EPISTEMOLOGY: The Key to Everything

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
281

Chris, please tell me what of this from the previous page you find untrue. Would Aquinas agree with you?(It’s been a very long time since I actually read very much of Aquinas. I am doing so now and will fit some in over the next several days.)

The God who in the beginning commanded pure incomprehensible nothingness to obey Him as it brought forth everything[quote]“from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.”[/quote]Therefore:[quote]he is the alone foundation of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom, are all things; and hath most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth. In his sight all things are open and manifest; his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature; so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain.[/quote]

282

While we’re waitin on Chris, how bout you Cortes. What do you find untrue in the post right above this one? If you would.

283

I found no fault

284

Okay, so I was making my bacon and eggs this morning when the concept hit me like a flash of blinding light, as always happens when the answer or missing piece of a puzzle comes to me after I’ve ruminated upon it for a while and set it aside to ripen, so to speak.

Mind you this occurred before I read the question above, and, very interestingly, as also nearly always tends to occur, with my flash of insight came just a little too coincidental accompanying event.

What occurred to me was that one of the reasons I’ve held for the existence of free will really doesn’t possess any logical value. That is, I had been thinking up to this point that existence for humans would have no point if there were not such a thing as free will. We would be, as I have said, wet robots, unknowingly playing out our various existences without any actual control of even our choices in a deterministic universe. Thing is, this line of reasoning is the very one I use upon atheists when I take them to task for demanding that God be a squishy touchy feely hippy type dude who doesn’t create Hell or punish anybody for anything, man, because like, if he was God, like, he wouldn’t do that, man. Cause that’s mean, and stuff.

However, if God is God, and he can “damned” well do as he pleases, well then, that works two ways, doesn’t it? It is just as plausible and possibly as likely that God has created us for no “reason” at all, at least not one that has anything to do with me. And my demanding that there be some reason is my assigning contingency to God Almighty, who is wholly non-contingent.

This does not mark the endgame for my position, however, as I can look to Scripture for evidence of and suggestion of the existence of human free will, first. And second, because the fact that God does not need to endow us with free will does not necessarily suggest that God could not endow us with it. Particularly as he exists outside of time, so our decision making process would not be viewed as an “I can see the future and know beforehand every decision you will make,” sort of scenario, but rather a “You may make any decision you choose, and I know every decision you will make,” which is not the same thing at all.

Now I already know what you are going to say about the Scriptural evidence I mentioned, because we dealt with that (sort of) in the Free Will thread. I am not sure I was satisfied with your answer there. Perhaps because I did not fully understand it. Perhaps we should revisit that here, there, or in Hijack Haven.

So in answer to your question: No, Tirib. I cannot find any fault in the above whatsoever.

285

http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/
Please see Chapter 9… OF Free Will. As usual(but not on every last thing), I agree with the Westminster assembly. Also as usual. I have no idea how all this works because He’s God n I ain’t. The Bear (LOL!!!) has a comment comin too.

286

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Okay, so I was making my bacon and eggs this morning when the concept hit me like a flash of blinding light, as always happens when the answer or missing piece of a puzzle comes to me after I’ve ruminated upon it for a while and set it aside to ripen, so to speak.

Mind you this occurred before I read the question above, and, very interestingly, as also nearly always tends to occur, with my flash of insight came just a little too coincidental accompanying event.

What occurred to me was that one of the reasons I’ve held for the existence of free will really doesn’t possess any logical value. That is, I had been thinking up to this point that existence for humans would have no point if there were not such a thing as free will. We would be, as I have said, wet robots, unknowingly playing out our various existences without any actual control of even our choices in a deterministic universe. Thing is, this line of reasoning is the very one I use upon atheists when I take them to task for demanding that God be a squishy touchy feely hippy type dude who doesn’t create Hell or punish anybody for anything, man, because like, if he was God, like, he wouldn’t do that, man. Cause that’s mean, and stuff.

However, if God is God, and he can “damned” well do as he pleases, well then, that works two ways, doesn’t it? It is just as plausible and possibly as likely that God has created us for no “reason” at all, at least not one that has anything to do with me. And my demanding that there be some reason is my assigning contingency to God Almighty, who is wholly non-contingent.

