APOLOGETICS- PHILOSOPHY- PROPHETS
21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears- Luke
https://youtu.be/-obZ4-MoPYE Apologetics- Philosophy- Prophets
.Kant- Camus- Sartre
.I have less dollars now!
.’I will never rot in the grave’- huh?
.Israel and Palestine- another view
.Pluralism or exclusivism?
.Moral, Natural law theory
.Redemption of the cosmos too
.Russian hacking- enough already!
.We hack too [and much worse]
.Cause and effect
.Love your neighbor as yourself
.Yes- The Muslim- Jew- Hindu – etc.- Jesus commands it
PAST TEACHING I DID THAT RELATES- [verses below]
Born in Northern Greece- in 384 BC.
The most famous student of Plato- attended Plato’s Academy for around 20 years.
His main disagreement with Plato was on his theory of Forms.
Plato believed that the ‘idea’ world contained the forms of all things we see in the physical realm.
Aristotle taught that substance itself was the main thing- that the forms of what we see in the natural realm come from matter itself.
He spoke about Potentiality and Actuality- that is the material things have in ‘seed’ form the final product.
The acorn has the Potential of becoming a tree- the fetus has the Potential of becoming a man- etc.
The form is already embedded in the thing itself- it does not exist in the ‘idea’ world of Plato.
Aristotle loved and admired his teacher- yet Plato had somewhat of a disdain for his most famous student.
Plato passed over Aristotle to head up the Academy- twice.
As things go- Aristotle went and started his own school- called the Lyceum.
Aristotle did not just teach Philosophy- but Biology- Logic- Ethics- Rhetoric.
Some refer to him as the first real scientist.
His development of the laws of Logic- Cause and Effect- play a key role in the Scientific Method till this day.
Aristotle taught that the main way we gain knowledge is thru sense perception and experiment.
As we study the natural order of things themselves- we gain understanding from them.
What we refer to as the Empirical method- knowledge gained thru the observation and experimentation of things.
He referred to God as the Final Cause- not the First Cause.
He believed in God [some debate this- Aristotle himself called him God in his work on Metaphysics] and called him the Prime Mover.
As I said before- a big thing with the early thinkers was the origin of Motion- who started the ball rolling- so to speak.
Aristotle credited the source of all motion to an ‘un- moved Mover’.
He gave the attributes of God to his Mover- said he had no beginning- was not material- an eternal and imperishable substance.
So- why the Final Cause?
He said God attracts all things to himself- so in his mind- motion started by attraction- not by a ‘push’ so to speak.
This is interesting indeed- in modern physics we see that the universe is undergoing a continual expansion- heading somewhere- of course we believe this somewhere is God himself- the source of all things.
Isaac Newton agreed with Aristotle on this point- he referred to it in his 3rd law of Physics.
The medieval Muslim thinkers called him ‘The First Teacher’- and Kant [who we will get to later in this study] credits him with the bulk of what we know today as the Laws of Logic.
Aristotle taught that the main activity of God was thought.
The bible says that thru Wisdom and Understanding God made things [‘Wisdom builds the house- Understanding establishes it- and thru Knowledge it’s rooms are filled with all pleasant and precious riches- Wisdom is profitable to direct- the words of the wise are like nails fastened by the masters of assemblies- as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation’- various bible verses found in Proverbs- Ecclesiastes and Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth] – in a way Aristotle was right.
One of his key contributions was the Syllogism- you start with a Logical argument- you engage in Deductive reasoning- and come to a Conclusion.
A famous example would be ‘All men are mortal- Plato is a man- Plato is mortal’.
Aristotle did not believe that something comes from nothing- a phrase that will come up a lot as we progress in this study is ‘ex nihilo nihil fit’- meaning Nothing comes from Nothing.
He was also what we refer to as a Teleolologist- he believed that there was design and purpose in the created order of things.
He saw design in the universe- world.
Many today embrace an idea that there is no purpose or design- that the design we see in the material world is by accident- and furthermore some say all that we see- CAME FROM NOTHING.
