Thursday, July 30, 2020

Bullet Thursday: 33 C/91 F

A previous recent warm day
Bullet Thursday: 33 C/91 F

• Following the medical guidance and advice of the MD from the long term care home, I am expecting my Mom to pass away from dementia within the next few days. As I discussed within the previous entry, sentimental theology or sentimental philosophy does not really solve any problems here.

Tuesday, July 28, 2020 Sentimental theology: Theology matters and so does philosophy

• A theoretical, speculative God that does not clearly reveal plans in regards to post-mortem existence for humanity in spirit and perhaps eventually in resurrection form, is almost in my mind, as useless as the basically no or little hope for post-mortem existence within atheism or agnosticism.

• Almost, I state, that in perhaps God could/might grant post-mortem existence for certain people, but that would be hopeful speculation.

• To be blunt, in general, sentimental theology and sentimental philosophy in regards to death has the same end, that is the same theological and philosophical result, as atheism and agnosticism; which is no significant hope of everlasting, post-mortem existence.

• A Christian theist such as myself can reason that the person that has died was morally imperfect as we all are, was part of, and affected by, the problem of evil, did not receive direct communication from God normally, and likely not at any point, prior to death. From this there is not an obvious reason to realistically, and reasonably assume that a person that has passed away goes to a better place within a speculative theistic model which lacks historically based religious revelation. 

• In my mind, theology and philosophy, even the very academic and technical types, have practical value in my life.

• The religious history of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament and the consistent theology of the ancient manuscripts even with minor textual variations, has me most confident in a Reformed, Biblical, Christian worldview and the gospel message, in comparison to other worldviews, even as there are truths is many worldviews. 


• Hebrews 9:27-28 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 27 And inasmuch as it is [a]appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

Footnotes: Hebrews 9:27 Lit laid up 

• Interesting from Jon Courson and his commentary here in regard to Hebrews 9: 27: Take those who say the Bible doesn't teach against reincarnation to this passage-and wallop 'em. Courson (1488). 

• Boice notes that from Hebrews 9: 27 that Christ put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, after that comes (divine, my add) judgement. Boice (348). 

• Humanity is not immortal states Hughes. (387). Humanity is totally dependent on God for 'the continuance of life'. (387). Any significant everlasting life is dependent on the grace of God. In the Christian worldview, everlasting life depends on divinely applied grace through faith to persons, in the gospel message. (Romans 1-6, Ephesians 1-2, John 1 as examples).

 • My three Vancouver Canucks masks finally arrived from NHL.com today after an approximately two month wait. With the longer straps they are far more comfortable than my other two cloth masks.

BOICE, JAMES, MONTGOMERY (1981) Foundations of the Christian Faith, Downers Grove, IVP Press. 

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

HUGHES, PHILIP, EDGCUMBE (1990) A Commentary On The Epistle To The Hebrews, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Tuesday, July 28, 2020

Sentimental theology: Theology matters and so does philosophy

Majorca: Facebook
Sentimental theology: Theology matters and so does philosophy

July 28, 2020 article, edited for an entry on academia.edu on August 24, 2022.

Related archives 



Preface

Admittedly, some religious worldviews, accept the bible, but with differing non-orthodox, non-traditional, interpretations. However, biblical studies, theology (religious philosophy within the bible), philosophy of religion (religious philosophy outside the bible) are legitimate academic disciplines as are, for example, science, mathematics and psychology. Without being an intellectual snob, the general ignorance of religious studies in the western world, significantly negates the establishment of well-reasoned, rational, worldviews.

Sentimental theology/philosophy 

Scientifically and empirically, by use of the senses, it appears that human beings die and all that is left are physical remains. Some religions and religious persons believe in an existence of the human spirit that exists after death. In the media, and at funerals it is said sometimes that the person that has passed away has gone to a better place. This is speculative, assumed and hoped for, since the departed was usually and seemingly a good person, humanly speaking. 

To be clear, I am not trying to be uncaring, without compassion, or mean here. I am attempting to be reasonable and rational.

This appears to be sentimental theology, and by that I mean theology that is primarily driven by feelings, that is speculative and lacks a significant use of reason that can be supported by historically based religious revelation. It is not backed by documented, religious history. Please note, I am not stating that all theological speculation is lacking the significant use of reason. The naturalist can dismiss this sentimental theology on empirical grounds. If the Scripture is not considered, this type of approach may be more accurately described as sentimental philosophy

Simon Blackburn defines naturalism as generally a view that nothing resists explanation from methods of natural sciences. A naturalist will therefore, (in many cases, my add) be opposed to the concept of mind-body since it allows for the possible explanation of human mental capacity outside of science. Blackburn (1996: 255). 

