How reliable is "Propositional Outlines"
Hi everyone,
I wanted to explore verses are tagged with "Background-Reason" under the "Propositional Outlines" I was surprised to find just 3 verses in the NT. Please see below.
My question is: how reliable is the tagging?
Thanks
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
Comments
-
I do not know how reliable it is. I get 4 verses in the NT and if you look there are a lot of background subcategories which make them rather specific. You should read the manual and determine if the methodology is appropriate for your research.
0 -
John Fidel said:
I do not know how reliable it is. I get 4 verses in the NT and if you look there are a lot of background subcategories which make them rather specific. You should read the manual and determine if the methodology is appropriate for your research.
Thanks a lot, John.
I am looking for verse to back my claim that God is infinitely logical. That is one of my starting points for the way I think about God. It is not possible to discern the "why" behind the "what" we believe (my interest lies in this) if God is not logical. [As an aside, my claim is that God is more predictable that human beings. Why? Because God is infinitely rational and hence easier to predict His behavior while it is impossible to predict irrational human beings whose decisions defy logic.]
I thought that knowing that we are made in the image of God is sufficient to make my claim. If I am logical (and being logical is not bad), then God must be infinitely logical. But believers give me eye rolls when I bring up image of God to buttress my claim. So I was looking for more verses where God is using logic to make His point. It is one thing to say that God's logic may be above human comprehension. I am perfectly ok with that. But the corollary is not that God is illogical. (I have no idea how people can have awe for an illogical God, but I don't want to go down that road here.)
I do have one verse that I stumbled upon where God is using logic. Haggai 2:10-14 (ESV): 10 The word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet, 11 “Thus says the Lord of hosts: Ask the priests about the law: 12 ‘If someone carries holy meat in the fold of his garment and touches with his fold bread or stew or wine or oil or any kind of food, does it become holy?’ ” The priests answered and said, “No.” 13 Then Haggai said, “If someone who is unclean by contact with a dead body touches any of these, does it become unclean?” The priests answered and said, “It does become unclean.” 14 Then Haggai answered and said, “So is it with this people, and with this nation before me, declares the Lord, and so with every work of their hands. And what they offer there is unclean.
I am looking for more verses. I did go through the whole glossary. Proposition=Condition, Proposition=Consequence, Proposition=Implication, Proposition=Inference, Proposition=Reason, and Proposition=Result has the potential to yield more verses but I thought Background-Reason was the best of the lot.
Extra question: Is there a way to limit the search to the situations where God/Jesus is the one who is making these logical arguments?
Thank you all.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
I am afraid you last question is above my pay grade. Perhaps someone more adept at those kinds of searches can assist. Interesting research.
0 -
1Cor10:31 said:
Extra question: Is there a way to limit the search to the situations where God/Jesus is the one who is making these logical arguments?
You can constrain them using the WITHIN operator - for example:
({Section <PropositionalOutline = Implication>}) WITHIN {Speaker <Person God>}
({Section <PropositionalOutline = Implication>}) WITHIN {Speaker <Person Jesus>}
0 -
1Cor10:31 said:
I am looking for verse to back my claim that God is infinitely logical.
I think you're heading off on a fool's errand for three basic reasons:
- "proposition" as used in linguistics does not have the same meaning as "proposition" as it is used in logic, so no matter how accurate the linguistic data is in coding, it will not be accurate for logic.
- one would expect that logic in the OT would be formulated in the Jewish structure not the Greek structure. The one pre-Talmudic book I am aware of is by a scholar I do not recommend based on his treatment of Buddhist logic. However, Principles of Talmudic Logic by Michael Araham and The Bomb Thief and Other Curious Cases: Leaves from the Jewish Logic Tree by Karlinsky and Rubin are both decent.
- while the laws of logic are universal in the same way mathematics is, their formulation is not. The Greeks made categorical logic manageable by restricting data to (a) ignore time and (b) ignore that answer might be indeterminable. The Arabs spent their time trying to fold the element of time back in. The South Asians insist on supporting the propositions with an example . . .
