(Originally written January 3, 2006 in Notebook 20)
Class Notes
Part I, the Old Testament
- Covered thousands of years of history
Abraham (Genesis 12, ca. 2165 BC)
Pentateuch (ca. 1400 BC)
Malachi (ca. 430 BC)
430 BC - AD 33 "Intertestemental History"
(The 400 Silent Years)
New Testament
AD 33 - Jesus
Gospels AD 55-90
When was the Pentateuch written?
- 4th year of Solomon's reign - 966 BC
- Date of the Exodus - 1446 BC
- Israel Wandered 40 years (1446 - 1406 BC)
It is likely that Moses wrote the Pentateuch during the wandering.
Part II of the Bible
Covered less than 100 years and is a third the length of the Old Testament
When was Jesus born?
- Winter of 5/4 BC (late 5 or early 4)
Christ died on April 13, AD 33.
A 6th century monk miscalculated the year of Jesus' birth when setting up the system of dating B.C. and A.D.
The Old Testament is called the Hebrew Bible or the Tanak by the Jews.
Tank is an acronym:
Torah (Law or Instruction)
Neviim (the Prophets)
Kethuvim (the Writings)
Protestant Bible: 66 books
- 39 from the Hebrew Bible
- 27 from the Greek New Testament
Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox churches include additional books: The Apocrypha.
The New Testament stands for the New Covenant, contrasted with the Old Covenant God made with the Israelites at Sinai (Exodus 19). Under this covenant, God forgave the sins of individuals provisionally via animal sacrifices.
The New Testament was written in Greek about A.D. 45-95
- Yet Jesus' native language was Aramaic.
3 Stages of Gospel Composition:
1) Jesus speaks in Aramaic
2) Jewish Christians followers had oral traditions
- Hebrew Jews
- Hellenistic Jews
3) Luke, writing in Greek to gentiles in Rome
Outline of the New Testament
1) History - 4 Gospels & Acts
2) Epistles - Pauline (Journey & Prison) or General
3) Visions - Revelation
Why Study the New Testament? (See Handout 1)
"The relative importance of the document will dictate the care with which it is examined" - Philip Yancy
Historical reason - to understand where the Christian faith came from
Cultural reason - The New Testament has permeated Western Civilization
Theological Reason - inspired account of Jesus' redemptive mission in the world, standard for faith and practice
Devotional Reason - Holy Spirit uses it to help you grow closer to the Lord
Socio-Cultural Setting of the New Testament
1st Century Social Setting
1 Corinthians 10:31-11:1
"So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God - even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good, but the good of many, so that they may be saved. Follow my example as I follow the example of Christ"
- Jews
- Greeks
- Romans
Jews
- Religious, spiritual people: concerned with their relationships with God
- Believed that God had chosen Israel and that all nations would be blessed through Israel
- 1st century Jews were looking a politically powerful Messiah
- Individual and solitary persons, a minority
Greeks
- Philosophers and intellectuals - speculative and reflective
- Aesthetic - loved beauty, spoke of virtue, admired eloquence
- Original
- Conceited & clever
Romans
- Practical, not speculative or spiritual
- Orderly: excellent in legislation and administration
- A mimic: copied Greek culture, not visionary
- Coarse and cold blooded
- The Romans created an amazing system
A Jewish Palestinian family was larger than the Greco-Roman family (see Psalms 127:3-5)
Joseph & Mary's Betrothal
- Bride money (mohar) affected the Jewish betrothal and marriage customs. The groom paid the family for the girls' hand.
What is an "inn"?
- a spare room in an apartment complex.
Tuesday, January 3, 2006
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Dreadful Freedom - Marjorie Grene
(Originally written December 20, 2005 in Book 1)
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
1948
Chapter 1 - Why Existentialism?
Existentialism is (in some sense) a reaction against Hegel.
Existentialism's first principle is that existence is prior to essence.
Existentialism can come off as a more complex version of pragmatism. Both attempt to shift value from the past to the future. Dewey and Sartre have similar shifts of the definition of value. However, Sartre proposes a philosophy that supports a constant state of revolution, whereas Dewey would replace the old dogma with an emphasis on maintaining a progressive society (this is still dogmatic, just less precise).
Both systems state existence before essence, but pragmatism moves philosophy from speculation to practical outputs; whereas existentialism focuses in on a stream of consciousness. Pragmatism uses science; existentialism uses sense-data to promote scientific research.
"It is a different kind of existence whose priority to essence is proclaimed by the two philosophies" (Green, 9).
Pragmatism fails to recognize that pure facts and pure science cannot produce values. It can only add or detract from them.
Some existentialists believe that a return to faith in the Christian God is "a possible and even necessary way out of our present moral chaos" (Green, 13). The atheistic existentialist however contends that values must be founded on objective facts.
Both a return to God and a value system based on facts "seek to escape our ultimate, inexplicable and terrible responsibility for the values that we live by, by giving them a cosmic rather than a human... source" (Green, 13).