Henry Clarence Thiessen explains that naturalists reject the idea of God and view nature as self-sufficient and self-explanatory. Thiessen (1956: 32). A Christian theist such as myself can reason that the person that has died was morally imperfect as we all are, was part of, and affected by, the problem of evil, did not receive direct communication from God normally, and likely not at any point, prior to death. From this there is not an obvious reason to realistically, and reasonably assume that a person that has passed away goes to a better place within a speculative theistic model which lacks historically based religious revelation. 

Within a speculative theistic model, I would reason that if a person lives an earthly temporal life apart from direct communication with God, within moral and ethical imperfection, then it is reasonable to assume that if God does grant everlasting life, it will not be some type of heaven in God’s presence, and therefore not necessarily a better place. Biblical Christianity is not dependent on sentimental theology. 

Millard Erickson writes that natural theology deduces that God can be understood objectively through nature, history, and human personality. Erickson (1994: 156). But, it should be stated that although natural theology can perhaps bring a person to a limited knowledge of God, it does not provide revealed information concerning salvation or everlasting life for human beings.

In a similar way, the study of philosophy of religion may produce true premises and a conclusion, for a logical, sound argument or just reasonable propositions, in regard to God and religion. But as it is outside of Scripture, it does not provide scriptural revelation that explains salvation. Erickson explains that Biblical revelation views God as taking the initiative to make himself known to followers. Erickson (1994: 198). This would be a more effective way than natural revelation as God reveals personal things about himself through his prophets, apostles, scribes, and of course Jesus Christ, who is both God and man. It can be reasoned that this revelation is documented in the Bible with persons that are historical and not mythological. 

Thiessen writes that God revealed himself in the history of ancient Israel. Thiessen (1956: 33). God is presented as personally appearing to chosen persons in the Hebrew Bible through dreams, visions and directly. Thiessen (1956: 34). Thiessen explains that miracles were also noted to occur within the Hebrew Bible, miracles being unusual events that were not a product of natural laws. Thiessen (1956: 35). 

The Hebrew Bible and New Testament present historical persons that experienced the supernatural God and supernatural occurrences. Some will accept the historicity of these persons, but deny the supernatural aspects of the Bible, but according to the New American Standard Bible presented by Charles Caldwell Ryrie and the Lockman Foundation, approximately 40 authors wrote the Biblical texts over a period of approximately 1600 years. Ryrie (1984: xv). Not all these persons knew each other and yet spoke of the same God that revealed himself progressively over time. 

The atoning work and resurrection of Christ was documented and discussed by several historical authors within the New Testament and through this work everlasting life is provided to followers of Christ. The book of Revelation describes the culminated Kingdom of God in Chapters 21-22. 

The New Testament provides information about the historical Jesus Christ and his followers in historical setting and this gives much more credibility for theology concerning the concept of life after death in the presence of God, than does sentimental theology which denies or twists the concepts of Scripture in order to fit some type of speculative theistic hope for everlasting life which is devoid of the significant use of reason and revelation. Without revelation that is legitimate, religious history, there is not convincing evidence for believing that God will provide a departed person with meaningful everlasting life, outside of revelation from God explaining by what means he would bring a person that has passed away into his presence forever, and/or place them in a better place. 

BARTH, KARL (193201968)(2010) Church Dogmatics, Vol. 4.3.1, Sections 69: The Doctrine of ReconciliationStudy Edition 27, London, T & T Clark. 

BARTH, KARL, G. W. BROMILEY and THOAMS F. TORRANCE, (1975) (2005) Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God. Vol. II/1, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975. 168. Print. 

BARTH, KARL, G. W. BROMILEY and THOMAS F. TORRANCE, (1975) (2005) Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God. Vol. IV/3/1, §69.2 The Light of Life, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975. 168. Print.

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 2: God and Creation, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids

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

BOICE, JAMES, MONTGOMERY (1981) Foundations of the Christian Faith, Downers Grove, IVP Press.

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

DARROW, CLARENCE (1928)(1973) ‘The Myth of the Soul’, in The Forum, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

DARROW, CLARENCE (1932)(1973) ‘The Delusion of Design and Purpose’, in The Story of My Life, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

DUBRAY, C.A. (1911)(2007) ‘Naturalism’ in New Advent: Catholic Encyclopedia, New York, Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10713a.htm 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

HEIMBROCK, HANS-GUNTER (2005) ‘From Data to Theory: Elements of Methodology in Empirical Phenomenological Research in Practical Theology’ in International Journal of Practical Theology, Volume 9, December, Berlin, Walter D. Gruyter.http://xolopo.de/religionswissenschaften/data_theory_elements_met hodology_empirical_15063.html 

KRIKORIAN, K. (1944)(2007) (ed.), Naturalism and the Human Spirit, New York, Columbia University Press, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press. 

