Enlightenment?

Gold Coast, Australia 

From my MPhil 

MPhil 

I realize I used some variant, but correct versions of words from British English back in 2003. 6. Enlightenment? In his sixth chapter, entitled Suffering and the God of the Philosophers, McGrath pointed out that suffering was nothing new in the world. He did state, however, that the philosophical way in which suffering was now discussed, had been changed. He noted: Indeed, I spent many years working through most of the major works on Christian theology written between the twelfth and sixteenth centuries, and cannot recall any of them treating the reality of suffering as a serious obstacle to Christian faith. McGrath (1992: 40). 

McGrath noted that the change took place beginning in the seventeenth century which led to the era of the Enlightenment. It shifted the defence of the gospel from revelation and Scripture to philosophy. The view was: "To defend the Christian faith, it was advisable to set aside traditional ways of justifying it, and instead to rely upon the wisdom of philosophy." McGrath (1992: 40). 

McGrath was critical of this approach which overlooked revelation and Scripture, and instead looked to philosophy. It changed the God represented from a personal God of Scripture to a perfect philosophical God. He was particularly critical of seventeenth century philosopher Rene Descartes. McGrath thought that the " . . .enormous emphasis which came to be placed upon the perfection of God by Descartes was totally compromised by the undeniable fact of the existence of evil and suffering. How could a perfect being allow such imperfection to exist?" McGrath (1992: 41). 

McGrath believed that this type of thinking, which he described as creating the god of philosophers, put so much emphasis on God’s perfect attributes that it took away from God’s actual experience in suffering as Christ. So when modern critics were criticizing God, they often criticised this perfect, aloof God whom they thought represented Christianity, whereas the God of revelation and Scripture suffered personally on earth. He died for the sins of humanity, was resurrected and will restore creation. Seventeenth century revision of Christian thought was known as the Age of Reason, which led to the Enlightenment. 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). So from Brown’s idea, the roots of the Enlightenment started with philosophers like Descartes, but went beyond those men. 

Basically the ideas McGrath was discussing took place in the Enlightenment - Age of Reason. David A. Pailin, of Manchester University, stated: 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). 

David Pailin’s comments demonstrate some of the modern assumptions made by philosophers of religion concerning Christianity. As McGrath indicated, there is a distrust of revelation and Scripture. As Pailin pointed out, revelation and ecclesiastical pretensions would often face great hostility philosophically. I agree with the Enlightenment approach to review Christian claims through reason, but it appears that more faith is put in the Enlightenment critics of Christianity than in the people who wrote the original work. Enlightenment thinking is committed to ". . . reason as the proper tool and final authority for determining issues." Pailin (1999: 179). 

Enlightenment thinking has human reason as the final authority, whereas traditional Christianity uses human reason, but it assumes that human nature is fallen and God must reveal himself to that reason. Enlightenment thinking, in my view, rests on the faulty idea that finite man should be able to be the final judge regarding ideas about God. Enlightenment era thinking, which is still prominent in liberal circles today, believes that man has the ability to reason out who God is, whereas traditional Christianity believes that God must reveal himself in order for human beings to come to some understanding of who he is. So the Enlightenment puts greater emphasis on the human mind comprehending God, whereas traditional Christianity puts emphasis on Scripture inspired by God, which must teach human beings about God. Two problems come to mind concerning the human mind’s ability to know God. First, the human mind is finite, God is infinite. It could be said that human beings could only understand God in a limited way. This is not to say that the limited human understanding was in error or without logic, but simply limited. 

For this reason, I think in this relationship God would have to take the initiative in presenting himself to humanity for greater understanding, and this would lead to revelation. Second, I believe there is significant evidence in Scripture and everyday life, that humanity is imperfect and sinful, and in a spiritual condition where they would have to be transformed in order to have a relationship with God. I am not saying that human beings cannot understand things about God without revelation, but I am stating that revelation is required for a changed spirit which could lead to a relationship with God. I, therefore, do not think that human reason outside of revelation should be our final authority in theology. 

BROWN, C. (1996) The Enlightenment, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

McGRATH, A. (1992) Bridge-Building, Leicester, Inter-Varsity Press. 

McGRATH, A. (1992) Suffering, London, Hodder and Stoughton Limited. 

PAILIN, D.A. (1999) Enlightenment, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.

   

Re: Our after church lunch discussion, this photo is dedicated to Charles I, Charles II, and Trevor.

