All truth is God's truth: II

Germany: Colourized

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

The Langer philosophy text review, continues. Some key symbols from the textbook:

≡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
---

Null class entails the class of cats and the class of not-cats. The null class 0 is included in each complementary pair (147). Every class has a complement and therefore every class includes null class 0. (147).

Langer continues:

As every class in the universe of discourse has a complement, the sub-classes of any class, also has a complement. (147). If two classes overlap we have like, the following example from the author:

Class A: Soldiers

Class B: Brave men (Note this was written in 1953 and revised in 1967)

Class C: Brave soldiers (148).

Class C: Brave soldiers is a sub-class of Class A and Class B. (148).

C = A x B (148). (Note it is A x B, not A + B; these groups overlap, they are not combined. Not all soldiers are brave, and some brave men are not soldiers and may be police officers, for example.)

The negative complement to Class C, is Class -C. This class is also known as -(A x B). (148). Langer states this everything that is not both a soldier and brave. (148).

This is Class A which is not Class B.
This is Class B which is not Class A.
This is everything that is neither Class A or Class B. (148).

Langer reasons that the sum (now +) of Class A and Class B is Class D.

This is all soldiers, brave or not, and all brave men, soldiers or not. (148).

D= A+B (148). (Not x/times. Here they are combined).

The complement of D is -D, which is -(A + B).

This is the class that is neither soldiers or brave men. (149).

Is this technical and somewhat tricky presentation from Langer, I can again philosophically appreciate how the idea of Class (Which Pirie also mentions in his philosophy text) allows one to reason and avoid contradiction and the illogical.

I also appreciate that in philosophy there is both positive and negative class and premises. Christian theology both emphasizes the positive and the negative counterpart.

Once again, this demonstrates within a theistic model, that all truth is God's truth.

C x T = Y

Christians x theologians equals Christian theologians.

C + T = Z

Christians + theologians equals Christians and all theologians, Christian or not.

Christian theologians is not the same as Christians and theologians in reasoning.

Y ˜ ⊃ Z

All truth is God's truth: I

All truth is God's truth: I

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

The Langer philosophy text review, continues.

Some key symbols from the textbook:

≡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
---

To combine various classes, that are not the same, through the use disjunction or conjunction, positive statements are required to connect membership. (145-146). Langer's example:

C = Cats D = Dogs

(x) : x ε C ⊃ (x ε -D) (146).

Variable equals variable is Cats, is the same as variable is not Dogs.

Philosopher Langer then once again discusses null class (147). Null class is the class which has incompatible properties (147). She suggests for example, a class of cats and not-cats.

x ε A . x ε -A  (147).

Variable is cats and variable is not cats. Based on Langer's writing, this is an incompatible premise.

0 represents null class.

(x ε 0) ⊃ (x ε A) . (x ε -A)

Null class is the same as the class of cats and the class of not-cats.

0 ⊨ A . -A

or

0 ⊨ C . -C

Null class entails the class of cats and the class of not-cats.

The null class 0 is included in each complementary pair (147). Every class has a complement and therefore every class includes null class 0. (147).

0 &lt; A

Null class is included in each class. (147).

Practical theology? This is technical philosophical material and even somewhat mathematical. It will help one to read academic materials within philosophy that use symbolic logic. But thinking in theological terms, I appreciate how each class has its complement, its opposite. Therefore, for example, a Christian has a non-Christian as opposite. Academically in both philosophy and theology logic and reason demands that opposites are complementary and cannot be intellectually spun to be otherwise based on worldviews that oppose biblical Christianity.

All truth is God's truth and here philosophy lends support.

Are you consecrated?/Luke 14

Sicily: Google+

God-willing, the Courson text, often in parallel with his online preaching will be my biblical and theological book review, now that I am finished with the Pirie, philosophical text.

I am thinking that some readers (and listeners) will be pleased that I will focus more on bible after approximately two years of the Pirie, fallacy, text. I need to focus on my marketable academic skills (regardless of work status) which will at times be under the umbrella of philosophy. My worldview does remain the same...

The Courson commentary is three volumes and will not be page by page as the Pirie and Langer reviews.

I will continue with the review of Langer, and symbolic logic.

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

In his recent online sermon on Luke 14-15-35, Pastor Courson emphatically stated (paraphrased) that there is a difference between being a saved, born-again Christian and an actual Christian disciple.

From his commentary:

'...there is a difference between being a Christian and being a disciple. 'Disciple means 'disciplined one'-one who is committed to the cause of the kingdom.' (371).