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

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

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

PATTISON STEPHEN. (2000)(2007) ‘Some Straw for Bricks: A Basic Introduction to Theological Reflection' in Woodward, James and Stephen Pattison (eds.) The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

PETERS, KARL, E. (1992) ‘Empirical Theology in the Light of Science, in The Journal of Religion and Science, Volume 27 Issue 3 Page 297-325, September, Oxford, Zygon, Blackwell Publishing.http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467- 9744.1992.tb01068.x 

RYRIE, CHARLES, CALDWELL (1984) The New American Standard Version Bible, Iowa Falls, Iowa, World Bible Publishers. 

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

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

SIRE, JAME W (1975) The Universe Next Door, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

THE ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE, NEW TESTAMENT AND PSLAMS (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books.

I know, I look like a 'crook'. I probably said goodbye to Mom, in this realm
for the last time, this afternoon. She is not alert as dementia has
taken its toll. Would sentimental theology/philosophy ultimately really solve
any problems here?


           

Monday, July 27, 2020

Monday Bullets: Another different kind of book to review?

Similar image of
the Zombie Red Skull
from Marvel Zombies

• Terrifying lead image courtesy J.C. Zombie...ZOM BIE: Edited for Blogger.. J.C. Zombie offered to buy me a belated birthday present, so I had him purchase me the paperback version of...

•  
Final Events and the Secret Government Group on Demonic UFOs and the Afterlife (Paperback: August 25, 2010).

• Cited from Amazon below:

• For decades, stories of alien abductions, UFO encounters, flying saucer sightings, and Area 51 have led millions of people to believe that extraterrestrials are secretly among us. But what if those millions of people are all wrong? What if the UFO phenomenon has much darker and far more ominous origins? For four years, UFO authority Nick Redfern has been investigating the strange and terrifying world of a secret group within the U.S. Government known as the Collins Elite. The group believes that our purported alien visitors are, in reality, deceptive demons and fallen angels. They are the minions of Satan, who are reaping and enslaving our very souls, and paving the way for Armageddon and Judgment Day. In FINAL EVENTS you'll learn about the secret government files on occultists Aleister Crowley and Jack Parsons, and their connections to the UFO mystery; revelations of the demonic link to the famous "UFO crash" at Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947; the disclosure of government investigations into life-after-death and out-of-body experiences; and an examination of the satanic agenda behind alien abductions. FINAL EVENTS reveals the stark and horrific truths about UFOs that some in the government would rather keep secret.

• This book might provide another different kind of book to review for this website.

Amazon



Sunday, July 26, 2020

Sunday Bullets: False Christianity

More Facebook wisdom from Pastor
David Pitman, Senior Pastor. Pastor Pitman of
 Addyston Baptist Church
  One example: 2 Corinthians 11: 12-15 from the New American Standard Bible (NASB): 12 But what I am doing I will continue to do, so that I may cut off opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be [e]regarded just as we are in the matter about which they are boasting. 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds. e 2 Corinthians 11:12 Lit found

• The Orthodox Study Bible using the New King James Version (NKJV) explains that in verse 14 'Satan imitates the Kingdom of God, telltale signs reveal his sham, such as nonapostolic doctrine'... (419). A different Jesus is preached (verse 4). Another telltale sign is a 'lucrative ministry' (verses 7-12) (419). Paul preached the gospel, free of charge (verse 7). (419).

• I am not opposed to types of reasonably paid ministry, as even Paul states in verse 9 that his needs were met from believers in Macedonia. (419).

• David J. A. Clines states (verse 15): 'They are servants of Satan in that the work of destruction and vilification they are doing is Satan's work.' (1409). 

• An aspect of these kinds of false apostles is attacking those true apostles in the New Testament era. In our present era, false teachers attacking true (but imperfect) teachers would be a similar comparison.

• With such religious teachers, often, black is white, and white is black. The truth is falsehood, and the falsehood is truth.

• I heed Clines' comments that a servant of Christ could do Satan's work. (1409).  A warning for us all in Christ.

• Indeed, as well, from a Reformed perspective,  in particular, God can also use the evil intents of persons for the greater good. (see The Bondage and Liberation of the Will and The Institutes of the Christian Religion)

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CLINES, DAVID J. A. (1986) 2 Corinthians, The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

Facebook



Saturday, July 25, 2020

Pantheism, Panentheism, The Trinity II: Non-exhaustive

Pantheism, Panentheism, The Trinity III: Briefly

Related archives



Pantheism 

From Cambridge

Pantheism is the view that ‘God is identical with everything’ Martinich (1996: 556). Pantheism may be the result of tendencies, such as 'an intense religious spirit' and 'the belief that all reality is in some way united'.  Martinich (1996: 556). 'Spinoza is the most distinguished pantheist in Western philosophy. He argued that since substance is completely self-sufficient, and that only God is self-sufficient; God is the only substance. Martinich. (1996: 556).