Wittgenstein and certainty

Wittgenstein and certainty

Preface

Lego church: I considered attending, but frankly it was just too small for me.

This article from my PhD work, was originally published on August 8, 2009, prior to my finalized PhD thesis. This presentation edited in September 2023.

Wittgenstein and certainty

Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote On Certainty which is a classic philosophical work on the subject from the twentieth century.[1] Wittgenstein (1889-1951)[2] is an Austrian philosopher.[3] On Certainty deals with philosophical skepticism by postulating that knowledge exists, in a sense, but that this knowledge is dispersed and not completely dependable.[4] He notes that ‘I make assertions about reality, assertions which have different degrees of assurance.’[5] It is often general knowledge that is not generally doubted.[6] Skepticism cannot be refuted by claiming certain propositions are certain.[7] Argumentation cannot completely express metaphysical truths in particular.[8] He uses the example of a child taught either to be a theist or atheist, and the child will be able to produce evidence for either position depending on which one he or she is instructed to believe.[9] He does admit that there is in a sense objective truth,[10] but something would be objectively true only within a system of reason and knowledge through the understanding of reasonable persons.[11] His view allows for the logical possibility that something considered objective truth in one system, is not objective truth in another.[12] Philosophy should, therefore, not be understood as primarily making discoveries, as much a reminding persons of the issues that need to be dealt with when one turns to unfamiliar and uncertain issues.[13] Wittgenstein does act with certainty, but it is his own.[14] This does not in his mind justify his view as objective truth to others, it is simply belief.[15] He reasons that ‘knowledge and certainty belong in different categories.’[15] Obtaining knowledge is very important, and more vital than having certitude.[17] Knowledge and certainty are two different mental states.[18]

[1] Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1951)(1979) On Certainty, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
[2] Blackburn (1996: 400). Sluga (1996: 859).
[3] Blackburn (1996: 400).
[4] Sluga (1996: 859). Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 66).
[5] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 66).
[6] Sluga (1996: 859).
[7] Sluga (1996: 859).
[8] Sluga (1996: 859).
[9] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 107). I agree. Regardless of the truthfulness of either position, a child can be guided to have arguments for a taught philosophical viewpoint.
[10] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 108).
[11] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 108).
[12] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 108). This is reasonable. If the laws of science were not the same as this universe, in a vastly different realm, for example, then objective truth could be much different at several points.
[13] Blackburn (1996: 401).
[14] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 179).
[15] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 175).
[16] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 308).
[17] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 308).
[18] Wittgenstein (1951)(1979: 308). Knowledge and certainty are not the same thing for Wittgenstein.

My views on certainty

A definition of certainty which I would consider helpful would be along the lines of what I found in The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Peter D. Klein describes the Cartesian account of certainty as being that a proposition is true if there are no legitimate grounds whatsoever for doubting it. 

I embrace the similar idea that a proposition is certain if there are no counter propositions that are superior. Therefore in regard to the Christian faith and philosophy, and its belief in Scripture inspired by God, the atoning work of Christ, the resurrection, and everlasting life, applied to believers, these things could be viewed as certain provided there are no legitimate counter arguments that are superior. I reason that evidence shows Christianity is philosophically certain in this sense. In other words, I do not reason that there are superior external (non-biblical) or internal (biblical) propositions, premises/conclusions that counter the Christian worldview.

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

EELLS, ELLERY (1996) 'Probability', in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, pp. 649-650. Cambridge University Press.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan. http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co. http://philosophy.eserver.org/kant/critique-of-practical-reaso.txt 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

KLEIN, PETER D. (1996) ‘Certainty’, in Robert Audi, (ed), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

KLEIN, PETER D. (1998, 2005). ‘Epistemology’, in E. Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, London, Routledge.

SLUGA, HANS (1996) ‘Wittgenstein’, in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

WITTGENSTEIN, LUDWIG (1951)(1979) On Certainty, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

 
Miniature city of London.

PhD questionnaire graphs (the problem of evil) finale

PhD questionnaire graphs (the problem of evil) finale

Edited on July 14, 2022.

---

I promised participants that I would share questionnaire results online as appreciation for the support.

The most relevant propositions were presented here:

Part 1: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 PhD questionnaire graphs (the problem of evil) 

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

With this post comments are appreciated. Thank you to Mark for helping me put the questionnaire together initially and Charles for assisting me with the graphs.