Chapter 2 - Soren Kierkegaard: the self against the system
Kierkegaard's problem was to find out what the misunderstanding was between speculation and Christianity. He contends that the problem is rooted in individual existence. (He uses the term 'speculation' as understood in Hegelian speculation).
He condemns empirical science: natural science is dangerous, especially physiology's attempt to take over ethics. He states that it is bad to treat ethics like a natural science, to make it an illusion of statistical averages.
He asks, "Do I need to know how the movement in the nervous system works in order to believe in God and love men?" (Green, 16).
Kierkegaard is afraid that by embracing natural science we will lose ourselves to it and forget that which is important, God.
Kierkegaard contends that the only important thing worth understanding is one's self.
Kierkegaard is limited by the Christian paradox: man's experience is nothingness before God, but it still fulfills his existence.
He contends there is no objective truth of Christianity.
He states that the problem for the sincere Christian is subjective. It is not to build a theological system, but to find the way to heaven for themselves. The Christian is only aware of his own personal existence and the existence of God.
Kierkegaard focuses philosophy into the question: "what is man?"
What is man?
-What can I know?
-What ought I do?
-What may I hope?
Kierkegaard attempted to fuse Plato & Christianity.
Kierkegaard and modern existentialism both held to the awareness that here and now may be the last moment as a central idea.
"Pragmatism is afraid to face evil" (Green, 27). It is also afraid of facing the ultimate puzzle of individual humanity.
Kierkegaard drowns himself in paradoxes and word plays. Some of his most profound passages are difficult to decide whether their profoundness lies in an amazingly brilliant insight or such incredibly word trickery.
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
1948
Chapter 1 - Why Existentialism?
Existentialism is (in some sense) a reaction against Hegel.
Existentialism's first principle is that existence is prior to essence.
Existentialism can come off as a more complex version of pragmatism. Both attempt to shift value from the past to the future. Dewey and Sartre have similar shifts of the definition of value. However, Sartre proposes a philosophy that supports a constant state of revolution, whereas Dewey would replace the old dogma with an emphasis on maintaining a progressive society (this is still dogmatic, just less precise).
Both systems state existence before essence, but pragmatism moves philosophy from speculation to practical outputs; whereas existentialism focuses in on a stream of consciousness. Pragmatism uses science; existentialism uses sense-data to promote scientific research.
"It is a different kind of existence whose priority to essence is proclaimed by the two philosophies" (Green, 9).
Pragmatism fails to recognize that pure facts and pure science cannot produce values. It can only add or detract from them.
Some existentialists believe that a return to faith in the Christian God is "a possible and even necessary way out of our present moral chaos" (Green, 13). The atheistic existentialist however contends that values must be founded on objective facts.
Both a return to God and a value system based on facts "seek to escape our ultimate, inexplicable and terrible responsibility for the values that we live by, by giving them a cosmic rather than a human... source" (Green, 13).
Chapter 2 - Soren Kierkegaard: the self against the system
Kierkegaard's problem was to find out what the misunderstanding was between speculation and Christianity. He contends that the problem is rooted in individual existence. (He uses the term 'speculation' as understood in Hegelian speculation).
He condemns empirical science: natural science is dangerous, especially physiology's attempt to take over ethics. He states that it is bad to treat ethics like a natural science, to make it an illusion of statistical averages.
He asks, "Do I need to know how the movement in the nervous system works in order to believe in God and love men?" (Green, 16).
Kierkegaard is afraid that by embracing natural science we will lose ourselves to it and forget that which is important, God.
Kierkegaard contends that the only important thing worth understanding is one's self.
Kierkegaard is limited by the Christian paradox: man's experience is nothingness before God, but it still fulfills his existence.
He contends there is no objective truth of Christianity.
He states that the problem for the sincere Christian is subjective. It is not to build a theological system, but to find the way to heaven for themselves. The Christian is only aware of his own personal existence and the existence of God.
Kierkegaard focuses philosophy into the question: "what is man?"
What is man?
-What can I know?
-What ought I do?
-What may I hope?
Kierkegaard attempted to fuse Plato & Christianity.
Kierkegaard and modern existentialism both held to the awareness that here and now may be the last moment as a central idea.
"Pragmatism is afraid to face evil" (Green, 27). It is also afraid of facing the ultimate puzzle of individual humanity.
Kierkegaard drowns himself in paradoxes and word plays. Some of his most profound passages are difficult to decide whether their profoundness lies in an amazingly brilliant insight or such incredibly word trickery.
Saturday, December 3, 2005
Notes on Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge - 3
(Originally written December 3, 2005 in Book 1)
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter 4 - The Playboy Mentality
The playboy mentality promotes free sex, TV sex and pornography. The playboy mentality has given a rise in drugs, explicit song lyrics, alcohol abuse and homosexuality.
