, anyway.
WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.
Chapter One:The Fantacizers Cont.
Further into the author's section on 'The Dangers of Islam', it is stated that to be a Muslim means to be the surrendered one. (8).
Within the Islamic religion the devoted follower is completely submitted to Islam. (8).
This implies complete obedience. Wallace reasons, and I reason correctly, that includes how the Muslim is governed. (8). There is a religious/political system is play from Qur'anic Islam, somewhat similar to the Church/State model within Christian Europe that began when Emperor Constantine began to favour Christianity openly in 312. Shelby (1982: 108). The Edict of Milan in 313 allowed emperors Licinius and Constantine to legislate freedom of Christian worship and for all religions. Cairns (1981: 1993).
In 380, emperor Theodosius made belief in Christianity 'a matter of imperial command'. (110). This was a continuation of the unfortunate beginnings of European Christian empire (s), in contrast to Jesus Christ in John 18 that stated his Kingdom is not of this world. In other words, the Kingdom of God was not to strive for religious/political power within this present fallen world system.
On the hand, I can grant that these new religious freedoms were a relief for formerly persecuted Christians within the Roman Empire.
The Church/State became incredibly powerful in the medieval period with political alliances between European kings and rulers and Roman Catholic Church popes, by creating united church/state societies. The sixteenth century Protestant Reformation began to weaken this united societies concept as did the rise of the seventeenth century-eighteenth century concept of nation states. This would be in essence, secular states, even while in the case of the United States of America, religious liberty was allowed and made constitutional.
I can agree with Mr. Wallace that the Islamic ideology is in contrast to American views of liberty, freedom and the freedom of American Christian heritage. (8). Modern Western Christianity has views on religious liberty in contrast to historical religion/state systems within both Christianity and Islam.
The author opines that Western values of religious liberty are a threat to the values of Islam. (8). I agree with this where Islam is interpreted from the Qur'an in any orthodox theology that would wish to force Shariah/Islamic law upon those that do not hold to the religion and instead prefer intellectual and religious liberty.
CAIRNS, EARLE E. (1981) Christianity Through The Centuries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
SHELBY, BRUCE L. (1982) Church History In Plain Language, Word Books, Waco, Texas.
WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.
Once again, with this review of the 'Encoutering' text, in particular the text images; the historicity of Christianity is demonstrated from Biblical, New Testament and Church Father sources.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
Hebrews, although with no definitive, documented author, is considered part of the New Testament canon. It is universally accepted within orthodox Christianity, as being produced from the group of New Testament era disciples of Jesus Christ, Apostles and scribes.
Further, it receives intellectual support from early Church Fathers.
Encountering page 338: It is good to read scholarship that states the truth that Scripture, at times, makes generalizations. It is generally true is regard to the rich/wealthy, but not always. This may smack against some theologies of fundamentalism, but this is important to realize for the sake of avoiding theological error. At times, some within the Church fail to intellectually embrace the truth that although all Scripture is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3), and is inerrant and infallible in the original documents, some contexts are presenting what is generally true. In contrast, as examples, the eternal, infinite nature of God, God's triune nature, and God's plans of salvation for those in Christ, through the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, are universally true doctrines. Biblical context determines general truths from universal truths.
'Dictionary of Bible Themes Scripture index, Martin H. Manser, 2009. As Editor, Martin Manser wishes to thank all those who compiled or edited the NIV Thematic Study Bible, on which this work is based.'
Cited
8747 false gods
Any gods other than the Lord himself. Some of these divinities took the form of images, others were mythical. Some Israelites became involved in idolatrous worship of such gods.'
'The first Christians were confronted with the worship of Greek and Roman deities
Zeus and Hermes Ac 14:12 Zeus was the patron god of the city of Lystra and his temple was there. Paul was identified as the god Hermes (the Roman Mercury), Zeus’attendant and spokesman.
Artemis Ac 19:24-28 Artemis was the Greek name for the Roman goddess, Diana.
Castor and Pollux See also Ac 28:11 the two “sons of Zeus”, regarded as the guardian deities of sailors'
'Attempts to deify human beings
Ac 12:21-22; Ac 14:12-15; Ac 28:6'
---
Satan/The Devil
2 Corinthians 4: 2-4: New American Standard Bible )NASB)
4 Therefore, since we have this ministry, as we received mercy, we do not lose heart, 2 but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled [a]to those who are perishing, 4 in whose case the god of this [b]world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving [c]so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
---
Satan, the Devil, although a finite and fallen creation of God (Genesis 1-3, Revelation 12) within God's sovereign control, is in a sense, the god of this present fallen realm. Satan is also the prince of the powers of the air (Ephesians 2: 2 from NASB). He should never be confused for infinite, almighty God.
23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a [a]tutor. 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is [b]neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Footnotes:
Galatians 3:25 Lit child-conductor
Galatians 3:28 Lit not male and female
Hebrews 8-10: Describes the New Covenant
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
8:13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.
9:11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,[d] he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining[e] eternal redemption. 13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,[f] so that we may serve the living God!
9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
Exorcisms & Demonic Activity: Occult v. New Testament
This ancient occultic formula stands in great contrast to a biblical, New Testament model.
A New Testament concept is that as demonic beings are fallen angels (Revelation 12), they can only be exorcised by spiritual means through the power of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as God. Demonic beings cannot be essentially exorcised by physical means, such as with a formula. However, physical human beings were used as agents of the divine power of exorcism. Driving away demons is not necessarily always exorcism, but could include. There is a tension between demonic activity and demonic influence and possession. From a New Testament model, one could also pray for no demonic presence (Matthew 4).
