Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
What do Mormons believe?
For more information see my link to the Mormonism Research Center.
I highly recommend "Reasoning from the Scriptures with Mormons" By Dr. Ron Rhodes.
A very powerful book showing you how to refute the false teachings of Mormonism, and to effectively evangelize our Mormon friends!
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
My Prolegomena Paper
In my Prolegomena, I will be defending the preconditions for the following statement: “The Bible is the divinely inspired Word of God, without error in all that it teaches”. I will not be defending the statement, but only the preconditions that make this statement possible.
“Prolegomena” is Greek in origin and means “that which comes before”. Prolegomena assumes and relies on the assumption that apologetics has already been done. Therefore, with prolegomena I am seeking to give rational arguments to defend a certain approach to theology and to demonstrate that the God, Who exists, is the God of the Bible.
To do this, I will be defending three categories. One is the metaphysical argument for not only God’s existence but also for the notion that the God, Who exists, is the One revealed in the Bible. Secondly, I will demonstrate through Epistemology that absolute truth exists; therefore, we can test historical claims such as Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. Lastly, I will deal with linguistics demonstrating that God-Talk is possible, and that we can make meaningful statements about God.
Metaphysical Argument
I will start with the Metaphysical Argument for God’s existence. If God does not exist, then everything else in our approach to theology fails. All of our Prolegomena rests on the belief that God exists and that the God, Who exists, is the same as the God of the Bible. This argument is the foundation upon which all others rest upon.
The Vertical Cosmological Argument
There are many arguments that could be given to prove God’s existence such as the Teleological Argument, the Axiological Argument and the Ontological Argument. All of these, when conjoined, make a very strong cumulative case for God’s existence, but perhaps no single argument is stronger for demonstrating God’s existence than the Vertical Cosmological Argument. I will lay out the argument in eight premises and go over each in detail.
1.) Something undeniably exists.
2.) Nothing can not cause something.
3.) Something necessarily and eternally exists.
4.) I am not eternal and necessary.
5.) Whatever is not eternal and necessary needs a cause.
6.) Therefore, there is an eternal and necessary cause for my existence.
7.) This eternal and necessary cause must be all-powerful, all-knowing, all-perfect/good
and personal.
8.) This eternal and necessary cause is identical to the being described as God in the
Bible. [1]
Let’s look at the premises one at a time in more detail.
Premise 3: Something necessarily and eternally exists.
From nothing, nothing comes, but something exists {I exist}. This demonstrates that something must necessarily and eternally exist. For there could never be a time when nothing was the cause of something; therefore, something must exist necessarily and eternally. There are several things we can conclude that will follow necessarily from this premise, such as this being must be Pure Actuality or Pure Existence with no potentiality since a necessary being can not, not exist because there is no potential. If there was potential, then this being could have the potential to not exist, but a necessary being can not cease to exist. Therefore, this being must be Pure Actuality. It follows necessarily that since this being, has no potential to not be, this being must also be changeless, non- temporal and non- spatial since both time and space involve change{moment to moment}. However, this being is before space, time and matter thus outside of them. This being must also be One, because if there was another being that was Pure Actuality with no potential, you would not be able to tell them apart since they would differ by nothing. Not to differ by something, is not to differ at all, and if there can be nothing to differentiate between two beings that were Pure Actuality, then there must be only one being. This being must also be simple, not composed of parts, since there is nothing to differentiate within the essence of the being. Because this being is simple, it follows that He must also be indivisible because this being has no parts to be divided up. This being must also be infinite since it is potential that limits a being. However, this being has no potential- thus no limits. This being must also be uncaused because to go from potentiality to actuality involves change, and since this being has no potential and is changeless, it must be necessary and uncaused.
Premise 5: Whatever is not eternal and necessary needs a cause.