With higher math having taken over much of the current research in logic, my son referred me to an article that argued God is a mathematical/logical being. Unfortunately, I never found the article. My point is, I tend to agree with you but you need to lay out very clearly what logic(s) you are looking for, what the assumptions are for those logic(s), and how to identify those logic(s) in Scripture.
1Cor10:31 said:while it is impossible to predict irrational human beings whose decisions defy logic
I would think for this project you may find this untenable. Explore deontic logic.
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 -
Just a thought, this may not be of help in your quest, it seems to me that Logic may be a subset of Wisdom, and the Scriptures have a lot to say about wisdom. I came up with beau que (sp.) result in a Logos word search.
Remember, an amateur built the Ark -
Professionals built the Titanic0 -
1Cor10:31 said:
[Because God is infinitely rational and hence easier to predict His behavior while it is impossible to predict irrational human beings whose decisions defy logic.]
.... So I was looking for more verses where God is using logic to make His point. ...
Just adding, what device allows you to think it's 'God's (or Jesus') logic, vs the readership? As a parallel, if you reasoned with a child, you would reason with the child's logic, not your own. And by what device is God (or Jesus) 'rational'? Meaning what is your basis for constraining a diety to your own metrics?
0 -
I would suggest another method to plumb the depths of scripture on this topic using Logos.1Cor10:31 said:I am looking for verse to back my claim that God is infinitely logical. That is one of my starting points for the way I think about God. It is not possible to discern the "why" behind the "what" we believe (my interest lies in this) if God is not logical. [As an aside, my claim is that God is more predictable that human beings. Why? Because God is infinitely rational and hence easier to predict His behavior while it is impossible to predict irrational human beings whose decisions defy logic.]
First, find a relevant scripture. I chose Is 55.9. Bring up the context menu. Find relevant selection. In this case it is Attributes Describing God in Himself Theolo...select this item. Theological Topic panel appears on the right. Select Factbook, three areas are of interest: the Heading info., the Key Article and the Key Passages...note that all are from the OT. Take a similar track to find NT verses. My challenge verse is from scripture where the Sadducees are testing Jesus, I prefer Mk 12.24-27. From the context menu select the event Jesus teaches while the leaders conspire agai...Next select the Biblical Event Navigator. Select Jesus teaches while leaders conspire against him. Upon inspection you will find relevant scriptures for study. You may also want to check out the Factbook entry. Below I provide screenshots illustrating the findings from each respectively:
Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.
International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.
MacBook Pro MacOS Sequoia 15.5 1TB SSD
0 -
Graham Criddle said:
1Cor10:31">Extra question: Is there a way to limit the search to the situations where God/Jesus is the one who is making these logical arguments?
You can constrain them using the WITHIN operator - for example:
({Section <PropositionalOutline = Implication>}) WITHIN {Speaker <Person God>}
({Section <PropositionalOutline = Implication>}) WITHIN {Speaker <Person Jesus>}
Thanks a lot, Graham. That WITHIN command was very helpful. I combined both Persons as follows: ({Section <PropositionalOutline = Implication>}) WITHIN ({Speaker <Person God>} OR {Speaker <Person Jesus>}). The WITHIN command drastically reduced the number of verses for me to peruse, so super helpful indeed. Thank you.
I tried searching and reading Logos Help to find what is the default number of words that go with WITHIN command. But I couldn't locate it easily. Is is 5 words or 10 words or something like that? Just for my knowledge.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
John Fidel said:
I am afraid you last question is above my pay grade. Perhaps someone more adept at those kinds of searches can assist. Interesting research.
Thanks for getting me going. As you can see, Graham Criddle was super helpful.
I have to do more PropositionOutline searches than just Background-Reason and Implication (suggested by Graham).
In addition to the verses in Haggai that I quoted in my 2nd post, I came across the following passage when I did a search of PropositionalOutline = Condition.
Matt 11:22-28 (ESV): 22 Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw. 23 And all the people were amazed, and said, “Can this be the Son of David?” 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.” 25 Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. 26 And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? 27 And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. 28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
I like how Jesus argues that He can't be Satan because Satan won't be driving out demons. This is the kind of verses that I am looking for to make my claim that God is logical.