Question 2


Question 3


Question 5


Question 6


Question 20


Question 29


Question 37


Question 41


Question 45


Question 47


Question 48


Question 49


Question 50


Question 51


Question 52


Question 53


Question 54


Question 55


Question 56



Bibliography: Some key references from my MPhil/PhD and website work

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

ANDERSON, RAY S. (2001) The Shape of Practical Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity 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.

BARNHART, J.E. (1977) ‘Theodicy and the Free Will Defence: Response to Plantinga and Flew’, Abstract in Religious Studies, 13, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

BAUER, W. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

BEEBE, JAMES R. (2006) ‘The Logical Problem of Evil’, in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Buffalo, University at Buffalo.

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

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

BLOESCH, DONALD G. (1987) Freedom for Obedience, San Francisco, Harper and Rowe Publishers.

CAIRD, GEORGE B. (1977) Paul's Letters from Prison Paperback, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html 

CALVIN, JOHN (1540)(1973) Romans and Thessalonians, Translated by Ross Mackenzie, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1550)(1978) Concerning Scandals, Translated by John W. Fraser, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1553)(1952) Job, Translated by Leroy Nixon, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1554)(1965) Genesis, Translated by John King, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust.

CHOPP, REBECCA S. (1995) Saving Work, Louisville, Kentucky, Westminster John Knox Press.

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

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

DAVIS, STEPHEN T. (1981)(ed.), Encountering Evil, Atlanta, John Knox Press. 

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.

ESHLEMAN, ANDREW (1997) ‘Alternative Possibilities and the Free Will Defence’, in Religious Studies, Volume 33, pp. 267-286. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

FEINBERG. JOHN S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, 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.

FLEW, ANTONY, R.M. HARE, AND BASIL MITCHELL (1996) ‘The Debate on the Rationality of Religious Belief’, in L.P. Pojman (ed.), Philosophy, The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company. 

FLEW, ANTONY AND A.MACINTRYE (1999) ‘Philosophy of Religion’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press. 

 

FRANCIS, LESLIE J. and Practical Theology Team (2005) ‘Practical and Empirical Theology’, University of Wales, Bangor website, University of Wales, Bangor. http://www.bangor.ac.uk/rs/pt/ptunit/definition.php. 

GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press. 

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

GRIFFIN, DAVID RAY (1976) God, Power, and Evil, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

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

HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

HASKER, WILLIAM (1989) God, Time, and Knowledge, Ithaca, Cornell University Press. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (1993) ‘C. Robert Mesle, John Hick’s Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique’, in Philosophy of Religion, Volume 34, Number 1, pp. 55-56. Dordrecht, Netherlands, Philosophy of Religion. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (1994) ‘Can Philosophy Defend Theology?’, in Faith and Philosophy, Volume 11, Number 2, April, pp. 272-278. Wilmore, Kentucky, Asbury College. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2000) ‘The Problem of Evil in Process Theism and Classical Free Will Theism’, in Process Studies, Volume. 29, Number 2, Fall-Winter, pp. 194-208. Claremont, California, Religion Online. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2003) ‘Counterfactuals and Evil’, in Philosophia Christi, Volume 5, Number 1, pp. 235-249. La Mirada, California, Biola University. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2003) ‘Is Free-Will Theism Religiously Inadequate? A Reply to Ciocchi’, in Religious Studies, Volume 39, Number 4, December, pp. 431-440. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2007) ‘Peter van Inwagen, The Problem of Evil’, in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, Notre Dame, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. 

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

HICK, JOHN (1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library. 

HICK, JOHN (1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University. 

HICK, JOHN (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1993) ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press. 

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. 

HOWARD-SNYDER, DANIEL AND JOHN O’LEARY-HAWTHORNE (1998) ‘Transworld Sanctity and Plantinga’s Free Will Defence’, in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Volume 44, Number 1, August, Springer, Netherlands, Publisher International Journal for Philosophy of Religion.

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.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

KLEIN, WILLIAM W., CRAIG, C. BLOMBERG, AND ROBERT L. HUBBARD, JR. (1993) Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, London, Word Publishing. 

LAFOLLETTE, HUGH (1980) ‘Plantinga on Free Will Defence’, in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 11, The Hague, Martimus Nijhoff Publishers.

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

MACKIE, J.L. (1955)(1996) ‘Evil and Omnipotence’, in Mind, in Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, and David Basinger (eds.), Philosophy of Religion, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

MACKIE, J.L. (1971)(1977)(2002) ‘Evil and Omnipotence’, in The Philosophy of Religion, in Alvin C. Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

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

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1986) ‘The Problem of Genuine Evil: A Critique of John Hick’s Theodicy’, in The Journal of Religion, Volume 66, Number 4, pp. 412-430. October, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1991) John Hick’s Theodicy, New York, St. Martin’s Press. 

