Hello faithful blog readers,
I wanted to share about resolve and resolving, or being certain about something and doing it, being determined to do it.
I took a Bible class on the book of Daniel and through the many times that I read over the book of Daniel I was struck by a few different things about Daniel and his character. Remember in Daniel 10:19a the angel says to Daniel that he's "highly esteemed" so you can tell Daniel is a man of character: he's wise and full of integrity and the list can go on.
We watched a video called "Lord, Save Us From Your Followers" and it was thought provoking and it was a reminder of many things, some topics were the Christian response towards homosexuals, natural disasters, homelessness, Christianity in the US, etc. I was touched by a few things that reminded me I should really resolve myself when it comes to my faith and all areas of my life.
Some things that I encourage all of us to resolve in our lives are the areas of coming to the fact of the goodness of God and the role of Jesus in our lives:
What this means for me*...
1) I resolve to remember people before considering and remembering their sins and their actions.
2) I resolve to seek Wisdom that can only come from God.
3) I resolve to be prayerful.
4) I resolve to allow Jesus first before me first.
5) I resolve to love.
6) I resolve to listen, to understand, to hear and to see.
*I am on a journey and I would really like to exemplify Christ...I have to confess that I could get in the way of what God is doing...so forgive me and you can keep me in your prayers.
I want others to see Christ and not get in the way anymore; I want to be a Christian attached to Christ and allow him to be head of this body.
Daniel started off all the time praying! That man prayed so much it was like he was wired to pray or had a timer that went off whenever a situation came up; he knew God was accessible through the means of prayer and he resolved to go to God first. Now, when Daniel was to do anything he was in prayer and when he did things God's wisdom showed forth. Daniel was on the veggie diet in the beginning of the book and then he was seen as much wiser and healthier than others eating from the tables of the king...Daniel depended on God not physical substance though he had it through the all-veg diet. As he resolved to the veggie diet, the result was God's glory and God-blessed health; Daniel was promoted; whatever Daniel did he was wise about it, he resolved and it and then God was glorified. The steps Daniel took taught me: think and pray, pray, pray. After seeking God, then resolve (be determined, be certain what God wants) and then he did! I would sure like to be like Daniel; he prayed, made a decision, and executed that decision.
If you can't tell, I am a huge fan of Daniel (other than Jesus). He's was a man; he was captive who turned into a political advisor—he was in leadership and was in a normal job…I really admire Daniel's courage and character.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Meno's Question Blog 1
In Meno’s question to Socrates, he asks whether virtue is something one is taught or something that one simply practices without another person teaching virtue to them. To answer this question we must address what assumptions may come up; we can assume that virtue is good and right. Meno can assume that Socrates is the right person to go to get answers about virtue; we can also assume that Socrates knows virtue, and he himself is virtuous. To go any further and get any answers, we should have the definitions for virtue, teaching, and practice; we need the definitions to understand what virtue, teaching, and practice is and is not; we need to know limits. I believe that after knowing what limits we have, we can better understand the question; like Meno, he asked how one could have virtue; he carefully questions if the practice of virtue is something that is basically acquired by practice, alone, and not taught. For Socrates to answer this question, he would have had to ask himself what definitions Meno was seeking, because to be clear and thorough, he must address all sides of this question. When a person asks a question they can come from any direction; for example, I will ask a professor a question, because I want to know what he thinks, and he may answer in a way that makes me dig deeper and still not give his opinion or view.Socrates is probably very intrigued by this question, because he loves wisdom; he will want to be clear with his answers so his audience will receive what he wants to convey. I could see during this discussion Meno questioning Socrates, but Socrates could be asking Meno what he believes virtue is or what things are virtuous. Another question that may come into this time could be “Who is virtuous?” or “How can one measure virtue?” When the big, moral questions are asked, one may not be receptive to the right answers; however, Socrates believed in the god so he had discerning ideas of virtue and good along with non-virtue and evil. This can lead us to some issues; like, how can the teacher of virtuous know what virtue is his or herself? How can the student be certain that his or her teacher knows virtue is; further, how can the teacher know their teacher learned exactly what virtue.
After digging into Meno’s question we can assume that Socrates will answer how one could have virtue. Socrates will be an effective communicator, who differentiates what is virtue and what is not. I personally feel that virtue can be acquired through practice, but to know these things one must go through questioning. One must see virtuous things happen and choose to learn and repeat the actions. Virtue is important, and one cannot simply be virtuous unless that person has understood the opposite of virtue. To be able to differentiate virtue, one must have been taught what it is like to be virtuous and not to be virtuous. Once Socrates clears up any confusion, defines what virtue, teaching, and practice, and addresses and issues that can be raised he can answer Meno.
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
How Should I Think?
How Should I Think?Logic, as described on Wikipedia, online encyclopedia, is the study of arguments. Logic in Greek is understood to be words, and more so as thought or reason. As I look in the Microsoft Words Program it says logic is synonymous with reason or judgment. First of all, let me just say that this topic of logic is very broad. Logic is not a topic I understand easily. As I am studying it, I have to look to analogies and examples and as I am explaining it, I have to do the same. At this point, I cannot break this down to the bone, but I can take you through my thinking of logic.