I've always struggled with adoring God (the A in ACTS acronym used in context of Prayer). But I've been able to recently as I've slowly discovered the beauty of God's brains. God has appeal to both our left brain and right brain. He has wired some to be more left-brain heavy and some to be right-brain heavy and He knows that. And He makes sure that all of us can adore Him regardless of the way He has wired us.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
1Cor10:31">I am looking for verse to back my claim that God is infinitely logical.
I think you're heading off on a fool's errand for three basic reasons:
"proposition" as used in linguistics does not have the same meaning as "proposition" as it is used in logic, so no matter how accurate the linguistic data is in coding, it will not be accurate for logic.
Thanks MJ for your inputs. I am not going to be blindly using the verses that get thrown out by the search. I will peruse them to see where God uses logic. I just wanted to limit the number of verses to peruse using SEARCH. And Graham's suggestion has proved invaluable in limiting the verses for me to examine.
MJ. Smith said:one would expect that logic in the OT would be formulated in the Jewish structure not the Greek structure. The one pre-Talmudic book I am aware of is by a scholar I do not recommend based on his treatment of Buddhist logic. However, Principles of Talmudic Logic by Michael Araham and The Bomb Thief and Other Curious Cases: Leaves from the Jewish Logic Tree by Karlinsky and Rubin are both decent.
Thanks for the book suggestions always.
MJ. Smith said:while the laws of logic are universal in the same way mathematics is, their formulation is not. The Greeks made categorical logic manageable by restricting data to (a) ignore time and (b) ignore that answer might be indeterminable. The Arabs spent their time trying to fold the element of time back in. The South Asians insist on supporting the propositions with an example . . .
Now you're talking above my pay grade when you brought in the time element. But that's ok.
MJ. Smith said:With higher math having taken over much of the current research in logic, my son referred me to an article that argued God is a mathematical/logical being. Unfortunately, I never found the article.
I would love to get the reference if you remember it.
MJ. Smith said:My point is, I tend to agree with you but you need to lay out very clearly what logic(s) you are looking for, what the assumptions are for those logic(s), and how to identify those logic(s) in Scripture.
1Cor10:31">while it is impossible to predict irrational human beings whose decisions defy logic
I would think for this project you may find this untenable. Explore deontic logic.
I am not smart enough to precisely define what logic I’m looking for. But it is logic that I should be able to explain to a child and the child should say, “that makes sense.” The verses in Haggai and Matthew that I quote are in this vein.
On a related note..
My Pastor was saying last week that I am trying to define everything in the form of equations, implying that doing so is a negative. I am not apologizing for the way God wired me. Of course, as I was walking back home after the meeting, I was thinking of how to define an equation. Not surprisingly, I came up with a definition of an equation with another equation. Here it is…Equation = English + Precision. Isn’t that the beauty of Math? By writing down what we say in the form of an equation, it forces us to be precise. I was so stoked by this definition of an equation, I walked back to tell my Pastor this definition. He didn’t find it humorous at all!
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
John Schneider said:
Just a thought, this may not be of help in your quest, it seems to me that Logic may be a subset of Wisdom, and the Scriptures have a lot to say about wisdom. I came up with beau que (sp.) result in a Logos word search.
Hi John,
Thanks for the suggested angle. I agree with you that wisdom and logic are interrelated. My starting assumption used to be “My God ain’t stupid.” That was grating for some. So I switched to saying “My God is logical.” But this statement is a non-starter for many who find that God dying for our sins is illogical. Maybe, my starting assumption should be “My God is infinitely wise.” I am going to try this out. I think in my mind, infinitely logical and infinitely wise go together.
An infinitely wise God designs the perfect system to achieve His goals. If we visualize God in human form, He would write down equations for all systems and then solve the crazy, complicated system of simultaneous equations to arrive at doctrines that He has put forth in the Bible. Of course, with God everything happened in an instant in eternity past.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
DMB said:
1Cor10:31">
[Because God is infinitely rational and hence easier to predict His behavior while it is impossible to predict irrational human beings whose decisions defy logic.]