As shown in Premise 4, I am only potential existence. Whatever is only potential existence is either uncaused, caused by another or self caused. It can not be uncaused because as shown in Premise 1, something can not come from nothing. Nothing can not be the cause or ground of potentiality to actuality. It was also demonstrated in Premise 4 that I am not eternal and thus need a ground for my being. Premise 1 also demonstrated that potentiality can not be self- caused because I can not cause my own existence before I exist. Therefore, the only other option is that I was caused by another.
Premise 6: Therefore, there is an eternal and necessary cause for my existence.
Adding an infinite series of contingent causes never answers what the ground of being is since it can not be finite, contingent changing beings. It must be grounded in a infinite unchanging being.
Premise 7: This eternal and necessary cause must be all- powerful, all- knowing, perfect and personal.
This being as we have shown is Pure Actuality and as was stated earlier it is potentiality that puts limits on beings. Since this being is limitless, all concepts of finitude must be dropped showing he has infinite power and knowledge.
Premise 8: This eternal and necessary cause is identical to the being described as God in the Christian scriptures.
The God described in the Bible is eternal (Colossians 1; John 1; Hebrews 1:2), changeless (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 6:18), infinite (1 Kings 8:23, Isaiah 66:1), all- powerful (Hebrews 1:3; Jeremiah 32:17) and all- loving (John 3:16; 1 John 4:16). As shown in Premise 3, there can not be two identical beings because there would be no way to tell them apart. Since this argument demonstrates a God that is the One identical to the One revealed in the Christian scriptures, the God of the Bible exists. [2]
“Prolegomena” is Greek in origin and means “that which comes before”. Prolegomena assumes and relies on the assumption that apologetics has already been done. Therefore, with prolegomena I am seeking to give rational arguments to defend a certain approach to theology and to demonstrate that the God, Who exists, is the God of the Bible.
To do this, I will be defending three categories. One is the metaphysical argument for not only God’s existence but also for the notion that the God, Who exists, is the One revealed in the Bible. Secondly, I will demonstrate through Epistemology that absolute truth exists; therefore, we can test historical claims such as Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. Lastly, I will deal with linguistics demonstrating that God-Talk is possible, and that we can make meaningful statements about God.
Metaphysical Argument
I will start with the Metaphysical Argument for God’s existence. If God does not exist, then everything else in our approach to theology fails. All of our Prolegomena rests on the belief that God exists and that the God, Who exists, is the same as the God of the Bible. This argument is the foundation upon which all others rest upon.
The Vertical Cosmological Argument
There are many arguments that could be given to prove God’s existence such as the Teleological Argument, the Axiological Argument and the Ontological Argument. All of these, when conjoined, make a very strong cumulative case for God’s existence, but perhaps no single argument is stronger for demonstrating God’s existence than the Vertical Cosmological Argument. I will lay out the argument in eight premises and go over each in detail.
1.) Something undeniably exists.
2.) Nothing can not cause something.
3.) Something necessarily and eternally exists.
4.) I am not eternal and necessary.
5.) Whatever is not eternal and necessary needs a cause.
6.) Therefore, there is an eternal and necessary cause for my existence.
7.) This eternal and necessary cause must be all-powerful, all-knowing, all-perfect/good
and personal.
8.) This eternal and necessary cause is identical to the being described as God in the
Bible. [1]
Let’s look at the premises one at a time in more detail.
Premise 1: Something undeniably exists.
In order to deny this, I would have to exist, which would end up being a self- refuting statement like: “I can not speak a word in English”. To deny this truth, I would be affirming it because I must exist in order for me to deny it.
In order to deny this, I would have to exist, which would end up being a self- refuting statement like: “I can not speak a word in English”. To deny this truth, I would be affirming it because I must exist in order for me to deny it.
Premise 2: Nothing can not cause something.
Since nothing is nothing, nothing can do nothing, nor can anything come from nothing. Thus, from nothing, nothing comes, but the fact that I exist demonstrates my cause of existence can not be from nothing, since nothing can be the cause of something.
