Saturday, December 23, 2017

A different kind of Reformation

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

The book review continues..

Chapter Three: The Reformers

Mr. Wallace opines that many (In the Western world) are attempting to reform Islam as a 'kinder', 'gentler' religion. (21).

He explains that this revised Allah is a fictional god of people's imagination, not in agreement with the Qur'an. Certain people do not like the judgmental Allah that is war-like. (21). Mr. Wallace reasons that Islam cannot be reformed. As example, an orthodox, Quranic Islam interpretation, should not ignore the (later) verses from the Qur'an that are more militant and cling to the earlier more peaceful passages from the Qur'an.

A reminder of the theory of open-ended verses within Islam:

October 24 2017

Religion of Peace

Quote

'Does the Quran really contain over a hundred verses promoting violence? The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Quran are open-ended, meaning that they are not necessarily restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.

The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God. Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence.

Islam apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally don't stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology. Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.'

End citation

'Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. '

This worldview approach by liberalized, Western Muslims will often reinterpret Allah, the Qur'an and the Sunnah through a reformed view. I tend to agree with Mr. Wallace that this will not be orthodox Islam, but at the same time I do not see the growth of Western Islamic population leading to a serious threat of radical Islamic rule in any Western country. It is theoretically possible, but does not seem likely to occur.

I am open to future correction, but as noted in this review series, I see secularism as the prominent Western worldview for now and decades in the future.

Islam in the West may very well pass all forms of Christianity in population.
London: metrouk2.files.com

Friday, December 22, 2017

Logically impossible: Fatal condition


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

The continuation of text review:

Key symbols

≡df = Equivalence by definition
: = Equal (s)
ε = Epsilon and means is
⊃ = Is the same as
⊨ is Entails
˜ = Not
∃ = There exists
∃! = There exists
∴ = Therefore
· = Therefore
= Is included
v = a logical inclusive disjunction (disjunction is the relationship between two distinct alternatives).
x = variable
· = Conjunction meaning And
0 = Null class cls
= Class int
= Interpretation
---

Langer explains that a proposition can only be known via another proposition. (183). Implication is a relation that only holds among propositions. (183). Propositions are regarded as postulates. (185).

A postulate needs to belong to the system, in the language of that system.
A postulate should imply further propositions of that system.
A postulate should not contradict any other accepted postulate, or any other proposition implied by another postulate. (185).

In other words, symbolic logic requires non-contradiction within its system in a universe of discourse.

Requirements

Coherence: Every proposition in the system must cohere to the established conceptual structure. (185). It must be in coherence with the rest.

Contributiveness : A postulate should contribute and have implication. (185-186).

Consistency: Most important states Langer (186). Two contradictory propositions (or premises) cannot contradict each other in a system. (186). The inconsistent is logically impossible. It is a fatal condition. (186). It is not logic at all. (186).

Independence: Postulates should be independent from each other. (186). If a proposition is deductible from a postulate already provided, then it is a theorem, a necessary fact, not another assumption. (186). Something provable in a theorem would be error to include as a postulate. (186).

I would reason that within philosophy there would be plenty of debate on what is a proposition/premise within systems and what would be a theorem.

Langer explains that when a theorem needs elucidation, any proposition  implied by another proposition as granted and proved within a system is a theorem. (186-187).

Within a biblical, system and universe of discourse...

Gd = God

(∃! Gd)

God exists. Would be viewed as necessary and a theorem.

Within an atheistic, system and universe of discourse...

˜ (∃! Gd)

God does not exist. Would be viewed as necessary and a theorem.

Noted: Some atheists would state they do not know if God exists, and not definitely that God does not exist. But my example stands as valid. Some atheists do fit within my proposition.

Further

Sc = Scripture

(∃! Sc) ⊨ (∃! Gd)

Scripture exists entails God exists.

From a Christian worldview, revealed, supernaturally inspired Scripture entails that God exists.


Thursday, December 21, 2017

The Wright Answer (PhD Edit)

Squidooit.com: Clarksville, TN


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

MPhil, Bangor University, 2003: The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives

Wright reasons the problem of evil can be solved in a straightforward manner by proposing that God predestines evils to occur for a particular purpose. Wright (1996: 197).

Persons do not have an answer back for God. Wright (1996: 197).

This comment from Wright is accurate from a Reformed perspective. I can interject and state that academically solving the logical and gratuitous problems of evil by tying them back to God is an ultimate intellectual solution, but there are still practical ramifications to deal with, such as why certain evils occur.

The fact that a sovereignty theodicy can logically and reasonable solve its problem of evil, does not mean that suffering often comes with an explanation.
 This is where practical and empirical theology can be very helpful when they offer practical assistance to those suffering under the problem of evil.

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

Tuesday, December 19, 2017

James: Double-minded revisited

Now

James 1: Double-minded from May 2013

James: 1: 8

a man two-souled unsettled in all the ways of him
anhr diyucoV akatastatoV en pasaiV taiV odoiV autou 

From the May, 2013 article: 

T. Carson writes that from James 1: 5-8 wisdom is a great theme of the text and that God does give generously and without finding fault to persons, but they must ask in faith and without doubt otherwise as a doubter one is like a double-minded man (person) unstable, a drunken person, and like a tossing ship in the sea. Carson (1986: 1537).

Barclay adds that a person such as this is as one with two souls, or two minds inside. As if one believes and trusts in God and the other does not. It is as if a civil war is going on inside of such a person. Barclay (1975: 46).

Being double-minded is to have two minds in regard to God. However, for example, if one has terminal cancer and prays for healing through medical intervention and/or supernatural healing, one would likely realize that God probably will not answer the prayer with healing in this life. So this is a form of doubt. But that person demonstrates faith and belief that God could and might provide the healing and that God is benevolent regardless of what God wills, based on his Scripture, related theology and even philosophy. This would not be double-minded thinking. Double-minded thinking would be to not consistently trust in God and turn to God and therefore doubt that God would answer prayer in times of trial, including when one would hypothetically have terminal cancer.



December 19, 2017

Courson writes in regard to James 1: 5-8 that if one lacks wisdom, he/she should ask God in faith, and God will give it to him/her. (1515). It is wise for the person that has a 'civil war' (Barclay) within the spirit/mind to ask God that double-mindedness be set aside, for instead a mind set upon Christ.

This way, when something is requested via prayer (James 4: 3), it is done with Christ-like motives and not from abundantly sinful motives. The believer in the body, has a tainted nature until the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15) but can be filled and guided with the Holy Spirit. Courson explains that many do not have his/her prayers answered (4: 3) because prayer should be more concerned with asking for the Lord's will for a life, than requesting a blessed life from human standards. (1527).

Bauer references the use of double-headed people in James 4:8.

δίψυχοi

From Strong's 1374

δίψυχοi δίψυχος, διψυχον (δίς and ψυχή)double-minded.

4: 8

oi 

You double-minded. Plural.

1: 8

ος

Double-minded man. Singular.

Both are in the nominative, describing the subject. Adjectives.

Bauer explains that these double-headed and more literally double-minded people stagger helplessly here and there without thoughts of doubt and hesitation (4:8) (201). This is a doubter in James 1: 8 (201).

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

CARSON, T. (1986) ‘James’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

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

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

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

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