This does not mark the endgame for my position, however, as I can look to Scripture for evidence of and suggestion of the existence of human free will, first. And second, because the fact that God does not need to endow us with free will does not necessarily suggest that God could not endow us with it. Particularly as he exists outside of time, so our decision making process would not be viewed as an “I can see the future and know beforehand every decision you will make,” sort of scenario, but rather a “You may make any decision you choose, and I know every decision you will make,” which is not the same thing at all.

Now I already know what you are going to say about the Scriptural evidence I mentioned, because we dealt with that (sort of) in the Free Will thread. I am not sure I was satisfied with your answer there. Perhaps because I did not fully understand it. Perhaps we should revisit that here, there, or in Hijack Haven.

So in answer to your question: No, Tirib. I cannot find any fault in the above whatsoever.
[/quote]

Have you ever stood naked in front of a crowd of people you didn’t know? Just like there is a certain shame experienced, anyone who tries to go to heaven imperfect will feel a similar shame, only much worse. Because of this, they have no choice but to either refine themselves in the cleansing fire to become perfect, or stay in the fire forever. This is a choice on their part. God sends no one to hell except the devil and his minions, which can possibly include some people if they choose so.

287

Man oh man are you behind. Not your fault. Jist sayin. Thanks for joining us though. You’re in the right place.

288

[quote]benjamin89 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Okay, so I was making my bacon and eggs this morning when the concept hit me like a flash of blinding light, as always happens when the answer or missing piece of a puzzle comes to me after I’ve ruminated upon it for a while and set it aside to ripen, so to speak.

Mind you this occurred before I read the question above, and, very interestingly, as also nearly always tends to occur, with my flash of insight came just a little too coincidental accompanying event.

What occurred to me was that one of the reasons I’ve held for the existence of free will really doesn’t possess any logical value. That is, I had been thinking up to this point that existence for humans would have no point if there were not such a thing as free will. We would be, as I have said, wet robots, unknowingly playing out our various existences without any actual control of even our choices in a deterministic universe. Thing is, this line of reasoning is the very one I use upon atheists when I take them to task for demanding that God be a squishy touchy feely hippy type dude who doesn’t create Hell or punish anybody for anything, man, because like, if he was God, like, he wouldn’t do that, man. Cause that’s mean, and stuff.

However, if God is God, and he can “damned” well do as he pleases, well then, that works two ways, doesn’t it? It is just as plausible and possibly as likely that God has created us for no “reason” at all, at least not one that has anything to do with me. And my demanding that there be some reason is my assigning contingency to God Almighty, who is wholly non-contingent.

This does not mark the endgame for my position, however, as I can look to Scripture for evidence of and suggestion of the existence of human free will, first. And second, because the fact that God does not need to endow us with free will does not necessarily suggest that God could not endow us with it. Particularly as he exists outside of time, so our decision making process would not be viewed as an “I can see the future and know beforehand every decision you will make,” sort of scenario, but rather a “You may make any decision you choose, and I know every decision you will make,” which is not the same thing at all.

Now I already know what you are going to say about the Scriptural evidence I mentioned, because we dealt with that (sort of) in the Free Will thread. I am not sure I was satisfied with your answer there. Perhaps because I did not fully understand it. Perhaps we should revisit that here, there, or in Hijack Haven.

So in answer to your question: No, Tirib. I cannot find any fault in the above whatsoever.
[/quote]

Have you ever stood naked in front of a crowd of people you didn’t know? Just like there is a certain shame experienced, anyone who tries to go to heaven imperfect will feel a similar shame, only much worse. Because of this, they have no choice but to either refine themselves in the cleansing fire to become perfect, or stay in the fire forever. This is a choice on their part. God sends no one to hell except the devil and his minions, which can possibly include some people if they choose so.[/quote]

Heh. I’m Catholic, brother.

Welcome to Politic and World Issues (and Religion).