Pantheism presents as a worldview that God is in everything and that God and the universe are one. Blackburn (1996: 276). Blackburn also documents that Benedictus de Spinoza (1632-1677) is noted for this view within Western philosophy.

From Spinoza 'Ethics' (1677)

Although each particular thing be conditioned by another particular thing to exist in a given way, yet the force whereby each particular thing perseveres in existing follows from the eternal necessity of God's nature. [ii.45] 

God is one, that is, only one substance can be granted in the universe. [I.14] 

Whatsoever is, is in God, and without God nothing can be, or be conceived. {I.15] 

God is the indwelling and not the transient cause of all things. All things which are, are in God. Besides God there can be no substance, that is, nothing in itself external to God. [I.17] 


There is only an infinite substance (1P14), that is, there are no created substances. The infinite substance consists of infinite attributes (1D6). (Spinoza in Ethics) 

From Oxford

Scientifically 'substance', to use the term from Spinoza, such as time, space, matter and energy are considered finite having perhaps originated with a 'big bang'. With all due respect to my 'young earth' readers, this 'big bang theory' is a cosmological theory that all matter and energy in the universe originated from a state of enormous density and temperature 'that exploded at a finite moment in the past' where space and time came into existence. (Oxford Dictionary of Science: 85). According to the Oxford Dictionary of Science, the universe will eventually have a heat death. (386). When entropy is maximized and 'all large-scale samples of matter are at a uniform temperature.' (386). Future 'heat death' indicates a finite universe.

Biblical theology

Biblical theology would support a view that the physical universe such as time, space, matter and energy are created and maintained by God that is infinite and eternal. Genesis 1 appears to describe in religious, not scientific history, the origin of the material, physical universe. Theologically, the biblical revelation demonstrates God as having existed before the creation of all things, both material and the finite spiritual (Genesis 1, John 1, Colossians 1, as examples).

Philosophy of Religion

Cambridge opines that it is not obvious that theism requires a personal notion of God. (556). I can grant that it is not empirically, scientifically provable that a God exists, and therefore it is not empirically provable that a personal God exists. God is spirit: John 4: 24 and is therefore not provable by empirical means within the Christian worldview. A non-biblical, theistic, philosophy of religion points toward a first and primary cause of all things.

The finite comes from the infinite.

Therefore,  finite, time, space, matter, energy come from an infinite cause.

For clarity, I claim with internal and external reasonable (not absolute 100%) certainty that anything finite arises from a personal, infinite cause.


Reasonable certainty is that internally and externally premises and conclusion (s) are consistent and not disproved by counter propositions and conclusions. Absolute 100% certainty belongs only to an infinite personalized entity with omnipotence and omniscience, that being God. 

Based on science, biblical theology and philosophy of religion I disagree with Spinoza that all substance is infinite. I also disagree with Spinoza that all substance is God.

Panentheism

Cambridge differentiates pantheism from panentheism as 'panentheism, the view that God is in all things. Just as water might saturate a sponge and in that way he is the entire sponge, but not identical with the sponge. God might be in everything without being identical with everything. Martinich (1996: 556).

David H. Nikkel (2003) defines panentheism as from the Greek meaning ‘all is in God’. Nikkel (2003: 1). Both God’s transcendence and immanence are accepted, as the world and matter is in God, and God is ‘all-encompassing with respect to being.’ Nikkel (2003: 1). 

Panentheism attempts to ‘avoid the pitfalls’ of traditional theism. Nikkel (2003: 1). God is prohibited from having a true and genuine relationship with matter and the universe because of traditional theistic views such as that God is immutable, impassible, and eternal and timeless. Nikkel (2003: 1). God is not eternal within this view. Panentheism is an intellectual compromise between traditional theism and pantheism. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94). Within panentheism, God is more than just the material universe, as there is an unchanging aspect to God’s being and also a dynamic aspect to God as the divine being changes as matter and the universe do. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94). 

From what I have stated, I do not believe in a finite, non-eternal God. Note this difference in panentheism from the eternal God of pantheism.

The Trinity

Within a trinitarian, biblical perspective, God as transcendent is beyond the finite, material universe. God is the first cause of all things and sustains all finite creation. God is not the vital force within his finite creation, but sustains and maintains it. 

