1 Peter 1: 3 Briefly on New Birth & Regeneration

1 Peter 1: 3 Briefly on Regeneration

(Edited for an entry on academia.edu on January 14, 2023)

Photo is from yesterday

Preface

I recently listened to a sermon at church where our pastor dealt with the biblical idea and theology of the new birth from 1 Peter. 1: 3. 

1 Peter 1:3

New International Version (NIV)

3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead...

English Standard Version (ESV)

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead...

King James Version (KJV)

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead...

Regeneration from PhD

Saturday, September 19, 2020: PhD Full Version PDF: Theodicy and Practical Theology 2010, Wales TSD  

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

From 

website archives: regeneration 

Edited

John Murray (1937-1966)(1977) explains that the Holy Spirit ‘summons men into union and fellowship with his Son so that, united to him in whom all spiritual blessings are treasured, they come to possess Christ and all that belongs to him in his capacity as Saviour and Redeemer.’ Murray (1937-1966)(1977: 167). 

Regeneration (Murray (1937-1966)(1977: 171) takes place which is a powerful change in the human being via the Holy Spirit (Murray (1937-1966)(1977: 171). This transforms one corrupt and in sin in opposition to God Murray (1937-1966)(1977: 168-169), to one pleasing to God and trusting in God. 

It is a new ‘vital principle, a new habit, the law of God, and a divine nature’ are framed in a human heart. Murray (1937-1966)(1977: 172). Soren Kierkegaard states that ‘sin is man’s destruction.’ Kierkegaard (1847-1848)(1955)(1966: 108).

There is ‘no compulsion of the will in regeneration.’ states Shedd. Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 136-137 Volume 2). Calvin reasons that a person is not forced or coerced to believe in the gospel. Calvin (1543)(1996: 68). I would view conversion as taking place simultaneously with regeneration in a person, although again I state that God alone via the Holy Spirit causes the regeneration process. Murray (1937-1966)(1977: 172). This means as God chooses to regenerate a person he simultaneously persuades one to freely believe.

This allows for a limited but significant human freedom within the salvation process that is not incompatibilism. Salvation remains alone a work of God. Weber writes that God with his freedom effects both human freedom and human bondage as he reaches out to a saved person through the Word of God. Weber (1955)(1981: 245). This would be a work of the Spirit.

---

Titus 3: 5

Wednesday, September 06, 2017 Titus 3: 5-7: Regeneration

Edited 

'by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit' from the New American Standard Bible (NASB) 

Bible Hub: παλιγγενεσία, ας, ἡ 

Strong's 3824

Strong's Concordance paliggenesia: regeneration, renewal 

Original Word: παλιγγενεσία, ας, ἡ 

Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine 

Transliteration: paliggenesia 

Phonetic Spelling: (pal-ing-ghen-es-ee'-ah) 

Short Definition: a new birth, regeneration 

Definition: a new birth, regeneration, renewal.

From Titus 3: 5 The main text of Strong's presents: Spiritual rebirth (figurative), spiritual regeneration (figurative). (72). Greek scholar Bauer documents this as: The rebirth of the redeemed person. (606). The regeneration and rebirth via the Holy Spirit. (606).

Greek New Testament With five Greek manuscript versions there is agreement on: paliggenesiaV

Jon Courson writes that those in Christ have been 'washed and renewed' (1424), not because of our own human righteousness, but because of the work of Jesus Christ. (1424). I suggest this supports a theology of justification, the applied righteousness of Christ to believers, and salvation for believers, through grace through faith, alone. We have been renewed and washed. (1424). Washing is symbolic, in part at least through baptism, in my view. Although there is the idea of being cleansed of sin through the sanctification process. 

Nute suggests in his commentary that washing is the cleansing in the new birth. (1496). And this may include the thought of baptism as a symbol of cleansing. (1496). The Pocket Dictionary defines regeneration as rebirth or re-creation as in being born again. (101). Salvation does include legal justification and the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ to believers, and as well, sanctification.

John 3

Again from my PhD, Herman Bavinck (1918)(2006) equates the term regeneration with rebirth. Bavinck (1918)(2006: 46). In the Gospel of John 3, Jesus Christ does not literally speak of a person being born a second time, but literally insists that a person be reborn and spiritually transformed from above.

