Sunday, August 01, 2021

Review of Reasons To Believe: On evolution (very non-exhaustive)

Review of Reasons To Believe: On evolution (very non-exhaustive)

Cologne, Germany, July 2021, I love my Germany, Facebook

(I was at Cologne Cathedral when I was eight years old. Extremely impressive building) 

Reasons to Believe: Newsletter (2021),July/August Reasons to Believe, Covina, California.

On the back page (4), Hugh Ross writes a very short article entitled 'Did God create us or did we evolve from a common ancestor with the apes?'

Dr. Ross immediately states 'I believe God directly intervened to create the first humans. Specifically, I hold the position that all humanity descended from a single male (Adam) and single female (Eve) whom God specially created. The writer of Genesis 1 and 2 uses Hebrew verbs (bara, asa, yatsar) for the origin of Adam and Eve, words that colorfully portray that God directly and miraculously intervened to bring about the origin of Adam and Eve. Genesis 3: 20 states that Eve would become the mother of us all. Acts 17: 26 declares that from one man, God made every nation of people.' (4)

When Dr. Ross states 'colorfully portray', this in my view connects to the biblical, theological concept that Genesis 1-3 is not written as mythology, as is fictional mythology. According to most scholarship, including many biblical conservatives, Genesis 1-3 does contain poetry and some degrees of figurative literal language.

Thursday, December 12, 2013 Genesis (PhD Edit) 

William Sanford La Sor, David Allan Hubbard, and Fredric William Bush (1987) from what I deduced was a moderate conservative, evangelical position, reason the author of Genesis is writing as an artist and storyteller who uses literary device. La Sor, Hubbard, and Bush (1987: 72). They point out it is imperative to distinguish which literary device is being used within the text of Genesis. La Sor, Hubbard, and Bush (1987: 72). 

Further, from what Dr. Ross wrote, using the New American Standard Bible (NASB), Romans 5 clearly requires a literal Adam, or at least first man, that would most reasonably be known as Adam. Romans 5: 12, through one man (Adam implied) sin entered the world and death to all of humanity. Romans 5: 14, death reigned from Adam to Moses. There was a universal corruption of humanity, see also Romans 1-3. Jesus Christ, the God-man, in Romans 5: 15, through grace covers sin.

Clearly, a literal, non-fictional, Adam, although admittedly described in figurative literal terms in Genesis 1-3, is described in more plain literal terms in Romans 5. Jesus Christ in comparison is the new Adam, last Adam, or second Adam. The existence and fall of Adam (and Eve) is biblically (Genesis 1-3, Romans, implied in Hebrews 2, as examples), theologically connecting the Adam of non-fiction and religious history, to the non-fiction and religious history of the death and resurrection, the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ for his people (Romans 9, Ephesians 1-2, as examples).

Dr. Ross opines that 'Humans are truly exceptional.' (4). One example he cites is that human beings alone can advance technologically. (5). In my view, human beings alone (of the physical beings on earth) can ponder on the spiritual realm, on God, angelic beings, and demonic beings. Dr. Ross reasons that God created a 'sequence of bipedal primate creatures before creating human beings.' (5). Bipedal, as in an animal that walks on two limbs or two feet.

Wednesday, December 16, 2020 PhD: Twitter quote 41 


Cited

The following tables give an overview of notable finds of hominin fossils and remains relating to human evolution, beginning with the formation of the tribe Hominini (the divergence of the human and chimpanzee lineages) in the late Miocene, roughly 7 to 8 million years ago. 

Cited 

The early fossils shown are not considered direct ancestors to Homo sapiens but are closely related to direct ancestors and are therefore important to the study of the lineage. 

I am not a scientist, but I side more so with evolutionary views of Dr. Ross and Reasons to Believe, than Darwinian Evolution. I can accept that evolution exists, not Darwinian type evolution with a secular, naturalistic, worldview, which of course includes considerable philosophy of science. But as a philosopher of religion and theologian, 'not direct ancestors', 'but closely related to direct ancestors' allows for debate and interpretations. Are these fossils demonstrating the same species, or similar species in regards to DNA and ontology? These creatures exist within same and similar ecologies and environments.

