Church in Hard Places: Brief Review

NBC news

Some key citations from the PDF version of:

McConnell, Mez and Mike McKinley. Church in Hard Places: How the Local Church Brings Life to the Poor and Needy. Wheaton, IL: Crossway (2016):

I was asked to read this text by the Director of Prayer Current. I read through the book in a day and thought there were some significant theological and philosophical statements. This a very brief review, due to media type limitations.

My further comments underlined.

Citations

'How do you break through the intellectual pride of a worldview that thinks religion is beneath them and that science has all the answers? How do you witness in an area where the average house price is more than $400,000? How do you talk to a guy who feels no need for Christ because he is distracted by his materialism?' (20)

There is a great worldview divide, in Western societies. Secularism is held to by many. Biblical Christianity, by relatively few.

'They don’t need bread; they need an entirely new way of life.'  (28).

This citation is in regard to the poor.

'A false or even an incomplete gospel is like a sugar pill. It might fool the patient into thinking he will get better, but it doesn’t have the power to cure him.' (39).

There is significant false teaching and error both within and outside of the Christian Church. There are of plenty of counterfeit gospels.

'Many people have a sliding scale when it comes to sin. So as long as they feel that they are not harming people or are not at the bad end of the spectrum, then they are going to be all right. But they are wrong. The Bible is clear that we don’t start with a clean slate and then get judged on what we have done. We all start guilty. We are already condemned, however good we think we are or are not.'  (40).

Humanity is corrupt by nature and needs enlightenment and regeneration by the Holy Spirit, through the atonement and resurrection of Christ, applied to believers. John 1-3, Romans, Galatians, Hebrews.

'Conversion is a work of God’s Spirit from start to finish, but people still need to be persuaded. In our teaching, we must be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks (1 Pet. 3:15).' (100).

This is good Biblical, Reformed, theology. In agreement with my Wales' MPhil and PhD theology presented where I highlighted often the need for preaching and teaching in order to persuade persons within a regeneration process from God.

'First, in the garden of Eden God’s people lived in communion with him. After Adam and Eve’s rebellion, he dissolved their immediate fellowship and expelled them from the garden. He established a perimeter around the garden and charged an angelic guard to keep the humans out. While they remained righteous, they were “in”; when they sinned, they were “out.”' (119).

This is a theological key. The Garden of Eden, may have been a physical, spiritual environment, set-apart from the rest of the planet earth. Humanity was barred from this earthyly paradise after the fall. Therefore, the angels stood as guards. This area now no longer in existence. Further, the physical laws of the universe may not have changed due to the human fall; rather humanity was taken from a protected paradise and sent to the present earthly realm.

 'We knew exactly what to do and say in order to get the things that we wanted with minimum engagement. Churches were particularly good targets because the people were generally nice, they would be kind to you, they were less savvy than government agencies, and all we had to do was sit through some God-talk and maybe take a booklet.' (177).

A peril of Christian ministry. A peril of urban Christian work.

Prayer Current.com Website under construction.

The problem of evil and justice (PhD)

Google+

Edited excerpts from Theodicy and Practical Theology, 2010, PhD, The University of Wales, Trinity Saint David.

Theodicy & Justice

The term theodicy arose from G.W. Leibniz’ book in 1710 entitled Theodicy.[1] Robert M. Adams (1996) notes that the word theodicy is from the Greek, as theos is God and dike is justice. [2] 

Theodicy is a defence of the justice of God in the face of objections arising from the problem of evil in the world.[3] 

Dewi Zephaniah Phillips [4] admits that ‘philosophizing about the problem of evil has become common place.’ [5] 

There are ‘theories, theodicies and defences abound.’[6] These are all seeking to somehow justify God,[7] or to render the concept of God as untenable.[8] Phillips rightly reasons that such work should be done with fear,[9] as approaches to the problem of evil in error could ‘betray the evils people have suffered.’[10]

Such explanation should never be overly simplistic, insensitive or ridiculous.[11] Phillips warns that pro-religious philosophical presentations can often do more damage to the cause of theodicy than can the work of critics.[12] 

Critical philosophy & Justice

Hille reasons that a satisfactory self-coherent answer to the question of the justice of God cannot be found in theology or philosophy.[13] Ferraiolo explains that many critics of theism would claim the existence of gratuitous evil makes a theodicy a difficult thing to establish in our present world filled with evil.[14] He concludes his article by noting it is not obvious that human suffering is reconcilable with theism.[15]  Bertrand Russell (1957)(1976) states that since the universe often lacks justice presently there is no good scientific reason to believe that God would eventually bring about justice.[16]

Theology & Justice

However, Augustine (421)(1998) notes that God did well, even in the permission of what was evil, as he permitted it for the sake of judgment, and his justice is perfect.[17] This gospel associated theodicy view allows for the possibility of forgiveness of sins within the atonement for persons and for persons to experience the ultimate justice of God’s culminated Kingdom.[18] Bloesch explains that in the context of atonement and justice[19] with God’s holiness he forgives and forbears and demonstrates his love.[20]  

