Briefly on jersey boycotts: Philosophical comments

Briefly on jersey boycotts: Philosophical comments

Photo: Capture from ESPN

Citations in italics

CBC News January 18 2023

NHL player's boycott of team's Pride night tribute 'disrespectful' to gay community: agent

Philosophically, I suppose that in regards to job security and job harmony, there can be a pragmatic debate on whether or not each player should agree to wear each and every themed uniform in the warmups.

Ivan Provorov's actions show league not 'safe environment' for players to come out, agent Bayne Pettinger says 

I am not a hockey insider and so I cannot reasonably opine on this point from the agent. However, within society, overall, I do not think that one player's boycott in this context, creates an unsafe environment for those within the LGBTQ+ community. Clearly the LGBTQ+ community has significant societal support in 2023 within the western world. Especially from within government, the media, academia and the corporate world.

A hockey agent says an NHL player's refusal to take part in his team's LGBTQ+ Pride Night warmup is an indication that more work needs to be done to make the sport more inclusive.

To the agent...

Sir, the western world is still at this point a democracy. There is never 100% public (or private) agreement on any issue. Public agreement should not be socially forced or coerced, as long as legally, reasonably, law and order is maintained within a democracy. In the west, we can eventually, favour forms of tyranny and dictatorship and make it seem like everyone agrees on every key societal issue, at least. But this will just force real disagreement into forms of silence. It will not eliminate all disagreement.

Philadelphia Flyers defenceman Ivan Provorov did not participate in pre-game warmups Tuesday night when the team wore Pride-themed jerseys and used sticks wrapped in rainbow Pride tape.  He cited his Russian Orthodox religion as the reason. "I respect everybody's choices," Provorov said after the game. "My choice is to stay true to myself and my religion. That's all I'm going to say."' '

Again, in regards to job security and job harmony, pragmatically, I will state that there can be a philosophical, ethical debate on whether or not each player should agree to wear each and every themed uniform in the warmups. However, I think this player has every right to hold to his Russian Orthodox religious views. His views which do not personally support the Pride event, also do not prohibit the event from occurring, whatsoever. As well, public support for the event still exists.

'Bayne Pettinger, a Toronto-based NHLPA certified player agent who came out as gay in 2020, said he was disappointed by Provorov's decision to use his platform for "essentially a protest" that sends a message to hockey fans and his teammates who did take part in the warmup. "[It] just says that, 'Hey, it's making it about me,'" Pettinger told CBC's All Points West. "I found it selfish and frankly disrespectful towards the the gay community."

The player has the right to be concerned with self, as we all do, within the context of a democracy and within reasonable law and order. The issue is also about the player's rights and freedoms. In a democracy the player should not have to agree with every idea and political cause that the agent, or anyone else holds to.

Pettinger agrees that more conversations are needed. "I'm a strong believer that no one is born to hate another group or religion or race, that's taught," he said. "We can't put ourselves in Provorov's shoes of how he was raised and his beliefs. We can only try to educate and humanize."

Sir, I do not personally hold to Russian Orthodoxy, Greek Orthodoxy, or any form of Eastern Orthodoxy. However, I have studied Orthodoxy, especially through the use of...

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

To the agent...

More conversations?

Are these somewhat at least, open-minded conversations, or are these actually desired indoctrinations into your way of thinking?

There is nothing in what the hockey player did to suggest 'hate', whatsoever. What exists is a worldview difference in regards to him publicly wearing a Pride uniform in support of the LGBTQ+ community. 

Sir, since you disagree with this player's stance. Does this therefore mean you hate Russian Orthodoxy? Do you hate his worldview?

Reason actually tells us that differing views on an issue, including this issue, and different worldviews, do not necessarily imply or indicate 'hate', by either side.

Why is it not simply reasonable to disagree on an issue?

Educate? 

Alright, let us become more educated...

Sir, are you educated in the beliefs of Russian Orthodoxy? We in the west, see LGBTQ+ education all around us.

Does Orthodoxy have any philosophical, intellectual merit? Can you opine with knowledge? Has the player simply been raised with these beliefs, or has he actually researched them? Is his understanding reasonable?

Again, I am not an adherent of any form of Eastern Orthodoxy, but although I have a biblical Christian worldview within the Reformed Christian tradition; I certainly do not assume that those within Russian Orthodoxy, by default, dehumanize outsiders. 

In this case, the hockey player expressed his Russian Orthodox religion as the reason for non-support of the Pride jersey. 

"I respect everybody's choices," Provorov said after the game. "My choice is to stay true to myself and my religion. That's all I'm going to say."' '

The player showed respect for  a different view and worldview, although within disagreement. This is not hatred. This is not dehumanizing, whatsoever.