These can be the earlier bipedal primates as Dr. Ross suggests.

The Oxford Dictionary of Science 

Cited 

Evolution 

The gradual process by which the present diversity of plant and animal life arise from the earliest and most primitive organisms...(304). This is believed to have taken place the last 3000 million years. (3 billion, my add). (304). 

Cited 

Most controversial, however, and still to be clarified, are the relationship and evolution of groups above the species level. (304). In other words, evolution from scientifically reasoned species to species.


Cited

Transitional forms

Fossils or organisms that show the intermediate states between an ancestral form and that of its descendants are referred to as transitional forms. There are numerous examples of transitional forms in the fossil record, providing an abundance of evidence for change over time. 

Cited 

Our understanding of the evolution of horse feet, so often depicted in textbooks, is derived from a scattered sampling of horse fossils within the multi-branched horse evolutionary tree. These fossil organisms represent branches on the tree and not a direct line of descent leading to modern horses. 

Similar. 

Not a direct line. All horses or horselike?


Edited from my first comment in 2013 on that article, in regards to Genesis 1-3...

Even in light of reasoning a significant degree of literal, fall, within the Genesis 1-3 event, I admit, while I was studying theology of 'the fall' for my PhD, I did not find any evidence or argument that was biblically based or related that had me reason that Adam and Eve were not literal in Scripture, as in  they were instead myth and fictional. The historical story does contain, it appears, figurative literal language as in, for example, the serpent 'on your belly shall you go' New American Standard Bible (NASB). Presumed to be Satan, and it is very doubtful, that as a fallen angel, and spirit, the entity crawls perpetually. Perhaps this is figurative language for being cast in the human realm and the physical universe in some sense. 

But issues like that would still would not make Genesis 1-3 myth. It is still religious history. I did have a Professor at Columbia Bible that speculated that God could have created human beings more than once, perhaps explaining how different human beings differ in ethnicity and skin colour; and therefore he speculated that different human falls may have occurred (not my own view). Also, Adam from Genesis, in Romans 5, ties directly into the gospel message, as mentioned. With increasing study especially the PhD, I was made more aware of the key issue of being very aware using bible tools, of the type of language being used in Genesis 1-3, whether poetry or prose.

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

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

DUNN, JAMES D.G. (1988) Romans, Dallas, Word Books. 

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

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.

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

Thursday, July 29, 2021

PhD: Twitter quote 96

PhD: Twitter quote 96

From my PhD thesis with in-notes (text) replacing footnotes.

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


I must be clear: theodicy is not the remedy to the problem of evil, but a speculative, and in my case, Biblically based attempt to explain how God deals with evil in his creation. Lindsley (2003: 3). In similar fashion, practical and empirical theology do not offer solutions to the problem of evil, but are theological disciplines Winquest (1987: 1) Francis (2005: 1), which assist persons to understand how evil is comprehended and dealt with in the Christian community and in society at large. 

Twitter version I

Theodicy is not the remedy to problems of evil, but is a speculative, in my case, biblical attempt at explaining how God deals with evils in his creation. 

Twitter version II

Practical and empirical theologies do not solve problems of evil, but can assist with comprehension and comfort. 

July 29, 2021 

The applied atoning and resurrection, gospel work of God the Son, Jesus Christ to those in him (Romans 9, 1 Corinthians 15, Ephesians 1-2, 1 Thessalonians 4-5, 2 Thessalonians 2, as examples), is ultimately culminated post-mortem. It is simultaneously applied in the restoration of the universe as in time, space and matter (alluded to in 2 Peter 3, Revelation 20-22 as examples). This  is the ultimate remedy to problems of evil. Problems of evil within the universe and earth will be remedied and will cease within the culminated Kingdom of God. 