MESLE, C. ROBERT (2004) ‘Suffering, Meaning, and the Welfare of Children: What Do Theodicies Do?’, in American Journal of Theology & Philosophy, Volume 25, Number 3, September. Lamoni, Iowa, Graceland University.

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.

LIGHTFOOT, JOHN B. (1993) The Destination of the Epistle to the Ephesians in Biblical Essays, New York, Macmillan. The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee. 

PETERSON, MICHAEL (1982) Evil and the Christian God, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

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.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company. 

QUINN, PHILIP L. (1996) ‘Philosophy of Religion’, Robert Audi (ed.), in The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

ROTH, JOHN K. ‘Introduction’ (1892-1907)(1969) in The Moral Philosophy of William James, John K. Roth (ed.), Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York. 

ROTH, JOHN K. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.

RUETHER, ROSEMARY R. (1998) Introducing Redemption in Christian Feminism, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press.

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. 

SPENCER, AIDA BESANÇON (1991) ‘Literary Criticism’, in David Alan Black and David S. Dockery (eds.), New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

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

TENNANT, F.R.(1906) The Origin and Propagation of Sin, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

TENNANT, F.R.(1930)(1956) Philosophical Theology, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies. 

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books. 

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2000) On Christian Theology, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. 

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2007) Wrestling with Angels, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids.

WOODWARD, JAMES AND STEPHEN PATTISON (2000)(2007)(eds.), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

WRIGHT, N.T., Colossians and Philemon, (1986)(1989), IVP, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids.

WRIGHT, R.K.McGREGOR (1996) No Place for Sovereignty, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

Additional:



Red 10 Blue 7

Zidane scores 3 goals and adds 3 assists (I counted 3 assists contrary to the Canadian Press article).

Zidane

Portions

My comments in blue.

'BURNABY, B.C. -- Organizational problems and a freak injury have plagued French soccer star Zinedine Zidane's promotional Canadian tour, but the former World Cup hero still managed to put on a show for a small but energetic crowd Sunday night.'

His skill level is amazing and at 3 goals and 3 assists that was a clinic. Mind you he was playing at striker and not his usual position of midfielder.

'Zidane scored three goals and set up two others while playing one half for each makeshift side as the Reds beat the Blues 10-7 before a crowd of about 4,000 on an overcast but warm night.'

As noted, I counted three assists.

'The game was played at Swangard Stadium, the home of the Vancouver Whitecaps' men's and women's pro teams that seats approximately 5,200.'

And with the same usual level of security. I liked the joker that hijacked the stadium public address system after the match. Also, as with the USL Championship game, members of the crowd went onto the field after the match and were not stopped by security.

'Zidane was originally supposed to play alongside other current and former international stars against the Vancouver All-Stars, a local select side. But none of the other international stars showed, so Zidane played a half with each team.'

Yes, the original promoted international quality of the Zidane and Friends was a misrepresentation. But I do not think I was ripped-off entertainment wise as Zidane was spectacular. He played much better than Beckham did when he was here with the Los Angeles Galaxy.

'The sides wore red and blue uniforms bearing the name Friends of Zidane.'

Yes.

'"The tour was not easy after sustaining a muscle tear," said Zidane, speaking in French in an interview with The Canadian Press. '

Fair enough.

'The game originally scheduled for July 4 at BC Place Stadium was postponed eight days and re-located to suburban Burnaby after he injured his back as he picked up his child while watching Canada Day fireworks.'

Fair enough.

'Zidane forced the goalkeepers to make a number of tough saves and sometimes hung his head in frustration as his teammates fired shots way wide after receiving excellent passes.'

Lol.

'Originally, Zidane's teammates were to include France's Ludovic Giuly, Cameroon's Samuel Eto'o, and Italy's Alessandro Costacurta, Gennaro Gattuso, and Franco Baresi.'

'None of them showed up, but the fans did not seen care as Zidane was the main attraction.'

Lol. Mind you, I did not pay for my ticket that was a birthday present.

'A Markham, Ont., fan, who shelled out $1,600 for VIP seats has threatened to file a class-action lawsuit because international stars did not play as advertised.'

Lol.