Chapter 5 - The Violent Society
Expressions of violence in our culture:
-War
-Television
-The Family
-Abortion
Christians and secularists may agree on the evils of war, but they do not have the same reasons leading up to the conclusion. Christians should strive for peace because it is in accordance with Christ's teachings.
Violence on TV leads to violence in society.
Without God we are free from accountability. We are free from marital covenants, free from child raising responsibilities and free to pursue all of our selfish ambitions.
Abortion is the ultimate expression of violence being used to solve a problem.
Chapter 6 - The schoolroom nightmare
There are four areas in which secular humanists and Christians clash in the public school system:
- Values clarification
- Sex Education
-Creation vs. Evolution
-Prayer in schools/observance of religious holidays
Public education has overstepped its role and has begun to teach morality or values clarification. Because of the presence of secular humanism in the schools they teach a morally relative version of ethics. Moral absolutes and religious teachings learned by children from their Christian parents are being undermined by the school's morality teachings.
Sex education is a dangerous arena for everyone. Because of the differing views on sex held by the secular humanists and Christians it is important to monitor this closely. It is important for children to learn about sex, but the worldly values taught in public education should be excluded from the curriculum.
Creation vs. evolution is a hot topic in the public school debate. Christians argue that scientific creation should be taught alongside of evolution or that evolution should be only taught as a theory and not fact. Because of the differing views of creation within the Christian community it is not likely that a strictly Christian view of the origin of life will be pushed into the public schools. Young Christians should be encouraged to become science teachers so that evolution will be only taught as a theory.
Prayer in schools is a question of whether the government should protect the freedom of religion or the freedom from religion. Christians should not advocate for token prayers in schools that are more for show than truly religious in nature.
Chapter 7 - The political tangle
The question is how involved should Christians be in using politics as a way of regulating morality. The clash between secularists and Christians over legislating morality is due to the secularists wanting laws to be relative so that people can do what they want, whereas Christians want to legislate against 'sinful acts' for the greater good of society. Homosexuality and their rights fall under the category of moral legislation. Christians want to protect the sanctity of marriage while secularists want to assert an individual's right of choice. A second example of moral legislation is the abortion issue. The U.S. government devalued the unborn child's life and gave it only the value of the carrier's decided value of that unborn child. A third example of this occurs within the laws of marriage. Commonwealth marriages give unmarried couples the rights and benefits of married couples. This new type of relationship undermines the institution of marriage. It gives way to the thought that society's social patterns is what ought to be used in determining what is right and wrong, in lieu of using moral absolutes as the determining factor.
In dealing with the issue of Church and State a Christian must realize the state is a temporary institution, while God is forever. A separate Christian state is nowhere advocated for by Jesus. We are to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's.
The state can be used by Satan to undermine the works of Christians.
Without a moral authority over the head of the state, the state becomes the ultimate source of right and wrong. Essentially, the state becomes a god.
Secularism argues that the state is to protect the rights of all individuals and to determine what is right and wrong. Communism, another secular movement, decides what is right for the collective community. Both of these are flawed because what is right can change from ruler to ruler due to shifting values and attitudes.
Christians argue that the function of the state should be to contain the differing institutions and balance their freedoms with a sense of order that is necessary to have a true government. Christians should look at the government as appointed by God, but should not overstep its boundaries to become itself a god. The thing that should be most frightening to Christians is that once a government passes moral legislation that is in conflict with the Christian viewpoint that legislation will soon become the ethical norm.
Chapter 8 Where do we go from here?
Secular humanism and Christian humanism will continue to clash. There are four reasons for this:
1 Human nature is fallen
-Christians believe man is evil by nature due to the fall
-Secular humanists believe in the inherent goodness of man
-"All naïve hopes that individuals will change and society will become better are utopian and false" (Webber, 106).
2 Christ has redeemed the world
-Christians believe that Christ offers salvation to the world
-Secular humanists believe salvation is man's duty to create
3 The Church is the society of the redeemed
-Christians believe this statement
-Secular humanists believe the Church is an enemy of progress
4 The Church is to act as 'salt & light'
-Christians believe and act on this statement
-Secular humanists see Christians as standing in the way of freedom
"The Church should not enter into political and economic alliances that will compromise authentic Christian humanism" (Webber, 109).
"The Church should not seek to accomplish its task in society through political power or legislative force" (Webber, 109).
We should not use America as a tool to spread Christianity throughout the world. The job of evangelism is the Church's. If we are to give that job to America we are going to weaken the Church and to give false premises to the world that Christianity is supposed to use military force to spread the good news.
The Church should instead instruct people on the values and ethics of Christianity and act as an example to the world. The Church needs to wake up, but not use political power to move its agenda.
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter 4 - The Playboy Mentality
The playboy mentality promotes free sex, TV sex and pornography. The playboy mentality has given a rise in drugs, explicit song lyrics, alcohol abuse and homosexuality.