The unregenerate ultimately post-mortem, will reside in the lake of fire (hell 2) as death, and hades (hell 1) are thrown into the lake of fire (hell 2)(Revelation 20: 14). I acknowledge the use of figurative language here, but reason there is a figurative, literal aspect to what is being described in this apocalyptic (revealed, revelation) literature, which is eschatological, last things, literature.

As I dealt with in my PhD thesis, the lake of fire was/is not an everlastingly intended existence for humanity to flourish in, it is the second death, everlasting death. It is not restored. A divine legacy of those that reject God and the gospel, perhaps? (Still within my Reformed, compatibilistic model)

BRUCE, F.F. (1986) ‘Revelation’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

FRANCIS, LESLIE J. and Practical Theology Team (2005) ‘Practical and Empirical Theology’, University of Wales, Bangor website, University of Wales, Bangor. 

LINDSLEY, ART (2003) ‘The Problem of Evil’, Knowing & Doing, Winter, Springfield, Virginia, C.S. Lewis Institute. 

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

WINQUIST, CHARLES E. (1987) ‘Re-visioning Ministry: Postmodern Reflections’, in Lewis S Mudge and James N. Poling, Formation and Reflection: The Promise of Practical Theology by Lewis S Mudge and James N. Poling, Philadelphia, Fortress Press. 

Saturday, July 24, 2021

PhD: Twitter quote 95

PhD: Twitter quote 95

Recent from Facebook, no confirmed location.

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

Saturday, September 19, 2020 PhD Full Version PDF: Theodicy and Practical Theology 2010, Wales TSD 


Edited from PhD thesis

Twitter version I

In regards to empirical theology & methodology. Williams comments there are certain broad foundations of the empirical method that can perhaps be agreed upon. 

Twitter version II

In regards to empirical theology & methodology. One, experience in the empirical method is the felt, bodily, organic action of human history. 
---

Referenced

Williams (1969: 176).

---

Edited from PhD thesis

This experience includes sense data, but is not limited by it. Williams (1969: 176). Williams writes that there is a mysterious disclosure of God by which God is revealed metaphysically, and he reasons that human faith cannot survive without interpreting this metaphysical experience that is manifested in all things. Williams (1969: 177-178). 

Traditional Christian thought can agree that, in a sense, God reveals things about himself outside of revealed Scripture. Mounce (1995: 77). Through creation God provided sufficient evidence for his existence Mounce (1995: 77), and therefore persons would be accountable for denying this revelation. Mounce (1995: 77). This is known as natural revelation and is distinguished from special revelation. Mounce (1995: 78). Special revelation would include Scripture and the gospel message Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 109), and therefore natural revelation would provide natural information concerning God Mounce (1995: 78), but not specific information in regard to salvation. Cranfield (1992: 32). The knowledge of God for humanity is limited when restricted to natural theology. Cranfield (1992: 32). It is not the same knowledge of God that is revealed supernaturally in Scripture. Cranfield (1992: 32). 

James D.G. Dunn (1988) writes it is clear that within the Romans text the concept of God revealing himself through natural theology exists. Dunn (1988: 56). This natural theology has always been apparent to humanity, and has been present as long as the cosmos have existed. Dunn (1988: 57). There is no assumption here that human beings existed at the creation of the cosmos. 

July 24, 2021 

Reviewing this more than a decade later, empirical theology, in many ways, is reading more like empirical philosophy of religion than empirical theology. In other words, under the academic umbrella of Philosophy, philosophy of religion examines religion and Christianity, extra-biblically or outside of the Bible. 

Natural revelation, is implied in Romans 1, and it not called natural revelation in Romans. Therefore, I referenced Mounce, Cranfield and Dunn, as Roman's scholars within my PhD thesis. Natural revelation can be viewed as an aspect of the study of philosophy of religion, although this academic discipline certainly interacts with biblical studies and theology. In contrast to philosophy of religion; biblical studies and various types of theology, including philosophical theology and systematic theology, would be placed under the academic umbrella of Religious Studies. 

Both philosophy of religion and philosophical theology were equally prominent within my British MPhil/PhD theses and questionnaire/survey work and I might add, are equally prominent within my website work. 