As I had mentioned earlier, in order to have any grasp on logic I have to break it down. I am sure you would like for this to be easy to understand. Since logic is synonymous with reason, I want to be reasonable. An example of being logical is, if I, being here in Redding, CA, go buy stamps at the post office when they are open, not closed, and if I buy clothes at the mall while they are open, not closed. And if I want to plant apple trees, at my farm, I would want good soil, good light, and good planning so that those plants would grow, and I would be successful. It is logical to complete these tasks during the day while stores are opened for business and the sun is out for me to see where I am planting my apple trees. Now, what is being ill thinking is doing the opposite of the previous example: to buy clothes at the mall when they are closed and to buy clothes or to go to the post office to buy stamps when they are closed. It would not be reasonable to try to plant apple trees when it is dark.
Furthermore, it leads me to how I should think. I believe it is important to think right and to act right. I am now raising the question if being logical or reasonable is being right? To answer the question of “How should I think?” I have to ask who am I? I am Sudea, the daughter of God who is made in his image. If I am made in his image I should reflect Him. His character, which I can understand through his word, the Bible, is an example of whom I should reflect. So, how should I think? I should think as God would think. I would base my understanding or reflection of logic with God as my guide. I would say when one is thinking logically, they are thinking rightfully. This brings me to my last point of how I should ultimately think with verse eight from Philippians Chapter four.
8Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. Philipians 4:8
I should think rightfully, purely, lovely, and admirably; I should be excellent and praiseworthy for God’s glory; in my Christian worldview that is logical.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Treating Others Well
According to an Internet search for a definition of ethics, it a word to capture a set of good, right conducts. Also included in the several definitions were words like principle and morals.Ethics is also known as principles, morals, and beliefs. Morals, principles, and beliefs are important to have. When one is conducting himself or herself well, in public or private, he or she is displaying some sort of principles. In the absence of morals, principles, ethics or beliefs then we see wrong thinking and further wrong conduct. I disagree with Protagoras in his view of ethics in The Consequences of Ideas, by R.C. Sproul; he says they are “a matter of preference”¹. Protagoras does not end with that note, but he continues to say that morals are a mere expression of customs or conventions, which he believes are not really right or wrong.
In addition, morals help us stay in line with good and correct thinking, but it is God who establishes those basic morals of loving our mother and father, not stealing, and so on through the Ten Commandments. God works in ways to guide us to do the right or moral thing. Morals, in today’s society, have lost its place. It is difficult to see that in secular settings, students are not blatantly taught what morals are and are not, because then the foundations of truth would come out and there may be a leak—bring up separation of church and state. God would be in the discussions and public school teachers cannot impose their thoughts.
Finally, to answer the question of how I should treat others, it has some to do with ethics. I am a follower of Christ; as a Christian, I firmly believe in loving God and loving my neighbors as I am commanded to do. It is a principle in my life to treat others with love. Love does amazing things in the best interest of others that is why God says when we love one another our joy may be full. As in Matthew 22:36-38, it is the greatest law. We aren’t just called to love the Lord, but beyond that to love him with all our heart, soul, and mind. We are to include every part of our being. The quote that I grew up hearing was “treat others how you want to be treated.” I know that not all my actions reflect a very refined or perfect set of principles nor does it always reflect God’s image, but I believe that daily, God is teaching me to grow that I may learn from past mistakes and do things differently. If something should go wrong today in my reaction to someone and it is not how God would react, I can seek repentance and forgiveness from God and that person. In taking that action, I think my ethics are being sharpened. My principle is to treat others as a reflection of God. The answer is treating others how God treats me: with love.
1
1 ¹R.C. Sproul, The Consequences of Ideas (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2000), 30.[i]
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Thoughts of Right and Wrong
It was the first day of philosophy class. Dr. Berger was calling out the names of each student and he had them stand up and he asked them questions. He didn’t ask, “Where are you from? What major are studying?” or “What year in college are you?” No, he asked us philosophical questions right off the bat! I knew I would not be comfortable during this interrogation. I am a terrible “on the feet” thinker ever since I was young, except when I was younger I was always right (NOT!). This time I was in a college philosophy class.When it was my turn I was asked, “What is right?” This question can be cut up into many pieces, but I would like to answer right is good and wrong is bad or evil. One may ask, where does good come from? Good comes from God and good is God and God is good, all the time. Socrates would have said that good comes from serving “the god” by asking him questions. I believe that when I first asked, I answered looking to satisfy both parties of believers and non-believers. In my philosophy, I could say that the world is like the people of Athens, and I am like Socrates. My view of right and wrong will upset the people of Athens. Does it change the fact that right is right and wrong is wrong?
During my examination, standing there with twenty other students critiquing me and trying to grasp all the questions, another one swiped me. A question similar to “Is choosing God right or not?” I was asked. I answered to satisfy others, but I betrayed myself. I answered that choosing God is right, but not everyone has to choose Him, and their choice not to choose God, he or she is right. The truth in my answer at that time was people will make a choice whether God is what they want or not; however, the truth remains that God is necessity in our lives, for both believers and non-believers.
When I first answered, I may have conveyed that we should choose to God or not and I may have put the emphasis on choice. This is my more thought out answer: the choice of not choosing God is denying Him. Denying a person their identity or their existence is wrong. Not choosing God is wrong for both believers and non-believers. It is the harsh reality. If a student does not like a professor, does it take away his or her professor’s existence? No. The professor still exists. To diminish the professor would be wrongful act on the student’s part for it brings him or her to his or her original design to reflect the image of God. So, back right or wrong: they are opposites. Right in my simplest answer is good and good is God. Thanks for reading; I welcome questions or concerns or suggestions. Thanks!