God’s nature does not equate to any human nature, for example. The infinite God causes the finite without being finite (This is not contradicted by Jesus Christ, the Word of God taking finite human nature in the incarnation without ceasing to be infinite God). God is immanent within his creation, but his infinite, eternal nature is not mixed with finite nature of any kind. Deity and humanity, two natures, are also not mixed in the incarnation of Christ. 

The finite is not infinite. A finite thing is also not eternal. The finite cannot become infinite. The finite cannot become eternal. The finite, can possibly become everlasting. Finite attributes therefore cannot evolve into infinite attributes.

God in pantheism may be considered to be equal with a tree.

God in panentheism may be considered beyond the tree, but the vital force within it. 

In my traditional Christian theistic understanding, God is beyond a tree and sustains it, but is not the vital force within it. The vital force is scientifically, theologically and philosophically finite and is sustained by the infinite triune God. This is my example based on Erickson’s presentation. Erickson (1994: 303-307).

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

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

KREEFT, PETER and RONALD K. TACELLI (1994) Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

NIKKEL, DAVID H. (2003) ‘Panentheism’, in Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, MacMillan Reference USA, New York.

MARTINICH, A.P. (1999) ‘Pantheism’ in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Oxford Dictionary of Science, (2010), Sixth Edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

SPINOZA, BENEDICT D (Baruch), (1677)(2014) Ethics, translated by RHM Elwes, Createspace Independent Publishing Platform, United States. 


Spinoza’s Works 

Spinoza Opera, edited by Carl Gebhardt, 5 volumes (Heidelberg: Carl Winters, 1925, 1972 [volume 5, 1987]). Abbreviated in SEP entry as G. Note: A new critical edition of Spinoza’s writings is now being prepared by the Groupe de recherches spinoziste; this will eventually replace Gebhardt. As of July 2012, three volumes have appeared: Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, Tractatus Politicus, and Premiers écrits, all published by Presses Universitaires de France. 

Spinoza, Benedictus, The Collected Writings of Spinoza, 2 vols., Edwin Curley, translator (Princeton: Princeton University Press, vol. 1: 1985; vol. 2: 2016). The Ethics is in vol. 1; the Theological Political Treatise is in vol. 2. 

Spinoza, Theological-Political Treatise, Samuel Shirley, translator, second edition (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2001). Abbreviated in SEP entry as S. 

Spinoza, The Letters, Samuel Shirley, translator (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1995).


It is true, through my walks I am serving as mosquito food, 2020.



Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Carbon dating

Facebook




The airplane video: Apparently the pilot was told not to let Arne fly the plane. But I suppose he let Arne, with his fancy Stetson hat, pretend to play cowboy and the plane was a 'horsie'.

 

Being in that type of water would be nice today.

Monday, July 20, 2020

Monday Bullets: Lovable Bear?



• My good friend from Norway, with the fashionable Stetson hat, is now embracing the title Deputy Dawg. That video has me imagining that bear breaking into Deputy Dawg's rural Norwegian mansion as the Deputy is stunned during his afternoon nap. During this nap, the Deputy has trained his mind to be hard at work maintaining law and order, according to Romans 13. The Deputy assumes it is a relative or neighbour looking for a beer and nachos and goes back to sleep...

• In general: Is the basis for rejection from an employer, for one job, the basis for acceptance from an employer, for another job? 

• In general: Is the basic for rejection from one type of romantic partner, the basis for acceptance from another type of romantic partner? 

• In the both cases, the answer is more so in the negative. In general: It is the strengths of the person involved that serve as reasons for acceptance. Hmm...something to ponder on.

• Overall in life: Should a person promote his/her negatives, accepting the results, or should a person promote his/her strengths? I think it better to promote strengths and work on weaknesses.

• Back to the Deputy. He states on Zoom (paraphrased) 'I do half the work required in twice the time needed'. Please do not judge him negatively. With the Norwegian sunset and sunrise being only a few hours apart this summer, this comedy genius is actually hard at work, asleep, awake or sort of awake, creating new comedy material as the Norwegian Benny Hill.

• Our Zoom meetings featured a discussion on strange tattoos, and our personal disinterest. 

• By grace through faith, seeking to suffer obediently in God's perfect will, can actually lead to a greater understanding of problems of evil, as one grows in character through Jesus Christ and the triune God.

Romans 5: 1-5 

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 Therefore, having been justified by faith, [a]we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and [b]we exult in hope of the glory of God. 3 And not only this, but [c]we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; 4 and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope; 5 and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.

1. Romans 5:1 Two early mss read let us have
2. Romans 5:2 Or let us exult 
3. Romans 5:3 Or let us also exult

Arne has started the hat trend on Zoom.






Sunday, July 19, 2020

The Orthodox Study Bible: Knowledge

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee. 