289

[quote]squating_bear wrote:
I found no fault[/quote]What about this? (Of course anybody else can answer too.) Of Providence. Chapter 5 section 4[quote]IV. The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence, that it extendeth itself even to the first Fall, and all other sins of angels and men, and that not by a bare permission, but such as hath joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering and governing of them, in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness thereof proceedeth only from the creature, and not from God; who being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.[/quote]In other words, God foreordained all sin and evil, yet the sinfulness of sin is charged to man alone. And that not only as simply allowing evil to happen, but ordering to His own purpose and glory. Here’s where we lose people. HOWEVER, particularly to you Cortes, this is most definitely taught in the bible AND absolutely required by biblical epistemology such as we have been discussing. He is “independent upon the creature; so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain” yet “He is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands.” Why? Because “To him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience he is pleased to require of them”.

The pathetic whining beggar that passes for god today bares no resemblance to the breathtaking, mind numbing, incomprehensibly exalted almighty God the Westminster divines (and I) found in the holy scriptures. The cross of Christ was NOT to fix the fall of Adam. The fall of Adam was decreed so there could be a cross of Christ. He WILL damn for all eternity every one of those He has decided to justly leave in their sin? Why? To the praise of His glorious grace. As he is casting sinners into the lake of fire, EVERYONE including the condemned will acknowledge His justice toward them AND by unimaginable contrast, His lovingkindness in sacrificing the only begotten Son on behalf of those whom He redeems from their sin and that same death.

How can He do such a thing? That can only be asked by someone who has understood neither their own sin nor His holiness. HE IS GOD. He is WORTHY of all glory, honor and praise and He alone. He WILL receive it. I am eager, blessed and privileged to freely worship Him for all that He is and all that He’s done and will do. This thread is intended as a monument to His holy, just, wise and loving sovereignty over everything and everybody. Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess (Isa 45:23; Romans 14:11; and Phil 2:10)

290

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
In other words, God foreordained all sin and evil, yet the sinfulness of sin is charged to man alone. And that not only as simply allowing evil to happen, but ordering to His own purpose and glory. Here’s where we lose people.
[/quote]I wouldn’t have said it myself - but nah, I wouldn’t argue it either.

291

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
God foreordained all sin and evil
[/quote]

So, there is no virtue and the Virgin Mary and Hitler sit at the same bar. Interesting view of the world you have.

292

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< So, there is no virtue >>>[/quote] There can only be “virtue” or anything else whatsoever, IF God foreordained all sin and evil.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< and the Virgin Mary and Hitler sit at the same bar. >>>[/quote]They were both conceived and born in identical states and standing before God. That would continue if both were elect in Christ and redeemed in His blood and resurrection. Jesus alone is the “salvific” difference between saints and sinners. That WILL be seen in their lives.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Interesting view of the world you have.[/quote]Simple, pure, logical, elegant AND most importantly, absolutely biblical. I said to Cortes last year[quote]A world view, a paradigm of reality, stands or falls as a system, the individualized components of which immediately point to the rest of the whole for their validity. Right now Cortes is asking me some good tough questions in the other thread that I DO have answers for, but those answers reside in the system. It is not possible for a truly Christian world view to be philosophically defended in an effective way on a point by point basis.

The points are kinda like fish. They swim in an intellectual ecosystem on which they depend for life. On the other hand the system, the whole, is contemporaneously apprehended by faith AS the entire sum of the points rightly divided within the system itself. Circular? You betcha. Divinely circular. Bitten, chewed, swallowed and digested all by faith in the utterly non contingent, all sovereign, all defining, all governing God which is itself His gift[/quote]

293

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
They were both conceived and born in identical states and standing before God. That would continue if both were elect in Christ and redeemed in His blood and resurrection. Jesus alone is the “salvific” difference between saints and sinners. That WILL be seen in their lives.
[/quote]

If you mean they were both born with the guilt of Original Sin, then yes you are right. Did they both have the stain of Original Sin? No, the Virgin Mary was given a singular grace. This is attested from the Early Christians (St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo) and even Martin Luther and John Calvin.

However, if it is preordained that one is to do the things they do, they cannot be responsible. There has to be free will.

294

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< However, if it is preordained that one is to do the things they do, they cannot be responsible. There has to be free will.[/quote]No sir. Not the free will you mean by this. A will freer than God’s introduces contingency into the Godhead. A catastrophic biblical and logical error. I say again. God has foreordained every last free movement of the will of every last human being and I am entirely unequipped to comprehend that and so are you. Bless His name, I don’t even have a desire to anymore.