There is within my Reformed theodicy concepts of ultimate justice[21] and deliverance from the problem of evil and its results,[22] but as a Christian scholar attempting to be as accurate in understanding as possible, I must include the concept that sin must first be atoned for in Christ[23] before a person can experience the benefits of a culminated Kingdom free from evil and suffering.[24]

God’s justice can be understood somewhat, but for the sufferer to realize theologically that death is a result of human sin and a corrupt world system,[25] it is not really all that comforting, although the concept is Biblically and theologically correct. The helpful traditional practical explanation that the resurrection awaits those who trust in Christ, is both theoretically and practically sound, and may be of comfort to a believer. Yes, God is a creator who demands justice, but through the atoning work and resurrection of Christ, his love and grace is also shown to followers. The resurrection of Christ, from a traditional perspective, is also not purely a theological concept, as the Kingdom of God is progressing towards its culmination.[26]  It can be pointed out practically that the resurrection of Christ as King has to take place for a culminated Kingdom of God to ultimately occur.[27]

ADAMS, ROBERT. M. (1996) ‘Theodicy’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

AUGUSTINE (388-395)(1964) On Free Choice of the Will, Translated by Anna S.Benjamin and L.H. Hackstaff, Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.     

AUGUSTINE (398-399)(1992) Confessions, Translated by Henry Chadwick, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

AUGUSTINE (400-416)(1987)(2004) On the Trinity, Translated by Reverend Arthur West Haddan, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 3, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia.

AUGUSTINE (421)(1998) Enchiridion, Translated by J.F. Shaw,  Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia.

AUGUSTINE (426)(1958) The City of God, Translated by Gerald G. Walsh, Garden City, New York, Image Books.

AUGUSTINE (427)(1997) On Christian Doctrine, Translated by D.W. Robertson Jr., Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.

AUGUSTINE (427b)(1997) On Christian Teaching, Translated by R.P.H. Green, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids,  Zondervan Publishing House.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

FERRAIOLO, WILLIAM (2005) ‘Eternal Selves and The Problem of Evil’, in Quodlibet Journal, Volume 7, Number 2, April-June, Evanston, Illinois, Quodlibet Journal.

HILLE, ROLF (2004) ‘A Biblical-Theological Response to the Problem of Theodicy in the Context of the Modern Criticism of Religion’, in Evangelical Review of Theology, Volume 28, Number 1, pp. 21-37. Carlisle, UK, Evangelical Review of Theology.

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.

LEIBNIZ, G.W. (1710)(1998) Theodicy, Translated by E.M. Huggard Chicago, Open Court Classics.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

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.

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.),  Atlanta, John Knox Press.

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (2005)  The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis.

RUSSELL, BERTRAND (1957)(1976) Why I am not a Christian, Simon and Schuster Inc., in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds.), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers.  

---

[1] Leibniz, G.W. (1710)(1998) Theodicy.

[2] Adams (1996: 794).

[3] Adams (1996: 794). David Hume in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion explains that geniuses over the ages have continued to look for proofs and arguments concerning God.  Hume (1779)(2004: 2). Theodicy would involve demonstrating that God exists and is good even as the problem of evil exists.

[4] Unfortunately Phillips died within the time frame of writing this thesis (1934-2006).

[5] Phillips (2005: xi).

[6] Phillips (2005: xi).

[7] Phillips (2005: xi). 

[8] Phillips (2005: xi).  Most often atheistic attempts, or those critical of Christian thought.

[9] Phillips (2005: xi). 

[10] Phillips (2005: xi). 

[11] Phillips (2005: xi). I can agree with this point in general terms, but there will certainly be disagreement between writers on the negative and positive aspects of various theodicy.

[12] Phillips (2005: xi).  Henry Blocher warns that theodicy as a philosophical defence of God fails on its own, unless backed up by Scripture.  Blocher (1994: 84). Phillips and Blocher would both be critical of poorly constructed theodicy approaches, even as their perspectives on theodicy are not identical.

[13] Hille (2004: 26).

[14] Ferraiolo (2005: 1).

[15] Ferraiolo (2005: 1).

[16] Russell (1957)(1976: 120).

[17] Augustine (421)(1998: Chapter 96: 48).

[18] Mounce explains that the Great White Throne judgment of Revelation 20 is not an arbitrary judgment of God but is based on the works of each person.  Mounce (1990: 365-366).  It is sign of the ultimate justice of God for all persons.

[19] Bloesch (1987: 97).

[20] Bloesch (1987: 97).

[21] Mounce (1990: 365-366). 

[22] Feinberg (1994: 141). Moltmann (1993: 178). Mounce (1990: 372). 

[23] On this matter I do not see myself as a judge of those outside of Christ, but rather as one reporting within the best of my ability, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, what Scripture states about human sin and salvation.

[24] Sin, death and suffering will not exist in the culminated Kingdom.  Mounce (1990: 372).

[25] Bloesch (1987: 16). 

[26] Moltmann (1993: 171-172).