I can’t stress enough that this is simply not possible- I don’t say this from the Christian view point alone- but from a scientific one.
Science deals with the observation and testing of things- we look into the material world and come to certain conclusions based on what we see- observe.
One of the most fundamental observations that science SEES- is what I quoted above- NOTHING COMES FROM NOTHING.
That is- every effect has a cause.
This is important for our day- because many have capitulated to the view that all things CAME FROM CHANCE.
Not only is this statement illogical [chance is simply a word- this statement ascribes Ontological status to a word- which is impossible].
But it is scientifically not true.
Because science shows us that things do not ‘pop into existence’ without a cause- from nothing.
True science in no way contradicts belief in God- no- it backs it up.
Aristotle- as well as most of the great thinkers we shall cover- came to the conclusion that there had to be some immaterial thing [being] that was the cause of all other things.
Now- why did he argue for a PRIME MOVER?
Because he believed that the universe was eternal- if there ever came a time when science showed us that the universe had a beginning point- then the argument would be over.
The Theists [those that believe in God] would win.
Sure enough- in the 20th century that’s exactly what happened.
Today Physics teaches us that time- space- matter did indeed have a beginning point- what we refer to as the Big Bang Theory.
If the early thinkers had this knowledge- then the argument for a Prime Mover would be moot- because instead we would have a Prime Starter- see?
Aristotle is credited with writing the second greatest work on Ethics from the ancient period- called Ethics [the first one being Plato’s Republic].
He wrote on political theory- believed that Aristocracy [rule by the excellent] was the best form of government [sort of like Socrates Philosopher Kings].
Aristotle’s most famous student was Alexander the Great.
During Alexander’s conquests- he took a huge team of scientists with him- they collected all types of specimens from these conquests- and Alexander brought them back to Athens and they were used at the Lyceum for further study.
It has been said that this was the most expensive scientific enterprise up to the day of the modern space program.
He taught that the intellectual virtues can be taught directly- but the moral ones HAD TO BE LIVED FIRST.
The bible says ‘the fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom’.
Proverbs 3:19 The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.
Proverbs 3:20 By his knowledge the depths are broken up, and the clouds drop down the dew.
Unfinished study- will complete over time.
JOHN LOCKE- JESUS- AND MONEY.
Today’s video [and post] is one of those ‘spur of the moment’ ones-
I made the video/post yesterday- ‘off the cuff’-
I’m at the ranch as I write- and have no WiFi out here- or I’d post it now- I also don’t have my on-line concordance- so I’ll try and remember exactly where some of the verses are and add them in [I do have my on-line bible saved to the drive!]
This video/post is in keeping with some of the stuff I’ve been recently teaching.
As Christians- we often look for the things we are supposed to do.
Which is fine- but what I have learned in my experience of doing ministry for many years- is many Pastors/ministers- learn a certain pattern/form- early on-
And as well-meaning as these men are- they often unconsciously do not realize they are violating scripture in their efforts to do the right thing.
When people feel God has called them ‘to preach’ [ called into ministry] most of the times they are taught that this means ‘starting a local church’.
In the American mindset- this means starting a nonprofit 501 c3- either renting or building some type of structure to meet in-
And then teaching a form of giving- usually called ‘the tithe’ [meaning 10 percent]-
And then saying ‘the local church is this place/501c3- the storehouse- and you will be cursed if you do not tithe to the storehouse’.
And without realizing it- in the more extreme cases- actually teaching people that they will fall under the curse of God- if they do not put 10% of their income into the ‘local church’.
This verse from Malachi is often used- Malachi 3:8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
Malachi 3:9 Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
Malachi 3:10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
And this basic idea of ‘church government’ is then propagated thru out the land.
I’ve discussed this recently- and for these short videos- I just want to note that the New Testament churches we read about in the bible- are talking about communities of believers living
ATHEISM- APOLOGETICS [links added- long version]
MY RADIO LINKS-
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-7R Kant, Hume, Sartre
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-6E Apologetics- Kant, Hume
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-6F DaVinci code
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-7Q Something from nothing- Quantum Leap
– Sartre is one of the most famous 20th century philosophers- also described as the father of existentialism.