295

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< However, if it is preordained that one is to do the things they do, they cannot be responsible. There has to be free will.[/quote]No sir. Not the free will you mean by this. A will freer than God’s introduces contingency into the Godhead. A catastrophic biblical and logical error. I say again. God has foreordained every last free movement of the will of every last human being and I am entirely unequipped to comprehend that and so are you. Bless His name, I don’t even have a desire to anymore.
[/quote]

But we have free will and He doesn’t foreordain our sin. You can’t ordain sin. That doesn’t even make sense.

296

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< However, if it is preordained that one is to do the things they do, they cannot be responsible. There has to be free will.[/quote]No sir. Not the free will you mean by this. A will freer than God’s introduces contingency into the Godhead. A catastrophic biblical and logical error. I say again. God has foreordained every last free movement of the will of every last human being and I am entirely unequipped to comprehend that and so are you. Bless His name, I don’t even have a desire to anymore.
[/quote]

But we have free will and He doesn’t foreordain our sin. You can’t ordain sin. That doesn’t even make sense. [/quote]From eternity Chris, He has rendered the fall of Adam and every evil that will ever be perpetrated against Him unchangeably certain. WITHOUT in any way being culpable or defiled in so doing. He accomplishes this by divine mechanisms known only to Himself. By faith, I praise His glorious name exactly BECAUSE He is the sovereign of all. The triumphant conquering King of all that is or ever could be. Even the hearts of other created kings(presidents). The Douay-Rheims Bible is wonderful here Chris. Proverbs 21:1 [quote]As the divisions of waters, so the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: whithersoever he will he shall turn it.[/quote]
I KNOW I will stand in His glorious presence at the judgement, clothed in the righteousness of Jesus. Redeemed, raised, sanctified and glorified in and by His electing grace. He chose me in Him before the foundation of the world(Ephesians 1). I CANNOT be ever lost again. Therefore I serve and worship Him with everything I am and everything I have. This is not mere theological philosophical gymnastics to me Chris. He made me who and what I am. I offer that back to Him in grateful humble submission.

297

Even one of the most passionate Believers in Christ and Christianity, Soren Kierkegaard, held that rationality can’t give one a good reason for believing in Christianity. The believer has to take a leap of faith, since there can’t be a rational foundation. Epistemology is the study of Knowledge not about faith. Unless you are a rationalist idealist, this way of viewing epistemology would be unacceptable, but as Kant said, " reason without percepts is blind, and percepts without reason is empty".

298

[quote]silee wrote:
Even one of the most passionate Believers in Christ and Christianity, Soren Kierkegaard, held that rationality can’t give one a good reason for believing in Christianity. The believer has to take a leap of faith, since there can’t be a rational foundation. Epistemology is the study of Knowledge not about faith. Unless you are a rationalist idealist, this way of viewing epistemology would be unacceptable, but as Kant said, " reason without percepts is blind, and percepts without reason is empty". [/quote]

…why do persons put a divide between faith and reason that does not exist, I am not sure. Just as much as I don’t understand why modern man insists, no demands, that philosophy has to go against common sense, Kant, as well as, Hegel being among those demanding men.

Not even Augustine in his emphasis on faith put a divide between the two, “I believe, in order to understand; and I understand, the better to believe.”

299

So according to your thinking Bro chris, you think faith and reason are interchangeable?

well a part of modern philosophy as I understand it has to do with Ordinary language philosophy. Here they the philosophers of ordinary language are looking at how language is used, and so it relies on context. . The notion of common sense is itself problematic, who’s everyday sense and in favor of what?

300

[quote]silee wrote:
So according to your thinking Bro chris, you think faith and reason are interchangeable? [/quote]

That’s a far step. No, I said nothing of the kind.

[quote]well a part of modern philosophy as I understand it has to do with Ordinary language philosophy. Here they the philosophers of ordinary language are looking at how language is used, and so it relies on context. . The notion of common sense is itself problematic, who’s everyday sense and in favor of what?
[/quote]

I don’t find the notion of common sense problematic, seems very simple.