Bible Hub: John 3

John 3: 3

γεννηθῇ be born

ἄνωθεν from above

Bible Hub: 1080 

Strong's 1080

Strong's Concordance gennaó: to beget, to bring forth 

Original Word: γεννάω 

Part of Speech: Verb Transliteration: gennaó 

Phonetic Spelling: (ghen-nah'-o) 

Definition: to beget, to bring forth Usage: I beget (of the male), (of the female) I bring forth, give birth to.

Bible Hub: 509 

Strong's 509

Strong's Concordance anóthen: from above 

Original Word: ἄνωθεν 

Part of Speech: Adverb Transliteration: anóthen 

Phonetic Spelling: (an'-o-then) 

Definition: from above 

Usage: (a) from above, from heaven, (b) from the beginning, from their origin (source), from of old, (c) again, anew.

1 Peter 1: 3

Bible Hub: 1 Peter 1: 3

ἀναγεννήσας having begotten again

Bible Hub: 313

Strong's 313

Strong's Concordance anagennaó: to beget again 

Original Word: ἀναγεννάω 

Part of Speech: Verb 

Transliteration: anagennaó 

Phonetic Spelling: (an-ag-en-nah'-o) 

Definition: to beget again 

Usage: I beget again, beget into a new life.

The website lists this as aorist, participle, active, and nominative, masculine, singular.

Bauer documents ἀναγεννάω (page 51), defined as beget again, be born again, figurative of spiritual rebirth of Christians. (51). This is the context of 1 Peter 1: 3,  born again. (51).

Biblically and theologically, the new birth, to beget again, being born again equates to regeneration.

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

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.

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. 

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. 

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

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

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

NUTE, ALAN G. (1986) in 'Titus', The International Bible Commentary, F.F. Bruce, General Editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan/Marshall Pickering.

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. 

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.

WEBER, OTTO (1955)(1981) Foundations of Dogmatics, Volumes 1 and 2, Translated and annotated by Darrell L. Guder, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

PhD: Twitter quote 102

Photo: University of Wales, Trinity Saint David (UWTSD), official 

PhD: Twitter quote 102

Twitter version (part 1)

Phillips reasons it is not logically contradictory for one to ride a bicycle and therefore God should be able to do it and yet he cannot. (part 1 of 2)

Twitter version (part 2) 

(Phillips) Therefore, God is not omnipotent. (I disagree on omnipotence) (part 2 of 2)

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

Edited

Frame explains that God cannot perform logically contradictory actions,[1] as in making a square circle,[2] committing that which is immoral and sinful,[3] and interestingly, God cannot commit actions ‘appropriate only to finite creatures.’[4] This would include ‘buying shoes’ and ‘taking medicine for a cough.’[5]  Philosopher, D.Z. Phillips within The Problem of Evil and The Problem of God, disagrees with this basic notion and writes that since God cannot commit the actions of finite creatures such as ‘riding a bicycle’[6] he is not omnipotent.[7]  Phillips reasons it is not logically contradictory for one to ride a bicycle and therefore God should be able to do it and yet he cannot.[8] Therefore, God is not omnipotent.[9]

One approach to Phillip’s argument[10] is to admit that God, as non-finite, cannot commit finite actions[11] and is therefore not omnipotent[12] as classically reasoned by many within traditional thought.[13] A second approach is in agreement with Frame’s point that even though God cannot by nature commit the actions of finite creatures,[14] this does not disqualify God as being omnipotent within his infinite nature.[15] God’s lack of finiteness is actually a strength.[16] Frame states God could commit the type of finite actions discussed if he so desired by taking human form.[17]  I reason God could take human form to accomplish the task of riding a bicycle, as for example, God is stated in Genesis[18] to have walked and spoken[19] in the Garden of Eden.[20] Although I do not reason this is a ridiculous suggestion to deduce God could take bodily form[21] to walk or ride a bicycle,[22] it certainly would not be within God’s nature to typically ride a bicycle.[23]

