Sunday, March 07, 2021

Reply to tikno II

Reply to tikno II

Photo: Casa-Parque-Leloir-v280513-e6 photo Eugenio Valentini Argentina

I have recently discovered very interesting 'block' like, modern house architecture from Argentina. I suppose this works well in regions where there is much yearly sunlight, unlike here.

Preface

My first reply to tikno


tikno replied in the comments

Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, all complexity of the above definitions, philosophical ism, theological teaching, and academically / empirical study about the Divine above is just complicate my limited intellect.

I felt the presence of the Almighty (God) when the first time I went to obstetrician with my wife.
I looked inside my wife's womb through the ultrasound monitor. There is miracle in the womb. There is life. Humans only able to create robots. I felt His presence through my consciousness, not by academical understanding / learning nor by the scriptures.

Jesus came to this world in simplicity. The Divine simplicity is goodness. All the scriptures has been simplified into the Law of Affection. That's my simplicity.

God bless you.

Reply to tikno II

The latest kind reply from tikno from my previous entry comments section:


Cited

There is daylight, there is night. Likewise, there is always goodness and evil in the human imagination. The two of them mingled in human desires. Fortunately, human race is different from animal. Human was blessed with a mind (intellect) with the hope to overcome wild desires. The decision (as a cause) is in the human hands. Its implementation (deeds) depends on their desires and decision. This mortal world is a testing ground for humans. 

Perhaps this link have an answer for this complexity: 


End of words, I'm just write my viewpoint and not intended for counterbalance. 

Sample Cited

I asked Lord Krishna to help me LOVE others, like He loves me. Krishna said: Ohhh..., finally... you got the idea!  
---

Although a biblical worldview does not view Krishna as Lord, we can agree that we are to love others.


Cited 

Jesus Christ within the great commandment (Mathew 22, Mark 12, Luke 10), mentions that the second commandment is to love all persons as neighbours as one loves self. The first commandment to love of God with the fullness in mind and spirit. This is the God of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. Some 'gospel' light can be shed even to the unregenerate outside of the Kingdom of God. Perhaps some that become regenerated, by the moulding of the Holy Spirit (John 3, Titus 3) will be impacted by both the love and truth within the Christian Church shown to them.

End of citation
---

I am not a scholar on Hinduism, but I  have studied World Religions within my BA/MTS degrees. I realize Hinduism has multifaceted views within. Buddhism as well has multifaceted views. However, philosophically, in general, if the human nature was indeed an aspect of the divine, we would all in humanity, be infinite, as opposed to finite. Moksha, as in seeking enlightenment and freedom from rebirths, would not be necessary; as in being part of what is infinite and divine, human beings would have no ontological needs. There would be no need to seek enlightenment and freedom as this would already be part of infinite, divine nature.

A development of moksha theory, is actually an unintended, backhanded admittance of the finite nature of humanity.


For other readers, I replied to tikno's views in the link above.

Further...

I have noted that logically and reasonably, 'cause' is not simply human cause as that is a finite cause. A primary and first cause, which is infinite is required. Indeed, human beings  with nature, consciousness, desires and will, are judged for their deeds (Revelation 20), but in Jesus Christ, finite sinfulness of humanity is covered by the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ (see Gospel of John, Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Hebrews, as examples).
---

AMERIKS, KARL (1999) ‘Kant, Immanuel’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

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. 

EDWARDS, PAUL AND ARTHUR PAP (1973) (eds), ‘A priori knowledge: Introduction’, A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

GUYER, PAUL AND ALLEN W, in KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

HUME, DAVID (1779)(2004) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Digireads.com/Neeland Media LLC, Lawrence, Kansas.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan. http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co. http://philosophy.eserver.org/kant/critique-of-practical-reaso.txt

KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE (2010) Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

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

NIGOSIAN, S.A (1994) World Faiths, St. Martins Press, New York.

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

SZUDEK, ANDY & TORSLEY, SARAH (2018) The Little Book of Philosophy, Landau Cecile (Ed), London, DK Publishing 

THE CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY (1995) Della Thompson (ed.), Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Friday, March 05, 2021

PhD: Twitter quote 58

PhD: Twitter quote 58 

Preface

Is there ever significant, human, moral and ethical responsibility for acts and actions? In general, do human beings have 'deeds'?

