Monday, July 13, 2020

Zoom & PhD discussion

Chuck's new specially designed shades to his prevent his
red dome from exploding? 




During our Zoom meeting Sunday evening, July 12, 2020, one of the subjects that arose was Reformed theology within the evangelical church. Briefly and very non-exhaustively, from my final PhD revisions, is some biblical work in regards to the New Testament concept of predestination.

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

In my mind, the concept of compatibilism, although the term is not used,[1] is implied in Scripture. The subject of predestination for salvation, for example, is a complex theological discussion and could be a topic for a Biblical Greek thesis.[2]  However, within Ephesians 1,[3] ‘predestined’ which is προορίσας[4] within Ephesians 1: 5,[5] and in the context is ‘predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ’[6]  and προορισθέντες[7] at Ephesians 1: 11, as  in ‘we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to his purpose’[8] appear to support Reformed compatibilist notions. Strong defines proorizw[9] which is the root word connected to the forms of the word in Ephesians 1, as to limit in advance in figurative terms,[10] and to predetermine, determine before, ordain, and predestinate.[11]  Bauer defines the root word as meaning to decide before hand, predestine of God and applies this definition to Ephesians 1: 5 and 11.[12]  Minimally, there appears reasonable textual support from this verse[13] that could support a Reformed compatibilistic perspective on how God chooses persons for his ultimate culminated Kingdom. 

There are incompatibilist, evangelical counters to the Reformed view.[14]  Ephesians scholar Francis Foulkes (1989) explains that predestination is not in opposition to human free will.[15]  The gospel of grace was offered to all persons,[16] and those persons that accepted the message were elected.[17]  Foulkes insists that the human faith required rests totally on God and not in self.[18]  Foulkes then shifts the issue to the idea that election is not simply salvation, but also holiness of life.[19]  He defines predestined as ‘marked beforehand.’[20]  It is understood as a divine, eternal plan.[21]  Foulkes presentation is commendable and reasonable and although his definition is similar to that of Strong[22] and Bauer,[23] he appears to downplay a deterministic aspect of the word.[24]  I do not agree, but inevitably, even with the use of linguistic sources there is room for debate and I lean toward a compatibilistic understanding based on Ephesians 1.[25] 


[1] The term being a modern philosophical one.

[2] This is not a Biblical Studies PhD and I was therefore advised to limit my Biblical work within this thesis, but I seek accuracy in my Biblical interpretations.

[3] A key Chapter for Reformed views on compatibilism.

[4] The Greek New Testament (1993: 654).

[5] The Greek New Testament (1993: 654). 

[6] The New American Standard Version Bible (1984: 1322).

[7] The Greek New Testament (1993: 655).

[8] The New American Standard Version Bible (1984: 1322).

[9] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[10] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[11] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[12] Bauer (1979: 709).

[13] I realize many other verses could be examined concerning this subject.  I provide Ephesians 1 as a prime Reformed example within a limited space allotted for this topic.

[14] Foulkes (1989: 55).

[15] Foulkes (1989: 55).

[16] Foulkes (1989: 55).  Browning (1997: 301).

[17] Foulkes (1989: 55).  Browning writes that the New Testament does not state that those that reject this offer are damned to hell.  Browning (1997: 301).

[18] Foulkes (1989: 55).  Frankly, Foulkes does not explain how this works within his incompatibilistic system.

[19] Foulkes (1989: 55).  I can agree that God does work out holiness in his people.

[20] Foulkes (1989: 56). 

[21] Foulkes (1989: 56). 

[22] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[23] Bauer (1979: 709).

[24] Foulkes (1989: 55-56). 

[25] I can still consider incompatibilistic notions and other perspectives, when needed.

---

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

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

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

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

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

---


Was 'The Rage' counting his millions?


Another Zoom, virtual background distortion or my reaction to radiation from Chuck's red dome?

Perhaps the best reaction of the night arose from shared thoughts of Charles Nelson Chuckles as a 'world dictator' with the Red Dome or Red Skull society or like. Even the Norwegian Benny Hill was thinking 'That is nuts!, we could get away with everything!' What would one of Chuck's punishments be...a Dairy Queen banishment?

Related archived article 


Thursday, July 09, 2020

Quote: Russ wants to date someone 1/2 his age and 3 x his fitness level





Quote: Russ wants to date someone 1/2 his age and 3 x his fitness level

So today, through The Rage, someone in the Christian community from afar, reopened an old discussion which I thought we had agreed to disagree on agreeably, several months ago. This person stated (paraphrased): 

Russ wants to date someone 1/2 his age and 3 x above his fitness level. 