Since nothing is nothing, nothing can do nothing, nor can anything come from nothing. Thus, from nothing, nothing comes, but the fact that I exist demonstrates my cause of existence can not be from nothing, since nothing can be the cause of something.
Premise 3: Something necessarily and eternally exists.
From nothing, nothing comes, but something exists {I exist}. This demonstrates that something must necessarily and eternally exist. For there could never be a time when nothing was the cause of something; therefore, something must exist necessarily and eternally. There are several things we can conclude that will follow necessarily from this premise, such as this being must be Pure Actuality or Pure Existence with no potentiality since a necessary being can not, not exist because there is no potential. If there was potential, then this being could have the potential to not exist, but a necessary being can not cease to exist. Therefore, this being must be Pure Actuality. It follows necessarily that since this being, has no potential to not be, this being must also be changeless, non- temporal and non- spatial since both time and space involve change{moment to moment}. However, this being is before space, time and matter thus outside of them. This being must also be One, because if there was another being that was Pure Actuality with no potential, you would not be able to tell them apart since they would differ by nothing. Not to differ by something, is not to differ at all, and if there can be nothing to differentiate between two beings that were Pure Actuality, then there must be only one being. This being must also be simple, not composed of parts, since there is nothing to differentiate within the essence of the being. Because this being is simple, it follows that He must also be indivisible because this being has no parts to be divided up. This being must also be infinite since it is potential that limits a being. However, this being has no potential- thus no limits. This being must also be uncaused because to go from potentiality to actuality involves change, and since this being has no potential and is changeless, it must be necessary and uncaused.
Premise 4: I am not eternal and necessary.
I did not cause my own existence. I have the potential to not exist and whatever has the potential to not exist is not a necessary being. I am contingent, finite and change from one state of actuality to potentiality; therefore, I am not eternal and changeless.
I did not cause my own existence. I have the potential to not exist and whatever has the potential to not exist is not a necessary being. I am contingent, finite and change from one state of actuality to potentiality; therefore, I am not eternal and changeless.
Premise 5: Whatever is not eternal and necessary needs a cause.
As shown in Premise 4, I am only potential existence. Whatever is only potential existence is either uncaused, caused by another or self caused. It can not be uncaused because as shown in Premise 1, something can not come from nothing. Nothing can not be the cause or ground of potentiality to actuality. It was also demonstrated in Premise 4 that I am not eternal and thus need a ground for my being. Premise 1 also demonstrated that potentiality can not be self- caused because I can not cause my own existence before I exist. Therefore, the only other option is that I was caused by another.
Premise 6: Therefore, there is an eternal and necessary cause for my existence.
Adding an infinite series of contingent causes never answers what the ground of being is since it can not be finite, contingent changing beings. It must be grounded in a infinite unchanging being.
Premise 7: This eternal and necessary cause must be all- powerful, all- knowing, perfect and personal.
This being as we have shown is Pure Actuality and as was stated earlier it is potentiality that puts limits on beings. Since this being is limitless, all concepts of finitude must be dropped showing he has infinite power and knowledge.
Premise 8: This eternal and necessary cause is identical to the being described as God in the Christian scriptures.
The God described in the Bible is eternal (Colossians 1; John 1; Hebrews 1:2), changeless (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 6:18), infinite (1 Kings 8:23, Isaiah 66:1), all- powerful (Hebrews 1:3; Jeremiah 32:17) and all- loving (John 3:16; 1 John 4:16). As shown in Premise 3, there can not be two identical beings because there would be no way to tell them apart. Since this argument demonstrates a God that is the One identical to the One revealed in the Christian scriptures, the God of the Bible exists. [2]
Johnathan Wells vs Massimo Pigliucci
Very Good cross fire debate. Dr Wells represents Intelligent Design. Dr Pigliucci affirms evolution
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
The Hypo Static Union
When people ask questions about Jesus, for instance like the JW's, we must make sure we parse the question. For instance, if Jesus was God, then why did He did not know the hour of His own coming {Matt. 24:35-36}? This and other questions of this type are answered actually very easily and when you understand this concept MUCH confusion disappears!