Revelation 20:12 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 

And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. 


Cited

ζωῆς

(of) life (Noun-Genitive-Feminine-Singular)
---

(The book of life contains the names of those in Jesus Christ)

Bible Hub

Cited:

zóé: life 

Original Word: 

ζωή, ῆς, ἡ Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine

Twitter version I

W.T. Stace (1952)(1976) explains that moral responsibility is consistent with determinism in the context of soft determinism and requires it. Stace (1952)(1976: 29). 

Twitter version II

If human actions are uncaused then reward or punishment would be unjustified. Stace (1952)(1976: 29). 

Twitter version III

Stace reasons that there must be at least some human cause within human actions to make them morally responsible. Stace (1952)(1976: 30). 

Twitter version IV

If human actions were coerced or forced with hard determinism, persons could not be held morally responsible. Pojman (1996: 596).

At the same time, if human beings are not at least a secondary cause of actions primarily caused by God, then human actions would be morally insignificant. My view based on Stace (1952)(1976: 30). 

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

STACE, W.T. (1952)(1976) Religion and the Modern Mind, in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds.), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers. 


Photo: Escobar, Province of Buenos Aires. 88 designboxdotcom

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


Wednesday, March 03, 2021

Reply to tikno

Reply to tikno

Photo: Shenandoah National Park, Virginia, February 2021, Facebook 

Preface



I replied to tinko's comments.

tinko: link provided


Cited

Maybe this post can be used as a reflections of how you deal with logic and faith (unlogic). After that, let people know of what you think. Just see how you react to this post.If you're very religious people (almost fanatic) then I guess your reaction will be very different to those who think more logical in response to various occurrence in these universe or even to your daily life.

Reply

Hi tinko,

Blessings to you and family. There are religious people and non-religious people that can be thinking logically or illogically and use logic or illogic. In every worldview there are ignorant, uneducated persons that do not rely significantly on logic and reason.

Science, Theology, Philosophy of Religion/Philosophy, Biblical Studies, Archaeology, Psychology, Medical Science, Law, Mathematics, are all examples of college and University level academic disciplines that require the use of logic and also reason, to be reasonably, successfully understood to even achieve even a passing grade.

To achieve a degree or level of achievement in any of these academic disciplines requires the significant use of both logic and reason. 

As only God is infinite, only God has infinite knowledge. As all things created, and all rational entities are finite, there is an aspect of faith with knowledge for human beings in each and every worldview, religious or not. 

Human beings and all angelic beings, angelic/demonic would be finite. To disobey God, and therefore oppose God through a corrupt nature, consciousness, desires, will, acts/actions is not just the difference between being positive and negative. It is sin (Genesis 1-3, Romans 1-6, Galatians, Ephesians 1-2, Hebrews) as examples. There is no salvation for fallen angels, but there is salvation for those that through regeneration (John 3, Titus 3) trust in the applied, salvific, atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ.

To quote you tikno

At least that's my personal understanding as ordinary people.

I appreciate the humility. I am ordinary and average in many ways. But, by God's grace and by God's will, I have been able research, write, edit and revise within certain, often difficult, academic disciplines. Here are some links for you to ponder on and some citations: 

Scientism


Cited 

Scientism 

Blackburn: Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy 

Scientism: A pejorative term for the concept that only the methods of natural science and related categories form the elements for any philosophical or other enquiry. Blackburn (1996: 344). 

From The Concise Oxford Dictionary 

Scientism: 1 a a method or doctrine regarded as characteristic of scientists b the use of practice of this. 2 often derogatory, an excessive belief in or application of scientific method. Oxford (1995: 1236). 

Oxford Science 

Empiricism: 'Denotes a result that is observed by experiment or observation rather than by theory.' (287). I view empiricism as a legitimate academic approach in reasonable contexts, but academia overall, does also require the use of philosophical approaches to gain knowledge and truth.

Immanuel Kant

SZUDEK, ANDY & TORSLEY, SARAH (2018) The Little Book of Philosophy, Landau Cecile (Ed), London, DK Publishing

The text under review (SZUDEK) explains that Kant argues that empiricism and scientific knowledge provides vital answers but is not 'the whole answer' (104). The text explains: 'That a true empiricist would argue against Kant that all acquaintances come from experience, in other words, nothing is apriori.' (104-105). The idea of God creating the world, is an apriori concept. (105).