First Things
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
What Are Your First Things?
What Are Your First Things?Thursday, in Philosophy and Critical Thought, Dr. Berger shared about C.S. Lewis’s first things. Lewis says that we must have our priorities straight or else if we have second things confused for first things we will not achieve any of them, but having first things first and second things second, we will achieve both.
In our discussion, I realized my first and second priorities were mixed up. In actuality, I didn’t know what my first and second things were; I never sat down to think, “This is my first thing in life…” I have made several goals in the past but they are not in any order. I wasn't sure I had succeeded at my first or second thing without knowing what they are. That night, I chose to “pursue truth” as a first thing with school. I also realized through dialogue between Dr. Berger and a couple of students that homework is not a first thing. When I want to pursue truth I want to do that in classes, asking questions, listening well and doing my homework and studying.
While studying for a test that night, I went through my notes with the mindset that I will seek truth in what I was reading and studying and learning. I remember making connections with the concepts and thinking to myself, “Wow, I know this is comes out of this equation during this process.” I felt like I achieved my first thing; I felt it was accomplished. I am not sure where grades come into play for me, because I got my test back and it was lower than an A. Even with the few hours of studying for the two nights of reading, reviewing, and studying plus all the work I did along the way, I found that I did not get an A. Does that mean I do know the information? I don’t know. I will go and speak with my professor this week.
As for now, I am still in the middle brain storming my “first things” or what I think my first things are. I have lots of words on the whiteboard in my head of “first things.” No one wakes up and says, “my first things are…” I know that I want “pursuit of truth” to be my first thing because it is a positive first thing. There is no harm in doing this first thing, at least not right now.
Although the discussion on first things helped a bit, it was also confusing. I have discovered some of the first things people have listed to be conflicting. If we want to represent Jesus with our love, who gave his life for his friends, then we wouldn’t want survival to be our first thing. I am currently looping around this talk of “first things” and what mine are and are not. I know that a guide for having first things will be to have them in the right order and to make sure they do not clash.
More Philosophy and Theology Mix
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
The Update on the Pursuit of Truth
Yesterday, I went in to see my Biology professor during her office hours. She welcomed me in and handed me my test booklet. Looking at my test, I scanned down to the ones I answered incorrectly. She asked me to start off with one and then continue so we would go through the whole test and go over the ones that required further explanations. In leaving my professor’s office I felt relieved; I felt satisfied. These thoughts bring me to Cicero, who is a philosopher who respected Plato and Socrates. The only knowledge I have on Cicero comes from a quick overview on the Internet and from Dr. Berger. He presented Cicero’s thoughts on that when he learns something it is a three-chord thing. Two that I remember are justice and harmony. My thoughts on the last one are either peace or truth; however, I want to focus on harmony of thought.Two weeks ago, Today, Dr. Berger asked if I completely agree with Cicero on his idea of when someone comes to a discovery of truth if there is a chord of three. I can’t say I quite agree still for I have much reading to do before I come to any conclusion. I do want to say I can agree on a surface level. When I was younger I would get so frustrated in learning math, science, and so on, but as soon I learned a concept and I applied that concept I felt at ease. Having the alphabet memorized, I can sit at this computer and type to create words and I am sure I making words that make up a sentence that make up some kind of meaning. There is a harmony in learning or coming to knowledge of truth.
A believing man must believe he has learned truth, for example, if he wants to know if one plus one is two then let him have one coin and add another coin; he will have two coins. The truth of 1+1=2 does not change. What can change are the perspectives and biases of an individual. If one is unsure if he or she has found truth to make sure that question or curiosity has been pursuit. Like what does 1+1 equal? The question is asked and the answers are sought by using tangible things. I believe similarly with wanting to know God’s existence, we can seek and ask and we will find.
God is infinite and we are but finite, although he stamps his patent on his creation. I believe we are beings that can reflect God’s nature and image. On top of us being made in his image and living among his creations, God also reveals himself to us. We must never forget the reliable resource of the Word of God. When one learns truth, it should create peace, harmony, understanding and justice of some sort and it should then be shared with others. Learning truth sparks a sort of good that is bountiful; it is news to be shared with others.
Philosophy and Theology (the mix) Part 1.
Older posts from when I was a junior in college taking Philosophy and Critical Thought:
My knowledge on “knowing how I know” comes from Dr. Berger’s class and a reading I did of a short introductory article on epistemology via Internet called “Epistemology,” by F. Heylighen dated September 1993. He starts by saying “Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies knowledge.” He brings us to the next step by saying that this study asks how we can know something to be true, adequate knowledge and false, inadequate knowledge. He then says he basically takes into scientific methodology.
Through the article, he presents different points of views, from history: the Renaissance Era, and so on. I would like to point out a few qualities for knowing true, adequate knowledge from my interactions of class and listening to Dr. Berger coupled with the article. As Plato talks about objective knowledge, believing truth to be foundational and outside of us, then so do I.
