Collective Guilt

GTA: trekearth

Collective Guilt

Edited August 8, 2022.

I continue with my review of the Pirie text:

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

Pirie:

'Guilt is something that pertains to individuals, not to institutions or categories.' (59).

I can grant the point. However, having written on corporate ethics at times on this site, I reason there are many times when individuals within corporations and organizations should transfer individual human guilt to a corporate level, repent and make restitution where this is possible.

The corporate entity, and not just in a business context to be clear, should not be by its existence therefore able to excuse itself, to forget the sin and guilt of its individuals and to avoid repentance.

I can again grant what Pirie is stating:

'...it is a fallacy to suppose that the guilt pertains collectively to the group'. (59).

Not every person in a corporate context is necessarily guilty, but at the same time this should not prohibit a corporate entity, in various contexts, not just business, from taking moral and ethical responsibility for the wrong acts and actions of some individuals within the group.

Would this not be even more the case when it is immoral and unethical actions from corporate leadership?

Pirie wisely states in the context of historical wrongs committed by the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, that 'Crimes and misdeeds are committed by people, not by nationalities.' (59).

Theologically and Biblically, although it could be stated that humanity has the collective guilt of sin against God (Romans 1-6, Romans 5, 1 Corinthians 15, Hebrews 4 and 9); it is still true that all persons are judged individually.

Some key examples:

Revelation 20

The unregenerate are judged for sins, not being covered by atonement of Christ. Everyone judged according to their deeds (New American Standard Bible Revelation 20: 12-13). Those not in the book of life are thrown into the lake of fire. This is likely figurative literal language for everlasting hell (14-15).

Biblehub

'Strong's Concordance ergon: work Original Word: ἔργον, ου, τό Part of Speech: Noun, Neuter Transliteration: ergon Phonetic Spelling: (er'-gon) Short Definition: work, labor, action, deed Definition: work, task, employment; a deed, action; that which is wrought or made, a work.'

Strong (41).

Greek New Testament

From Revelation 20: 12 and 13

Byzantine Majority

kata         ta   erga          autwn
according   to   the works   of them

Alexandrian

kata         ta   erga          autwn
according   to   the works   of them

Hort and Westcott

kata         ta    erga          autwn
according   to    the works   of them

According to works, deed, actions.

2 Corinthians 5

The regenerate in Christ are judged for works as in 'deeds in the body...whether good or bad.' (New American Standard Bible 2 Corinthians 5: 10).

Biblehub

'Strong's Concordance prassó: to do, practice Original Word: πράσσω Part of Speech: Verb Transliteration: prassó Phonetic Spelling: (pras'-so) Short Definition: I do, fare, require Definition: I do, perform, accomplish; be in any condition, i.e. I fare; I exact, require. Strong (80).

Deeds and works, practiced.

Greek New Testament

epraxen
Be practiced

The Greek matches from Alfred Marshall and also Byzantine Majority, Alexandrian and Hort and Westcott manuscripts.

1 Corinthians 3

Those that build upon the foundation (12) will have their work tested (13) and be rewarded (14) or the works (work) burned up (15). A reference to the post-foundational work of those in Christ that built upon the New Testament gospel work.

Although both exist, Biblically, for God, in the New Testament context especially, individual human guilt seems to take priority over collective guilt, in regards to judgment. I acknowledge here that the Hebrew Bible, in regards to the judgement of Israel, as a key, but not only example, does have a strong corporate judgement component. This is not overlooked in the New Testament writings of Paul, for example in Romans and Galatians. See also Hebrews. 

---

ALLEN, LESLIE. C, in Bruce, F.F. (ed.), (1986), Romans, The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

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

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

BOICE, JAMES, MONTGOMERY (1981) Foundations of the Christian Faith, Downers Grove, IVP Press.

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

BRUCE, F.F., (1963)(1996) Romans, Grand Rapids, IVP/Eerdmans.

BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

BRUCE, F.F. (ed.), (1986) The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

CLINES, DAVID, J. A. (1986), 2 Corinthians, The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

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

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

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

DUNNETT, WALTER M. (2001) Exploring The New Testament, Wheaton, Crossway Books.

ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.

