At a TriCity Church bible study of Philippians, the following verse was provided in regard to the Christian walk and the need for thankfulness by the follower.
Philippians 4: 6
English Standard Version (ESV)
6 do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.
Courson theologically connects staying at a place of joy in Christ with staying in prayer. (1292). In context he explains that prayer here is being in communication with God, while supplication is prayer made for specific requests. (1292).
Ephesians 5: 20 also came to mind.
Ephesians 5:18-21
English Standard Version (ESV)
18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, 19 addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, 20 giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Courson opines that the believer will be blessed and productive when giving thanks to God for all things in Christ. (1256).
In the last few month especially, I have focused on Matthew 6 and living one day at a time. I attempt to live a day at a time as far as problems are concerned, and I make certain that I focus on past and present blessings, which are substantial.
From a Reformed perspective (and personally my PhD/MPhil research forward) it can be understood that God wills all things as a primary cause, whether by perfect or permissible, divine will. Being thankful during suffering, especially, can be difficult. Biblically a believer needs to trust in the sanctification process as an aspect of salvation (Romans 6-8).
COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.
My friend John and I briefly discussed the concept of viciousregress on the phone last night, along with more typical subjects.
(I do not just talk theology/philosophy for those of you opining. If I was a betting man, which I am not, I would bet more than one person has stated that this is all I talk about, as fact.)
Last night on the phone, I referenced in brief, the three examples below.
A god, is caused by a god, is caused by a god, is caused by a god, ad infinitum, is an infinite regress. It is a vicious regress, because it does not solve its own problem and requires a first cause, without a cause.
(In philosophy of religion, the first cause, can be considered what is necessary and exists by necessity. From a biblical perspective this is Almighty God, infinite and eternal.)
A choice is caused by a choice, is caused by a choice, is caused by a choice, ad infinitum, is an infinite regress. It is a vicious regress, because it does not solve its own problem and requires a first cause, without a cause.
(Human choice is traced back to human nature. Human nature is traced back to its creator, God, that has infinite, eternal nature and will/choice.)
Time is caused by time, is caused by time, is caused by time, ad infinitum, is an infinite regress. It is a vicious regress, because it does not solve its own problem and requires a first cause, without a cause.
(If there is an infinite distance between Maple Ridge and Vancouver, one will never arrive in Vancouver.)
In the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Simon Blackburn discusses ‘infinite regress’ and mentions that this occurs in a vicious way whenever a problem tries to solve itself and yet remains with the same problem it had previously. Blackburn (1996: 324) A vicious regress is an infinite regress that does not solve its own problem, while a benign regress is an infinite regress that does not fail to solve its own problem. Blackburn (1996: 324). Blackburn writes that there is frequently room for debate on what is a vicious regress or benign regress. Blackburn (1996: 324).
An example of a benign regress is infinite numbers both plus and minus, as they in reality represent conceptualized things as opposed to being real things. 'Problem' solved.
Therefore:
Based on my philosophical reading and Blackburn's explanation, it can be deduced that philosophers would debate whether a particular vicious regress is illogical and whether it is using a logical fallacy.
Further:
An argument can be logical and not sound, as sound arguments are not the only valid arguments but are those where 'all the premises are true'. (1997: 35).
Whether or not a particular vicious regress, and the examples I raised, are illogical and using a logical fallacy in the sense of invalid argument is of secondary importance. It is of primary importance when a vicious regress is not reasonable and does not solve its own problem and is fallacious as in faulty reasoning. That is the case with my three examples, I reason.
Bradley (371) mentions that it is not illogical, and not a vicious regress that each act of free choice is caused by another act of free choice. I agree that it is not necessarily illogical, but disagree that the argument as described is not a vicious regress.
McSween, British Columbia: trekearth.com
BLACKBURN, S. (1996) ‘Regress’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
BRADLEY, RAYMOND D. (1996) ‘Infinite Regress Argument’, in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.
WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.