Heylighen adds that contradictions arose against the idea of truth as absolute. Some later suggested truth to be relative, situational, or subjective. The knowledge of truth was even said to be static where knowledge is something that builds from something passive to active and adaptive. Adaptive truth is the daily interactions of life and the objects of this earth. I, for instance, could adapt truth of my existence and beliefs by the objects of the world.
After the Renaissance Era, came empiricism or rationalism. Empiricism sees knowledge as a result or product of your senses, for example, I can know a chair is real if I hit it and sit on it for I have used my sense. Rationalism is I can say well if this thing has four straight, even-length, wooden things standing like pillars under a four-side, flat shape, and I have sat on this thing. I can say for 21 years of my life I have seen this figure; I will call it a chair. With a name like “chair” I have reasoned to say I use this “chair” to sit on in class or in my room.
My current thoughts on the qualities of truth as absolute, universal, eternal, objective, knowable, authoritative and exclusive. My argument is truth is objective, eternal, and absolute. It is not relative, where it is true for me and not for you because it can translate truth as meaningless and worthless to try and discover. Truth is established outside of myself, outside of you, and outside of maybe Simpson University; it is be universal. Truth is not fluid; it is not situational. God is real that is a truth; he is not not real to me, because I am mad; if I am mad, he is still real; it does not matter what my situation or attitude is. What distorts the quality or value of truth is the intent and perception of an individual. Truth has to be the same year after year, person after person. My knowledge of God, for example, as a living God who faithful, loving, jealous, etc should not be totally gone if I die. Since the truth of God is outside of me He will remain known throughout the ages to many people at one time. He will be known universally and He is an absolute truth. Truth is a pursuit; it is real and existent. My thoughts may be infantile, but I can measure truth and how truth exists in the world.
What is God like?
God is real and alive; He is infinite; we are finite beings. God has no beginning and no end; we have a beginning and an end. God is all-powerful, and he is all knowing. Though some of God’s nature and character is known and revealed, much of his nature is still a mystery. Though we cannot know everything there is to know about God, we can know some things about Him. God is a part of a trinity. The trinity is God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit as three persons in one. The concept of the trinity is very complex. When we look at God, we must look at Christ and the Holy Spirit. We can find the nature of God and his being through the Bible, which is His inspired Word.
God’s nature is described using adjective, phrases, and nouns; however, we cannot completely describe all of God’s nature, we can describe some of it. In Romans 1:20 God is invisible, eternal, and divine. In Hebrews 6:17 says God is unchanging. God’s nature is a builder like in Hebrew 11:10; he is the Creator—he created the world in six days. God is honest, because he never lies, as it says in Hebrew 6:18. God is just, everlasting, great, the King, faithful, a refuge, fortress, hiding place, above all gods. God is holy, worthy of praise; the Lord is God, and full of compassion. God’s nature can be hidden and revealed; this belief is seen in Dialectical Theology under theologians like Karl Barth and Rudolf Bultmann.
In theology God’s nature is dialectal; his nature may seem contradictory, but it is true. Have you ever heard that God is a jealous God or about “His wrath”? God says in Exodus 20:5, “for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God…” in context, however God means that He will punish those who hate Him. God is balanced. In 1 Corinthians 6:12 we are told, “everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial.” God is one who is purposeful. It is a familiar saying around Christians that God does things for a reason. God’s paradoxical nature, in theology, says that he is both hidden and revealed; he is known in the past and the future hence the connection with receiving Christ into our hearts, reading the Word, and being in relationship with God.
How then is God’s nature revealed? God is known through Jesus through the work of the Holy Spirit. Who is Jesus? In John 3:16, He is God’s only son, who died on the cross for our sins as a sign God’s love for us. The Holy Spirit is given to us, as believers, as our guide, so to speak, to teach and convict, and so on. The Bible and God’s words are “active and alive” as said in Hebrews 4:12. God’s word is sharper than any double-edged sword and it can penetrate through the soul and spirit right to the heart and judge the character of a person. Because God is all powerful and all knowing he can make himself known in multiple ways beyond our experience, his word, nature, and so on.
God’s nature is described using adjective, phrases, and nouns; however, we cannot completely describe all of God’s nature, we can describe some of it. In Romans 1:20 God is invisible, eternal, and divine. In Hebrews 6:17 says God is unchanging. God’s nature is a builder like in Hebrew 11:10; he is the Creator—he created the world in six days. God is honest, because he never lies, as it says in Hebrew 6:18. God is just, everlasting, great, the King, faithful, a refuge, fortress, hiding place, above all gods. God is holy, worthy of praise; the Lord is God, and full of compassion. God’s nature can be hidden and revealed; this belief is seen in Dialectical Theology under theologians like Karl Barth and Rudolf Bultmann.
In theology God’s nature is dialectal; his nature may seem contradictory, but it is true. Have you ever heard that God is a jealous God or about “His wrath”? God says in Exodus 20:5, “for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God…” in context, however God means that He will punish those who hate Him. God is balanced. In 1 Corinthians 6:12 we are told, “everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial.” God is one who is purposeful. It is a familiar saying around Christians that God does things for a reason. God’s paradoxical nature, in theology, says that he is both hidden and revealed; he is known in the past and the future hence the connection with receiving Christ into our hearts, reading the Word, and being in relationship with God.
