Isaiah 45: God allows and creates

This week

Again listening to a recent Searchlight sermon, I examine the related commentary.

Quote in regard to Isaiah 45: 5-7

Isaiah 45:5-7: New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 “I am the Lord, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God. I will [a]gird you, though you have not known Me; 6 That [b]men may know from the rising to the setting of the sun That there is no one besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is no other, 7 The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing [c]well-being and creating calamity; I am the Lord who does all these.

Footnotes:
Isaiah 45:5 Or arm
Isaiah 45:6 Lit they
Isaiah 45:7 Or peace

'On the eye of their being carried into captivity, God says He has plans for His people they wouldn't understand. The Hebrew word translated "evil" is ra, or "catastrophe." This means that the Lord is the One who at the very least allows, if not creates, certain situations in my life that to me might seem unsettling or catastrophic.' (428).

David F. Payne writes in regard to this section: 'prosperity and disaster, alike come from Him (God, my add)'.(751).

Bible Hub

Strong's with 7451 lists בּוֺרֵא רָ֑ע Isaiah 45:7 (of God).

'ra' from 7489 (144), a prime root to spoil, figurative, to make, or be good for nothing. (145) 'Ra' in 7451 defines as bad or evil, adversity, affliction, calamity as the first examples.

Therefore, there is basic agreement between the texts.

Continued with Pastor Courson:

'Too often, we blame Satan for the wrong in our lives. But, as we know from Job 1, Satan can't do a single thing to us unless it is allowed by the Lord.' (428).

Courson views this as a form of purification. (428). The Master Potter is transforming those in him to the type of vessel desired. (428).

In this case, the Pastor states that one should not seek their own will, but accept God's plans for their own betterment. (428). This is of course, far easier said than done, humanly speaking and these connect to problems of evil and problems of suffering. God's assistance is prayerfully required.

Pastor Courson to me is not an obvious Reformed adherent, but in this section his views reflect a biblical, Reformed perspective.

Within a compatibilist view, God would cause, will, create and allow all things within his perfect nature and morality, for his holy divine purposes. Satanic beings and human beings could indeed be secondary causes of same events, but without perfectly holy motives. Satanic beings, of course directly opposing God with distinctly unholy motives, while simultaneously serving him. Human motives will at least, minimally, be tainted by sin.

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

PAYNE, DAVID F. (1986) 'Isaiah' in The New International Bible Commentary, Zondervan/Marshall Pickering, Grand Rapids.

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

Values & not worth

Bologna: People and Countries-Facebook

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

Cited

'The elements which may be meant by a variable symbol are called values. Here again we encounter the use of "value" in a mathematical sense, not to be confounded with any sort of "worth". (87).

Cited

'A value for a variable is any element which the variable may denote. The entire class of possible values for a variable, i.e. of individual elements it may signify is called the range of significance of the variable. (87).

Cited

'In the expression "a fm a" (a is the fellowman of a, or a is in fellowship with a, my add) within our formal context, the range of the variable a is the entire universe of discourse. (87).

Universe of discourse explained previously as according to Langer, quoted from a previous entry:

'The total collection of those and only those elements which belong to a formal context is called a Universe of Discourse. (68).

She states further:

'Any element whatever may be substituted for a, and the result will be a proposition which is either true or false. (88).

But she notes that the two terms a fm a, may be in dyadic relation (88) which is describing the interaction between a pair of individuals. Therefore, Langer reasons that the terms a and b are not 'necessarily distinct.' (88). The first and second mentioned elements may be the same element. 'If the same variable appears in both places, then we know the terms denoted are identical.' (88). If different variables occur, it is not known whether or not they are identical.(88).

Specification is when a specific value is assigned a value. (88). It is not the same as interpretation, where a symbol is commissioned with a meaning.

Interpretation fixes the terms with a universe of discourse and an equation. (88).

From Langer, it is explained as a equals, by specification, the element C. Therefore a=C. This does not tell us that a denotes the sort of thing called a house, but which house it denotes: the house named C.

'The range of significance of a variable, then, is the class of all those and only those elements which may be substituted for it by 'specification.'

In other words, specification in symbolic logic is a specific denotation for a symbol.

My examples:

Interpretation would be h=house
Specification would be w=wood cabin house.

As much as symbolic logic is meant to be a more reasonable and clear approach to dialogue than the linguistic syntax approach, I deduce that this parsing between interpretation and specification will lead to confusion in many instances.

Is explaining the difference between h (house) and w (wood cabin house), or a (a house) and C (a specific house), within symbolic logic going to be simpler than writing the concept out in sentence and paragraph form in English? I think this depends on context and audience.

Valuesaustralia.com

Comedy: I would recommend missing all family reunions.

