A consideration of Paley's 'watchmaker' design argument. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/g/genpub/PaleyNatur/1:2?rgn=div1;view=fulltext
A less ambitious argument, yet largely depends on belief in God for probable force. Moreover, God is nevertheless Creator of all things, even those that appear chaotic or undesigned.
Whatever can be proven, would thereby not be God. The Christian God of Scripture, the Creator of all things, is not subject to the laws He creates. And we come to know Him through directly experiencing His speaking the truth about Himself in Scripture by regeneration.
Incoherence of classic restrictions on self-evidence: 1. idea that it must be accepted by all experts/everyone is unknowable; furthermore, itself neither proven, nor self-evident (so, self-referentially incoherent) 2. idea that it must be a necessary law is derived from religious view of logic as Divine; also self-referentially incoherent 3. idea that it must be infallible contradicts fact that humans have no belief-forming capacity that cannot be possibly mistaken; also self-referentially incoherent
Self-evidence A belief is self-evident if it is: 1. known not by inference from any other belief, and 2. known as prima facie true, and 3. known as irresistibly true (even if not at first)
Normal perceptions, introspection, memory, and 'rational' intuition can generate self-evident beliefs.
3 'classic' further restrictions are incoherent, failing their own test. a. all experts and/or everyone b. necessary 'law' c. infallibility
We can know God is real by experiencing Scripture to be God speaking, His revelation, the self-evident truth about God from God.
What is religious experience? An experience is religious iff: 1. it generates (where one comes to see as true), or 2. confirms (what one could expect if true), or 3. deepens (one's understanding of or commitment to) a religious belief.
Varieties: 1. perceptions 2. awareness behind what is perceived 3. sense of presence 4. ineffable sense of union *5. reading/hearing Scripture
Basic views of how the non-Divine relates to the Divine (in Venn diagrams) 1. 'Theist' (Divine is transcendent to created reality) 2. 'Naturalist' (Divine is some immanent part/s within reality) 3. 'Pantheist' (Divine is coextensive with or entirely permeates reality)
Objections to the definition of religious belief, answered:
1. Ob: Not all gods/deities are viewed as self-existent. A: Right. Such gods are not what is taken as the Divine per se.
2. Ob: Some beliefs about what is self-existent occur in context of scientific theories. A: Right. That's irrelevant to it, nevertheless, being a belief in something taken as Divine.
3. Ob: Some beliefs about what is self-existent are not accompanied by worship or ritual. A: Right. That's irrelevant to whether something is, nevertheless, taken as Divine.
4. Ob: Some beliefs about what is self-existent are 'rational' and not taken on 'blind faith'. A: No belief about what is taken to be Divine is based on inferential 'proof', nor is any viewed as 'blind faith'. Rather, all such beliefs are experienced as self-evidently true (to be explained further).
5. Ob: Some beliefs about what is self-existent are not accompanied by ethics, or by views of human nature or destiny. A: Right. However, all beliefs about what is self-existent have implications for such matters, even if one does not consider them.
Considering the totality of reality, either all or some part must necessarily be Divine/self-existent, since there is nothing else for it to depend on.
Different kinds of definitions: - archetypal (classic example of the object), - nominal (how a word is being used in a given case), - operational (how something behaves under given conditions), - real/essential (characteristics true of all and only the given object)
The Divine is a self-existent reality (unconditionally non-dependent) upon which all else depends (however else further characterized). [So, we might say religion is inevitable human awareness of and relation to the Divine, whether known truly or falsely.]
What is religious belief? A belief is religious iff: 1. it is about something taken as Divine, or 2. it is about how non-Divine relates to (or depends on) the Divine, or 3. it is about how humans can stand in proper relation to the Divine
What is philosophy? The study of reality (and knowledge), generally. A matter of how all the various sides of reality relate and 'hang together'; and how we know it.
See also Intro to Christian Philosophy: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwrDNUO5MDu-T6PEv7K3nfET-yWKoo523Reformed Close Confessional Communionreformational2024-08-28 | : Why "credible profession of faith" of penitent, baptized church members is *not* the biblically *sufficient* criterion for admission to the Lord's Supper
The usual standard for admission to the Lord's Supper in Orthodox Presbyterian Church (and other NAPARC) congregations is that the would-be communicant have a credible profession of faith in the gospel, live penitently, and be a baptized member of a gospel-believing church. The confessional Presbyterian & Reformed view of close communion or confessional communion is not widely known or understood today. Gregory Baus describes the Reformed close/confessional view in contrast to usual OPC practice, and presents some Scriptural and doctrinal support for it.
#HermanDooyeweerd #AbrahamKuyper #NeoCalvinism #ReformationalPhilosophyKerry Baldwin on The Hrvoje Moric Show, Mon 5 Feb 2024reformational2024-02-07 | mereliberty.com/membership/courses https://tntradio.live/shows/the-hrvoje-moric-show/ Instructor Kerry Baldwin gives her analysis of the current state of the world from a (Reformed) libertarian Christian's perspective, expertly defines critical thinking, explains the proper way to use the Socratic method and more.Turning Points In American Presbyterian History Introductionreformational2024-01-16 | Written by Darryl G. Hart and John R. Muether available here: opc.org/TurningPoints.html Read by A.I. audio clone of Hart's voice See their book _Seeking A Better Country: 300 Years Of American Presbyterianism_ here: amazon.com/dp/1629956546Charles Lee Irons on the Framework Interpretation of Creation Days in Genesisreformational2022-06-16 | at UCLA in 2001 Charles Lee Irons of @CharlesLeeIrons / The Upper Register site and podcast presents the literary framework view of the days of the creation week revealed in Genesis 1-2. See summary here: upper-register.com/papers/framework_interpretation.html