How then is God’s nature revealed? God is known through Jesus through the work of the Holy Spirit. Who is Jesus? In John 3:16, He is God’s only son, who died on the cross for our sins as a sign God’s love for us. The Holy Spirit is given to us, as believers, as our guide, so to speak, to teach and convict, and so on. The Bible and God’s words are “active and alive” as said in Hebrews 4:12. God’s word is sharper than any double-edged sword and it can penetrate through the soul and spirit right to the heart and judge the character of a person. Because God is all powerful and all knowing he can make himself known in multiple ways beyond our experience, his word, nature, and so on.
Saturday, March 25, 2006
Can I Really Know Anything?
When I ask the question of whether we can really know anything, I dig deeper to ask if we can know everything. I then ask if it is possible to not know anything. I can know some things, but not everything. I know that God is infinite, and I am finite. I do exist: it is the “I think therefore I am” philosophy that makes Descartes popular. He would say because one doubts he or she exists.
Can I know everything? No, I cannot know everything. I can know some things. I know that either thing exist or they don’t. Do unicorns get mad? I know that unicorns do not get mad, because they are not real. How can I know the things I know? I believe that all knowledge begins with the fear of the Lord, like in Proverbs 1:7 “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.” To know God is to encounter Him, like Thomas Aquinas believes. To fear him and be in awe, love, and respect of Him is to be in relationship with Him.
The verse above shows that those who want knowledge, wisdom, and discipline are not fools. Fools are those who are morally deficient, as described in footnotes on www.biblegateway.com under Proverbs 1:7. The criteria for knowing and knowledge is one must seek the discipline and wisdom through God. No fool desires knowledge outside his or her own strength. When the righteous wants the truth he or she will use discipline and wisdom on the Lord’s understanding.
When one knows something it is vital to encounter God and to be in relationship with Him. We need to encounter discipline and wisdom. We can also know things in His Word. Some things are knowable that go against Rene Descartes’ law that material things are subject to physical law. We know miracles are not subject to physical law, because Jesus was a man, but he was God. Jesus healed the blind, the sick, and so on. A woman is in stage four of chemotherapy, the doctor diagnosed that she had a few days to live, but in her next check up there is no cancer detected. The physical law had not bound the miracle.
Knowledge is not always found or bound in physical laws. We can know things through God and with the senses given to us. We can sense, beyond out eyes, ears, nose, mouth, hands and feet. We are creature with soul; we are creatures with depth and eternal need. Further, we can know beyond our senses: spiritually and mentally. We have desire for knowledge; we desire to know. We can know; we can know through our senses. It is important to know with the criteria of discipline and wisdom and the fear of the Lord. We cannot know everything; God knows everything. Though we may never know everything, He allows us to know some things.
Can I know everything? No, I cannot know everything. I can know some things. I know that either thing exist or they don’t. Do unicorns get mad? I know that unicorns do not get mad, because they are not real. How can I know the things I know? I believe that all knowledge begins with the fear of the Lord, like in Proverbs 1:7 “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.” To know God is to encounter Him, like Thomas Aquinas believes. To fear him and be in awe, love, and respect of Him is to be in relationship with Him.
The verse above shows that those who want knowledge, wisdom, and discipline are not fools. Fools are those who are morally deficient, as described in footnotes on www.biblegateway.com under Proverbs 1:7. The criteria for knowing and knowledge is one must seek the discipline and wisdom through God. No fool desires knowledge outside his or her own strength. When the righteous wants the truth he or she will use discipline and wisdom on the Lord’s understanding.
When one knows something it is vital to encounter God and to be in relationship with Him. We need to encounter discipline and wisdom. We can also know things in His Word. Some things are knowable that go against Rene Descartes’ law that material things are subject to physical law. We know miracles are not subject to physical law, because Jesus was a man, but he was God. Jesus healed the blind, the sick, and so on. A woman is in stage four of chemotherapy, the doctor diagnosed that she had a few days to live, but in her next check up there is no cancer detected. The physical law had not bound the miracle.
Knowledge is not always found or bound in physical laws. We can know things through God and with the senses given to us. We can sense, beyond out eyes, ears, nose, mouth, hands and feet. We are creature with soul; we are creatures with depth and eternal need. Further, we can know beyond our senses: spiritually and mentally. We have desire for knowledge; we desire to know. We can know; we can know through our senses. It is important to know with the criteria of discipline and wisdom and the fear of the Lord. We cannot know everything; God knows everything. Though we may never know everything, He allows us to know some things.
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Truth Values
In doing the in-class packet/midterm, I thought through a lot of the statements beyond just saying, “Oh yeah, it’s this or that…” but answering questions like “what truth values or assumptions are made?” I also can say that many people do not put enough reasoning and assumption for truth-value or a moral premise in the statements made daily. I like Aristotle’s laws of noncontradiction, law of identity, and law of the excluded middle because establish the truth and existence of things. It is important to establish the value of truth of a thing like a unicorn. Unicorns are not real; therefore they cannot be vicious like Hegel would declare.
If someone gives you a statement like “You shall not commit adultery.” It is either true or false with the implication that the nature of commit or adultery is something else. A moral premise is important for any statement. The second example is a command, like from a sergeant “I want you to search the houses: knock on the doors, search inside, go around the houses, and report back to me when you are done.” We have to know the moral premise of why a house is being searched maybe because there are enemies. The command has no truth in it until there is a moral premise; the sergeant wants to make sure there are no enemies that’s why he wants his officer to do as he said.