Chapter 5 - The Violent Society
Expressions of violence in our culture:
-War
-Television
-The Family
-Abortion
Christians and secularists may agree on the evils of war, but they do not have the same reasons leading up to the conclusion. Christians should strive for peace because it is in accordance with Christ's teachings.
Violence on TV leads to violence in society.
Without God we are free from accountability. We are free from marital covenants, free from child raising responsibilities and free to pursue all of our selfish ambitions.
Abortion is the ultimate expression of violence being used to solve a problem.
Chapter 6 - The schoolroom nightmare
There are four areas in which secular humanists and Christians clash in the public school system:
- Values clarification
- Sex Education
-Creation vs. Evolution
-Prayer in schools/observance of religious holidays
Public education has overstepped its role and has begun to teach morality or values clarification. Because of the presence of secular humanism in the schools they teach a morally relative version of ethics. Moral absolutes and religious teachings learned by children from their Christian parents are being undermined by the school's morality teachings.
Sex education is a dangerous arena for everyone. Because of the differing views on sex held by the secular humanists and Christians it is important to monitor this closely. It is important for children to learn about sex, but the worldly values taught in public education should be excluded from the curriculum.
Creation vs. evolution is a hot topic in the public school debate. Christians argue that scientific creation should be taught alongside of evolution or that evolution should be only taught as a theory and not fact. Because of the differing views of creation within the Christian community it is not likely that a strictly Christian view of the origin of life will be pushed into the public schools. Young Christians should be encouraged to become science teachers so that evolution will be only taught as a theory.
Prayer in schools is a question of whether the government should protect the freedom of religion or the freedom from religion. Christians should not advocate for token prayers in schools that are more for show than truly religious in nature.
Chapter 7 - The political tangle
The question is how involved should Christians be in using politics as a way of regulating morality. The clash between secularists and Christians over legislating morality is due to the secularists wanting laws to be relative so that people can do what they want, whereas Christians want to legislate against 'sinful acts' for the greater good of society. Homosexuality and their rights fall under the category of moral legislation. Christians want to protect the sanctity of marriage while secularists want to assert an individual's right of choice. A second example of moral legislation is the abortion issue. The U.S. government devalued the unborn child's life and gave it only the value of the carrier's decided value of that unborn child. A third example of this occurs within the laws of marriage. Commonwealth marriages give unmarried couples the rights and benefits of married couples. This new type of relationship undermines the institution of marriage. It gives way to the thought that society's social patterns is what ought to be used in determining what is right and wrong, in lieu of using moral absolutes as the determining factor.
In dealing with the issue of Church and State a Christian must realize the state is a temporary institution, while God is forever. A separate Christian state is nowhere advocated for by Jesus. We are to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's.
The state can be used by Satan to undermine the works of Christians.
Without a moral authority over the head of the state, the state becomes the ultimate source of right and wrong. Essentially, the state becomes a god.
Secularism argues that the state is to protect the rights of all individuals and to determine what is right and wrong. Communism, another secular movement, decides what is right for the collective community. Both of these are flawed because what is right can change from ruler to ruler due to shifting values and attitudes.
Christians argue that the function of the state should be to contain the differing institutions and balance their freedoms with a sense of order that is necessary to have a true government. Christians should look at the government as appointed by God, but should not overstep its boundaries to become itself a god. The thing that should be most frightening to Christians is that once a government passes moral legislation that is in conflict with the Christian viewpoint that legislation will soon become the ethical norm.
Chapter 8 Where do we go from here?
Secular humanism and Christian humanism will continue to clash. There are four reasons for this:
1 Human nature is fallen
-Christians believe man is evil by nature due to the fall
-Secular humanists believe in the inherent goodness of man
-"All naïve hopes that individuals will change and society will become better are utopian and false" (Webber, 106).
2 Christ has redeemed the world
-Christians believe that Christ offers salvation to the world
-Secular humanists believe salvation is man's duty to create
3 The Church is the society of the redeemed
-Christians believe this statement
-Secular humanists believe the Church is an enemy of progress
4 The Church is to act as 'salt & light'
-Christians believe and act on this statement
-Secular humanists see Christians as standing in the way of freedom
"The Church should not enter into political and economic alliances that will compromise authentic Christian humanism" (Webber, 109).
"The Church should not seek to accomplish its task in society through political power or legislative force" (Webber, 109).
We should not use America as a tool to spread Christianity throughout the world. The job of evangelism is the Church's. If we are to give that job to America we are going to weaken the Church and to give false premises to the world that Christianity is supposed to use military force to spread the good news.
The Church should instead instruct people on the values and ethics of Christianity and act as an example to the world. The Church needs to wake up, but not use political power to move its agenda.
Friday, December 2, 2005
Notes on Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge - 2
(Originally written December 2, 2005 in Book 1)
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter Three - What is Secular Humanism?
Many different types of secular humanism:
-Ethical humanism
-Existential humanism
-Scientific humanism
-Utilitarian humanism
-etc.