Philips summarizes his view on God’s omnipotence in three points.[24] One, God would only be omnipotent if he could do anything that can be explained that is done without contradiction.[25] Two, he then reasons there are many countless activities that God without contradiction cannot do.[26] Three, his conclusion is that God is not omnipotent.[27]  Philips’ view can be accepted as reasonable and for some God’s omnipotence would need to be redefined.[28] However, I reason Frame’s explanation adequately offers the points that God can only do what is logically possible[29] and as well what is not contrary to his infinite and spiritual nature.[30]

Bibliography

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

CAUTHEN, KENNETH (1997) ‘Theodicy’, in Frontier.net, Rochester, New York, Kenneth Cauthen, Professor of Theology, Emeritus, Colgate Rochester Crozer Divinity School.

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

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

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?,  Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

FRAME, JOHN M. (1999) ‘The Bible on the Problem of Evil: Insights from Romans 3:1-8,21-26; 5:1-5; 8:28-39’, IIIM Magazine Online, Volume 1, Number 33, October 11 to October 17, Fern Park, Florida, Third Millennium.

FRAME, JOHN M. (2002) The Doctrine of God, P and R Publishing, Phillipsburg, New Jersey.

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.

HAMILTON, VICTOR P. (1988) Handbook on the Pentateuch, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

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

LA SOR, WILLIAM SANFORD, DAVID ALLAN HUBBARD, AND FREDERIC WILLIAM BUSH. (1987) Old Testament Survey, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

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. 

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

WEBER, OTTO (1955)(1981) Foundations of Dogmatics, Volumes 1 and 2, Translated and annotated by Darrell L. Guder, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

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

 

---

[1] Frame (2002: 518).  Erickson (1994: 277). Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 359-360 Volume 1).

[2] Frame (2002: 518).  Thiessen (1956: 126).

[3] Frame (2002: 518).  Thiessen (1956: 126). Weber (1955)(1981: 440).

[4] Frame (2002: 520).

[5] Frame (2002: 520).

[6] Phillips (2005: 113).

[7] Phillips (2005: 113).

[8] Phillips (2005: 113).

[9] Phillips (2005: 113). For Philips, God’s inability to do finite things is a weakness making God less than all-powerful.  For Frame it is a strength which maintains God as omnipotent.  Frame (2002: 520). 

[10] Phillips (2005: 113).

[11] Frame (2002: 520).  Phillips (2005: 113).

[12] Phillips (2005: 113).

[13] Cauthen (1997: 1).  Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 85-86).  Wright (1996: 278).

[14] Frame (2002: 520).  Phillips (2005: 113).

[15] Frame (2002: 520).  A traditional perspective would not view the lack of finite nature of God as a negation, but God would be understood in the positive sense as not lacking power by being infinite.

[16] Frame (2002: 520).  With Phillips’ view, God could be considered less than omnipotent with my own example I provide here, because it is not illogical for a being to sleep, and God cannot sleep.  However, it could be stated that it is a strength for God to not need to sleep or be able to sleep.

[17] Frame (2002: 520).  Phillips would more than likely view this as an ‘absurd suggestion’ with no contextual warrant, as he describes similar attempts to counter his argument.  Phillips (2005: 113).

[18] Genesis 3: 8 in The New American Standard Version Bible Version (1984: 4). 

[19] Old Testament scholar Victor P. Hamilton reasons this could be taken from a literal (to some degree) reading. Hamilton (1982: 48).

[20] I realize there is debate on the creation story in Genesis concerning whether it is to be taken as plain literal, figurative literal, myth or a combination of approaches.  La Sor, Hubbard, and Bush reason there is definitely metaphorical language in Genesis. La Sor, Hubbard, and Bush (1987: 72).  My example does serve well as agreement with Frame’s point, however.  Aspects of Genesis will be further discussed within this thesis.

[21] Hamilton (1982: 48).

[22] Phillips (2005: 113).

[23] Phillips (2005: 113).

[24] Philips (2005: 11).

[25] Philips (2005: 11).

[26] Philips (2005: 11).  Frame (2002: 518-520).   I of course offered Frame’s response to this view, and my own. 

[27] Philips (2005: 11). 

