Tagging Suggestions / thoughts in L8 Library
Comments
-
Hamilton Ramos said:
I do agree with MJ that a valid true initial point should be the base for further study / discussion, but my disagreement is that such departure point may not be a manmade theological construct our of synch with revealed truth or the character and nature of God, or an addition to the Scripture (as in long formula in Mt 28:19), because it is not properly aligned with the evidence (both internal and external).
Er. ah.. step back a bit please. Validity is an attribute of an argument "Validity (logic) In logic, an argument is valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false." and your disagreement is against something I did not and would not say. However, because we are reading and reasoning in some language, we are, by definition, using human constructs.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
By all means Cynthia, you are free to do as you see fit.
I apologize if I offended you. I did not intend it to be offensive. I just was not sure of your view of topical inductive study, which has a deductive part.
0 -
Copy that MJ. I am not as sophisticated as you in the details of logic.
What I tried to communicate is that in deductive usually one moves from the general to the particular.
A premise assumed to be true is mentioned in an excerpt that you agree with. From there you work to a conclusion.
What I object is that to me an unchecked premise (against the relevant evidence available for possibility) does not qualify as a suitable premise.
Example: some groups affirm that Jesus was the product of one of Mary's ovum, with a miraculous working of the H.S. on that ovum.
Is this a valid premise?
With the evidence available, it does not:
The Lamb for atonement had to be without defect. Fallen nature by default does not qualify.
A being with part nature of a fallen kind could not have the H. S. descend and remain John 1:32, because most likely would die (a lot of the rituals of the Priests in the OT, was to not die in the presence of the Holy Spirit).
No fallen human could have the H.S. remain because Jesus had not died to pay the price.
Adam was tested in an unfallen status, and failed. It would be unjust to have Jesus be tested in a state different from that of pre fall Adam.
Etc. The original creation was the unfallen, so the standard and prototype for correct status is that.
The result of working from a wrong premise, is that it can take to wrong conclusions. Some groups thinking that indeed Mary's ovum was involved in Jesus, then may come up with the idea that fallen creatures can achieve deity status having self-existence like God has.
That would be a wrong conclusion. Aseity is a noncummunicable attribute of God, and what makes Him precisely worthy of worship.
It seems that some gnostic christian groups really believe that the deification (as achieving self-existence) is possible, I do not want to think that part of that idea came about because of the idea of Mary's ovum being involved in Jesus conception.
Created creatures have no self-existence. Their existence depends on God's grace, power and mercy.
0 -
Hamilton Ramos said:
A premise assumed to be true is mentioned in an excerpt that you agree with. From there you work to a conclusion.
What I object is that to me an unchecked premise . . .
A false premise is equally possible and equally damaging in both deductive and inductive logics. Different genres in scripture provide propositions of different flavors ... some more appropriately used for deductive logic; others more appropriately used for inductive logic; law section propositions likely are best used for abductive logic; others require informal logic or fallacy analysis or conductive logic . . .What you appear to be arguing is "garbage in, garbage out" which no one disagrees with. My point is very simple: deductive logic is logic to certainty; inductive logic is always to probability. Therefore, I am perpetually puzzled by statements that imply inductive study is in some way a corrective to deductive study as "deductive study" is usually defined in a way to create a straw horse. Your term "manmade theological construct", I would describe "taking as a premise, the conclusion of previous study" ... without taking advantage of previous work, we can spend 80 years coming to exactly the same conclusions with absolutely no growth in understanding, in fact without the possibility of growth. For me, my study is always built upon my previous studies and my current knowledge.
Fortunately, intuitional logic is usually quite reliable ... we depend upon the results of our reasoning to survive. Knowing the formal terms does not guarantee solid logic ... which is why in a Bible study it is often some self-effacing, elderly high-school dropout who is most insightful. At least that is true in my experience.
Like Cynthia, I think this is a good point to drop out, beyond reading any responses. You can contact me through Faithlife, if you feel it necessary to continue.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Hamilton Ramos said:
Copy that MJ. I am not as sophisticated as you in the details of logic.
Hamilton, you have premises on both sides of your argument. You're going in circles. You'd do better to take a page from the early believers. Just believe in Diety. You're done.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
MJ, Denise, Cynthia:
Believe it or not I find the exchange very interesting. I do know that logic is important. It just baffles me that after 2000 years of theology in the making, there is not a resource that:
List most important propositional truths of the Bible.
Tackles head on the examples I have given, and clearly show how deductive and inductive methods would apply to try to get to valid truths.
I would think that author John Frame works in a manner that he tries to very clearly delineate the philosophical and theological implications of subjects.
I guess I have to take time to read more of his works.
Worship, catechesis, systematics, ethics, ministry, discipleship, lawlessness, deification, etc. are important, and I think should have more interdisciplinary treatment, to clearly articulate principles and further research needed themes.
Thanks for your time and patience.
0 -
Hamilton Ramos said:
List most important propositional truths of the Bible.
Read the history of propositional truths in theology. Read a bit of logic to understand that propositional logic is the equivalent of limiting yourself to integer arithmetic. Then read some predicate logic to extend your tool set. You should then be able to answer your own question.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0