I say ‘also’ because when we covered Kierkegaard- I said the same of him.
How can this be?
Well- Kierkegaard was a Christian- Sartre an atheist.
So you can divide existentialism between ‘Christian existentialists- and atheistic’.
Ok- it would be a lot to try and cover all of his ideas- but what I want to do is sort of contrast the thinkers who trended away from God with those who continued to believe in a creator- while at the same time engage in the intellectual world [many I could name- Descartes- Kant- etc.].
Though Sartre- like Camus- was indeed an intelligent man- when they tried to develop philosophies- ways to explain man- his purpose- what ‘it’s’ all about.
They have difficulty giving any real purpose or meaning to man.
Because if you believe [and teach] that man is really some sort of a cosmic accident- with no creator who made him- then how do you teach ‘that man’ that he has a purpose?
This would apply to all the great thinkers- who rejected God.
In the end- if you were born without a preceding purpose [which Christians teach is to glorify God] and when you die- there is no after life- then it’s common sense to see your life ‘without purpose’.
Sartre’s most famous work ‘being and nothingness’ says it all in the title.
Some of his most famous ideas are ‘no essence before existence’.
Now- Christians usually criticize him for this [which I just did in a way].
But he sort of tried to apply this idea- and say ‘because we are not predetermined- then we are indeed responsible for our actions- we are ‘left alone- without excuse’.
When you study Philosophy- along with Theology [the study of God]. A big thing that is debated is predestination.
Many misunderstand the historic reformation doctrine of Predestination –and they see it as a form of fatalism- meaning ‘whatever will be- was meant to be’.
You can do a whole debate on this subject- in studying theology alone.
Yet it also ‘bleeds’ into philosophy- because many thinkers were trying to figure out the problems of man- and some thought the doctrine of original sin taught a form of fatalism.
Actually- it does not.
But that’s why you see these ideas pop up – that we can act without our past having power over us.
So- in a sense- though Sartre was an atheist- this was an attempt [I think] to try and give man the ‘freedom’ to act on his own will.
But without belief in God- there really is no grounding authority to values- ethics.
Where would they come from? [that’s a long debate- but if in effect ethics- right and wrong- were simply some sort of value system that was majority rule- then when the majority gets it wrong- slavery- abortion- etc.- then these values do not really ‘mean’ anything].
From the Christian view [they do debate between predestination by the way] Values- worth- purpose- do indeed ‘precede’ existence.
God had a purpose for us before we were born- and values are the revealed ‘rules’ that God gave to man.
The Nihilistic thinkers [those who admit that there really is no purpose] in the end have a hard time teaching their ideas- and at the same time instilling self-worth in people.
Camus summed it up when he said-“There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide” (MS, 3).Oct 27, 2011
Sartre [like Kierkegaard] wrote plays- poetry- etc.
One of Sartre’s dramas was called ‘NO EXIT’
He depicted Hell as a place where people are forever ‘observing’ one another- with no way out [obviously he did not really believe in Hell].
But why would he see it this way?
Sartre had a unique insight [though an atheist- he was indeed smart].
One of the things that Sartre believed- was subjectivity- he taught that if man were to be truly Free- he could not be an Object [lots has been said in the last few years on objectifying people- seeing them as objects degrades them].
So in Sartre’s mind- belief in God objectifies people.
If there is an ‘all seeing’ creator who is always looking/seeing into people’s lives [and intents- hearts] then they are not truly free.
All the thinkers who rejected God- did not do so for the same reasons.
Freud- and those who taught Hedonism- said it was the moral constraints on man [from God and the church] that was the problem.
So in Freud’s mind- we should deny God- and man should live out all of his most base desires.
It was a failed idea for sure- but that was the Hedonists view.
Sartre did not espouse unrestrained passion- actually even though he was an atheist- he believed that men should live with some type of ethic.