“You shall not commit adultery” because you must love and honor your wife/husband, you are violating God’s law, and ruining your relationship. When one looks at a statement, one must assume something about truth and revelation. I said that truth in all aspects should be objective: it is either true or false. Either you shall or shall not commit adultery; however, this statement says that we shall not it does not determine our actions. A man who is not pleased with his spouse may hire a call girl during a lonely business trip or a wife who is not pleased with her spouse may hire a male prostitute during a girls’ night out. To give value to a statement in philosophy there needs to be what Dr. Berger calls “underlying assumption.”
It is hard to be in conversation with a person that may have personal beliefs that differ largely from you (like Atheists versus Christians). I have engaged in conversation with people who raise the most ridiculous statements. Charles Colson in The Good Life, at a luncheon with his close friend and his friend’s personal bible study group members a guy pointed out that he does not like Christians because they are “know it alls” in a sense. I appreciate Colson’s response that Jesus was the one who said the claim of “No one comes through the Father except through me” (194). The guy he was speaking to was a postmodern who claimed that a pen was not falling (as he saw several times when Colson dropped a pen in front of him), but that the pen was “passing through particles.” It is interesting that Colson says that postmodernism has “abandoned reason in the process [they] left adherents with ‘both feet planted firmly in midair” (195).
Reason and assumption should be used to determine truth-values, without reason one will be firmly planting his or her feet in midair. Word Count (555)
If someone gives you a statement like “You shall not commit adultery.” It is either true or false with the implication that the nature of commit or adultery is something else. A moral premise is important for any statement. The second example is a command, like from a sergeant “I want you to search the houses: knock on the doors, search inside, go around the houses, and report back to me when you are done.” We have to know the moral premise of why a house is being searched maybe because there are enemies. The command has no truth in it until there is a moral premise; the sergeant wants to make sure there are no enemies that’s why he wants his officer to do as he said.
“You shall not commit adultery” because you must love and honor your wife/husband, you are violating God’s law, and ruining your relationship. When one looks at a statement, one must assume something about truth and revelation. I said that truth in all aspects should be objective: it is either true or false. Either you shall or shall not commit adultery; however, this statement says that we shall not it does not determine our actions. A man who is not pleased with his spouse may hire a call girl during a lonely business trip or a wife who is not pleased with her spouse may hire a male prostitute during a girls’ night out. To give value to a statement in philosophy there needs to be what Dr. Berger calls “underlying assumption.”
It is hard to be in conversation with a person that may have personal beliefs that differ largely from you (like Atheists versus Christians). I have engaged in conversation with people who raise the most ridiculous statements. Charles Colson in The Good Life, at a luncheon with his close friend and his friend’s personal bible study group members a guy pointed out that he does not like Christians because they are “know it alls” in a sense. I appreciate Colson’s response that Jesus was the one who said the claim of “No one comes through the Father except through me” (194). The guy he was speaking to was a postmodern who claimed that a pen was not falling (as he saw several times when Colson dropped a pen in front of him), but that the pen was “passing through particles.” It is interesting that Colson says that postmodernism has “abandoned reason in the process [they] left adherents with ‘both feet planted firmly in midair” (195).
Reason and assumption should be used to determine truth-values, without reason one will be firmly planting his or her feet in midair. Word Count (555)
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
How Can I Know Truth?
My knowledge on “knowing how I know” comes from Dr. Berger’s class and a reading I did of a short introductory article on epistemology via Internet called “Epistemology,” by F. Heylighen dated September 1993. He starts by saying “Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies knowledge.” He brings us to the next step by saying that this study asks how we can know something to be true, adequate knowledge and false, inadequate knowledge. He then says he basically takes into scientific methodology.
Through the article, he presents different points of views, from history: the Renaissance Era, and so on. I would like to point out a few qualities for knowing true, adequate knowledge from my interactions of class and listening to Dr. Berger coupled with the article. As Plato talks about objective knowledge, believing truth to be foundational and outside of us, then so do I.
Heylighen adds that contradictions arose against the idea of truth as absolute. Some later suggested truth to be relative, situational, or subjective. The knowledge of truth was even said to be static where knowledge is something that builds from something passive to active and adaptive. Adaptive truth is the daily interactions of life and the objects of this earth. I, for instance, could adapt truth of my existence and beliefs by the objects of the world.
After the Renaissance Era, came empiricism or rationalism. Empiricism sees knowledge as a result or product of your senses, for example, I can know a chair is real if I hit it and sit on it for I have used my sense. Rationalism is I can say well if this thing has four straight, even-length, wooden things standing like pillars under a four-side, flat shape, and I have sat on this thing. I can say for 21 years of my life I have seen this figure; I will call it a chair. With a name like “chair” I have reasoned to say I use this “chair” to sit on in class or in my room.
My current thoughts on the qualities of truth as absolute, universal, eternal, objective, knowable, authoritative and exclusive. My argument is truth is objective, eternal, and absolute. It is not relative, where it is true for me and not for you because it can translate truth as meaningless and worthless to try and discover. Truth is established outside of myself, outside of you, and outside of maybe Simpson University; it is be universal. Truth is not fluid; it is not situational. God is real that is a truth; he is not not real to me, because I am mad; if I am mad, he is still real; it does not matter what my situation or attitude is. What distorts the quality or value of truth is the intent and perception of an individual. Truth has to be the same year after year, person after person. My knowledge of God, for example, as a living God who faithful, loving, jealous, etc should not be totally gone if I die. Since the truth of God is outside of me He will remain known throughout the ages to many people at one time. He will be known universally and He is an absolute truth. Truth is a pursuit; it is real and existent. My thoughts may be infantile, but I can measure truth and how truth exists in the world.
