Religious Labels

The University Wales, Lampeter

God willing, I shall be in Wales, Lampeter in October for my PhD defence.

This is my first posting with my new computer.

I am recovering from either food poisoning (fish), or stomach flue. This article is short and sweet and edited from my PhD. If you would like to make me feel better, please comment.

Please do not get fishy with me.;)

Russ:)

Religious Labels

From my PhD questionnaire, I asked respondents that attended Christian churches to choose from a list of provided religious labels. I purposely sampled many mainline Protestants, and so not only conservative evangelicals.

The label ‘Evangelical’ has 69 (32.4%) respondents for primary label, for the secondary label it has 54 (25.4%) respondents. As a tertiary religious label it features 12 (5.6%) respondents. Overall 63.4% of respondents chose evangelical as an option. ‘Conservative’ is the primary preference of 45 (21.1%) respondents, 45 (21.1%) respondents for a secondary preference with a leading frequency for tertiary preference at 25 (11.7%) respondents. The conservative label was chosen by 53.9% of respondents and this is an indicator of my efforts to have those within liberal, progressive Christianity specifically in my project, since although a majority of respondents chose conservative as a label, it is not an overwhelming majority. ‘Charismatic’ is the primary preference of 18 (8.5%) respondents, a secondary preference of 12 (5.6%) respondents, and 10 (4.7%) respondents as a tertiary preference. So 18.8% of respondents chose this as a religious label. ‘Catholic’ is the primary religious label of 16 (7.5%) respondents, secondary preference frequency of 12 (5.6%), and tertiary preference of 10 (4.7%).

Bishop James Judd (2003) explains within ‘Short History of the Old Catholic Church’ that the term ‘catholic’ equates with the term ‘universal.’ Judd (2003: 1). The term catholic literally means ‘universal’ or ‘worldwide.’ Grenz, Guretski and Nordling (1999: 24). Since the term ‘catholic’ is not defined in my questionnaire, some respondents who state they are catholic are not necessarily Roman Catholic. Thirty-eight respondents state they are catholic for religious label, but only 9 respondents at 4.2% are part of the Roman Catholic denomination. A total of 17.8% chose the catholic option. This is not necessarily an indicator that they are members of the Roman Catholic Church, but they consider themselves catholic Christians. Judd (2003: 1).

A quick note, concerning my previous article on causation:

I would like to add, that I understand we are discussing human choices and actions and morally significant choices and actions. My heart pumping or not is in a sense a human action, but does not require my choice to work. If I was foolish I could choose to try and terminate my heart, and would perhaps die. I suppose one could argue that involuntary human actions are a form of hard determinism, but it is not morally significant or very relevant to the previous discussion on causality, but I admit that within compatibilism it is possible that some human actions could possibly in a sense fall outside of the category.

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

JUDD, BISHOP JAMES (2003) ‘Short History of the Old Catholic Church’, in American Apostolic Catholic Church, Diocese of Michigan-Georgia-Minnesota, Greenville, Michigan. American Apostolic Catholic Church, Diocese of Michigan-Georgia-Minnesota, An Old Catholic Jurisdiction.
http://www.americanchurch.org/history.htm



http://satireandtheology.blogspot.com/2008/08/i-told-you-so.html

Causation and Causality

Durham, England

http://satireandtheology.blogspot.com/2008/08/annihilation.html

This short posting will present another example of how similar words are used differently in my related PhD/MPhil theses fields, of philosophy of religion, and empirical theology and social research methods/statistics. As usual with my blog postings I am mixing it up between the various academic disciplines I am studying. My last post dealt more with Biblical studies with some philosophical theology.

Blackburn explains that in philosophy, causation is the relation between two events. It holds that when one event will determine and necessitate the second event, it is causation. When the first event occurs, the second must occur by necessity. Blackburn (1996: 59). Jaegwon Kim writes that causation is the relation between cause and effect, which can be an event, or state of an object. Kim (1996: 110).

In Reformed theology as God is infinite, omnipotent, and omniscient, he is reasoned to be the cause of all things. Philosopher Louis P. Pojman explains that within determinism or hard determinism, an outside force causes an act and no created being is responsible for his or her moral actions, while for compatibilism or soft determinism, although an outside force causes actions, created beings are responsible where they act voluntarily. Within hard determinism an outside force would be the only cause of human actions, while with soft determinism an outside force would be the primary cause of human actions and persons the secondary cause. Pojman (1996: 596). I hold to soft determinism and therefore:

God causes all things, including human actions.

Human beings cause human actions.

Human actions are not forced or coerced by an outside force.