One of the most apparent characteristics of secular humanism is its evangelical approach to atheism.
In 1980, "A secular humanist declaration" was signed by 61 prominent scholars
Secular humanism insists on thought and knowledge being free of the shackles of ecclesiastical, religious, political, ideological or social constraints.
Religious institutions have been guilty of censoring thought, for example: Theodosius' declaration of Christianity as the only legal religion in the empire, the Medieval Papacy, the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Salem Witch Trials. Contemporary Christian Humanism however, advocates free thought.
"A secular humanist declaration" contains ten theses of secular humanism. Education, science and technology, evolution, moral education, religious skepticism, knowledge through reason, free inquiry, separation of church and state, freedom and critical intelligence.
Secular humanism intends to "tolerate diversity of opinion" and to "respect the rights of individuals to express their beliefs.
Truth is more likely to be produced in an area of exchanging opposing opinions in this worldview.
Secular humanism's hypocrisy is shown through groups like the ACLU advocating for free speech of the Nazi movement, but oppressing the religious right.
Secular humanists advocate for a complete withdrawal of religion from politics. They insist that if a certain religion is given primacy then minorities will suffer.
Secular humanism is completely against any form of totalitarianism.
Secular humanism rejects moral absolutes that come from God.
Ethics come from critical reason and existed before religion. A guide to discovering personal moral beliefs should be taught in public schools.
It is the duty of the government (public schools) to give people choices for morality. (Hypocrisy - this is a form of totalitarianism).
Reason is the ultimate means of knowing truth.
Science and technology offer salvation.
Evolution is the origin of man and the evolutionary process is not yet finished; however, it is not "an infallible principle of science". Creation cannot be taught because it is not a scientific fact. (Hypocrisy - Secular humanists admit that evolution is not "an infallible principle of science" yet it is taught as a scientific fact).
Evolution has not reached the final stage.
Education is essential for a free and humane society.
The church and Christianity are enemies of the people and progress.
Potential Dangers of Secular humanism:
1 Destructive, irresponsible freedom
2 Naïve Utopianism
3 Moral chaos
4 Loss of human dignity
Destructive and Irresponsible freedom
Secularist point of views promote a sick, narcissistic society concerned only with personal rights. There is no basis for caring for the welfare of other humans aside from altruism. It weakens society's sense of duty and obligation. Charity is done only to promote one's self.
Naïve utopianism may introduce totalitarianism. Secular humanism states if man were free of everything that binds or restrains him he would create the perfect society. This does not take in account for man's inborn evil nature.
Moral chaos
When man is free of any higher force (God) he must determine what is right and what is wrong. If man is the determiner of right and wrong then right and wrong become subjective and can change.
Loss of human dignity
In a secular humanist society man will only be worth his contributions to that society.
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter Three - What is Secular Humanism?
Many different types of secular humanism:
-Ethical humanism
-Existential humanism
-Scientific humanism
-Utilitarian humanism
-etc.
One of the most apparent characteristics of secular humanism is its evangelical approach to atheism.
In 1980, "A secular humanist declaration" was signed by 61 prominent scholars
Secular humanism insists on thought and knowledge being free of the shackles of ecclesiastical, religious, political, ideological or social constraints.
Religious institutions have been guilty of censoring thought, for example: Theodosius' declaration of Christianity as the only legal religion in the empire, the Medieval Papacy, the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Salem Witch Trials. Contemporary Christian Humanism however, advocates free thought.
"A secular humanist declaration" contains ten theses of secular humanism. Education, science and technology, evolution, moral education, religious skepticism, knowledge through reason, free inquiry, separation of church and state, freedom and critical intelligence.
Secular humanism intends to "tolerate diversity of opinion" and to "respect the rights of individuals to express their beliefs.
Truth is more likely to be produced in an area of exchanging opposing opinions in this worldview.
Secular humanism's hypocrisy is shown through groups like the ACLU advocating for free speech of the Nazi movement, but oppressing the religious right.
Secular humanists advocate for a complete withdrawal of religion from politics. They insist that if a certain religion is given primacy then minorities will suffer.
Secular humanism is completely against any form of totalitarianism.
Secular humanism rejects moral absolutes that come from God.
Ethics come from critical reason and existed before religion. A guide to discovering personal moral beliefs should be taught in public schools.
It is the duty of the government (public schools) to give people choices for morality. (Hypocrisy - this is a form of totalitarianism).
Reason is the ultimate means of knowing truth.
Science and technology offer salvation.
Evolution is the origin of man and the evolutionary process is not yet finished; however, it is not "an infallible principle of science". Creation cannot be taught because it is not a scientific fact. (Hypocrisy - Secular humanists admit that evolution is not "an infallible principle of science" yet it is taught as a scientific fact).
Evolution has not reached the final stage.
Education is essential for a free and humane society.