[28] Traditional perspectives would still reason that God’s omnipotence need not be redefined as a lack of finiteness would demonstrate God’s lack of impotency.

[29] Frame (2002: 518).  Erickson (1994: 277). Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 359-360 Volume 1).  Blackburn (1996: 268). 

[30] Frame (2002: 520).   Erickson (1994: 277).  Thiessen (1956: 126).  Weber (1955)(1981: 440).  David Hume within Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion questions this traditional understanding of an omnipotent supreme being as human limitations make God’s attributes ‘totally incomprehensible.’  Hume (1779)(2004: 21).

Saturday, September 19, 2020>>>PhD Full Version PDF: Theodicy and Practical Theology 2010, Wales TSD 

archive search Phillips

Christ opposed to lawyers?/Because the emotion comes in play, not reason/Briefly: Part 2

A view from the back of my condo, today...

Preface

Saturday, September 18, 2021>>>Christ opposed to lawyers? Briefly: Part 1

Radio Discussions  

Cited 

May 13, 2012

Legendary Broadcaster Pat Burns' Hotline Debuts in Vancouver 49 Years Ago Today

By Glen Livingstone

An outspoken defender of freedom of speech and freedom in general, the Runyunesque Burns - with his hard-right conservative views and a voice that suggested he began his morning ablutions by gargling with Drano - was the talk show host who gave Western Canadians a voice. He was fearless, thoughtful, and possessed a great sense of humour to boot.

Cited 

The "dolls" as Burns liked to refer to the female members of his listening audience -loved him - as did the station's advertisers who clamoured for airtime on his show.

Cited 

But in 1963 Pat himself was far too busy sifting through the personal death threats and fighting off the myriad of Board of Broadcast Governors ultimatums against him to pay any attention to the comings and goings of Jack Webster, a.k.a. "The Oatmeal Savage."

Cited 

"And when I say any topic under the sun I mean precisely that. For it doesn't matter to me if what you want to talk about is of a purely local nature, regional, provincial, state wide, national, international, philosophic, outer space or sports."

Sort of like my weekly (tonight for example) Zoom meetings. Saturday (or Sunday) night open topic Zoom meetings.

Cited

Sure, he could sometimes be a little rude to the "dolls" who called in, but along with his impeccable journalistic skills Pat knew that showmanship was also a part of the package and his brusque language and barbed insults added entertainment value to the show.

I am prayerfully not rude to anyone on Zoom. But, yes, I realize Mr. Burns added some drama for effect...

Paraphrased statements and my analysis from the You Tube video

Part 2

Roughly 4: 00 minute mark

Burns: Because the emotion comes in play, not reason.

Thursday, October 06, 2016 Those emotional appeals... 

I stated

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London. 

Emotional appeals as fallacy occur when 'it becomes the means of deciding the soundness of an argument.' (87). Emotions being used to influence what is determined as fact. This fallacy can be triggered by a person (s) abusing the emotions of the determined audience. To play on the emotional disposition of such an audience. (88). 

The author writes that 'sentimens is a clever fallacy.' (89). Perhaps this should be documented as 'sentiments'; a more common usage. If someone does not play along with this sentimental philosophical approach, he or she may be considered 'cold'. (89). This can lead to an abandonment of reason. (89). In contrast, emotional fallacy should be abandoned. Not emotions, but the abuse of emotions should not be used in attempts to determine reasonable arguments and truth.

Roughly 14: 00 minute mark

Mr. Burns discusses (the eventually failed) Meech Lake Accord.

Wikipedia 

Cited 

The Meech Lake Accord (French: Accord du lac Meech) was a series of proposed amendments to the Constitution of Canada negotiated in 1987 by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and all 10 Canadian provincial premiers. It was intended to persuade the government of Quebec to symbolically endorse the 1982 constitutional amendments by providing for some decentralization of the Canadian federation. The proposed amendments were initially popular and backed by nearly all political leaders. However, former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, feminist activists, and Indigenous groups raised concerns about the lack of citizen involvement in the Accord's drafting and its future effects on Canadian federalism, and support for the Accord began to decline. 