.... So I was looking for more verses where God is using logic to make His point. ...
Just adding, what device allows you to think it's 'God's (or Jesus') logic, vs the readership? As a parallel, if you reasoned with a child, you would reason with the child's logic, not your own. And by what device is God (or Jesus) 'rational'? Meaning what is your basis for constraining a diety to your own metrics?
Sorry DMB, I didn’t understand what you meant by “device.” The only sentence I truly understood is the last sentence.
I am not constraining God to my metrics. He is infinitely logical and, therefore, I may not comprehend His logic given my finiteness. I am smart enough to understand my limitations. But God can never ever be less logical than the most logical person He has ever created. Here is an illustration from my field. We know that both implicit and explicit incentives work. What do I mean by that? Let me give an example. If I publish my paper in a top-tier journal, my salary gets a (meager) bump compared to if I don’t publish my paper. That is an example of explicit incentives. Even if I don’t get a salary boost, I still have incentive to publish my paper. Because it increases the odds that other schools will offer me higher pay even if my school doesn’t. This could be considered implicit incentives. Even if I don’t have salary motivations from my school or other potential employers, I still have incentive to publish because (i) I value the recognition from my peers and (ii) I get a kick from being cited by my peers. These are clearly implicit incentives at play.
The truth that both explicit and implicit incentives matter to get people to work is not some human-generated truth. Humans don’t create truths; we only discover truths, which by definition are all set by God (Calvin, Aquinas).
Now let me bring this to a close. When I say that God is logical, it means that God’s system will include both explicit and implicit incentives. When someone’s theology refutes one or the other, my antenna goes up and wants to say, “my God is not illogical.”
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
Beloved Amodeo said:
1Cor10:31">I am looking for verse to back my claim that God is infinitely logical. That is one of my starting points for the way I think about God. It is not possible to discern the "why" behind the "what" we believe (my interest lies in this) if God is not logical. [As an aside, my claim is that God is more predictable that human beings. Why? Because God is infinitely rational and hence easier to predict His behavior while it is impossible to predict irrational human beings whose decisions defy logic.]
I would suggest another method to plumb the depths of scripture on this topic using Logos.
First, find a relevant scripture. I chose Is 55.9. Bring up the context menu. Find relevant selection. In this case it is Attributes Describing God in Himself Theolo...select this item. Theological Topic panel appears on the right. Select Factbook, three areas are of interest: the Heading info., the Key Article and the Key Passages...note that all are from the OT. Take a similar track to find NT verses. My challenge verse is from scripture where the Sadducees are testing Jesus, I prefer Mk 12.24-27. From the context menu select the event Jesus teaches while the leaders conspire agai...Next select the Biblical Event Navigator. Select Jesus teaches while leaders conspire against him. Upon inspection you will find relevant scriptures for study. You may also want to check out the Factbook entry.
Thanks Beloved Amodeo for new rabbit trails. I went and re-read LST article on attributes of God. I agree completely with you and others that we can never fully fathom God. But here is how I figure out where to draw the boundaries of what we can know about God. God’s goal is to have a relationship with people. Thus, a logical God will never do anything that ultimately impedes His own goals. A corollary is that He has no incentive to hide things from us if it enables us to have a more intimate relationship with Him. Thus, how much of the knowledge of attributes of God we can wrap our hands around – the boundaries of our knowledge of God – is dictated by whether that knowledge helps us have a more intimate relationship or not.
If I am wired left-brain heavy by God, the questions I need answered are to help me have a more intimate relationship with Him. He has no reason to hide the answers from me. I see verses that cater to a right-brain heavy individual. Take for example the verses in Hebrews where it is mentioned that God can sympathize with my temptations and sufferings because Jesus experienced them. Does it imply that if God didn’t become man, He couldn’t sympathize with me? Does it mean that He could not sympathize with people in the OT? The answer is a clear NO. A God who has to experience pain in order to sympathize with my pain is no God at all. So why have these verses? To cater to the right-brain heavy human beings He has created. I see so many people in my church who are moved by these verses. I don’t need these verses for me to know that God can sympathize with me.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
Thanks again to everyone. Now that I've responded to everyone, I can go to sleep!