'"The players, from the Vancouver Metro Soccer League, and the Fraser Valley League, they realized that this game really wasn't about them," said Kenward. "It wasn't a typical game." '

Lol. I was basically right in my deduction.

'"I guarantee you, if he still wanted to, he could still play at the highest level - that's for sure," said Sulantic.'

Agreed. But injuries are a key issue, I suppose.

'But Zidane said he is content to play charity matches only and has no desire to play professionally in North America. '

I'm in.

'NOTES--Zidane arrived and left the game by RCMP escort . . . Adlani said Zidane waived his fee for the game, but Zidane appeared to indicate that he would be paid as he responded "Non" when asked if he was playing for no money.'

Lol.

A fan and grown man wearing a white France jersey kept yelling out Zidane's nickname 'Zizu' in the first half until finally Zidane waved to him. The man later continued yelling Zizu and another fan yelled 'Are you his girlfriend'?

People roared.

I assume a fan asked the lemonade vendor how much the drink was and the vendor stated $3.50. Later the vendor came by again with a sort of silly sign that stated something along the lines of 'Fresh Lemonade' with the price listed and he also yelled out 'fresh lemonade'. A male fan yelled, 'Are the prices the same as before'? The vendor stopped and looked toward the voice. The male fan stated, 'keep moving'.

People roared.

New and old very non-exhaustive thoughts on hell

If you know where these are from please let me know. The second one may be somewhere in the United States.

From Facebook:

I do the best I can in this life and with my study of evil, asking God for help, but philosophically very very important things to ponder on are what happened before I existed (a first cause and originator of material reality or other?) and what will happen after I physically die (complete non-existence?, judgment?, heaven?, hell?). Death should make one ponder on such. My take: Hebrews 9: 27-28

thekingpin68

I am swamped with revisions, but here are some very non-exhaustive thoughts. Comments much appreciated. I provide the reader with a break from the philosophy of religion articles I have been presenting.

2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 (NASB)

5This is a (A)plain indication of God's righteous judgment so that you will be (B)considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering.

6For after all (C)it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you,

7and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well (D)when the Lord Jesus will be revealed (E)from heaven (F)with His mighty angels (G)in flaming fire,

8dealing out retribution to those who (H)do not know God and to those who (I)do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.

9These will pay the penalty of (J)eternal destruction, (K)away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,

10when He comes to be (L)glorified in His saints on that (M)day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed--for our (N)testimony to you was believed.

Revelation 20:10-15 (NASB)

10And (AF)the devil who (AG)deceived them was thrown into the (AH)lake of fire and brimstone, where the (AI)beast and the (AJ)false prophet are also; and they will be (AK)tormented day and night forever and ever.

11Then I saw a great white (AL)throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence (AM)earth and heaven fled away, and (AN)no place was found for them.

12And I saw the dead, the (AO)great and the small, standing before the throne, and (AP)books were opened; and another book was opened, which is (AQ)the book of life; and the dead (AR)were judged from the things which were written in the books, (AS)according to their deeds.

13And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and (AT)death and Hades (AU)gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them (AV)according to their deeds.

14Then (AW)death and Hades were thrown into (AX)the lake of fire This is the (AY)second death, the lake of fire.

15And if anyone's name was not found written in (AZ)the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Introduction

Celebrity death has been in the news lately. I reason death and hell are humanly distasteful, and on these points the Christian can often relate very well with the non-Christian. Death and the possibility of hell are very difficult to stomach especially when a deceased person really had a lot of valuable human qualities. However, Biblical Christianity states that there is an everlasting hell for those not in Christ. Many if not most Christian Biblical scholars and theologians appear to reason everlasting hell consists of conscious continual punishment. Other Christian scholars reason the figurative (not mythological!) hell type language allows for the Biblical possibility of annihilation of those outside of Christ, as does the Biblical concept of death meaning termination only. This in contrast to a concept of permanent banishment from God and everlasting life. For example, 'perish' from Strong (1986) page 16 can be interpreted in different ways depending on context. Strong provides the meanings as 'to destroy fully, to perish or lose, literally or figuratively, destroy, die, lose, mar, perish'.

From:

Perish

'Definition
1.to destroy
a.to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
b.render useless
c.to kill
d.to declare that one must be put to death
e.metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
f.to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2.to destroy
a.to lose'

Argument

I shall present an argument against the annihilation of unregenerate post-mortem persons. This is not exhaustive and is an argument, not the argument. This has been presented on satire and theology in the past and I add some material revised for this post from a hell lecture posted on this blog previously and from my MPhil posted here also. I have used Erickson as a source to support my premises and conclusion.