The church and Christianity are enemies of the people and progress.
Potential Dangers of Secular humanism:
1 Destructive, irresponsible freedom
2 Naïve Utopianism
3 Moral chaos
4 Loss of human dignity
Destructive and Irresponsible freedom
Secularist point of views promote a sick, narcissistic society concerned only with personal rights. There is no basis for caring for the welfare of other humans aside from altruism. It weakens society's sense of duty and obligation. Charity is done only to promote one's self.
Naïve utopianism may introduce totalitarianism. Secular humanism states if man were free of everything that binds or restrains him he would create the perfect society. This does not take in account for man's inborn evil nature.
Moral chaos
When man is free of any higher force (God) he must determine what is right and what is wrong. If man is the determiner of right and wrong then right and wrong become subjective and can change.
Loss of human dignity
In a secular humanist society man will only be worth his contributions to that society.
Thursday, December 1, 2005
Notes on Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge - 1
(Originally written December 1, 2005 in Book 1)
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter 1 - Introduction
America changed in the 1960's & 1970's. According to Jerry Falwell, "Secular humanism has become the religion of America".
History used to be divided into two eras, the pre-Christian era and the Christian era. Now we are entering a third era: the post-Christian era. (C.S. Lewis). The post-Christian era has brought about a change in society. Those in favor of this change see it as abandoning religion, which is false, for science, which is true.
Even Christians have changed. They now separate the secular and sacred aspects of life. Prayer and church no longer have a place in the public persona of Christians.
This book is about the recovery of an authentic Christian humanism.
Secularization has driven a wedge between religious faith and our life in the world. Secular humanism is a potent force in American society. The extreme religious right does not have the answers. The extreme religious left does not have the answers. The alternative to the religious right and left is the recovery of authentic Christian humanism.
Chapter 2 - What is Humanism?
"Humanism challenges every principle America was founded on" - Jerry Falwell
Humanism is defined as a reference to man and man's importance. Humanism is interested in what man is capable of creating, especially by using his mind.
Education is important to humanism.
Humanism came from the Greco-Roman world and the Judaic-Christian world.
Protagoras (500 BC) wrote, "man is the measure of all things". He was the first humanist.
Biblical humanism comes from Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs.
The difference between Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian humanism is that the first is naturalistic and the latter is supernatural. Christian humanism asserts that God became human and understands what humanity faces. It also makes God knowable.
Human life is sacred because man is created in the image of God and because God became human.
The Incarnation affirmed that moral absolutes were real. This is contrary to the pagan or secular belief that morals are relative.
Christian humanism has been perverted over the years (the Inquisition, the Crusades and Theodosius' decree of Christianity as the only legal religion are examples of this).
The rediscovery of Greco-Roman humanism in the Renaissance period paved the way for today's secular humanism. That humanism denies anything that is supernatural. That humanism sees religion as an obstacle blocking growth as a species. That humanism sees religion as imposing beliefs upon individuals, denying them the opportunity to live by personal convictions.
Humanism does not wish to negate all morality however. Because their view lacks an ultimate God or an ultimate good. they have no common way of measuring good or evil.
Humanism acquires its values from experience, observation and rationalization only. Humanism seeks to individualize all beliefs and values.
Christian humanism contrasts secular humanism in four ways:
-Confidence in God, in Christ
-A supernatural worldview
-The power of Christ through the Church
-Incarnational humanitarianism
Christ is the model human for Christian humanism. Christ came as a man due to the dehumanizing of men.
Christian humanism seeks to stop the dehumanizing effects of secular humanism and restore the intended nature of man in society. Christian humanism recognizes the battle between good and evil, light and darkness and between God and Satan.
In death, Christ destroyed the power of evil. In resurrection, Christ demonstrated his power to recreate in his new body.
A Christian humanist explains the evils that still exists today in two ways:
-Christ's work will only be completed when He comes again
-The Church is the presence of the future world to come
Christian humanism is rooted in God's love for humanity
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter 1 - Introduction
America changed in the 1960's & 1970's. According to Jerry Falwell, "Secular humanism has become the religion of America".
History used to be divided into two eras, the pre-Christian era and the Christian era. Now we are entering a third era: the post-Christian era. (C.S. Lewis). The post-Christian era has brought about a change in society. Those in favor of this change see it as abandoning religion, which is false, for science, which is true.
Even Christians have changed. They now separate the secular and sacred aspects of life. Prayer and church no longer have a place in the public persona of Christians.
This book is about the recovery of an authentic Christian humanism.
Secularization has driven a wedge between religious faith and our life in the world. Secular humanism is a potent force in American society. The extreme religious right does not have the answers. The extreme religious left does not have the answers. The alternative to the religious right and left is the recovery of authentic Christian humanism.
Chapter 2 - What is Humanism?
"Humanism challenges every principle America was founded on" - Jerry Falwell
Humanism is defined as a reference to man and man's importance. Humanism is interested in what man is capable of creating, especially by using his mind.