FEE, GORDON D. (1987) The First Epistle To The Corinthians, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

GUNDRY, ROBERT (1981) A Survey of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

HAMILTON, VICTOR P. (1988) Handbook on the Pentateuch, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

HUGHES, PHILIP, EDGCUMBE (1990) A Commentary On The Epistle To The Hebrews, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

HOCKING, DAVID (2014) The Book of Revelation, Tustin, California, HFT Publications. 

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

LA SOR, WILLIAM SANFORD, DAVID ALLAN HUBBARD, AND FREDERIC WILLIAM BUSH. (1987) Old Testament Survey, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

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

MARSH, PAUL, W. (1986) ‘1 Corinthians’, in F.F. Bruce, (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/Zondervan.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

PAPINEAU, DAVID (Gen. Ed) (2016) Philosophy: Theories and Great Thinkers (2016), New York, Shelter Harbour Press. 

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

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

Mark 16 Fifth Short Study/Not All Faith Is Equal Faith

Apple McIntosh Photo

Christianity Explored

In this week's Christianity Explored, there was a DVD video presentation on the resurrection of Christ.

Mark 16: 1 and 5-6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

'16 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of [a]James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him...5 Entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe; and they were amazed. 6 And he *said to them, “Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him.'

This led to a table discussion where a 'seeker' (in evangelical terms) asked (paraphrased): What do other religions say about Jesus Christ, and what do they say about his resurrection?

Further in the discussion the lead pastor connected the Hebrew Bible and Isaiah 53 to the Gospel of Christ.

Isaiah 53: 5 and 10-11 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 But He was [h]pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our [i]well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed.

10 But the Lord was pleased To crush Him, [l]putting Him to grief; If [m]He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His [n]offspring, He will prolong His days, And the [o]good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand. 11 As a result of the [p]anguish of His soul, He will see [q]it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities.

Isaiah 53:10 Lit He made Him sick
Isaiah 53:10 Lit His soul
Isaiah 53:10 Lit seed
Isaiah 53:10 Or will of
Isaiah 53:11 Or toilsome labor Isaiah 53:11 Another reading is light

I opined that Isaiah as religious history can be tied prophetically and theologically to the gospel and New Testament in a way that the New Testament cannot be prophetically and theologically tied to certain 19th century religious movements, which I declined to name to remain within the context of a Mark discussion. I am not stating whether this was the better decision or not. It was just an approach.

The lead pastor and the table leader both decided to mention two notable American religious movements, likely on the mind of the questioner, that are Christian restoration movements from the 19th century.

As a facilitator, I further opined that not all faith is equal faith, to the person that asked the question.

Further again, as the topic continued in regard to non-Biblical sources historically documenting Jesus Christ, and to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, I did mention Cairns as a good academic historical source from my Columbia Bible College days. I have also used that source in my British academic work and on my sites. I also mentioned Josh McDowell as useful source, although based on my years of experience, by British academic standards, it may not be considered as serious scholarship.

It should not be expected that non-Christians, especially opposing Romans and Jews of the New Testament era, would rationally accept the resurrection of Jesus Christ as true. But, the mention of the historical Jesus Christ does tie these sources to the gospel story, which includes the atoning work and resurrection of Christ.

From October 2013

From Historian Earle E. Cairns with Josh McDowell secondary citations.

In regard to extrabiblical evidence for the existence of the historical Jesus Christ. 

Roman and related

Tacitus (55-117) a Roman historian connected the name and origin of Christians with 'Christus' who under Emperor Tiberius was put to death by Procurator Pontius Pilate. Cairns (1981: 45).

Pliny, the propraetor of Bithynia and Pontus in Asia Minor wrote a letter to Emperor Trajan at about 112 for guidance on how he should deal with the Christians. He noted that they 'sing a song to Christ as to a God'. Cairns (1981: 45).

Suetonius in 'Lives of the Twelve Caesars' writes that the Jews were expelled from Rome because of disturbances over 'Chrestos'. Cairns (1981: 45). He is noted to have mentioned the fire in Rome in 64 under Emperor Nero and that Nero inflicted punishment on Christians. McDowell (1999: 121). 

Lucian (ca. 125-190) wrote a satirical review of Christians at about 170 and described Christ that was crucified in Palestine after he began 'a new cult'. Cairns (1981: 46). McDowell adds that he 'spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians'. McDowell (1999: 121).