Chapter Two: The Appeasers
Mr. Wallace opines that America is making the same mistake that the Allies made with Nazi Germany prior to World War II; that is appeasement. (15). The Allies did not match the Nazi Germany military buildup and were not prepared for war. (15).
The author reasons that Islam, like Nazi Germany, both 'preach a supremacy doctrine'. (15). Both movements favour a totalitarian system. Dissidents are killed and the Jewish people are opposed in both movements. (15). The appeaser is working from a weaker position, whereas the bully, by being appeased, can become strong enough to defeat the appeaser. (15-16).
---
I can agree that Quranic Islam is seeking to dominate other worldviews.
I reason that because of this very faulty State/Religion government model, Jihad/Holy War can easily be at times interpreted and implemented with varied degrees of force and coercion. This has been done throughout the history of Islam.
Critics have pointed out that much of the Qur'an has open-ended verses in regard to Jihad meaning that they are not necessarily restrained to an historical context. Radical forms of Jihad and aggressive martyrdom could be conceivably reasonably interpreted within today's Islam, for today's world.
Mr. Wallace does have some reasonable concerns...
However:
Nazi Germany was a national, political, movement under one umbrella.
Islam is a worldwide movement under many umbrellas.
My work has documented that those such as the Islamic Supreme Council of America, officially take a more moderate position in regard to Jihad/Holy War, claiming it was and is for primarily defensive purposes. Will there be a large enough, and more importantly powerful enough combined Islamic political and military force to overthrow the Western World, including the United States?
At this point in history, I state there is not and this seems doubtful to occur any time soon. Frankly, Islam is not even in what I would consider one of the four most powerful political, military blocks in the world. Those being:
I am not intellectually persuaded or convinced that any united form of Islam will challenge one of these power blocks, any time soon. Some may reason that Western Europe will fall to Islam, but will its Muslim residents be more like radical Islamists or liberalized, secularized Muslims? This is not certain enough to formulate the likely rise of an European Islamic Empire.
Germany, trekearth.com: More colour than previous version. I like the contrast!
Enlightenment & the Seventh-day Adventist Church An educational video and brief, non-exhaustive notes. About the author from You Tube
'Bruce W. Gore, M.A., J.D., has offered educational materials for those interested in the Christian faith for about 40 years. He served on the adjunct faculty of Whitworth University in Spokane, Washington for over 30 years, while maintaining a private practice in trial law. His informal and relaxed style, combined with rich content, have made Bruce a popular lecturer, teacher, and preacher, for many years. Bruce offers educational materials in Bible, history, and theology from the perspective of the Reformed Tradition, but his even-handed approach to his topics have made him popular with many from a variety of other traditions as well.
Bruce is now retired, but continues to develop and upload material of help to many, and it is his firm hope that you will find these presentations a blessing and encouragement!'
Enlightenment
Mr. Gore opines that within Western society there were new ways of thinking in the 19th century.
I would add that this is the Enlightenment era:
Colin Brown described the Enlightenment as follows:
The Age of Enlightenment (German Die Aufklarung) covers roughly the eighteenth century. It is sometimes identified with the Age of Reason, but the latter term covers both the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Although the Enlightenment had some of its roots in seventeenth century rationalism, the ideas which characterize the Enlightenment went far beyond the rationalism of Descartes, Spinoza, and the thinkers of their time. Brown (1996: 355).
My former and brief academic adviser at the University of Manchester:
David A. Pailin, of Manchester University, stated (paraphrased):
The Enlightenment’s criticism of the authority of tradition led to increasing secularization in attitudes and ideas. Nature is seen as an ordered whole rather than as a stage for divine interventions and supernatural happenings. So far as religious beliefs are concerned, claims to revelation are acceptable only when they are rationally justified and their contents subject to reason’s judgement. Biblical stories and accepted doctrines are not immune from criticism.
Works like Bayle’s Historical and Critical Dictionary and Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary highlight the faults of revered figures and the questionability of standard doctrines. Historical and literary investigations into the Bible develop. Reports about miracles, especially that of the resurrection, give rise to considerable discussion. There is great hostility to priestcraft and suspicion of ecclesiastical pretensions to guide human understanding. Pailin (1999: 180).