Education is important to humanism.
Humanism came from the Greco-Roman world and the Judaic-Christian world.
Protagoras (500 BC) wrote, "man is the measure of all things". He was the first humanist.
Biblical humanism comes from Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs.
The difference between Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian humanism is that the first is naturalistic and the latter is supernatural. Christian humanism asserts that God became human and understands what humanity faces. It also makes God knowable.
Human life is sacred because man is created in the image of God and because God became human.
The Incarnation affirmed that moral absolutes were real. This is contrary to the pagan or secular belief that morals are relative.
Christian humanism has been perverted over the years (the Inquisition, the Crusades and Theodosius' decree of Christianity as the only legal religion are examples of this).
The rediscovery of Greco-Roman humanism in the Renaissance period paved the way for today's secular humanism. That humanism denies anything that is supernatural. That humanism sees religion as an obstacle blocking growth as a species. That humanism sees religion as imposing beliefs upon individuals, denying them the opportunity to live by personal convictions.
Humanism does not wish to negate all morality however. Because their view lacks an ultimate God or an ultimate good. they have no common way of measuring good or evil.
Humanism acquires its values from experience, observation and rationalization only. Humanism seeks to individualize all beliefs and values.
Christian humanism contrasts secular humanism in four ways:
-Confidence in God, in Christ
-A supernatural worldview
-The power of Christ through the Church
-Incarnational humanitarianism
Christ is the model human for Christian humanism. Christ came as a man due to the dehumanizing of men.
Christian humanism seeks to stop the dehumanizing effects of secular humanism and restore the intended nature of man in society. Christian humanism recognizes the battle between good and evil, light and darkness and between God and Satan.
In death, Christ destroyed the power of evil. In resurrection, Christ demonstrated his power to recreate in his new body.
A Christian humanist explains the evils that still exists today in two ways:
-Christ's work will only be completed when He comes again
-The Church is the presence of the future world to come
Christian humanism is rooted in God's love for humanity
Friday, November 18, 2005
God's role in the creation of sin
(Originally written November 18, 2005 in Book 1)
Recently I was asked by a friend about a topic that was intriguing. She said that she was having a very interesting conversation with a friend of hers about life and God. The conversation turned deep and 'philosophical' very quickly. It left me to think about what my friend's friend had said. She had posed the question, 'Who created sin?' My friend answered 'Satan'. The girl then replied, "Wrong, it was God; because God made Satan".
Is God responsible for sin? Is this a logical assumption? I thought and discussed aloud that a belief in God is faith-based and not always rooted in man's rationality. (I am not arguing that a belief in God cannot be proven rationally, I am simply stating that sometimes man's logic and rationality and logic is flawed and warped). My friend told me that her friend would not accept that answer because she only thinks on a logical and rational level.
So I now had two premises for her friend's argument. First that her friend was always rational and would not accept anything based on faith. Second, I knew that she believed God was the author of sin. I decided then to see if I could logically disprove one or both of her statements.
Written out an argument for hers would look like this: (We'll name her Penny)
Penny's Argument I
Premise A - I am always logical and rational in my thinking.
Premise B - God created sin.
Conclusion: The statement that 'God created sin' is a logical one.
This is basically her argument, but to arrive at the premise 'B' there must be a few presuppositions or an argument leading up to it. This argument would be as follows:
Premise A - God created Satan
Premise B - Satan contained Evil
Premise C - Evil caused Sin
Conclusion: God created sin
Now there is a solid argument showing that Penny is logical and that Penny believes that God created sin; and, since Penny is always logical her conclusion is logical. Now that we have an argument to check for logical correctness and rationality let's start.
To disprove this logical argument I am going to pose an argument that uses the same form. First, let's look at the form of Penny's arguments.
The argument I is a deductive argument. The argument affirms the antecedent. "IF Penny is always logical in her thinking, then her arguments are always logical. Penny is logical, therefore her argument that 'God created sin' is logical."
The argument for God's creation of sin has this form:
A created B
B contained C
C caused D
A therefore created D
To disprove this argument I will pose an argument using the same form that this argument uses. Since this is a deductive argument if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. But if the conclusion is false, then one of the premises (or more) must be false. Using this form I will pose this argument:
Bobby created a grilled cheese sandwich
The grilled cheese contained bacteria X
The bacteria X caused the virus Y
Bobby therefore created virus Y
This is obviously a false conclusion. A person cannot create a physical virus inadvertently by cooking a sandwich. Since this argument is false and it uses the same form as Penny's argument for God's creation of sin, Penny's argument is illogical. Since this argument is illogical it cannot serve as a premise for a logical argument. Premise B in argument I is false, rendering argument I false. That leaves us now with a dilemma.