Cited 

Failure to pass the Accord greatly increased tensions between Quebec and the remainder of the country. The Quebec sovereignty movement gained renewed support for a time. The general aims of the Accord would be addressed in the Charlottetown Accord (1992, my add), which failed to gain a majority vote in a referendum.

Roughly 15: 30 minute mark

Bizarre UFO/Aliens caller story is told...

Roughly 26: 30 minute mark

Burns: (Hearsay evidence) You can know something is true, from first-hand knowledge, but cannot prove it in a court of law.

Agreed. Hearsay evidence, often will not serve as documented evidence.

What is hearsay evidence? Posted to: Law : 07/08/2018 from Provincial Court of British Columbia

Cited

The general rule 

All evidence presented in a trial must be “admissible”. The word “admissible” means that the law of evidence will permit the judge to admit it as evidence in the trial and consider it when deciding your case. 

Although there are exceptions, evidence that is considered “hearsay evidence” is normally not admissible – it’s “inadmissible” and won’t be allowed at a trial. 

Although, with my skill-set and with God's help, I have been able to combine first-hand, hearsay evidence with documented evidence from online chats to successfully support and defend myself in a (non-court) dispute where I was slandered and libeled. 

Christ opposed to lawyers? Briefly: Part 1

Photo: LinkedIn, Civil Engineering Discoveries London, England September 14 2021

Preface

Something different...

I came across these two videos on You Tube, Part 1 below. Mr. Pat Burns (1921-1996) was a controversial, political and somewhat philosophical, talk show host that my elders listened to.

I was at the time, a youth, so my understanding of what was being stated, was more limited than now. But his more philosophical statements interested me as I would overhear them as my elders listened to the radio. 

Radio Discussions 

Cited 

May 13, 2012

Legendary Broadcaster Pat Burns' Hotline Debuts in Vancouver 49 Years Ago Today

By Glen Livingstone

An outspoken defender of freedom of speech and freedom in general, the Runyunesque Burns - with his hard-right conservative views and a voice that suggested he began his morning ablutions by gargling with Drano - was the talk show host who gave Western Canadians a voice. He was fearless, thoughtful, and possessed a great sense of humour to boot.

Cited 

The "dolls" as Burns liked to refer to the female members of his listening audience -loved him - as did the station's advertisers who clamoured for airtime on his show.

Cited 

But in 1963 Pat himself was far too busy sifting through the personal death threats and fighting off the myriad of Board of Broadcast Governors ultimatums against him to pay any attention to the comings and goings of Jack Webster, a.k.a. "The Oatmeal Savage."

Cited 

"And when I say any topic under the sun I mean precisely that. For it doesn't matter to me if what you want to talk about is of a purely local nature, regional, provincial, state wide, national, international, philosophic, outer space or sports."

Sort of like my weekly (tonight for example) Zoom meetings. Saturday (or Sunday) night open topic Zoom meetings.

Cited

Sure, he could sometimes be a little rude to the "dolls" who called in, but along with his impeccable journalistic skills Pat knew that showmanship was also a part of the package and his brusque language and barbed insults added entertainment value to the show.

I am prayerfully not rude to anyone on Zoom. But, yes, I realize Mr. Burns added some drama for effect...

Paraphrased statements and my analysis from the You Tube video

Part 1

Roughly 22: 36 mark

Burns: Truth and integrity come from within, money can be obtained in a corrupt manner.

Reasonably true. Although, biblically, Jesus Christ is the ultimate human source of truth (John 14: 6). In other words, the triune Godhead is the ultimate source of truth, humanly represented in Jesus Christ.

Roughly 24: 20 mark

Burns: Basically lawyers are scum.

I do not agree with statement, as it is too absolute. In my adulthood, for example, I have embraced lawyers and the use of their services for legal protection. Part of the reason I am in a good financial standing at this point is because I received good legal advice from a now retired lawyer, that told me (paraphrased) 'My boy, do not leave my office until you agree to what I have suggested.' He was absolutely right, and my student loans and debt, were eliminated far sooner because of his fine, professional advice.

One has to know when he/she is the teacher, and when he/she is the student. I was the student...