So his rejection of God was based on the idea that God is always ‘watching you’ and a man cannot truly be free- if someone is always watching him. It was an interesting idea [and yes- God is always watching- but from the Christian view he is not watching as some type of cosmic voyeur- but as a Father watches over his children.
Or- as the bible says ‘as a mother hen watches over her chicks’. So Sartre was right about God always seeing us- but he disagreed with the Christian view of omniscience [all knowing God] and said this ‘constant watching’ makes us an object- and to Sartre- the basic attribute of human character is subjectivity- if he is not a subject- with no previous ‘essence’ [remember- his other famous idea was ‘existence precedes essence’] he is not truly free.
So to Sartre- man and reality are simply things- and we develop life from this materialistic view.
He rejected universals- there is not a universal category of ‘mankind’ but simply individual people.
Another famous atheist thinker was Camus [‘there is only one really serious question left- suicide’].
Even though some of the atheistic thinkers ‘meant well’ yet- in the end- as Kant said- if there is no God- then society cannot function without the basic understanding that we are all accountable- and will someday give an account.
In Kant’s view- he rejected the classical idea that you could ‘prove God’ from reason and nature.
But some said he ‘let God in the back door’.
Because for Kant- if you reject God outright- then society cannot function.
For instance- if there is some type of injustice- maybe framed for murder and you sit in jail your whole life- never being vindicated.
For Kant- the person can survive- because he knows- in the end- the truth will come out [if there is a God].
And not only will it come out- but those who wronged the man will give an account.
So Kant saw the need for there not only to be an ‘all seeing God/judge’.
But that Judge had to also have all power- so he could carry out justice in the end.
But for Sartre- and Camus- and the other atheists- they grappled with the problem of where moral laws come from [or if there is even such a thing].
How can we really define ethics if there is no real meaning to our existence?
If ‘nothing matters’ [no essence before existence] then in the end- WE don’t matter.
And you come to the same conclusion as Camus.
The question of suicide has been pondered for centuries- it has made it into the plays of Shakespeare [below]
Many are familiar with this famous line- but read it carefully- it’s Hamlet’s struggle- whether it’s nobler to ‘go thru stuff’ or- end it.
That’s why I think the Camus’ and Sartres of the world don’t help- in the end.
To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them. To die—to sleep,
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to: ’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there’s the rub:
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause—there’s the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th’oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely,
The pangs of dispriz’d love, the law’s delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th’unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovere’d country, from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action.
PAST POSTS I WROTE THAT RELATE-
TELOS [What’s your purpose?]
A telos (from the Greek τέλος for “end”, “purpose”, or “goal”) is an end or purpose, in a fairly constrained sense used by philosophers such as Aristotle. It is the root of the term “teleology,” roughly the study of purposiveness, or the study of objects with a view to their aims, purposes, or intentions. Teleology figures centrally in Aristotle’s biology and in his theory of causes. It is central to nearly all philosophical theories of history, such as those of Hegel and Marx. One running debate in contemporary philosophy of biology is to what extent teleological language (as in the “purposes” of various organs or life-processes) is unavoidable, or is simply a shorthand for ideas that can ultimately be spelled out nonteleologically. Philosophy of action also makes essential use of teleological vocabulary: on Davidson’s account, an action is just something an agent does with an intention–that is, looking forward to some end to be achieved by the action.
In contrast to telos, techne is the rational method involved in producing an object or accomplishing a goal or objective; however, the two methods are not mutually exclusive in principle.
Q. 1. What is the chief end of man?
A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.
1Peter 2:1 Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, all evil speakings,
1Peter 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
1Peter 2:3 If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
1Peter 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but
 CHRIST CHURCH? A few weeks back I was going to write a post from the words of St. Peter found in the New Testament ‘The time has come that judgment must begin at the house of God [Christ’s church= house of God] and if it starts there- what will the outcome be for the rest of the world?’ [paraphrased it]. Right after the ‘thought’ the major events off the coast of Japan hit and we have this
MY RADIO LINKS-
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-7R Kant, Hume, Sartre
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-6E Apologetics- Kant, Hume
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-6F DaVinci code
http://wp.me/a4V5qQ-7Q Something from nothing- Quantum Leap
I quoted-read just a few verses from the prophet Micah-
They deal with the purpose of God and the expression of his kingdom both now- and after.