Theological concepts of predestination found in Ephesians 1 and Romans 8 work well with the philosophical concept of cause. God causes the elect to follow Christ, and by moulding their hearts in regeneration through the Holy Spirit, simultaneously has elected persons to freely choose God. Therefore persons although predestined, are not coerced or forced to believe.

With the unregenerate, God wills everlasting punishment by not electing persons, and the unregenerate freely choose to sin with a corrupted human nature, and therefore although caused and determined to reject God, persons are not forced or coerced by God to sin and reject God. The unregenerate are simply allowed to exist with a corrupted nature and choices and are judged and punished accordingly.

Within social research methods and statistics, causality is the concern with making causal connections between variables (the attribute in terms where cases differ), rather than the mere relationships between them. Bryman (2004: 537, 545). A relationship between variables would examine the association between two variables, where the variation in one variable coincides with the variation in another. Causality would be looking for what causes the connections between the variables. Bryman (2004: 537, 543). In a questionnaire/survey a variable could be age and another variable could be income. The connections between the statistical findings from the variables would be examined to see what has caused the similar results with the two variables.

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

BRYMAN, ALAN (2004) Social Research Methods, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

KIM, JAEGWON (1996) ‘Causation’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

End

Thanks to Odd Facts in my satire and theology links for the following:

Black and white twin sisters

If a woman is of mixed race, her eggs will usually contain a mixture of genes coding for both black and white skin.

Similarly, a man of mixed race will have a variety of different genes in his sperm. When these eggs and sperm come together, they will create a baby of mixed race. But, very occasionally, the egg or sperm might contain genes coding for one skin colour. If both the egg and sperm contain all white genes, the baby will be white. And if both contain just the versions necessary for black skin, the baby will be black.

For a mixed-race couple, the odds of either of these scenarios is around 100 to one. But both scenarios can occur at the same time if the woman conceives non-identical twins, another 100 to one chance.

This involves two eggs being fertilised by two sperm at the same time, which also has odds of around 100 to one.

If a sperm containing all-white genes fuses with a similar egg and a sperm coding for purely black skin fuses with a similar egg, two babies of dramatically different colours will be born.

The odds of this happening are 100 x 100 x 100 - a million to one.

Black and white twins: Daily Mail




Black and white ravens (Thanks, Mom)

Please have a look at my previous article. I spent much time on it.

Objections to Christ

Objections to Christ

Preface

This short, non-exhaustive article was originally published on Blogger, 20080801. Serving as a secondary article referenced for a larger entry on academia.edu.

The primary article...

Tuesday, June 18, 2019: The Orthodox Study Bible: The Psalms, types of Psalms and prophecy

I am not an expert on the Hebrew Bible or a linguist. I do take Jewish scholarship seriously. I realize that both Jewish and Christian scholars need to take verses in the Hebrew Bible in the original context. 

Objections to Christ

Bible Hub: Psalm 22: 17 Hebrew (My add)

Psalms Chapter 22: mechon-mamre.org (My add)

Cited

17 For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet. 

18 I may count all my bones; they look and gloat over me. 

19 They part my garments among them, and for my vesture do they cast lots.

Why Jews don't Believe in Jesus: Ohr Somayach International

Psalm 22: 17

The Rabbi states:

In Psalm 22:17 the Hebrew states "hikifuni ca'ari yaday veraglay" which means "they bound me (hikifuni) like a lion (ca-like ari-lion), my hands (yaday) and my feet (ve-and raglay-my feet). The Christians translate this as "they pierced my hands and feet". Nowhere in the entire Torah, Prophets and Writings do the words ca'ari or hikifuny mean anything remotely resembling "pierce".

A Christian response:

Brown

Reply to Objection: First, the verses regarding the piercing are not quoted by New Testament writers, Secondly, the translation of pierced is backed up the Septugint and the Dead Sea Scrolls. So the translation problem here is not only a Christian problem its also a Jewish problem.

Jewish interpreters claim the Christians have misinterpreted Psalm 22:16 [17] because in the Masoretic text the verse reads ka’ari followed by my hand and my feet. The word ka (like) followed by ari (lion) means like a lion. The imagery here presents the picture of “Like a lion” my hands and my feet are mauled. In the older Dead Sea Scrolls version of Psalms 22 the word is ka’aru meaning, “to dig out” or “to bore through”

So the issue of pierced is not so much a question of the King James translators, as much an issue of Jewish manuscripts. Dr. Michael Brown sums up this argument succinctly,

……….According to Rashi, the meaning is “as though they are crushed in a lion’s mouth.” While the commentary of Metsudat David states, “They crush my hands and my feet as the lion which crushes the bones of the prey in its mouth.” Thus, the imagery is clear; These lions are not licking the psalmist’s feet! They are tearing and ripping at them. Given the metaphorical language of the surrounding verses (cf. vv. 12-21 [13-22]), this vivid image of mauling lions graphically conveys the great physical agony of the sufferer…….