[27] Moltmann (1993: 171-172).

Holy (PhD Edit)

Morguefile.com

Concerning the idea of God being holy, Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki and Cherith Fee Nordling (1999) write the term holy is a Biblical idea, generally meaning to be set apart. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 60). It is described of God who is set apart from his creation, pure from any of the evil within it. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 60).

Mennonite Old Testament scholar Elmer A. Martens (1990) suggests holiness is concerned with the idea of separation, not separation from something, but separation to something. Martens (1990: 94). Biblically this type of holiness has to do with separation of a person to God. Martens (1990: 94).

Augustine writes that God is holy and the sovereign divine governor of the universe who is completely just in punishing evildoers, and God is not the cause of their wrong actions. Augustine (388-395)(1964: 3). God can rightly judge people because each evil person is the cause of his/her rebellion against God. Augustine (388-395)(1964: 3).

I would suggest, from a Reformed perspective, what God allows as an omnipotent being, he therefore wills, but remains moral and holy in nature. This is a compatibilistic, yet Biblical model. Divine motivation remains holy and perfectly good. Theologically, the death of Christ leading to the atonement and resurrection, imputed to believers, is probably the best biblical example of God using the evil within his creation, most notably sinful thoughts and actions of humanity and demonic beings, for the good of his Kingdom.

AUGUSTINE (388-395)(1964) On Free Choice of the Will, Translated by Anna S.Benjamin and L.H. Hackstaff, Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.

AUGUSTINE (398-399)(1992) Confessions, Translated by Henry Chadwick, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

AUGUSTINE (400-416)(1987)(2004) On the Trinity, Translated by Reverend Arthur West Haddan, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 3, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia. 

AUGUSTINE (421)(1998) Enchiridion, Translated by J.F. Shaw, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia. http://www.knight.org/advent

AUGUSTINE (426)(1958) The City of God, Translated by Gerald G. Walsh, Garden City, New York, Image Books.

AUGUSTINE (427)(1997) On Christian Doctrine, Translated by D.W. Robertson Jr., Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.

AUGUSTINE (427b)(1997) On Christian Teaching, Translated by R.P.H. Green, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

MARTENS, ELMER A. (1990) God’s Design: A Focus on Old Testament Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

All cats are selfish?

All cats are selfish?

The existential fallac

Edited for an entry on January 8, 2023

Photo

cat_hiding_in_the_sofa-700x560 anything.net 2016

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

Note

A formal fallacy is concerned with presenting a logical form to avoid being fallacious, and an informal fallacy occurs when there are errors in reasoning with a premise (s) and conclusion.

Existential Fallacy 

Logically fallacious website referencing...

GOODMAN, M. F. (1983) First Logic, University Press of America, USA.

Cited 

'Description: A formal logical fallacy, which is committed when a categorical syllogism employs two universal premises (“all”) to arrive at a particular (“some”) conclusion. In a valid categorical syllogism, if the two premises are universal, then the conclusion must be universal, as well. The reasoning behind this fallacy becomes clear when you use classes without any members, and the conclusion states that there are members of this class -- which is wrong.'

Cited

'Logical Form: 

All X are Y. 

All Z are X. 

Therefore, some Z are Y. '

Cited 

'Just because the conclusion might be true, does not mean the logic used to produce it, was valid.'

This website is discussing a formal fallacy as problematic. Pirie too documents this as a formal fallacy (219).

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

It is a curious feature of logic that statements that refer to a whole of a class do not actually tell us whether there are members of that class.' (100).

'All cats are selfish.' (100).

Pirie explains that this documents that there are creatures known as cats. Being cats in themselves does not imply that they are selfish. (100). Rather the statement explains that some cats are selfish. It is a statement about a class and not necessarily each member of that class. (100).

It is a fallacy, according to Pirie to draw universal conclusions (100) in making that statement:

'All cats are selfish'. Rather, a more careful statement would be to state that some cats may demonstrate that they are selfish.

This fallacy brings me back to my United Kingdom academic training and the use of assertions versus arguments which would be premise (s) and conclusions. It would be a mere unproven, unsubstantiated assertion to state that 'All cats are selfish'. Instead a reasonable and sound argument is required.

This fallacy consists of placing something into a conclusion, which was not significantly offered as evidence in a premise (s). (100).

Admittedly, in academia, even in a PhD, at times assertions are used as each and every point in a dissertation cannot be argued in a limited space; but key ideas and points needs to be presented in valid argumentation.

Using the Langer text:

∃!=There exists
K=creatures
c=cats
$=selfishness

Below are more reasonable statements than 'All cats are selfish.' These are more reasonable assertions:

∃!=K (Creatures exist)
∃!=c (Cats exist)
∃!=$ (Selfishness exists)

Selfish creatures do exist, but not necessarily, universally cats.

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

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

GOODMAN, M. F. (1983) First Logic, University Press of America, USA. 

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

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.

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

WALTON, DOUGLAS (1996) ‘Informal Fallacy’, in Robert Audi, (ed), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Travel Destinations on Twitter