ESPN January 19 2023 

Associated Press 

PHILADELPHIA -- Flyers coach John Tortorella defended Russian defenseman Ivan Provorov's decision to cite religious beliefs as his reason to boycott the team's pregame Pride celebration. "Provy did nothing wrong," Tortorella said Thursday. "Just because you don't agree with his decision doesn't mean he did anything wrong."

Well-stated...

Happy 2023: Brief bullets on career/confidence

• Hotel del mar by @the_line_visualization [IG] January 4 2023, from LinkedIn

• Quite the hotel...

---

• Besides basic training, I now have two main work disciplines completed, course wise.

• I am now quite good at the first discipline, and I am improving with the second.

• It is a good career, as with government there are various departments I could transfer to, as I gain experience and status.

• This is completing over 60 self-directed online courses since late September...

• And then the real, career work is the actual, real data processing.

• Time will tell whether I relocate eventually.

• Most likely, not a permeant relocation, but work travel, as I am in good financial shape with my condominium, etcetera, by God's grace.

---

• In regards to the TikTok video below, IMHO, a significant reason there are so many negatives with romantic relationships in 2023, particularity in the western world, is the philosophical idea of what we 'deserve'.

• I do not deserve a potential wife with a PhD, because I have a PhD.

• I do not deserve a potential wife that is significantly blessed within some academic discipline.

• No one deserves a potential romantic partner based on his/her youth, looks and overall attractiveness.

• No one deserves a potential romantic partner based on age, lack of looks and lack of overall attractiveness.

• Clearly with the attitudes of many in today's western world, much of his/her worldview embraces the idea that a person should seek out, and only be presented with, what they deserve, romantically.

• To be presented with less than what is supposedly deserve, can be viewed as an offence.

• This can be a shunning offence...

• However, based on a New Testament worldview, as the regenerate (John 2, Titus 2, 1 Peter 1) are saved by grace through alone (Ephesians 1-2 as example), everyone is a universally sinful person (Romans, Galatians, Hebrews, as examples).

• Each and every person is not deserving of God's blessing of abundant life.

• Certainly, would not, a good romantic partner be an aspect of abundant life?

• I suggest that any concept of 'deserve' should be dropped within romantic considerations.

• Instead within the gospel, a single person without a gift of contentment (1 Corinthians 7) should seek mutual spiritual, intellectual and romantic/physical attraction.

• In other words, reasonably, prayerfully, within the Christian community, but not perfectly, the spiritual, intellectual and romantic/physical needs are mutually met.

• I suggest, that people considered for a potential romantic relationship under the philosophical, worldview umbrella of what we 'deserve' would at times differ VASTLY, from people considered within the concepts of significant, but not perfect, mutual, spiritual, intellectual and romantic/physical attraction.

• The young woman speaking on the TikTok video.

• (Paraphrased) Sometimes short guys have too much confidence. 

• Typically, most men, even under six feet tall would still be taller than she appears.

• To be blunt, she is an average, at best, looking young adult woman.

• Her attitude is very unattractive, IMHO.

• In regards to male confidence...

• Many men lack confidence that a western woman will choose him romantically.

• The female 'group think' mentality is a negative consideration for a man...

• This however, does not necessarily equate to a man that is overall, lacking confidence.

• The presenter, confidently presents his material.

• The presenter, confidently makes some good points.

• The man seemingly has some significant value (I know little about him).

---

• A person's overall value, as a Christian, or potential husband or wife, is not measured by what a person deserves.

• But instead, by the significance of any mutual attraction.

• Love (and equally truth) is key here as opposed to a market value dating approach...

• Galatians 5:14 NASB2020 For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” NASB2020: New American Standard Bible - NASB

God eventually kills everybody (Response to a question)

God eventually kills everybody

Image: Linked In, Civil Engineering Discoveries

---

I was asked this question (paraphrased) below at church Sunday and replied. But here is a website version.

Q: In Matthew 2, God spared baby Jesus from Herod. But other babies (2 years and under, my add) were killed by Herod. What about the lives of those boys that were not saved?

My add

Matthew 2: 16-20 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

16 Then when Herod saw that he had been tricked by the magi, he became very enraged, and sent men and killed all the boys who were in Bethlehem and all its vicinity [j]who were two years old or under, according to the time which he had determined from the magi. 17 Then what had been spoken through Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: 18 “A voice was heard in Ramah, Weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children; And she refused to be comforted, Because they were no more.” 19 But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord *appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, and said, 20 “Get up, take the Child and His mother, and go to the land of Israel; for those who sought the Child’s life are dead.”