The same themes we see in the preaching of John the Baptist and Jesus.
Instead of teaching the actual context of the time- and who Micah was directly speaking too- I just wanted to give you a glimpse of the overall purpose of the kingdom of God on earth now.
The above post on ‘politics’ is really not so much about politics- it was meant to show us how we- in the world- engage in ‘rule’ dominion- power.
The global system of government is attempting to do this very thing- to enact rule.
The church- the people of God- are the ones who true authority in society is vested in.
Yes- whether they rule in a monarchy- a democracy- or any other type of human government.
Even in a true Democracy- the simple concept of majority rule- can never insure true justice in society.
If human values are simply determined by what the majority wants- in the end- there’s no real assurance that life will be respected.
The country I live in shows us that- with the legalization of abortion right up until the 9th month.
The prophet envisioned a time where the people of God would indeed be the salt of the earth- as Jesus said.
To me this does not mean theocracy- in the sense that believers should try and institute religious rule.
But the foundation for true moral virtue- rests within moral law.
That which God has revealed to man both by scripture and through Natural law.
God put conscience in man when he created man in his image.
This conscience only exists within the Human-
God gave man dominion [rule]over the creation when he made man.
After the fall of man- this image of man was ‘marred’ if you will- yet- he still has the conscience of good and evil.
Even the most ardent atheist- if he is honest- will admit he ‘feels’ guilt- if he does ‘wrong’.
Yet- he has no explanation for the guilt- or even the moral foundation for his own witness- that he did ‘wrong’ [which is a witness that he too is created in the image of God- because he has this inner sense of right and wrong].
This debate is long- and I have taught it all in the past [Philosophy- Kant- etc.]
But for today- we see that the rule of God- comes to the people of God.
Not in an abusive way- but thru the expression of Christ in us.
I’ll end with a true story I heard many years ago.
There were 2 Africans [one white- One black] and the white man happened to be an atheist.
Over the years he observed the many Christian missionaries who came to his continent- and reached out to the children.
Both protestants and Catholics did this.
The Atheist would criticize what the Christians were doing- saying they were wasting their time trying to convert the younger generation to Christianity.
Most of the children were indeed Black.
The black man eventually told his atheist friend ‘I have heard you for many years now criticize these Christians [the black man was also not a Christian] yet- in all the years these missionaries have been coming to our land- they have fed the children- made many efforts to teach them about their God- and sacrificed much to help the children- yet I have never seen any atheist organization attempt to do the same’.
It was the actual witness of the Christians- and their efforts to reach out to the Africans- that made this great impact on the man.
And in a way- I think that’s what the kingdom is all about.
Rule- authority- comes to the humble and meek followers of Christ-just like Jesus said-
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Matt. 5:5
NOTE- I mentioned abortion in the late stage- in actuality the majority of the country does not approve of late stage abortion- but the Supreme Court ‘decided’ it was a ‘constitutional right’- a right to privacy. Many legal scholars believe this decision is flawed. I mention this because in the U.S. it is not so much a democratic rule- on this issue- but an overreach of the court.
Micah 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?
Micah 6:9 The LORD’s voice crieth unto the city, and the man of wisdom shall see thy name: hear ye the rod, and who hath appointed it.
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
. Luke 24:13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
Luke 24:14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
Luke 24:15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
Luke 24:16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
Luke 24:17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
Luke 24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
Luke 24:19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
Luke 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
Luke 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
Luke 24:22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
Luke 24:23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
Luke 24:24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
Luke 24:26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Luke 24:28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
Luke 24:29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
Luke 24:30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
Luke 24:31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
Luke 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
View profile at Medium.com
Note- Please do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on- Thanks- John.#