Note, in my both my formal and website academic work, I have found that there are some within Christian academia that deny there is any such thing as natural theology, it is reasoned that any actual type of theology comes from biblical revelation. It is a debate of semantics, but I can reasonably view natural theology as more so ‘natural’ philosophy of religion. 

As example, Karl Barth was a noted opponent of natural theology: 

Cited 


'Karl Barth is the most famous (and infamous) opponent of Natural Theology in the world. However, in the final volume of the Church Dogmatics, Barth developed a Natural Theology of his own, that he titled "Secular Parables of the Kingdom" (c.f. CD IV/3.1, §69.2 The Light of Life).’ 

Referenced 

Barth, Karl (193201968)(2010) Church Dogmatics, Vol. 4.3.1, Sections 69: The Doctrine of Reconciliation, Study Edition 27, London, T & T Clark. 

Postbarthian citing Barth

Barth, Karl, G. W. Bromiley, and Thomas F. Torrance, (1975) (2005) Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God. Vol. II/1, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975. 168. Print. 

'One would think that nothing could be simpler or more obvious than the insight that a theology which makes a great show of guaranteeing the knowability of God apart from grace and therefore from faith, or which thinks and promises that it is able to give such a guarantee—in other words, a "natural" theology—is quite impossible within the Church, and indeed, in such a way that it cannot even be discussed in principle.’ —Karl Barth, CD II/1 [2]’ 

Postbarthian citing Barth

Barth, Karl, G. W. Bromiley, and Thomas F. Torrance, (1975) (2005) Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God. Vol. IV/3/1, §69.2 The Light of Life, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975. 168. Print. 

‘we have no need to appeal either for basis or content to the sorry hypothesis of a so-called "natural theology" (i.e., a knowledge of God given in and with the natural force of reason or to be attained in its exercise). CD IV/3.1, §69.2 The Light of Life.’ 
---

BARTH, KARL (193201968)(2010) Church Dogmatics, Vol. 4.3.1, Sections 69: The Doctrine of Reconciliation, Study Edition 27, London, T & T Clark. 

BARTH, KARL, G. W. BROMILEY and THOAMS F. TORRANCE, (1975) (2005) Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God. Vol. II/1, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975. 168. Print. 

BARTH, KARL, G. W. BROMILEY and THOMAS F. TORRANCE, (1975) (2005) Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God. Vol. IV/3/1, §69.2 The Light of Life, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975. 168. Print. 

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

DUNN, JAMES D.G. (1988) Romans, Dallas, Word Books. 

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

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. 

WILLIAMS, DANIEL DAY (1969) ‘Suffering and Being in Empirical Theology’, in The Future of Empirical Theology, Chicago, the University of Chicago Press.

--- 

Referencing G.W. Bromiley once again 


BROMILEY, G.W. (1996) ‘Baptism, Infant', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

This is always an interesting citation, as someone that leans more towards believer's baptism. I do not think infant baptism/paedobaptism is heretical.

G.W. Bromiley(1915–2009), who as of 1996 (according to the referenced text listed credentials) was Senior Professor of Church History and Historical Theology at Fuller Theological Seminary, explains that in early church history those such as Irenaeus and Origen, who were close to the apostles, were involved in baptizing children of professing believers. 

BROMILEY, G.W. (1996) ‘Filioque’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.) Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

BROMILEY, G.W. (1996) ‘Trinity’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

Tuesday, July 20, 2021

Brief on transhumanism

Facebook image: I have no plans to retire. 

Reasons to Believe: Newsletter (2021), May/June, Reasons to Believe, Covina, California.

On the back page (4), there is an article titled:

Will Brain Implants Provide The Means For Our Salvation? 

By Fazale "Fuz" Rana.

The article explains that in 2016, Elon Musk, helped to found Neuralink. (4) This is a company that is attempting to build a neural implant 'that can sync with the human brain.' (4). These types of implants are known as developments in 'brain-computer interface (BCI) technology. (4).