Burns: If you do not believe me (in regards) to lawyers, think about what Christ said about them.

Burns cites Luke 11: 46

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

46 But He said, “Woe to you lawyers as well! For you load people with burdens that are hard to bear, [a]while you yourselves will not even [b]touch the burdens with one of your fingers. 

Footnotes (a) Luke 11:46 Lit and (b) Luke 11:46 I.e., to assist them

The New Testament context is religious, not secular.

In the New Testament context, Jesus Christ, God the Son, God incarnate, was criticizing religious scholars, the Scribes and the Pharisees, for their religious legalism, which missed the central points of serving God through faith credited as righteousness (Romans 4) and not by works righteousness.

Friday, January 11, 2019: Matthew 7: 21-23: The Lord, Lord people trust in works righteousness 

I noted from the article above...

Matthew 7:21-23 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many [a]miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’ 

Biblically, in contrast, one that is saved, performs works in salvation, after being saved by grace through faith, not by works (Ephesians 2.8-10). Those that do the will of the Father in heaven are those that produce works (Ephesians, James) after the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ is applied to him/her through regeneration (Titus 3), being born again (John 2). 

Author: Matthew B. Tozer 

Cited

In conclusion, the Scriptures do not appear to specifically comment on the professional, secular attorney at law. Rather, Jesus denounced certain members of the Mosaic Law clergy who, at that time in history, were leading the lay people astray spiritually. The apostle Paul spoke favorably of Zenas the lawyer. But Zenas was, most likely, a former Mosaic law clergyman who converted to Christianity.

Yes...

An example is Jesus Christ commenting in Matthew 21: 28-32... 

Sunday, January 26, 2020 Matthew 21: 28-32 -- Devotional III 

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

Courson cited:

'Jesus likened the prostitutes and publicans (tax-collectors, from the ESV) to the first son. They seemed unlikely candidates to receive John's message, but receive it they did.' On the other hand, like the second son, the pseudo-religious scribes and Pharisees gave only lip service to the preaching of John.' Courson (158).

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

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

BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

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

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

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

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

HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

 

PhD: Twitter quote 101

Photo: You Tube October 8 2018

PhD: Twitter quote 101 

Edited from my PhD

Twitter version I

Erickson also reasons, interestingly, that God cannot undo the past (Erickson (1994: 277), although he may take away the effects and memory of it. Erickson (1994: 277). 

Twitter version II

God cannot logically violate his own nature, Erickson (1994: 277), Thiessen (1956: 126), Weber (1955)(1981: 440), or fail to live up to a promise. Erickson (1994: 277). 

From my PhD

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

Twitter version III

The implication being that God could hypothetically change all the results of a past occurrence, but could not logically make the past occurrence to have not occurred, even if only he had any ultimate knowledge of it. 

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. 

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

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It? Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

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. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books. 

FRAME, JOHN M. (1999) ‘The Bible on the Problem of Evil: Insights from Romans 3:1-8,21-26; 5:1-5; 8:28-39’, IIIM Magazine Online, Volume 1, Number 33, October 11 to October 17, Fern Park, Florida, Third Millennium. 

FRAME, JOHN M. (2002) The Doctrine of God, P and R Publishing, Phillipsburg, New Jersey. 

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

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. 

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

WEBER, OTTO (1955)(1981) Foundations of Dogmatics, Volumes 1 and 2, Translated and annotated by Darrell L. Guder, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

archive search: omnipotence

Saturday, September 19, 2020 PhD Full Version PDF: Theodicy and Practical Theology 2010, Wales TSD

Cherry picking fallacy

Cherry picking fallacy

Photo: Visit Manchester, Manchester Cathedral

Updated for an article on academia.edu: February 26, 2023

Preface

While living in Manchester, I did visit the Cathedral which was architecturally fairly interesting. I was not as impressed by the very liberal theology pamphlets that were on offer. 

The first place I lived in within Greater Manchester, was Crumpsall, and I used to do a very interesting walk from Crumpsall to well past this Cathedral in central Manchester.

One time a kind younger man in Crumpsall walked by me on the street and stated (paraphrased): 'Watch your back here, this is like the Bronx!' Interestingly, I visited the Bronx three years later.

