March 31, 2007
The God Fearin' Fiddler
has a post up on why Protestants are offended by Mariology.
This was one of the issues that came up in our previous debate
, so I would like to address it briefly here. Before I do so, I want to make a few preliminary remarks. The first is that the assertion that Mariology is offensive to Protestants contains a terminological mistake, but it is a mistake that is also made by many Protestants. "Mariology" is the branch of theology that deals with Mary. Protestants are not offended by this subject of study. In fact, there is...
Continue reading "Protestant Mariology"
March 26, 2007
The Conjunction of the Armstrong-Laws is God
D. M. Armstrong is the best known proponent of a currently quite popular understanding of natural laws. Laws so understood are, as a result, called Armstrong-Laws, or A-Laws for short. These are distinguished from L-Laws, named for David Lewis. L-laws are identical to regularities in events (but not all regularities are laws). Unlike L-Laws, A-Laws are actual metaphysical entities, which exist independently of their instances. That is, according to this theory, the Law of Universal Gravitation is a thing out there in the universe (not in the mind) which actually makes massive objects move toward one another. The attraction (no...
Continue reading "The Conjunction of the Armstrong-Laws is God"
March 23, 2007
1 Timothy 2:12
Over at Better Bibles Blog
, Suzanne has been doing a series on Bible passages relevant to women in leadership. 1 Timothy 2:12 is of course an important verse to deal with on this subject. She hasn't actually got to it yet, but it came up in the comments to the post on 1 Corinthians 12:27-31
, and I felt that I needed to say more about it than could reasonably be said in a comment, so here it is: 1 Timothy 2:12 is a very difficult verse. When taken with the following few verses it appears at first glance to make some argument like...
Continue reading "1 Timothy 2:12"
March 21, 2007
Sola Scriptura in Augustine
As previously promised
, this post will treat the presence of the doctrine of Sola Scriptura in Augustine. First, let me state that by Sola Scriptura I do not necessarily mean a particular formulation by Luther or Calvin or any particular church, but rather I mean to show that the cluster of doctrinal positions into which all of these fall exists in the early church. So I really mean the doctrines
(plural) of Sola Scriptura, and not some particular doctrine. I define these as follows: A teaching is a Sola Scriptura doctrine
if and only if it asserts that the contents of the canonical books of Scripture possess divine authority
Continue reading "Sola Scriptura in Augustine"
Catholicism and Church History
I have recently been participating in a little debate
over at The God Fearin' Forum
on some of the issues of Church history (primarily history of doctrine) that are significant to Protestant-Catholic (and Orthodox!) disagreements. I encourage you all to head over and read the debate so far, and perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I will jump in! Later today (if I have a chance) I'm hoping to get a case put together for the historical foundations of Sola Scriptura...
Continue reading "Catholicism and Church History"
March 19, 2007
Rational Atheism Entails Rational Solipsism?
In the Fourth Dialogue of Berkeley's Alciphron, Alciphron the "Free-Thinker" challenges Berkeley's spokesman, Euphranor, to present a proof of the existence of God. Alciphron, however, lays down some quite stringent conditions: First then, let me tell you I am not persuaded by metaphysical arguments; such, for instance, as are drawn from the ideas of an all-perfect being, or the absurdity of an infinite progression of causes. This sort of arguments I have always found dry and jejune; and, as they are not suited to my way of thinking, they may perhaps puzzle, but never will convince me. Secondly, I am...
Continue reading "Rational Atheism Entails Rational Solipsism?"
March 17, 2007
The Historicity of the Doctrine of Inerrancy
Jeremy Pierce of Parableman
has an excellent post refuting the claim that the doctrine of inerrancy was invented in the 19th century as a response to theological liberals.
I intend someday to get back to my long-stalled Why Believe the Bible?
series, and when I do some of what Jeremy says here will be important for the next post, which is supposed to be on the witness of the Church to the Scripture. My one complaint about this post is that, in a fashion that is unfortunately typical of my fellow Protestants, it jumps through Church history from the New Testament, to Augustine, to Luther and Calvin, as though there was nothing in between...
Continue reading "The Historicity of the Doctrine of Inerrancy"
March 13, 2007
The Northwest to Remain Free?
It will come as little surprise to regular readers that I am not a fan of the Real ID act
, a law passed by congress mandating certain standards of identity verification for all state-issued IDs (including drivers' licenses), requiring states to share data collected in this process with the federal government, and requiring that one have such an ID in order to board planes, enter national parks, or enter federal courts (see also the ACLU's FAQ
on the subject). The law orders states to come into compliance within three years or not have their IDs accepted by the federal government...
Continue reading "The Northwest to Remain Free?"
March 12, 2007
A Note on Middle Knowledge and Berkeleian Philosophy of Science
A thought occurred to me just now as I was reading the end of Sydney Shoemaker's "Causality and Properties" and thinking, as usual, of a Berkeleian response. What, we ask, are the truth-conditions or truth-makers for statements about natural laws and causality? Shoemaker has a story about properties being defined in terms of dispositions to act a certain way in the presence of certain other properties, and he thinks we can flesh out these statements in this way. For Berkeley, of course, the properties of physical objects can have no causal efficacy. Instead, Berkeley takes these statements to be simple...
Continue reading "A Note on Middle Knowledge and Berkeleian Philosophy of Science"
March 10, 2007
Laissez-faire (the game) Version 2
Update (6/2/07): Three minor changes: (1) the cost of the Home Maintenance Co. has been increased to $500. (2) A provision has been made (see under "Taking a Turn" and "Jail") to ensure that players going out do not gift their properties to other players to alter the course of the game. (3) Changes have been made to the selection order at the beginning of the (not yet play-tested) zero sum variant in the hope of increasing the fairness of the initial selection of properties. Also some clarifications have been made. I am considering removing the Petroleum Distribution Co., but...
Continue reading "Laissez-faire (the game) Version 2"