My review, as a biblical Christian of the Reformed tradition, of this fine academic source, continues. This Orthodox source uses the New King James Version (NKJV). 

Glossary from Reverend John W. Morris, Ph.D.

Knowledge

Quote:

'Knowing and experiencing the truth of God and salvation through Jesus Christ. Spiritual knowledge (1) is frequently identified with Christian doctrine (2) is applied to the spiritual meaning of the Scripture; and (3) refers to the mystical and contemplative knowledge, not merely intellectual knowledge of God. its aim and effects are to enhance man's responsibility, to aid in discernment of good and evil and to lead people to God...'(802).

From the verses this study bible provides, I will comment on 2 Corinthians 4: 6.

2 Corinthians 4: 6 The New King James Version (NKJV)

6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

2 Corinthians 4: 6 King James Version (KJV)

6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 

2 Corinthians 4: 6 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 

6 For God, who said, “Light shall shine out of darkness,” is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. 

Greek New Testament 2 Corinthians 4: 6

From the five Greek  New Testament sources provided. 

(knowledge)

gnwsewV 

Bible Hub 2 Corinthians 4: 6

γνώσεως knowledge N-GFS

Noun: Genitive (of) feminine, singular

of the knowledge

Bible Hub.com 

Cited 

Strong's Concordance 
gnósis: a knowing, knowledge 
Original Word: γνῶσις, εως, ἡ 
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine 
Transliteration: gnósis Phonetic 
Spelling: (gno'-sis) 
Definition: a knowing, knowledge 
Usage: knowledge, doctrine, wisdom. 

Cited 

2 Corinthians 4:6 
N-GFS GRK: φωτισμὸν τῆς γνώσεως τῆς δόξης 
NAS: to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory 
KJV: [give] the light of the knowledge of the glory 
INT: radiancy of the knowledge of the glory
---

Theological reflections

I am in basic agreement with the Orthodox text here.

1) True, legitimate, New Testament knowledge of God, which is spiritual knowledge of God, is directly connected to concepts of New Testament (and biblical) doctrine. Therefore, it is related to theology.

2) This spiritual knowledge of God is applied for a correct and reasonable interpretation of scripture. For correct theology.

3) This knowledge refers to mystical and not just intellectual knowledge. In the perfect will of God for Christian believers, the Holy Spirit guides the spirit/mind, and physical brain of the regenerate (John 3, Titus 3) to have a true understanding of doctrine and theology, which is both intellectual and spiritual, not either/or in my humble opinion.

It would be possible for a scholar or reader/reviewer to intellectually understand scripture and theology without a proper spiritual understanding. Scholars such as these could still serve as legitimate academic sources of facts within biblical studies, theology and philosophy of religion, for example. I deduce I have cited some of these scholars. However, it is crucial all biblical exegesis and analysis be guided by the Holy Spirit for both good interpretation and practical application.

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

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

Last night


Last night

Saturday, July 18, 2020

Quote: Perfect people are crucified-Bullets and introducing Deputy Dawg

Zoom: July 17, 2020: We had six on...

 • The Norwegian Benny Hill, also known as the quite fashionable Deputy Dawg, stated (paraphrased): Perfect people are crucified. The context of his comments was our imperfection as Christians and human beings living within the present fallen and corrupt world system (Genesis 1-3, Romans 1-3).This in comparison to Jesus Christ as God-incarnate that lived within our world system  in sinless perfection.

• King James Bible (KJV): For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

 • Now of course every crucified person other than Jesus Christ was non-perfect, but I think a point from the Deputy was that even if we as Christians were perfect, the world system would still reject us.

•  Theologically, we should therefore obey the laws of the land, relevant laws from governments, where we can stay true to the gospel and New Testament theology; but we should not, without significant reason, submit to political correctness within the world system. In our case, within the western world.

•  J.C. Zombie, ZOM BIE, was so impressed with the classic look from Deputy Dawg, that he requested that the same quite fashionable hat be sent to him from Norway.

• According to the philosophy of some, it seems to me, especially in the western world, the sumo wrestler should not go to bed at night in good conscience that he has ontological (existence), intellectual, value. 

• Often from secular sources when 'education' is mentioned in worldview contexts, it means the re-education of persons that do not follow the present secular 'orthodoxy'.
 
Terrytoons

Wednesday, July 15, 2020

The Orthodox Study Bible: Matthew 5: 21-22-Non-exhaustive on murder in the heart

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

My review, as a biblical Christian of the Reformed tradition, of this fine academic source, continues. This Orthodox source uses the New King James Version (NKJV).  