Exorcisms
Browning explains that the exorcism of demonic beings in the synoptic gospels was an 'undoubted fact' as an aspect of the ministry of Jesus Christ. (128). They are not found in John. (128). The disciples were also given the power to exorcise demonic beings from persons (Matthew 10), and this was performed in the book of Acts.
Bromiley explains in regard to Exorcisms:
Cited
'In the New Testament exorcisms are primarily found in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts. No exorcisms are referred to in the Gospel of John. (244-245).
Jesus is depicted as an exorcist in the Gopels, and
He is able to delegate this ability to His disciples (Mk. 3:14f; 6:7 [par Mt. 10:1; Lk. 9:1; 10:17–20];
9:18, 28 [par Mt. 17:16, 19; Lk. 9:40]; 16:17f). Exorcisms, which are acts of liberating afflicted
persons from the malevolent influence of demons, are distinguished from other forms of cures
involving the restoration to health of those whose disease or affliction was not regarded as having a
demonic cause (Mk. 1:32–34 [par Mt. 8:16; Lk.4:40f]; 1:39 [par Mt. 4:24]; 3:10f [par Lk. 6:17f];
Lk. 13:32).
'Jesus’ method of curing the sick usually involved the touch of His hand, but in performing
exorcisms He avoided the use of His hand and focused on addressing the demon with short,
authoritative commands. Six accounts of exorcisms performed by Jesus are preserved in the
Synoptic Gospels
1. Mk. 1:21–28 par Lk. 4:31–37;
2. Mk. 5:1–20 par Mt. 8:28–34; Lk. 8:26–39;
3. Mk. 7:24–30 par Mt. 15:21–28;
4. Mk. 9:14–29 par Mt. 17:14–21; Lk. 9:37–
43;
5. Mt. 9:32–34;
6. Mt. 12:22f par Lk. 11:14.'
Cited
'Acts of the Apostles
The Gospels themselves contain evidence that the name of Jesus was used
during His lifetime by disciples in the performance of exorcisms (Mt. 7:22; Lk. 10:17; cf. Mk. 16:17),
as well as by other Jewish exorcists not formally associated with Him (Mk. 9:38f par Lk. 9:49). In
Acts it is primarily through the utterance of the name of Jesus that healings and exorcisms are
effected (3:6, 16; 4:7, 10, 30; 9:34). The name of Jesus was regarded as so effective that it was also
taken up by non-Christian exorcists (Acts 19:13). Origen noted that the name of Jesus was so
powerful that it was even effective when used by evil men.'
Acts 19:13-20
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
13 But also some of the Jewish exorcists, who went from place to place, attempted to name over those who had the evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, “I adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preaches.” 14 Seven sons of one Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15 And the evil spirit answered and said to them, “I recognize Jesus, and I know about Paul, but who are you?” 16 And the man, in whom was the evil spirit, leaped on them and subdued all of them and overpowered them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. 17 This became known to all, both Jews and Greeks, who lived in Ephesus; and fear fell upon them all and the name of the Lord Jesus was being magnified. 18 Many also of those who had believed kept coming, confessing and disclosing their practices. 19 And many of those who practiced magic brought their books together and began burning them in the sight of everyone; and they counted up the price of them and found it [a]fifty thousand pieces of silver. 20 So [b]the word of the Lord was growing mightily and prevailing.
Footnotes:
Acts 19:19 Probably fifty thousand Greek drachmas; a drachma approximated a day’s wage
Acts 19:20 Or according to the power of the Lord the word was growing
Mount Fuji: Facebook
BROMILEY, G.W. (1988) The
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Volume 2, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans,
BROWING, W.R.F. (1997) Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
A church bible study leader asked me what texts I use:
Non-exhaustive:
Texts used in BA to PhD and newer in my possession, and also online academic blogging since 2004.
Current academic site book reviews
LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy)
WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers. (Theology)
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic. (Bible: Mainly review the graphic lists)
COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville. (Bible: Also listen to his online sermons)
Recently finished review (2 years)
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London. (Philosophy: Fallacies)
Texts for citations (not exhaustive)
Biblical Studies
NASB (New American Standard Bible)
ESV (English Standard Version)
KJV (King James Version)
Online Greek manuscripts
BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
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.
F.F. Bruce, (ed.),
The International Bible Commentary (1986), Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/Zondervan.
BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press. (Liberal work from my PhD stay in United Kingdom, but good facts)
Theology
FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. (Main PhD text for compatibilism)
CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html
CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html
AUGUSTINE (388-395)(1964) On Free Choice of the Will, Translated by Anna S.Benjamin and L.H. Hackstaff, Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.
AUGUSTINE (398-399)(1992) Confessions, Translated by Henry Chadwick, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
AUGUSTINE (400-416)(1987)(2004) On the Trinity, Translated by Reverend Arthur West Haddan, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 3, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
EDWARDS, JONATHAN (1754)(2006) Freedom of the Will, Flower Mound, Texas. Jonathanedwards.com. http://www.jonathanedwards.com
Philosophy and Philosophy of Religion
FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. (Main PhD text for compatibilism)
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. (Incompatibilism)
AUGUSTINE (388-395)(1964) On Free Choice of the Will, Translated by Anna S.Benjamin and L.H. Hackstaff, Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall. (Incompatibilism)
AUGUSTINE (398-399)(1992) Confessions, Translated by Henry Chadwick, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
AUGUSTINE (400-416)(1987)(2004) On the Trinity, Translated by Reverend Arthur West Haddan, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 3, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia.
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press. (Humanist, but excellent for facts. Another United Kingdom, PhD buy)
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.