It is suggested that such technology might 'alleviate the pain and suffering associated with neuromuscular disease, brain and spinal cord injuries, loss of limbs, and many other afflictions.' (4)

It might 'mitigate pain and suffering' and be a form of human progress, which the article supports (4), and I would be in agreement.

The author then opines that transhumanists desire to create a utopia through science and technology. (4). Transhumanism could be reasoned out as a 'techno faith' of sorts. (4).

It is then asked if (paraphrased) transhumanism and this type of BCI and related technology, could 'present a counterfeit salvation?' (4).

I reason that technology when helpful to humanity should be embraced, but that true, full, complete, human salvation, as spiritual and physical in nature, requires the work of the infinite, eternal, God that is spirit (John 4: 24). God created all finite reality (Genesis 1, Colossians 1). Salvation was provided by God incarnate, God the Son, Jesus Christ and his atoning and resurrection work, in his death and resurrection, applied to believers. 

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


Edited from original

Science has made discoveries that have assisted humanity, (Krikorian (1944)(2007: 1)) and has at the same time, helped persons understand many realities. Krikorian (1944)(2007: 1). My Reformed theological and worldview perspective deduces that human corruption cannot be entirely corrected scientifically, but human beings are changed permanently to avoid evil only by the completed regeneration work of God. Murray (1937-1966)(1977: 172). Erickson (1994: 1228). Packer (1996: 924). Mounce (1990: 394). This completed post-mortem (Revelation 20-22). Human suffering is only ended, ultimately, through this applied work of Jesus Christ.

In other words, divine supernatural assistance is required to overcome evil. I reason that scientific progress has helped humanity tremendously to live better quality lives, (Krikorian (1944)(2007: 1)), but human beings are capable of committing as grotesque and intense evils as ever in the twenty-first century. For example, nuclear technology has made nuclear weapons possible since the 1940s and there are nuclear weapons in the world which can do tremendous damage to humanity on a large scale within a few hours. This is so, in my view, because scientific knowledge has not as of yet, been able to change the essential nature of human beings. 

Even if science could perfect the physical nature of persons to avoid evil actions, assuming for the sake of argument human beings have a spirit+, it needs to be considered if materially based science could perfect the human spirit as well to avoid all wrong actions. This would appear doubtful. Simultaneously, human suffering would not end.

Philosophy and theology have assisted human beings throughout history to better understand life (Scudder (1940: 247)), but neither of these disciplines can provide a remedy to the problem of evil (Henry (1983: 282). Blocher (1994: 84)).

However, philosophy (philosophy of religion, in particular) and theology with biblical studies, can help to explain evil and suffering through effective theodicy. Scudder (1940: 247). Theodicy can and should, when done properly, adequately explain that the applied gospel work of Jesus Christ for those that believe, is the ultimate, remedy to problems of evil. As noted, ultimately completed, post-mortem.

+ Genesis 2:7. H.L. Ellison (1986) explains that in the Old Testament breath or spirit came from God and provided life and individuality. 

BLOCHER, HENRI. (1994) Evil and the Cross, Translated by David G. Preston, Leicester, InterVarsity Press. 

ELLISON, H.L. (1986) ‘Matthew’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

HENRY, CARL (1983) God, Revelation and Authority: Volume 6: God Who Stands and Stays, Waco, Word Books. 

KRIKORIAN, Y. (1944)(2007) (ed.), ‘Naturalism and the Human Spirit’, New York, Columbia University Press, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/ 

MURRAY, JOHN (1937-1966)(1977) Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2: Select Lectures in Systematic Theology, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust. 

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. 

PACKER, J.I. (1973) Knowing God, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

PACKER, J.I. (1996) ‘Regeneration’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

SCUDDER, DELTON, LEWIS (1940) Tennant’s Philosophical Theology, London, Oxford University Press. 


Cited from Sean A. Hays 

'Transhumanism, social and philosophical movement devoted to promoting the research and development of robust human-enhancement technologies.'


More on transhumanism from the same source, that I also reviewed.