Crumpsall seemed to be a more dangerous place than the Bronx, in my humble opinion, but I was (am) no expert.

Cherry picking fallacy (informal fallacy) 

Informal fallacies were reviewed in the Pirie text. This opposed to formal fallacies that are formal logic errors, that have been reviewed in Langer.

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

Facebook Discussion

Citing Dean Hintz 

I do find it somewhat puzzling that so many people who used to follow the advice of authoritative agencies such as these now are inclined to dismiss them out of hand simply based on popular social media feeds.

My Facebook reply 

Cherry picking, may be taking place in some cases. 

Logically fallacious 

Cited

Cherry Picking (also known as: ignoring inconvenient data, suppressed evidence, fallacy of incomplete evidence, argument by selective observation, argument by half-truth, card stacking, fallacy of exclusion, ignoring the counter evidence, one-sided assessment, slanting, one-sidedness) Description: When only select evidence is presented in order to persuade the audience to accept a position, and evidence that would go against the position is withheld. The stronger the withheld evidence, the more fallacious the argument.

One-sided argument 

Thursday, June 29, 2017 A one-sided argument

I have reviewed a one-sided argument, previously, edited.

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London. 

Many decisions persons may weigh in have advantages and disadvantages. The fallacy of one-sided assessment is fallen into when only one side of a case is taken into consideration. (158). 

Pros and cons should be evaluated in order to make judgements based on the balance. (158-159). This fallacy can err on only counting the advantages or disadvantages in regard to an issue. Relevant material is omitted from arguments in order to achieve a one-sided argument. (159). 

Providing two or more sides on an argument and supporting theology and philosophy with methodology was very much emphasized to me within my British academic studies at the University of Wales. Besides this approach providing more potential objectivity, at least, in the evaluation if arguments; it also disciplines the academic mind to reasonably consider alternative views. This is an approach which in theory should make an academic less biased and partisan.

Omitting the benefit

Tuesday, June 27, 2017 That idea would go over like an atomic bomb 

A one-sided argument is quite similar to omitting the benefit in the Pirie text. 

Cited 

When evaluating the benefits of an activity, both the good and bad consequence, should be considered. (157). If each may exist. A surprisingly (157) common fallacy consists of omitting the benefits produced by an activity or proposal and counting only the adverse consequences. (157).

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

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

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London. 

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

Friendly Zoom debate & discussion

From Facebook 

I just finished hosting my sometimes, Saturday night (possibly Sunday night) open topic Zoom meeting 'World of Domes' (host is an exception). Tonight we mainly discussed the pandemic and vaccines. 

I appreciate Howard James Bartel for his libertarian stance and Dean Hintz for his scientific knowledge, and others. I am thankful we debated as friends. 

--- 

Blogger

I will add in this Blogger context, from last evening, Sir Robin (not on Facebook) was also appreciated for his political science and other contributions. 

It was four of us on extended at the end, but other friends contributed earlier as well.

PhD: Twitter quote 100

PhD: Twitter quote 100

Photo: AR_200417_GortonMons-1 Manchester Evening News, Gorton Monastery

Preface

I think I have viewed Gorton Monastery while in a motor vehicle, but I do not believe it was near my walking routes, although looking at a map, it was close.

In my Reformed theology, God's infinite attributes work within the logically possible. For examples, God cannot choose to cease to exist (as logically necessary, and the first and primary cause), make the finite, infinite, or create another infinite, omnipotent God, equal to self.

God the Son, as infinite, within the Trinity, did (does) take a finite, human nature in the incarnation. Correctly, and classically, the natures do not mix. Jesus Christ is both finite man and infinite God.

PhD: Twitter quote 100

Edited from PhD thesis

PhD Full Version PDF in article 

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

Twitter version I

Thiessen defines omnipotence as meaning the creator is able to accomplish whatever he wills, as long as it does not oppose his nature. Thiessen (1956: 126). 

Twitter version II

Omnipotence: Herman Bavinck reasons God does whatever pleases God. Bavinck (1918)(2006: 233 Volume 2). 

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. 

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

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It? Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

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. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

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

archive search: omnipotence