How does this person know my fitness level? I had stomach sculpting last year and the nurses and the person in charge told me that which was stomach fat was frozen away.

By the way, many thin looking women were in the office for stomach sculpting. My size, in-part, means I am not a fast runner, but I can walk for hours and am proficient with martial arts and martial arts weapons. If I could date a woman, where mutual attraction exists, of any age that could keep up with my hours of walking and my martial arts fitness, I would be very impressed. I will be impressed with someone that can proficiently use and defend against weapons at any age.

I will be impressed by someone, like me, that has not declined in martial arts ability, well into his/her adulthood and is still improving.

I am functionally fit, but not thin, not just according to me, but medical sources. Note the nickname The Kingpin given to me by ironically, Mr. Bobby Buff.

New American Standard Bible

Romans 16:17 

Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them.

Done...


Wednesday, July 08, 2020

Genetic Fallacy/Damning The Origin/Damning The Source III

Loebau, Germany, trekearth 2017

One of my favourite desktop photos. 

Brilliant contrast. Colourized version.
Genetic Fallacy/Damning The Origin/Damning The Source III

Archived Related Articles



My continued attempts at improvement and clarification with God's help.

Archived Edited Definitions From Two British Philosophers

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

Pirie: 'The genetic fallacy has nothing to do with Darwin'... (116) But a great deal to do with not liking where an argument comes from. (116). People give less credence to views which emanate from those they detest, regardless of the actual merit of the views themselves. (116).

Note that this fallacious approach demonstrates a lack of objective thinking. Objective thinking being a view and/or approach primarily based on the object, facts not feelings. Instead this fallacy shows the use of subjective thinking, which more so as a view or approach reflects the thoughts of the person thinking, subjectively, than objective thoughts on the issue in question. 

This view and/or approach would therefore be more influenced by feelings than facts. To dismiss an argument based on source alone is to commit the genetic fallacy. (116)

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

Interestingly, philosopher Blackburn again, as with elsewhere in his text, uses the word 'alleged' in regard to the subject of fallacy and in this case genetic fallacy. 'The alleged mistake of arguing that something is to be rejected because of its suspicious origins.' (155). A useful entry for balance: 'More widely, any mistake of inferring something about the nature of some topic from a proposition about its origins. Frequently such reasoning is, actually quite appropriate, as when one uses the make of an automobile as an indicator of its likely quality.' (155). Without disagreeing with the speakers or Pirie and the documented academic fallacy, I also once again can appreciate Blackburn's cautious and balanced academic approach as reasonable.

Academic considerations

An example I have written on previously, that comes to mind is a debate with a critic and friend from years ago. The critic stated (paraphrased): The academic work of Biblical scholars cannot be trusted because they are all Christians. 

However: Biblical scholars presenting academic work are Christians and non-Christians. (There are for example, Jewish and Hebrew, Hebrew Bible scholars and some non-religious, Biblical scholars presenting academic work). Christian scholars can have objectivity. The terms Christian and Biblical scholar are not mutually exclusive. By definition to be a scholar, recognized at a Masters and/or Doctoral level with a degree by a significant University, or roughly equivalent experience, requires at least a significant level of objectivity. 

To work at a significant academic institution requires at least a significant level of objectivity, to have an academic book or work published by a significant publisher requires at least a significant level of objectivity. Therefore the critic used the genetic fallacy and damned the origin and damned the source.

Instead, the critic, for the sake of truth, should seek objectivity in examining propositions/statements/conclusions made within the academic work of Biblical scholars. The critic, for the sake of truth, would need to seek objectivity in examining arguments, a premise (s) and conclusion made by Biblical scholars.

Practical considerations

To avoid fallaciously (at least, acknowledging what Blackburn states) damning the source, does the critic offer a reasonable:

Argument with a logical, premise and conclusion?

and/or

Argument with logical, premises and conclusion?

Or at least, a reasonable...

Statement/proposition, also known as conclusion?

Is there counter evidence against the critic's argument (s) and/or proposition (s) that is/are superior?  

Does the critic speculate without reasonable evidence? There is philosophical room for speculation, granted, this is part of our curiosity in human nature, but speculative theories should not be held to as reasoned fact (s).
---

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

CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.

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.