Wedding Plans
It is true; the word is out! I am engaged to the love of my life: Clay Romo. We have been together over four years now and it's been great and we finally got engaged a week after celebrating four years! I have been so excited for our engagement party and our wedding! We are to be wed February 07, 2009...its totally mathematical, too: 2+7=9...I love it. I am very excited for the future though each day must be lived for that day. God has been good to us and we are so happy. There are ups and downs but nothing too drastic. As of right now I have about 75% of the wedding planned. The 25% are minor details that are very important.
Our prayer requests: God would grant us:
Our prayer requests: God would grant us:
- peace
- patience
- love
- kindness
- growth individually and as a couple
- others will pray with and for us
- remain steadfast and pure
- seek first God and his kingdom before any plans
- prayer for others to see God working in our lives, etc.
Dating Diaries (from my old blogspot account)
The Must Haves
Hello friends,
I wanted to let you all know I am continuing my series on dating. I have chosen to share the "must haves" in a relationship. Everyone is different, every couple is different, and no one person or no two couples can be exactly alike; however, in every relationship there are the necessary things I want and have and know others should have, too.
Every romantic relationship needs to build on friendship. Each couple should feel safe with their significant other. If you do not have a safe, lasting friendship chances are you will not a safe, lasting romantic relationship. Having your relationship mean "friends first" will help you recognize you should think your boyfriend/girlfriend as better than you and you will do what is in their best interest. Now, I am not saying to sit there and take it when you think your boyfriend/girl wants to hear something you will just say a little sweet something rather you will do the right thing because you would do that too for your other friends, for your family, and so on. Clay is so loving and caring and he brings out the best in me. I think it is important to bring out the best in someone else.
What do I care about friendship? What should friendship look like? I know those are some questions that we all know the answers to, but I think I can share some insight of how that looks like for me and how I would like to help you see friendship in your romantic relationship. How friendship works out in my relationship with Clay is friendship is open, comfortable, safe, and lasting. I can share many things with Clay. Not only to I share the good, but the bad. I talk openly about what I like and love about our relationship and then we talk about things that we can improve. I LOVE IT...in the last three and half years we have grown. OKAY ladies and gentlemen it is so important to see grow and improvement. Friendship brings out the best in us. Friends challenge one another with love and within SAFE boundaries. I have challenged my friends, not because I am a bitter girl or horrible, but because I love them and want to make sure they are thinking right...that they are healthy. I would like to see people on the right track and thinking critically. You should never let your friend say stupid stuff and encourage them by saying stupid stuff like "that's awesome" like if your friends think killing people is great you wouldn't say "awesome" but you would be like what's going on? You are thinking very violently...are you all right? I know some of you are thinking, "Dea, I wouldn't have friends who wanna kill people for reals." I know people, but fill that crazy talk with something else. How about if you friends were thinking something ridiculous that did not make sense or didn't settle well with you. Friends care for one another, friends share with one another, friends go the extra mile(s) for each other. We are there to encourage and uplift one another—though we might discourage one another, we will come around to seeing how much we mean to each other and choose the better and wiser action. Having a friendship helps in many other areas. The area of expectations is one that comes to mind. When we consider others as our friends we allow them to be them. I think when we forget how our friends are we treat them maybe like clients, customers, strangers, and so on. It can depend on how we respond to them because we have forgotten how much they mean to us and we think of how quickly we can get rid of them or try to solve problems prematurely. Friends can dialogue through problems or issues to think on a ground that is leveled for both; no one is better than the other rather they are trying to see eye to eye. I could continue to write about what friendships should look like, but I think you get the idea. I want to remind others to consider a healthy friendship before a romantic relationship.
Other must haves: friendship foundation, courtesy, encouragement, humor, truth, trust, love, etc. if you have anything missing—say no to the relationship especially trust, love, and encouragement.
that's all for now...
I wanted to let you all know I am continuing my series on dating. I have chosen to share the "must haves" in a relationship. Everyone is different, every couple is different, and no one person or no two couples can be exactly alike; however, in every relationship there are the necessary things I want and have and know others should have, too.
Every romantic relationship needs to build on friendship. Each couple should feel safe with their significant other. If you do not have a safe, lasting friendship chances are you will not a safe, lasting romantic relationship. Having your relationship mean "friends first" will help you recognize you should think your boyfriend/girlfriend as better than you and you will do what is in their best interest. Now, I am not saying to sit there and take it when you think your boyfriend/girl wants to hear something you will just say a little sweet something rather you will do the right thing because you would do that too for your other friends, for your family, and so on. Clay is so loving and caring and he brings out the best in me. I think it is important to bring out the best in someone else.