Jeremiah 31:15 (My add)

[j] Matthew 2:16 Lit from two...and under 

In regards to the asterisk *

laridian.com 

Cited 

The NASB uses an asterisk in many passages. An example is found in Mark 2:5. And Jesus seeing their faith *said to the paralytic, "My son, your sins are forgiven." The meaning of the asterisks is found in the Front Matter of the NASB, in the section titled Explanations of General Format. "Asterisks are used to mark verbs that are historical presents in the Greek which have been translated with an English past tense in order to conform to modern usage. The translators recognized that in some contexts the present tense seems more unexpected and unjustified to the English reader than a past tense would have been. But Greek authors frequently used the present tense for the sake of heightened vividness, thereby transporting their readers in imagination to the actual scene at the time of occurrence. However, the translators felt that it would be wise to change these historical presents to English past tenses." 

This indeed 'appears' the case in Mathew 2. 

Bible Hub 

Cited for reference

φαίνεται = appears 

A: Based on a biblical, Reformed, philosophical, theology, and also theistic use of philosophy of religion; God is infinite, eternal and the first cause of all things. God is the only necessary being, God exists by necessity. Something exists by necessity when it is not possible for the proposition to be false. The denial of such being self-contradictory. Bradley (1996: 522). God’s essence is eternal and necessary (logically must exist), and the finite universe is temporal and contingent (not necessary). Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 191 Volume 1). God as a necessary being is therefore the cause of contingent creation.

What is necessary (what exists by necessity) is truly good. What is necessary (what exists by necessity) is the ultimate good. This is necessary and exists by necessity. 

Reasonably, contingent beings do not have to exist. Contingent beings 'could have failed to exist'. They 'must be caused to exist by some another being'. Quinn (1996: 609). Contingent beings, such as human beings and angelic/demonic beings, if significantly rational and significantly free, via their nature and consciousness, can serve as secondary causes of thoughts, actions and acts, for which there is moral accountability. But secondary causes only exist because the first-cause, God, chose for them to exist.

Note that the moral accountability of rational, secondary causes becomes questionable when under the duress of force and coercion.

The first cause, God, could reasonably, theoretically, even after creating humanity, will for them not to exist in various contexts, including complete annihilation of both body and spirit. God could cause physical death alone as the spirit lives on (Luke 16 as a figurative literal example, although a parable). Physical death does not require a supernatural act. Death could be a scientific aspect of human, physical, existence.

I reason, it quite morally, reasonable, that God as necessary could theoretically eliminate what is contingent, because the creator alone is necessary. Contingent beings that do not exist by necessity could be eliminated, unless God as eternally truthful, has promised otherwise. God is not obliged to maintain contingent life, unless there is a divine, ethical/moral promise by God, most importantly, from scripture, to provide human beings with continued existence. 

The first-cause, Biblical God has promised everlasting life, post-mortem, for those trusting in Jesus Christ. This through the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, to those who are regenerated (John 3, Titus 3, 1 Peter 1) in belief, through grace through faith alone. These are those that embrace the work of Jesus Christ on the cross for their sins. The only way of salvation, according to the New Testament (John 1-3, Acts 2:21, Romans 10:13 as examples).

On the flip side, God has simultaneously warned of everlasting death/punishment, post-mortem, for those outside of Christ (Revelation 20-22). These are those that do not embrace the work of Jesus Christ on the cross for the sins. The only way of salvation. This is the continuation of the embracing of fallen, human nature and sin, that features a fracture between God and humanity that only the work of Jesus Christ on the cross can fix. 

Note, in regards to the fall, see also Genesis 1-3.

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Romans 3: 21-23 21 

But now apart [a]from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the [b]Law and the Prophets, 22 but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those [c]who believe; for there is no distinction, 23 for all [d]have sinned and fall short of the glory of God... 

a) Romans 3:21 Or from law 

b) Romans 3:21 I.e., the Old Testament 

c) Romans 3:22 Or who believe. For there is 

d) Romans 3:23 Or sinned 

Romans 6: 23 23 

For the wages of sin is death, but the gracious gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Ephesians 2: 8-10

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and [l]this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

i) Ephesians 2:8 I.e., this salvation

God eventually kills everybody is this temporal realm, in a sense, as the first cause of all things. For each person, God alone has providential, sovereignty over human life and death. God as necessary is also by nature, infinite, holy and perfectly good. 

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

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of the Word of God: Volume 1, Part One, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark. 

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of Creation: Volumes 1 and 3, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark. 

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of God: Volume 2, First Half -Volume, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark.

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.

BONJOUR, LAURENCE. (1996) ‘A Priori’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

BRADLEY, RAYMOND D. (1996) ‘Necessity’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

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

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

DUNN, JAMES D.G. (1988) Romans, Dallas, Word Books.

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. (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.

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

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.

GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

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

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

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.

QUINN, PHILIP L. (1996) 'Philosophy of Religion' , in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

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.

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

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