Either God is not the creator of sin or Penny does not always think logically. We now know from my counter argument that Penny doesn't always think logically because she uses a false premise to prove a conclusion. Therefor, God is not the creator of sin. This may seem like a large jump but there is no way of logically defending the statement that God created sin. This is an indefensible argument and to take a belief that is logically indefensible is illogical.
Recently I was asked by a friend about a topic that was intriguing. She said that she was having a very interesting conversation with a friend of hers about life and God. The conversation turned deep and 'philosophical' very quickly. It left me to think about what my friend's friend had said. She had posed the question, 'Who created sin?' My friend answered 'Satan'. The girl then replied, "Wrong, it was God; because God made Satan".
Is God responsible for sin? Is this a logical assumption? I thought and discussed aloud that a belief in God is faith-based and not always rooted in man's rationality. (I am not arguing that a belief in God cannot be proven rationally, I am simply stating that sometimes man's logic and rationality and logic is flawed and warped). My friend told me that her friend would not accept that answer because she only thinks on a logical and rational level.
So I now had two premises for her friend's argument. First that her friend was always rational and would not accept anything based on faith. Second, I knew that she believed God was the author of sin. I decided then to see if I could logically disprove one or both of her statements.
Written out an argument for hers would look like this: (We'll name her Penny)
Penny's Argument I
Premise A - I am always logical and rational in my thinking.
Premise B - God created sin.
Conclusion: The statement that 'God created sin' is a logical one.
This is basically her argument, but to arrive at the premise 'B' there must be a few presuppositions or an argument leading up to it. This argument would be as follows:
Premise A - God created Satan
Premise B - Satan contained Evil
Premise C - Evil caused Sin
Conclusion: God created sin
Now there is a solid argument showing that Penny is logical and that Penny believes that God created sin; and, since Penny is always logical her conclusion is logical. Now that we have an argument to check for logical correctness and rationality let's start.
To disprove this logical argument I am going to pose an argument that uses the same form. First, let's look at the form of Penny's arguments.
The argument I is a deductive argument. The argument affirms the antecedent. "IF Penny is always logical in her thinking, then her arguments are always logical. Penny is logical, therefore her argument that 'God created sin' is logical."
The argument for God's creation of sin has this form:
A created B
B contained C
C caused D
A therefore created D
To disprove this argument I will pose an argument using the same form that this argument uses. Since this is a deductive argument if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. But if the conclusion is false, then one of the premises (or more) must be false. Using this form I will pose this argument:
Bobby created a grilled cheese sandwich
The grilled cheese contained bacteria X
The bacteria X caused the virus Y
Bobby therefore created virus Y
This is obviously a false conclusion. A person cannot create a physical virus inadvertently by cooking a sandwich. Since this argument is false and it uses the same form as Penny's argument for God's creation of sin, Penny's argument is illogical. Since this argument is illogical it cannot serve as a premise for a logical argument. Premise B in argument I is false, rendering argument I false. That leaves us now with a dilemma.
Either God is not the creator of sin or Penny does not always think logically. We now know from my counter argument that Penny doesn't always think logically because she uses a false premise to prove a conclusion. Therefor, God is not the creator of sin. This may seem like a large jump but there is no way of logically defending the statement that God created sin. This is an indefensible argument and to take a belief that is logically indefensible is illogical.
Friday, September 23, 2005
The Problems of Philosophy - Chapter 15
(Originally written September 23, 2005 in Book 2)
The Problems of Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1912
Chapter 15 - The Value of Philosophy
It is important to realize that even if all hunger and disease were disposed of, much work would still be needed to be done to produce a valuable society
The interesting fact of philosophy is, when a definite knowledge of that which something is being studied in philosophy has been found it ceases to be philosophy. Astronomy and psychology are prime examples of this process.
Philosophy cannot prove dogmatic beliefs.
The value of philosophy is to free us from the prejudices of common sense, from habitual beliefs of one's time or nation, and from convictions to which we have been subjected to from birth and have accepted without any scrutiny.
"It [Philosophy] removes the somewhat arrogant dogmatism of those who have never traveled into the region of liberating doubt" (Russell, 157).
Without philosophy we are constantly haunted by an insistence of desire and a powerless sense of will. Without philosophy we are trapped.
The Problems of Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1912
Chapter 15 - The Value of Philosophy
It is important to realize that even if all hunger and disease were disposed of, much work would still be needed to be done to produce a valuable society
The interesting fact of philosophy is, when a definite knowledge of that which something is being studied in philosophy has been found it ceases to be philosophy. Astronomy and psychology are prime examples of this process.
Philosophy cannot prove dogmatic beliefs.
The value of philosophy is to free us from the prejudices of common sense, from habitual beliefs of one's time or nation, and from convictions to which we have been subjected to from birth and have accepted without any scrutiny.
"It [Philosophy] removes the somewhat arrogant dogmatism of those who have never traveled into the region of liberating doubt" (Russell, 157).
Without philosophy we are constantly haunted by an insistence of desire and a powerless sense of will. Without philosophy we are trapped.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)