Luke 14: 27 is referenced:

Luke 14:27 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

27 Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.

Luke 14:27 English Standard Version (ESV)

27 Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.

Luke 14:27 King James Version (KJV) 27

And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

Pastor Courson, opines that to carry one's cross is not the typical modern, western sufferings such as a 'noisy neighbor' or 'arthritis'. (371). The way of the cross is to die to self, and to live in Christ, for others. (371). To put aside 'rights and privileges' (371) in order to see others do well. There is cost in discipleship. (371).

I can agree that a biblical, Christian, disciple, may find self at odds with society, certain family, friends, and co-workers. Certainly, many that claim the name of Jesus Christ for salvation today are not disciples.

Frankly, there is plenty of room for theological debate on whether or not a Christian that is not a disciple is actually regenerated (Titus 3) and born again (John 3). This has been a subject for research and analysis on my websites for years.

But Pastor Courson stated (paraphrased) in the recent sermon that salvation and justification was totally up to God, but being consecrated was up to us, as in those under the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ via the triune, biblical, God.

Browning explains that consecration is the act of separating persons from the profane and instead dedicating self to God. (76). It is to render things to God. (76).

The concept of consecration is associated with sanctification. The 'Pocket Dictionary' opines that sanctification is two-fold: One, it is an aspect of salvation via Jesus Christ. Two, those in Christ are to strive for holiness through the Holy Spirit. (105).

As sanctification is an aspect of New Testament salvation, the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ is applied to believers by grace through faith, not by works, but for good works (Ephesians 1-2). Within Reformed theology, by grace alone, through faith alone.

Titus 3:5-7 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs [a]according to the hope of eternal life. 

This means salvific sanctification, biblically, is up to God alone, and not by human means. But, having listened to Pastor Courson since 1987, I reason he knows this theology as fact and accepts it.

The difference in view will be with the second proposed aspect of sanctification, which would include Pastor Courson's theology on consecration.

Today's typical evangelical, libertarian free will theology will assume this must be left entirely up to the persons in Christ, without simultaneous influence from God or any external force.

Within a Reformed theology and in my case, also via theistic philosophy within philosophy of religion, I reason that as God is infinite, eternal and omnipotent, God wills and causes all things as the primary cause, whether within his perfect will or his permissible will.

Within my Reformed view, God within either perfect or permissible will, would decide, noting Courson's theological idea, for my premise, which Christians would be disciples as opposed to saved believers only, and to what degree. But again, it is theologically debatable whether or not a true regenerated Christian could avoid being a disciple, at least of some sort.

Rest assured, limited free will does exist, within my Reformed theology:

Human beings embrace, as secondary cause (s) what God has caused and willed, or else this would be forced and/or coerced and would not include significant, human moral responsibility.

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

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

GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI AND CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

In Three Minutes: Fascism (As opposed to conservative/conservatism)

Hoodie City, Wales

Via British philosophy texts, I provide academic definitions for fascism.

To be clear, I am a moderate conservative, Reformed, biblical Christian. I do not intellectually hold to or support any forms of fascism or communism. I never have and never will.

Fascism

Blackburn explains that from the Latin, this is fasces the bundle of rods carried before the Roman consuls as an insignia of authority. (136). This served as loose inspiration for the early 20th century political, military and government movements of Mussolini in Italy and Hitler in Nazi Germany. (136).

Elements of fascism include nationalism, hostility to ideals of equality, hatred of minorities and hatred of degenerates, deviants, elitism, liberalism and freedom of expression. (136).

Fascism focuses on a cult-like leader and the destiny of race. It embraces political symbolism, uniforms, emblems. (136). Fascism is idealized that it must take place through political energy and struggle. (136).

Cambridge explains that in National Socialism, this form of fascism featured anti-antisemitism and was militarist. (629).

STERBA, JAMES P (1996) 'Political Philosophy" in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

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

In Three Minutes (A little over)

This audio/video took several takes, how much worse it would be if I had to be concerned with how I looked! However, yes, I can acknowledge there are many American conservatives, and American Christian conservatives that are opposed to aspects of illegal immigration and legal immigration. Many of these favour a southern wall. But, I do not reason that being opposed to legal immigration is a distinct conservative premise that can be connected to fascism. Remember there are many conservatives and conservative Christians that also live in Canada, Europe and elsewhere that hold to more moderate views and many American conservatives and American Christian conservatives do as well. Hatred of immigrants and minorities, for the most part, is not a conservative premise.