In John 1:1 we are told: "In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word WAS GOD" and then in John 1:14 we read: "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us".
Jesus has 2 natures: one is 100% Human, the other 100% Divine. Many think that Jesus stopped being God when He came to earth, but this is false. Instead of "subtraction", think of it as "addition " Jesus ADDED a human nature to Himself. In fact we are told in
Philippians 2:6-8 "who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 2:7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
The Greek word here for "emptied" means that Christ laid aside His divine attributes and chose not to use them at certain times; however, there are times when He does use them. For instance, in Matthew 12:25 we read: "And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, "Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand." This is a example of Jesus demonstrating His omniscience {All- Knowing }. Another example is when Jesus is in the boat with the disciples. We read in Mark 4:38-40: "But Jesus was in the back of the boat, asleep on a cushion. So they woke him up and asked him, "Teacher, don't you care that we're going to die?" v-39--And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, "Hush, be still." And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm. -v--41--They became very much afraid and said to one another, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?"
This is a great example of Jesus being omnipotent by calming the wind and the waves, yet He is in the boat sleeping. We know that God doesn't sleep, and man can not control nature, so what we see is Christ's dual natures.
This is how you answer the question: did Jesus know all things? In His human nature "no", but in His divine nature "YES"! Consider the following when you are asked a question about Jesus.
JESUS' DIVINE NATURE:
Uncaused
Unchanging
Knowledge is INFINITE
Necessary Being
All-Powerful
Simple Being {Not composed of parts}
INDEPENDENT
JESUS' HUMAN NATURE:
Caused
Changing
Knowledge IS finite
Limited Power
Composed Being
Dependent
This hopefully will help clear up much of the confusion. Let us sit in awe and wonder of our amazing and great God as it was Him and Him ALONE who sacrificed His Son, the Second Person of the Trinity so that we may live!!!
In John 1:1 we are told: "In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word WAS GOD" and then in John 1:14 we read: "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us".
Jesus has 2 natures: one is 100% Human, the other 100% Divine. Many think that Jesus stopped being God when He came to earth, but this is false. Instead of "subtraction", think of it as "addition " Jesus ADDED a human nature to Himself. In fact we are told in
Philippians 2:6-8 "who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 2:7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
The Greek word here for "emptied" means that Christ laid aside His divine attributes and chose not to use them at certain times; however, there are times when He does use them. For instance, in Matthew 12:25 we read: "And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, "Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand." This is a example of Jesus demonstrating His omniscience {All- Knowing }. Another example is when Jesus is in the boat with the disciples. We read in Mark 4:38-40: "But Jesus was in the back of the boat, asleep on a cushion. So they woke him up and asked him, "Teacher, don't you care that we're going to die?" v-39--And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, "Hush, be still." And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm. -v--41--They became very much afraid and said to one another, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?"
This is a great example of Jesus being omnipotent by calming the wind and the waves, yet He is in the boat sleeping. We know that God doesn't sleep, and man can not control nature, so what we see is Christ's dual natures.
This is how you answer the question: did Jesus know all things? In His human nature "no", but in His divine nature "YES"! Consider the following when you are asked a question about Jesus.
JESUS' DIVINE NATURE:
Uncaused
Unchanging
Knowledge is INFINITE
Necessary Being
All-Powerful
Simple Being {Not composed of parts}
INDEPENDENT
JESUS' HUMAN NATURE:
Caused
Changing
Knowledge IS finite
Limited Power
Composed Being
Dependent
This hopefully will help clear up much of the confusion. Let us sit in awe and wonder of our amazing and great God as it was Him and Him ALONE who sacrificed His Son, the Second Person of the Trinity so that we may live!!!
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
What evidence would make Hitchens believe in Christ?
The answer is nothing, he presupposes there is no God, thus if you start in the wrong place you end in the wrong place!
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Friday, April 10, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Friday, April 3, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)