…Where did the King James translators come up with this idea of ‘piercing’ the hands and feet? That’s not what the Hebrew says.” …..

…..Actually, the Septuagint, the oldest existing Jewish translation of the Tanakh, was the first to translate the Hebrew as “they pierced my hands and feet” (using the verb oruxan in Greek), followed by the Syriach Peshitta version two or three centuries later (rendering with baz’u) not only so, but the oldest Hebrew copy of the Psalms we possess (from the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating to the century before Yeshua) reads the verb in this verse as ka’aru (not ka’ari, “like a lion”), a reading also found in about a dozen medieval Masoretic manuscripts—recognized as the authoritative texts in traditional Jewish thought—where instead of ka’ari (found in almost all other Masoretic manuscripts) the texts say either ka’aru or karu.

In conclusion, the Dead Sea scrolls agrees with the picture of the pierced Messiah in the 22nd Psalm, verse 16.

The Rabbi also raises concerns with the Christian interpretation of Isaiah 14:7.

In Isaiah 7:14 the Hebrew states "hinei ha'almah harah veyoledet ben" "behold (hineih) the young woman (ha - the almah- young woman) is pregnant (harah) and shall give birth (ve-and yoledet-shall give birth) to a son (ben)". The Christians translate this as "behold a virgin shall give birth." They have made two mistakes (probably deliberate) in the one verse. They mistranslate "ha" as "a" instead of "the". They mistranslate "almah" as "virgin", when in fact the Hebrew word for virgin is "betulah".

John M. Frame suggests that there is a controversy surrounding the Septuagint and Matthew’s use of Isaiah 7: 14. Frame reasons that the virgin birth event influenced Mathew’s understanding of Isaiah 7:14, rather than the other way around. Frame reasons the prophecy may have been culminated in ways that Isaiah did not expect. Frame (1996: 1145).

Brown cited sources

Jews for Jesus: http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/m.sion/ps2mesin.htm 

Judaica Press Tanach, with Rashi Notes, The Judaica Press, Inc.123 Ditmas AvenueNew York, NY 11218 

Jewish Study Bible, Jewish Publication Society, Tanakh Translation, Oxford University Press, 2004, Psalm 2 pgs. 1285-1286 

Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus Volume 3, Dr. Michael Brown, Pgs. 113-114, Baker Books 2003 Jewish Study Bible, Jewish Publication Society, Tanakh Translation, Oxford University Press, 2004, Psalm 22 pgs. 1305 

Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Dr. Michael Brown. Pgs. 121-122, quoting from the standard translation of Wiliam G. Braude, Pesikta Rabbati: Homiletical Discourses for Festal Days and Special Sabbaths, 2 Volumes (New Haven; Yale, 1968) 680-81, 685-86, 686-87

---

Rev. Dr. Eugen J. Pentiuc: Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, suggests:

Pent (This website is no longer available)

Rev. Dr. Eugen J. Pentiuc: www.goarch.org/-/the-word-almah-in-isaiah-7-14 I found another version.

'The Septuagint, in Isaiah 7: 14 as in other instances, proves to be rather an interpretation of the Hebrew text, although the reading proposed by the Greek version, he parthenos "the virgin," does not conflict with the Hebrew text, for the meaning "virgin" is implied in the Hebrew term ha-‘almah "the concealed one" (betrothed)… In summary, while the Hebrew word betulah "virgin" (Greek parthenos) emphasizes the idea of chastity,[16] the term ‘almah [17] hints at the fact that the young woman so labeled was independent,[18] living alone or with her parents, yet separated from her fiancé or future husband, in a state of seclusion, with little or no public appearances.'

The Rabbi suggests in regard to the Trinity: In Jewish law, worship of a three-part god is considered idolatry; one of the three cardinal sins for which a person should rather give up his life than transgress. The idea of the trinity is absolutely incompatible with Judaism.

In the New Testament, The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are of three distinctions in one nature and essence. Erickson states that each member of the Trinity is qualitatively the same, and they are divine in the same way. Erickson (1994: 337). The essence of the each member of the Trinity is the same, even if one distinction submits to the other at times. Erickson (1994: 338).

From Erickson’s point, the triune God is one God in nature and essence, represented in three distinctions and therefore is not a three-part God.

Jesus Christ is human, with a human spirit, and is resurrected as such.

Jesus Christ is fully God and God in spirit.

The natures do not mix.

