SkipCaptcha
731
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
my philosophy
This editor is a Bible-believing Christian, non-denominationalist, graduate of Bible College and Seminary, and universities (USA and England), holding 5 graduate degrees. I have concentrated study in math, science, Bible, modern history, ancient history, classics, Greek, Hebrew, linguistics, health science, and counseling. I have taught private school from 1st grade through 12th grade, taught Bible college, seminary, and university. I have enough education to realize that there is a lot I do not know.
As to epistemology, I hold these truths to be self-evident axioms:
1) I exist.
2) The sky is blue (unless you live in England),
3) If A = B, then A + C = B + C.
3) The God of the Bible exists.
4) The Bible is the Word of God.
With these axioms, one can do a lot of theology and arrive at a lot of knowledge.
Aside from the above, it is to be noted that the Bible offers fulfilled prophecy as evidence that it is the Word of God (e.g., in Isaiah 40 and following chapters, here and there). Also, the Bible indicates that creation should convince one that God exists. But I do not say that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true (circular reasoning). I say that axioms 3 and 4 above are self-evident and that every man owns the problem of affirming them or denying them for himself at his own peril. You must directly perceive that God exists (as, for illustration, Paul indicates in Acts 17). You must read the Bible and affirm for yourself that it is the Word of God -- that is your homework, not mine for you.
Without axioms, one cannot do logic, for logic depends upon starting with givens; and if the givens are not self-evident, ultimately logic cannot lead to certain truth. Why do I affirm proposition A?
Well, prop A is true becs of reason B.
Yes, but how do you know that reason B is correct?
Glad you asked, reason B is true because of reason C.
Yes, but how do you know that C is true?
Well, C is true becs of D.
Now tell me, how do you know that D is true?
This is an endless process which leads to no certainty, as one can always demand a reason why the reason is valid. Logic must start with axioms, self-evident truths which can be used as givens upon which one may apply logic.
My approach to faith (pistis) is that objective faith is being convinced that something is so, while subjective Christian faith is trusting the Lord Jesus. I reject that idea that faith is essentially affirming some proposition without evidence, though in modern English the term seems to be used that way more and more. I put it to you that objective faith (convinced that something is so) can indeed be for poor reason, no reason, sufficient evidence, or absolute proof -- it is all faith. But I put it to you that ''proper'' objective faith is the resting of the soul in the sufficiency of the evidence and in the obviousness of the self-evident. There are gullible fools who would buy the Brooklyn Bridge exercising faith, but such faith is not proper faith, but credulity. And credulity is foolishness.
As to epistemology, I hold these truths to be self-evident axioms:
1) I exist.
2) The sky is blue (unless you live in England),
3) If A = B, then A + C = B + C.
3) The God of the Bible exists.
4) The Bible is the Word of God.
With these axioms, one can do a lot of theology and arrive at a lot of knowledge.
Aside from the above, it is to be noted that the Bible offers fulfilled prophecy as evidence that it is the Word of God (e.g., in Isaiah 40 and following chapters, here and there). Also, the Bible indicates that creation should convince one that God exists. But I do not say that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true (circular reasoning). I say that axioms 3 and 4 above are self-evident and that every man owns the problem of affirming them or denying them for himself at his own peril. You must directly perceive that God exists (as, for illustration, Paul indicates in Acts 17). You must read the Bible and affirm for yourself that it is the Word of God -- that is your homework, not mine for you.
Without axioms, one cannot do logic, for logic depends upon starting with givens; and if the givens are not self-evident, ultimately logic cannot lead to certain truth. Why do I affirm proposition A?
Well, prop A is true becs of reason B.
Yes, but how do you know that reason B is correct?
Glad you asked, reason B is true because of reason C.
Yes, but how do you know that C is true?
Well, C is true becs of D.
Now tell me, how do you know that D is true?
This is an endless process which leads to no certainty, as one can always demand a reason why the reason is valid. Logic must start with axioms, self-evident truths which can be used as givens upon which one may apply logic.
My approach to faith (pistis) is that objective faith is being convinced that something is so, while subjective Christian faith is trusting the Lord Jesus. I reject that idea that faith is essentially affirming some proposition without evidence, though in modern English the term seems to be used that way more and more. I put it to you that objective faith (convinced that something is so) can indeed be for poor reason, no reason, sufficient evidence, or absolute proof -- it is all faith. But I put it to you that ''proper'' objective faith is the resting of the soul in the sufficiency of the evidence and in the obviousness of the self-evident. There are gullible fools who would buy the Brooklyn Bridge exercising faith, but such faith is not proper faith, but credulity. And credulity is foolishness.