God is perfectly holy.

Erickson writes that God is totally separate from his creation. Erickson (1994: 284).

Erickson lists Exodus 15: 11, 1 Samuel 2: 2 and Isaiah 57: 15.

God is absolutely pure and good; God is not evil. Erickson (1994: 285).

Erickson lists Job 34: 12, Habakkuk 1: 13 and James 1: 13

Human beings are sinful.

Jeremiah 17: 9, Romans Chapter 1-3, Romans 3: 23, Romans 6: 23.

Sin must be atoned.

God is the administrator of justice and cannot justly simply forgive sins. Erickson (1994: 816). God is equally the God of love and justice. Justice is therefore not ignored for the sake of love, as a holy God must be just.

Christ as infinite God outlasted finite sin in the atonement.

As God, Christ’s death has infinite worth. Erickson (1994: 804). As God he can atone for all finite human sin.

Christ as a perfect man was sacrificed for imperfect persons in the atonement.

As a human, Christ could redeem other humans. Erickson (1994: 804). Christ redeemed all of human nature through the atonement. Erickson (1994: 804).

Conclusion

Therefore, those outside of Christ cannot justly be annihilated as their sins are never atoned. Biblically, all persons exist port-mortem (Revelation, Chapter 20). It could be reasoned that everlasting punishment exists as finite unregenerate persons continue to attempt to atone for their sins in hell, but can never fully cover their sins without Christ. Therefore they cannot justly be annihilated. Earthly sins are not covered, and post-mortem sins (rejecting God and related) in disembodied and resurrection states also remain uncovered.

C.S. Lewis:

Concerning the objection of the horrors of hell, and the intense punishment, Lewis rejected annihilationism because he stated that ". . . the destruction of one thing means the emergence of something else. . . . If souls can be destroyed, must there not be a state of having been a human soul?" Lewis (1940)(1996: 127). This could be the case, but I think it tenable to believe that God could completely destroy what he had created. To say he could not would be troubling in light of the Christian belief in God’s omnipotence (see my recent articles). It would not be contradiction for God to destruct what he had constructed, so I think Lewis has a logical point, but one that would not concern annihilationists, or critics of hell very much, since the God Christians believe in should possess the power to destroy his own creations.

It is quite possible that the level of hell one endures could very well be proportionate to their level of rebellion against God which takes place in their sin position. Jesus indicated there was greater sin for certain acts, as when he was handed over to the Romans by Judas and the Jews in John 19:11.

I think that annihilationism may be philosophically reasonable, and Biblically possible, although the argument from Scripture for everlasting punishment seems stronger. As well, if annihilationism is true, and a non-believer does not face God after death, or is simply annihilated after negative judgment, there seems to be a lack of justice. The sinner never is really faced with the trueness of his/her sin, and the foolishness of hating (Romans 5: 10 the unregenerate are enemies of God) and rejecting God (Romans 3) and not responding to the light one could have in life (Romans 1), although one cannot save self and is dependent on the regenerating work of God (John 3). If one is annihilated after judgment facing God, one must wonder how God can make one sinner's punishment worse than another person's? Everlasting death would seemingly be equal punishment for all.

With annihilation, the sins of the unregenerate are not atoned for by Christ and these people remain unrighteous (Romans 1, 4, 5). These people, although likely resurrected, are not fully sanctified with these resurrection bodies as are believers (1 Corinthians 15) and they are not suffering/punished for their sins in everlasting punishment. Is this just? In the name of divine justice, can some type of unlimited and universal atonement of Christ be applied to them for sin as they then face annihilation?

This seems problematic.

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

LEWIS, C.S.(1940)(1996) The Problem of Pain, San Francisco, Harper-Collins.

STRONG, J. (1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.



I fell through a lawn chair once and scratched my back up pretty good.

A friend from Los Angeles sent me this...

Scientology

I found there was only one way to look thin, hang out with fat people.
Rodney Dangerfield

Some dog I got too. We call him Egypt. Because in every room he leaves a pyramid. Rodney Dangerfield

A girl phoned me the other day and said... Come on over, there's nobody home. I went over. Nobody was home. Rodney Dangerfield

I went to the psychiatrist, and he says, "You're crazy. " I tell him I want a second opinion. He says, “Okay, you're ugly too!" Rodney Dangerfield

The other night a mugger took off his mask and made me wear it. Rodney Dangerfield