Brief On Objectivism

Sunday

Blackburn: 'Objectivism (ethics) Any view upholding the objective status of ethical commitment, in opposition to error theories, scepticism, and relativism. The central problem is finding the source of the required objectivity. (267).

On error theory: 'Term due to the 20th-century philosopher J.L.Mackie, describing a theory according to which everyday thought in some area is sufficiently infected by mistaken philosophical views to be widely in error.' (125).

Mackie was a key non-theistic exemplar for MPhil and PhD studies. In the context I examined, he was a non-theistic compatibilist.

Cambridge explains: 'Objectivism may be naturalist or non-naturalist. The naturalist objectivist believes that values, duties, or whatever are natural phenomena detectable by introspection, perception, or scientific inference. (244). This is connected to empiricism and empirical facts. (244).

I agree. I connect naturalism, philosophically with empiricism.

The non-naturalist objectivist, believes that values and ethics exist independently of any belief about them. (244). These can be revealed as ethical intuition and as necessary. (244). These are not based on empiricism (primarily at least) but more so an approaches within rationalism. Based on reason.

The Christian, theistic position would be largely at least, based on the non-naturalist view. Scripture, theology and philosophy would be reasonable sources of objective ethics. The Hebrew Bible and New Testament viewed as actual, documented texts with thousands of manuscripts in whole and part. The Scripture viewed as religious history, inspired by God through writers that experienced God. In the New Testament context, the Son of God. Theology, as in Christian theology, would be the philosophy of God in support of Scripture. Philosophy and Philosophy of Religion, when in agreement with Scripture and theology, would be under the concept of 'All truth is God's truth.' I reason there is room for a limited type empiricism, in the sense that within a Christian theistic worldview, scientifically the finite, material world can be practically understood through science.

Naturalism and empiricism is often connected to non-religious worldviews.

In my philosophical understanding, no person is completely objective in intellectual approach and worldview. There are assumptions and biases that effect and influence reasoning. However, a significant objectivity is willing to examine different views and to accept where facts lead. In other words, to avoid being so emotionally attached to views that a reconsideration of views in virtually impossible.

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

SPRIGGE, T.L.S (1996) 'Ethical Objectivism', The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Today

Going Social: Brief Review

Going Social

It has been requested of me to essentially review, Chapter One: Social Marketing Even More Important Than You Think. (1). I have opined that social networking and related social marketing will continue to increase in importance, over the next few years, at least. This is because they are growing and progressing industries still at this point, and will be more utilized by businesses and organizations over the next several years.

The author cites Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs from Abraham Maslow in 1943. (5). I have read this theory previously with my psychological studies during my Bachelor's degree. Quote: 'Once an individual's physiological and safety needs are met, the remaining layers of needs are related to social well-being.' (5).

The author reasons that the rules behind online socialization are the same as socializing in real life. (5). This is idealistically true.

I do not fully accept this point, practically. Although I can understand that the principles are similar, the fact is that ethically, because of levels of anonymity and privacy, some people at times, will tend to treat online social contacts as less important. Avoiding face to face contact allows some to act in ways online, that they would not offline.

However, online Christian ministry, for example, must avoid this type of situational ethics (a phrase used by professors and students at Columbia Bible College) and hold to universal Biblical ethics in regard to love and truth. An online reality with social media, is it is not within a fictional universe and therefore persons need to be treated the same as in 'real life.'

Goldman reasons: 'Increasingly, customers want to be reached on social platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, and the like, by companies with which they choose to interact with online.' (6). Online customers and associates need to be treated as well as face to face real life contacts.

The author discusses the power of recommendation. (11).

'MP3s are a great example of this phenomenon: Instead of going into a store to buy the CD, you can download a few tracks on iTunes or Amazon in the first minute of or two of hearing a band.' (11).

I have made this transfer over from CD to MP3, the last few years and You Tube is a very good source as well. MP3 is a more useful method of storing digital at this point than is CD. CD serves as a good archived music source.

'Social marketing is more about the social component and less about the marketing.' (13). This is true with ministry as well.

Chapter 10: How To Build Strong Relationships With Bloggers And Work With Online Personalities. (199). By bloggers Goldman means 'highly trusted experts.' (199). He states 'Given the rising importance of bloggers'... (201), they should be considered a meaningful part of marketing strategy. (201).

I agree with his distinction between generic bloggers and bloggers that have expertise in the field or fields in which they present.

Theories within this text can be largely summed up from the front and back covers: 'Going Social: Excite customers, generate your brand with the power of social media. (Front cover). Pinpoint where your audience "lives" online. Create relevant, engaging content. Give your brand a unique voice and personality. Build strong bonds with bloggers...' (Back cover).

GOLDMAN, JEREMY (2013) Going Social, Amacom Management Association, New York.

Time