Jewish

Josephus (37-ca 100) wrote of James the brother of Jesus the so called Christ. There is some debate in regard to the authenticity of Josephus writings. There may have been according to critics 'interpolation by Christians' but Cairns writes that most scholars accept the writing as from Josephus and as original text. What Josephus wrote demonstrates he was not an ally of Christians or Christianity. Cairns (1981: 46).

McDowell mentions that within the Babylonian Talmud it states 'In has been taught: On the of Passover they hanged Yeshu'. McDowell (1999: 123-124). Hanged being a crucifixion reference. McDowell (1999: 123). Jesus and his disciples, five of them are also mentioned. McDowell (1999: 124). In one section Jesus is also called 'Such-an-one is a bastard of an adulteress'. McDowell (1999: 124).

Interesting that McDowell used Gary Habermas as a major source.

Christian

Cairns mentions that there are many Christian 'apocryphal gospels, acts, letters and apocalypses' Cairns (1981: 46). These would depend as in predicate on an historical Christ existing. Cairns (1981: 46).

CAIRNS, EARLE E. (1981) Christianity Through The Centuries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

MCDOWELL, JOSH (1999) The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

---

Gary Habermas

Begging The Question & Circulus In Probando

Tuscany, Italy

August 25, 2016

I noticed my original article on 'Begging the question' did not receive much viewership, but it was 2007. I therefore will republish and continue with my Pirie review, simultaneously (See, I am not a total moron, as I tell the toddlers). As readers will know, I am not whatsoever apologetic for recirculating old material with newer material, as I do not believe in 'reinventing the wheel.' Time is short and I am a busy man.

Begging The Question & Circulus In Probando

'It consists of using as evidence a fact which is authenticated by the very conclusion it supports.' (56).

From the original article below from 2007,  in the next section, I grant what Professor Blackburn is stating and acknowledge that such arguments can often be reasonably held to. Again, Blackburn's balance on such philosophical issues is very useful.

I will once again state what I did in 2007, that I still very much attempt to make my arguments as non-circular as possible. I have spent many hours on both of my Blogger sites, rewording premises so that they do not overly assume the conclusion.

Pirie further states:

'It fails to relate the unknown or unaccepted to the known or accepted. All it gives us is two unknowns so busy chasing each other's tails that neither has time to attach itself to reality.' (57).

Pirie notes (in this secular text, my add) that convincing proofs for religion and ideology would make it much more difficult for intelligent people to disagree with them. (57). He also warns against the use of supposed scientific knowledge with circular reasoning. A new theory in line with old theories is accepted, he suggests, but these are not often objectively proven. (57). He warns that scientific knowledge from argumentation may be consistent and circular, simultaneously. (57).

It seems to me that attempting to separate premise from conclusion as much as possible, within reason, is valid.

Rather than stating:

Premise

People have a 'God-shaped hole in the heart'.

Conclusion

Therefore the Bible is true.

Better to seek objectivity, even with spirituality as these are not mutually exclusive, contrary to some with hyper-theologies.

An obviously limited and non-exhaustive example follows:

Premise

The Hebrew Bible is documented religious history.

Premise

The New Testament is documented religious history.

Premise

The New Testament presents a bridge to and from the Hebrew Bible by prophetic and theological means.

Premise

The New Testament presents the culmination of God's plans for this creation through the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ.

Premise

Rationalism and philosophy of religion can provide arguments for the existence of an infinite, eternal, non-material first cause.

Conclusion

Therefore, the Christian faith and philosophy is reasonable to hold to.
---

Begging the question

February 12, 2007

In books and on blogs I see the term begging the question thrown around a lot. Here is a look at how three philosophy texts define this term.

Simon Blackburn in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy writes that begging the question assumes what is at issue in an argument. Blackburn (1996: 39). Although persons are commonly accused of begging the question there is no logical definition of those kinds of arguments that beg the question. Blackburn (1996: 39). In the widest sense any valid argument may beg the question since its premises already contain its conclusion. Blackburn (1996: 39). Blackburn explains that these types of arguments can still be reasonably held. Blackburn (1996: 39). I do however, attempt to avoid arguing my conclusion in any one of my premises although a premise could allude to a conclusion, although I attempt to avoid this as well. Blackburn writes that a best definition of begging the question would be if a clear premise would not be accepted by any reasonable person who is initially prone to deny the conclusion. Blackburn (1996: 39).