Liberalism Mr. Gore reasons that this was a response within Enlightenment thinking. This embraced naturalistic ways of looking at Christianity, which was in contrast, traditionally and biblically, supernatural.
He mentions concepts of Deism that developed in this era.
Mysticism
As well concepts of mysticism and new thought such as Unity (Unity Church) and Christian Science came into being.
I would add that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also came into existence in the 19 century.
The Second Great Awakening Mr. Gore states that Christian Millennialism arises.
Ellen G. White (1827-1915)
Mr. Gore explains that White was influenced by Finney (1792-1875) in regard to prophetic, post-millennial, social concerns and Miller (1782-1848) in regard to prophetic, pre-millennial and social concerns. White's views became prophetic, pre-millennial, with social concerns.
Mr. Gore reasons that White became more famous for her social concerns than for her being one of the founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
He discusses that as a youth, Ellen G. White (Harmon at the time) had a serious head injury. Soon afterwards as life went on she would have visions, that she interpreted as being a Christian, spiritual experiences. In her youth, Ellen and her family were part of the Millerite movement, which was an Adventist movement.
Joseph Bates wrote a pamphlet written by an Adventist that connected Christian Sunday worship with the mark of beast from Revelation. This influenced White.
Some Theology Points White focused on an histortist approach to Revelation.
Annihilation is held to and not hell and everlasting punishment within SDA theology.
It holds to Sabbatarianism, dogmatically.
---
In contrast, I would note, the Apostle Paul writes against the Judaizers (In Galatians in particular). Hebrews 8: forward discusses that there is a new covenant.
Sabbatarians will disagree with the dismal of this core doctrine of theirs, but the Apostle Paul appears to support Christian Liberty on the matter:
Colossians 2:16-17
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
16 Therefore no one is to [a]act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath [b]day— 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the [c]substance [d]belongs to Christ.
Footnotes:
Colossians 2:16 Lit judge you
Colossians 2:16 Or days
Colossians 2:17 Lit body
Colossians 2:17 Lit of Christ
The Sabbatarian argument that it is not the Hebrew Bible 'Sabbath' being discussed here seems a desperate one. I do not think that in light of Judaizers, Paul would make such a comment unless it had a clear meaning of Sabbath day. Based on Wright's commentary I would reason that the Hebrew Bible literal Sabbath day was an aspect of the shadow of the things to come in Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 13: 10). Wright (118-119).
Romans 14: 5 is also not helpful for a Sabbatarian position:
5 One person [c]regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, [d]does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God. 7 For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself; 8 for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
For balance, a professor of mine, in my mind, correctly criticized me for working seven days a week while working on my Bachelor's degree. By taking the written Mosaic Law and applying in it Jesus Christ, spiritually, I do now take a day of rest, but within liberty, not legalism. It is usually Sunday, as long as employment will allow and I do strongly push for this to occur.
In principal, I do reason that a day of rest, set aside for the Lord (Church and related, often) is a very good thing for the Christian believer.
So, for clarity, I do not have an 'axe to grind' with a biblical concept of a day of rest. I follow it, but within a new covenant and not old covenant, context.
---
Mr. Gore explains that Seventh-day Adventism uses hyper-speculation with eschatological theology although he stated that they were Christian believers. This would be debated within the Church. A major concern I have with this movement is the elevation of what should be a secondary issue, the Sabbath, to the level of a primary issue. According to Mr. Gore, orthodox SDA views would exclude non-Sabbatarians from the Kingdom of God. This is serious error and cultic theology.
Please excuse my satirical side, but I do attempt to attend Northview Community Church (megachurch) service Saturday nights and then the TriCity Church (church plant), Sunday mornings.
BROWN, C. (1996) The Enlightenment, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
PAILIN, D.A. (1999) Enlightenment, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
WRIGHT, N. T. (1986)(1989) Colossians and Philemon, Grand Rapids, IVP/Eerdmans.