God's infinite, eternal nature has never been altered, and cannot be altered.

The Rabbi states:

"You will not be able to see My face, for no human can see my face and live" (Exodus 33:18-20)

Persons viewed the incarnated Christ.

God was not viewed in his entirety.

It would be impossible for a finite being to fully experience the infinite. It is both philosophically impossible and would result in death to the finite person.

The Rabbi raised some textual issues which Jewish and Christian scholars debate. The Christian positions appear to be supported by some within Jewish scholarship. The theological objections to Christ such as to the Trinity and God being seen face-to-face can be overcome.

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

FRAME, JOHN M. (1996) ‘Virgin Birth of Jesus’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.


Thanks, Jeff.

Jeff made this for his blog, Thoughts and Theology. Jeff has joined me in a Green Lantern anti-blog troll network.

Theism and Deism

Wasdale, The Lake District, England (trekearth)

Theism and Deism

John S. Feinberg states that theism is literally the belief in the existence of God. The term may be recent and a counter to the seventeenth century terms deism and deistic and is used as the opposite of atheist. Feinberg (1996: 1080). Feinberg writes the term theist is used for religious believers and those who hold to certain philosophical and theological positions without necessarily being religious. Feinberg (1996: 1080).

Richard G. Swinburne explains that theism is the idea that there exists a God that is personal, without a body, omnipotent, omniscient, free, and the creator of the universe. Christians, Jews, and Muslims are all theists. Swinburne (1999: 562). Swinburne states that God is personal in theism as he acts intentionally to bring about purposes and has knowledge of all things. Swinburne (1999: 562-563).

M.H. Macdonald writes that deism describes an unorthodox religious view expressed among readers in the first half of the seventeenth century, most notably Lord Herbert of Cherbury. Macdonald (1996: 304). Deism is from the Latin for deus, in contrast, to theos from the Greek. Macdonald (1999: 304). Deism is different than theism and is connected to natural religion that thinks religious knowledge is gained through reason and not revelation or church doctrines. Macdonald (1996: 304). There is a belief in a supreme being, but this being is not directly involved in the affairs of his creation. Macdonald (1996: 304). Therefore, the revelation of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament would be denied as actually occurring, and the gospel and related doctrines would be denied. In agreement with Christianity, it would be an understanding of God as the first cause and the creator of universal laws. Macdonald (1996: 305). David A. Pailin, my brief former academic advisor, writes that deism is often in parallel to theism. Pailin (1999: 148).

In modern times deism is used to define a supreme being who is the ultimate source of reality but does not intervene in the natural and historical processes through revelation or salvific acts. Pailin (1999: 148). Pailin writes that the common use of the term ‘theism’ does not carry the same negative implications. Pailin (1999: 148). He explains that historically deism is not so much a set of doctrines, but a movement, largely British, that became popular in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Pailin (1999: 148). Many within deism will have doubts concerning concepts of supernatural religious doctrines, revelation and the authority of the Bible. Pailin (1999: 148). Pailin notes that some within deism desire to replace Christianity with a more ‘reasonable’ faith, and for others, it is an attempt to produce a more ‘reasonable’ version of Christianity. Pailin (1999: 149).

William J. Wainwright explains that deism understands true religion as natural, as opposed to supernatural religion. Wainwright (1996: 188). He writes that some self-styled Christian deists accept revelation although they argue that the content is the same as natural religion. Wainwright (1996: 188). Most deists reject revelation as fiction, but many reason that God has ordained that human happiness is possible through natural means that are universally available. Wainwright (1996: 188). Salvation, therefore, does not come via divine revelation. Wainwright (1996: 188).

Accepting that human nature is corrupt as described in Romans 1-3, it is very unlikely that the problem of evil would ever be solved but rather merely treated by humanity if deism is true. There would at no time be any solution for sin, death, and the problem of evil since the infinite, omnipotent God would not interfere with his creation and through the gospel regenerate and change individuals in order to eventually establish the Kingdom of God where the problem of evil does not exist. With a deistic universe seemingly sin, death, and the problem of evil continue to exist as long as humanity does. Deism seemingly does not offer any ultimate solution to the problem of evil.

Theists and deists are different and deists could only possibly be considered theists in a sense, as there is a shared belief in a first cause creator that has personal consciousness and purpose in creation. But, for the most part, academically, deists should not be considered theists.

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1996) ‘Theism’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

MACDONALD, M.H. (1996) ‘Deism’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

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

SWINBURNE, Richard G. (1999) ‘Theism’. in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

WAINWRIGHT, WILLIAM J. (1996) ‘Deism’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.



Is this a new type of door-to-door pseudo-Christian cultist?