David H. Sanford within The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy defines begging the question under the heading of circular reasoning. It is described as reasoning that traced backwards forms it own conclusion and returns to that starting point. Sanford (1996: 124). Sanford explains that presuming a truth of a conclusion within a premise thwarts the attempt to increase the degree of reasonable confidence that a conclusion is true. Sanford (1996: 124). It is better when putting together different types of arguments to establish separate but related premises that would ultimately support a conclusion rather than weakening an argument by assuming the conclusion within a premise and therefore not providing actual evidence for the conclusion.

David A. Conway and Ronald Munson in The Elements of Reasoning explain begging the question (Petitio Principii) as when the issue at hand is begged and not really addressed. Conway and Munson (1997: 132). This is when some reason offered for some conclusion is not really different from the conclusion itself. Conway and Munson (1997: 132). This is stating a conclusion that also serves as a premise. Conway and Munson (1997: 132).

In my view it is not begging the question to define a viewpoint without argumentation or to state that if a certain view is assumed correct then a related point could be assumed correct in a hypothetical context. If a person defines a theory in response to a contrary view it is not begging the question because the person is merely pointing out the differences between two different perspectives and not arguing for or against those perspectives. Also if a person states that if an assumption is correct then another assumption may be true is also not begging the question since the person would be offering hypothetical analysis and not an argumentation on the truth of the claims. Begging the question would be if a person specifically argued the conclusion of an argument within a premise.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) ‘Begging the question’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

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

SANFORD, DAVID H. (1996) ‘Circular Reasoning', in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Mark 8 Brief On Spitting/Fourth Short Study

Christianity Explored

Mark 8:22-26

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

22 And they *came to Bethsaida. And they *brought a blind man to Jesus and *implored Him to touch him.
23 Taking the blind man by the hand, He brought him out of the village; and after spitting on his eyes and laying His hands on him, He asked him, “Do you see anything?”
24 And he [a]looked up and said, “I see men, for [b]I see them like trees, walking around.”
25 Then again He laid His hands on his eyes; and he looked intently and was restored, and began to see everything clearly.
26 And He sent him to his home, saying, “Do not even enter the village.”

Footnotes: Mark 8:24 Or gained sight Mark 8:24 Or they look to me

During the Christianity Explored class, Wednesday, the question was asked in regard to Mark 8: (paraphrased) Why did Jesus Christ use spitting and saliva in some healing? I stated that God and Christ could have healed the blind man instantly, but this was a matter of progressive faith or a progression of faith. The man would be provided more healing as he demonstrated more faith.

Short explains this was done 'to awaken faith in the man.' (1166). 'But on account, perhaps, of the weakness of the man's faith, he did not at first attain full clarity of vision...' (1166). The healing did ultimately fully occur. (1166).

John 9, also contains a story where Jesus Christ uses spittle.

Barclay has an interesting take on the use of spittle in the context of the three synoptic gospels. He writes in regard to Mark (7: 33; 8:23).

Mark 7:33

New American Standard Bible (NASB) My add:

33 Jesus took him aside from the crowd, by himself, and put His fingers into his ears, and after spitting, He touched his tongue with the saliva;

Barclay

'What was it about these miracles which made Matthew and Luke omit them? They are unusual miracles and they do stand apart. In both of them Jesus used spittle to effect a cure (7: 33; 8:23); and the healing of the blind man is one of the rare occasions where a miracle had, as it were, two stages.' (92).

Barclay opines that Matthew and Luke may have omitted Jesus Christ's lack of immediate success with the healings, as he used spittle which was a conventional method. (92). 'Matthew will tell no miracle story in which the cure in not immediate.' (92). Perhaps, in regard to miracles, Mark was more willing to document the humanity and human workings of Jesus Christ as Messiah. This done without differing with three other gospels in essential New Testament theology. This differing emphasis is reasonable within the New Testament theology of God, the Holy Spirit inspiring Scripture through individual writer perspectives.

2 Timothy 3:16

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

16 All Scripture is [a]inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for [b]training in righteousness;

Footnotes: 2 Timothy 3:16 Lit God-breathed 2 Timothy 3:16 Lit training which is in

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

SHORT, STEPHEN S. (1986) ‘Mark’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.