Matthew 5: 21-22 

21 “You have heard that it was said to those [d]of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother [e]without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’[f] shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, [g]‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of [h]hell fire. 

d Matthew 5:21 in ancient times 
e Matthew 5:22 NU omits without a cause
f Matthew 5:22 Lit., in Aram., Empty head 
g Matthew 5:22 Gr. More 
h Matthew 5:22 Gr. Gehenna


Cited 

NU-Text These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text described previously in "The New Testament Text." They are found in the Critical Text published in the twenty-seventh edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (N) and in the United Bible Societies’ fourth edition (U), hence the acronym, "NU-Text.

In other words, in some of the earlier found Alexandrian and Egyptian manuscripts, NU means omits 'without a cause'.


Cited

Angry "without a cause" in Matthew 5:22? "But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matthew 5:22, KJV) 

The word, "εικη", translated as "without a cause" in the KJV is omitted in modern translations. 

The KJV reading is supported by the majority of manuscripts, being found in Aleph (second correction), D, L, W, Theta, 0233, 33, the majority of Byzantine manuscripts and other authorities (Nestle-Aland: Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th ed.). The earliest of these is W from the 4th/5th century. The omission is a minority reading, but is supported by three manuscripts that are earlier than W. These are: P64 (3rd century), Aleph (4th century) and B (4th century). However, the KJV reading is supported by Cyprian and Origen who lived in the 3rd century.

Further from that source:

Origen wrote: 

"Let us then see if in this matter, as in others, we can perceive the Saviour mingling the newthings that flow from His own breasts with the wine of the ancients, on the occasion when Mary and Joseph searching found Him in the Temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them and asking them questions, and all ...were astonished at His answers. But perhaps the glory o this figure is fulfilled in the place where, going up into a mountain, He taught the people and said: 'It was said to them of old, "Thou shalt not kill..." But I say to you, whosoever is angry with his brother without reason shall be held guilty'; and, 'It was said to them of old, "Thou shalt not commit adultery." But I say to you, whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Homilies on the Song of Songs, Book 1, translated in R P Lawson, Ancient Christian Writers: The Song of Songs, Commentary and Homilies, Issue 26 (New York: Newman Press: 1988)). 

KJV Today

Absent the phrase "without a cause" the Lord would be prohibiting all anger towards a brother, which is not biblical. Mark 3:5 describes our Lord being angry, saying, "And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other." As righteous anger is not sin, only anger "without a cause" is sin. 

For Balance

I can accept the theological view based on the majority text in regards to Matthew 5: 22 that just anger, at least for a time, does not with certainty lead to hatred and murder in the heart. In the notes, the Orthodoxy text states: 'Jesus forbids sinful anger'. (16). This is 'anger, or righteous indignation that is not sinful.' (16). In contrast, sinful anger is associated with murder. (16). 

Courson, in his commentary asks: 'Is anger ever right? Yes. (28). But it should be short term, as in to be angry and yet not sin. (Ephesians 4: 26). (28). It is not my theological leaning that the minority texts and manuscripts that omit 'without a cause' are implying or indicating a different theology here than the majority text and manuscripts. Agreeing with Courson, even just anger, if allowed to fester and continue can lead to murderous anger, if unchecked long enough, although again this is not with certainty, going to occur, as righteous anger may only exist. However, in context the anger described by Jesus Christ is murderous. As murderous anger, it does not necessarily need the objection of without cause in verse 21, because righteous anger is not mentioned in context of verse 21.

According to R.T France, this is the type of anger not measurable in a human court (119), those who have murder in the heart 'are no less culpable in the sight of God'. (119). The human heart is not measurable I agree, but it does not mean it is not detectable for any motives, humanly, whatsoever. But, ultimate judgement is up to God, in the Church, 2 Corinthians 5: 10 and humanity, perhaps the unregenerate only, in Revelation 20. 

Mounce explains that the Great White Throne judgment of Revelation 20 is not an arbitrary judgment of God but is based on the works of each person. Mounce (1990: 365-366). It is sign of the ultimate justice of God for all persons. Note this does not work against the atoning and resurrection work of Christ for salvation, rather Mounce is noting that those judged at Revelation 20 are judged for works. This leads some scholars to reason this is a judgment for those outside of Christ, in contrast to 2 Corinthians 5: 10. However, Mounce leans to Revelation 20 being a general judgment of all. 

eikh: Manuscripts for Matthew 5: 22


Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus: eikh  yes 

Scrivener 1894 Textus Receptus: eikh  yes 

Byzantine Majority: eikh yes 

Alexandrian eikh no

Hort and Westcott:  eikh no
---

Based on both majority and minority manuscript (s) readings documented and discussed, I reason there is a consistent theology where Jesus Christ condemns murder in the heart, connecting it to the sin of murder.
---

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

FRANCE, R.T. (1985) Matthew, Grand Rapids, IVP, Eerdmans.