The Nature of God



First Cause: Philosophy of Religion &Theology

Even if the Hebrew Bible and New Testament documents could be proven historically false (not my academic or personal, position), this in my mind would in no way by default demonstrate the likelihood of secularism, atheism or agnosticism as correct views. 

First cause is a major philosophical problem. As matter is time, space, finite and cannot be their own cause as this would cause a vicious regress, it requires a cause beyond matter and time and space, which are also finite. As example, one also cannot have a vicious regress of time or the present time would never be arrived. A vicious regress never solves its own problem...(logical or not). 

Philosophical arguments for first cause do not prove the existence of the Biblical God but can serve as parallel truth to the creation story of Genesis 1. I use arguments for God being philosophically and theologically the first cause and this parallels the Genesis (1-3) creation account without being explicitly biblical. Deism or a related theism, in my mind is a far more likely alternative to Christianity than a non-theistic view, although I fully believe in the Biblical texts. 

Although Deism, and related theisms, do not accept a God that reveals self it still accepts the God of first cause. First cause provides premises which prove, philosophically and theologically, in a sense, the existence of God. 

God: Biblical Studies & Theology

It is also Biblical and reasonable to deduce that God creates human beings with certain innate understanding of reality that will be assisted by experience. 

Romans 1:19 explains that God made human beings with a natural understanding of his existence. Perhaps this would be a priori knowledge and would not exist entirely on human presuppositions. The existence of natural knowledge of God does not necessarily mean that human beings worship or obey God. 

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. Footnotes: Romans 1:18 Or by Romans 1:19 Or among 

Within a biblical Christian worldview and Christian theology, the Scripture is legitimate, well-documented with manuscript evidence, religious history. God through Jesus Christ has revealed himself to finite humanity in an effective, limited, empirical fashion, and this would be considered a posteriori knowledge of God, although God as pure spirit remains beyond the physical senses as a priori. 

Jesus Christ as God’s key supernatural representative (yet God-man), was preceded by Hebrew Bible, prophets and writers and John the Baptist in the New Testament, and followed by the disciples of Jesus Christ and the apostles and scribes in the New Testament era. Post-New Testament era, followed by the Church Fathers, forward. The Scripture provides religious history, via supernatural and human sources, which in a sense, proves the existence of God. 

Logic


A main text used

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

Fallacies


A main text used

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

AMERIKS, KARL (1999) ‘Kant, Immanuel’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

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.

EDWARDS, PAUL AND ARTHUR PAP (1973) (eds), ‘A priori knowledge: Introduction’, A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

GUYER, PAUL AND ALLEN W, in KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

HUME, DAVID (1779)(2004) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Digireads.com/Neeland Media LLC, Lawrence, Kansas.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan. http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co. http://philosophy.eserver.org/kant/critique-of-practical-reaso.txt 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE (2010) Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

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

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

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

SZUDEK, ANDY & TORSLEY, SARAH (2018) The Little Book of Philosophy, Landau Cecile (Ed), London, DK Publishing

THE CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY (1995) Della Thompson (ed.), Oxford, Clarendon Press. 

Sunday, February 28, 2021

PhD: Twitter quote 57

PhD: Twitter quote 57 

Omnipotence

Thiessen defines this as meaning the creator is able to accomplish whatever he wills, as long as it does not oppose his nature. Thiessen (1956: 126).
---

I would add that God's infinite attributes, including omnipotence, cannot accomplish the illogical, the contradictory.

There is historical religious history from Scripture, both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament that presents God directly and implied as eternal and infinite, existing prior to divine creation of matter in Genesis 1. God has sovereign, providential control. God repeatedly in Scripture claims to be holy as in Exodus 3, Leviticus 11. 1 Peter 1:16, ss examples. Infinite goodness.

Matter, time (solar time) and space did not exist prior to Genesis 1:1. Theologically, the angelic realm as well, not being eternal, also being created within God's eternal plans. The spiritual realm, as only God has infinite knowledge, may contain a type of finite time, so finite entities can reason from point a to point b.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

Photo: Winter Beauty with Nola, February 22 2021, Facebook

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

Archived; omnipotence