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
1Cor10:31 said:
I tried searching and reading Logos Help to find what is the default number of words that go with WITHIN command. But I couldn't locate it easily. Is is 5 words or 10 words or something like that? Just for my knowledge.
There are two ways in which Logos uses the WITHIN operator.
One is to do with proximity, where the help file uses, for an example,
suffering WITHIN 1-10 WORDS glory — Will match “suffering” and “glory” in any order with zero to nine words in between.
But the usage I suggested above is the other way - it is not to do with number of words (there isn't a default) but where the first term is completely contained within the second. Here, the help file says:
The smaller left term must appear within the bounds of the larger right term. The left term his highlighted in results and the right term is not.
So, above, I was looking for a set of words tagged as a particular proposition that all occur within a block of text spoken by an individual.
Does that clarify things?
0 -
1Cor10:31 said:
But it is logic that I should be able to explain to a child and the child should say, “that makes sense".
Ah yes, intuitional logic -- yes, that's a thing. I suspect that you're looking for the wider field of reasoning, or maybe informal logic. You might want to read Wikipedia on those topics.
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 -
Graham Criddle said:
1Cor10:31">I tried searching and reading Logos Help to find what is the default number of words that go with WITHIN command. But I couldn't locate it easily. Is is 5 words or 10 words or something like that? Just for my knowledge.
There are two ways in which Logos uses the WITHIN operator.
One is to do with proximity, where the help file uses, for an example,
suffering WITHIN 1-10 WORDS glory — Will match “suffering” and “glory” in any order with zero to nine words in between.
But the usage I suggested above is the other way - it is not to do with number of words (there isn't a default) but where the first term is completely contained within the second. Here, the help file says:
The smaller left term must appear within the bounds of the larger right term. The left term his highlighted in results and the right term is not.
So, above, I was looking for a set of words tagged as a particular proposition that all occur within a block of text spoken by an individual.
Does that clarify things?
It is very helpful indeed, Graham. Didn't know the nuance. As a follow up, could you please tell me what precisely does it mean to say "within a block of text"? I was able to google and find this article: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/198398.aspx, but I couldn't find the answer.
Thanks
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
1Cor10:31">But it is logic that I should be able to explain to a child and the child should say, “that makes sense".
Ah yes, intuitional logic -- yes, that's a thing. I suspect that you're looking for the wider field of reasoning, or maybe informal logic. You might want to read Wikipedia on those topics.
You've introduced me to new terms such as Deontic logic and Intuitionistic logic. Thank you.
Yes, my idea of logic is very simple. I think of the financial economist principles that we teach as something that can be derived intuitively. Even though people use fancy math to derive propositions, there is underlying intuition behind the models that can be used to explain the principles without the math.
I might over-estimate my ability to use simple logic to explain things to people because I was able to teach my girl to do relative velocity problems in her head while in elementary school. Probably it was her God-given IQ that made learning possible and not my teaching style.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
1Cor10:31 said:
As a follow up, could you please tell me what precisely does it mean to say "within a block of text"?
Apologies - on reflection, my use of that term wasn't particularly helpful
But it is basically the "thing" defined by the second term in the search string - the element to the right of WITHIN. And it can be used in many different situations - with some very helpful examples being shown in the article at https://wiki.logos.com/Search_HELP#Proximity
0 -
Graham Criddle said:
1Cor10:31">As a follow up, could you please tell me what precisely does it mean to say "within a block of text"?
Apologies - on reflection, my use of that term wasn't particularly helpful
But it is basically the "thing" defined by the second term in the search string - the element to the right of WITHIN. And it can be used in many different situations - with some very helpful examples being shown in the article at https://wiki.logos.com/Search_HELP#Proximity
Thanks Graham for the clarification. The wiki page was also helpful.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0