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

ORIGEN (238-244) (1988), 'Homilies on the Song of Songs, Book 1', translated in R P Lawson, Ancient Christian Writers: The Song of Songs, Commentary and Homilies, Issue 26 (New York: Newman Press: 1988)

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

Tuesday, July 14, 2020

Monday, July 13, 2020

Zoom & PhD discussion

Chuck's new specially designed shades to his prevent his
red dome from exploding? 




During our Zoom meeting Sunday evening, July 12, 2020, one of the subjects that arose was Reformed theology within the evangelical church. Briefly and very non-exhaustively, from my final PhD revisions, is some biblical work in regards to the New Testament concept of predestination.

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

In my mind, the concept of compatibilism, although the term is not used,[1] is implied in Scripture. The subject of predestination for salvation, for example, is a complex theological discussion and could be a topic for a Biblical Greek thesis.[2]  However, within Ephesians 1,[3] ‘predestined’ which is προορίσας[4] within Ephesians 1: 5,[5] and in the context is ‘predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ’[6]  and προορισθέντες[7] at Ephesians 1: 11, as  in ‘we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to his purpose’[8] appear to support Reformed compatibilist notions. Strong defines proorizw[9] which is the root word connected to the forms of the word in Ephesians 1, as to limit in advance in figurative terms,[10] and to predetermine, determine before, ordain, and predestinate.[11]  Bauer defines the root word as meaning to decide before hand, predestine of God and applies this definition to Ephesians 1: 5 and 11.[12]  Minimally, there appears reasonable textual support from this verse[13] that could support a Reformed compatibilistic perspective on how God chooses persons for his ultimate culminated Kingdom. 

There are incompatibilist, evangelical counters to the Reformed view.[14]  Ephesians scholar Francis Foulkes (1989) explains that predestination is not in opposition to human free will.[15]  The gospel of grace was offered to all persons,[16] and those persons that accepted the message were elected.[17]  Foulkes insists that the human faith required rests totally on God and not in self.[18]  Foulkes then shifts the issue to the idea that election is not simply salvation, but also holiness of life.[19]  He defines predestined as ‘marked beforehand.’[20]  It is understood as a divine, eternal plan.[21]  Foulkes presentation is commendable and reasonable and although his definition is similar to that of Strong[22] and Bauer,[23] he appears to downplay a deterministic aspect of the word.[24]  I do not agree, but inevitably, even with the use of linguistic sources there is room for debate and I lean toward a compatibilistic understanding based on Ephesians 1.[25] 


[1] The term being a modern philosophical one.

[2] This is not a Biblical Studies PhD and I was therefore advised to limit my Biblical work within this thesis, but I seek accuracy in my Biblical interpretations.

[3] A key Chapter for Reformed views on compatibilism.

[4] The Greek New Testament (1993: 654).

[5] The Greek New Testament (1993: 654). 

[6] The New American Standard Version Bible (1984: 1322).

[7] The Greek New Testament (1993: 655).

[8] The New American Standard Version Bible (1984: 1322).

[9] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[10] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[11] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[12] Bauer (1979: 709).

[13] I realize many other verses could be examined concerning this subject.  I provide Ephesians 1 as a prime Reformed example within a limited space allotted for this topic.

[14] Foulkes (1989: 55).

[15] Foulkes (1989: 55).

[16] Foulkes (1989: 55).  Browning (1997: 301).

[17] Foulkes (1989: 55).  Browning writes that the New Testament does not state that those that reject this offer are damned to hell.  Browning (1997: 301).

[18] Foulkes (1989: 55).  Frankly, Foulkes does not explain how this works within his incompatibilistic system.

[19] Foulkes (1989: 55).  I can agree that God does work out holiness in his people.

[20] Foulkes (1989: 56). 

[21] Foulkes (1989: 56). 

[22] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[23] Bauer (1979: 709).

[24] Foulkes (1989: 55-56). 

[25] I can still consider incompatibilistic notions and other perspectives, when needed.

---

BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

FRANKE, JOHN R. (2005) The Character of Theology, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press.

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

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

---


Was 'The Rage' counting his millions?


Another Zoom, virtual background distortion or my reaction to radiation from Chuck's red dome?

Perhaps the best reaction of the night arose from shared thoughts of Charles Nelson Chuckles as a 'world dictator' with the Red Dome or Red Skull society or like. Even the Norwegian Benny Hill was thinking 'That is nuts!, we could get away with everything!' What would one of Chuck's punishments be...a Dairy Queen banishment?

Related archived article