What do I care about friendship? What should friendship look like? I know those are some questions that we all know the answers to, but I think I can share some insight of how that looks like for me and how I would like to help you see friendship in your romantic relationship. How friendship works out in my relationship with Clay is friendship is open, comfortable, safe, and lasting. I can share many things with Clay. Not only to I share the good, but the bad. I talk openly about what I like and love about our relationship and then we talk about things that we can improve. I LOVE IT...in the last three and half years we have grown. OKAY ladies and gentlemen it is so important to see grow and improvement. Friendship brings out the best in us. Friends challenge one another with love and within SAFE boundaries. I have challenged my friends, not because I am a bitter girl or horrible, but because I love them and want to make sure they are thinking right...that they are healthy. I would like to see people on the right track and thinking critically. You should never let your friend say stupid stuff and encourage them by saying stupid stuff like "that's awesome" like if your friends think killing people is great you wouldn't say "awesome" but you would be like what's going on? You are thinking very violently...are you all right? I know some of you are thinking, "Dea, I wouldn't have friends who wanna kill people for reals." I know people, but fill that crazy talk with something else. How about if you friends were thinking something ridiculous that did not make sense or didn't settle well with you. Friends care for one another, friends share with one another, friends go the extra mile(s) for each other. We are there to encourage and uplift one another—though we might discourage one another, we will come around to seeing how much we mean to each other and choose the better and wiser action. Having a friendship helps in many other areas. The area of expectations is one that comes to mind. When we consider others as our friends we allow them to be them. I think when we forget how our friends are we treat them maybe like clients, customers, strangers, and so on. It can depend on how we respond to them because we have forgotten how much they mean to us and we think of how quickly we can get rid of them or try to solve problems prematurely. Friends can dialogue through problems or issues to think on a ground that is leveled for both; no one is better than the other rather they are trying to see eye to eye. I could continue to write about what friendships should look like, but I think you get the idea. I want to remind others to consider a healthy friendship before a romantic relationship.
Other must haves: friendship foundation, courtesy, encouragement, humor, truth, trust, love, etc. if you have anything missing—say no to the relationship especially trust, love, and encouragement.
that's all for now...
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Dealish Dating Diary 1
So, I made two different dishes for lunch in a period of an hour! sweet, Dea! is what I say to myself and for left overs for the week so I don't have to cook meals all the time. I am on my way to a third dish tonight. I felt sooooooooo cool. However, I am not writing to tell you all that but that I am starting Dealish's Dating Diaries because OCTOBER 5th WAS 3.5 YEARS of dating for Mr. Clay Romo and me.Introductory Blog for Dealish's Dating Diary
I have gathered so many thoughts that I thought I could share with friends and family as to what are red flags, struggles, learning experiences, and all of that good stuff. I would say that I am honored that God has blessed me with a wonderful, goofy and cute boyfriend. It's so true what people say...like Gidget, the first, cute surfer girl said, "You gotta learn how to take the bitter with the sweet." oh man, I love her.
I would love to share as many experiences as possible about dating and to share the celebratory things and to warn others of dangerous ideals/ideas we can pursue. Today I will share about RED FLAGS...
How Clay and I met: Clay and I met at a "Young Political Christian Leaders Event" on the East Coast where we represented our church's youth group and congregation on important moral issues that go beyond abortion, poverty, etc...JUST KIDDING
He really saved my life when I tripped, blacked out, and fell into the Sacramento River at Caldwell Park...JUST KIDDING, again. We met at Simpson University's Freshmen Class Pizza Party at Upper Crust Pizza our very first semester in college. A few hang outs with friends and we developed a crush and the caterpillar broke out of the cocoon and developed into a beautiful butterfly of a relationship. The relationship is not perfect and it is a relationship not a task to be perfect but a foundation of friendship and fun...remember the good and the bad. :) Let me tell you that I am not a great person (DEA=HUMAN)...Clay is the best, and he is a real man because he brings out the best in me. I think I have always had HIGH standards and I am so crazy because I make Clay jump higher and higher with each week; poor Clay and he still loves me? wow. THANKS CLAY! My mom recently reminded me that we are two completely different people and what he can handle is what he can handle and what I can handle I can handle.
Red flags I have come to learn of from other people's relationships not mine, because remember y'all I am perfect (JOKE). Red is usually the color of warning; a color that catches the eye; it causes some sort of stimulation or for the brain to alert the body and the nerves of a possible threat...HELLO FIRE TRUCKS, the lights flail when the sirens sound and FIRE ooh...remember the warnings are for self-assessment or for you to use as a tool for discerning when something does not seem right.
*ladies and gentlemen...do not date people who do not have a heart for the Lord.
*Get to know friends and family well into the dating relationship or in the friend anywhere from 3-12 months if possible. You will need to look for things like can you or can your significant other be yourself around each other's groups of friends...
*Can your man or your woman's friends hang out with your friends?
*Does the man or woman you like/love enjoy your family?
*Does the man or woman you like/love love your family?
*For the interracial couples: does he/she like your food? does he or she like your cooking? Does he/she get to know cultural taboos/to do's? Do you wanna learn the language?
*are you controlling? Is he/she controlling?
*In the week-few months of dating have you lost friends? have you lost friends that are of the opposite sex because the significant other is JEALOUS?
*How is your relationship with your parents? How is his/her relationship with his/her parents?
*Look at habits like smoking, drinking, etc. How are the cleaning habits? The spending habits (be careful not to limit spending to money but time, space, energy).
I know a put a lot of things up for red flags...I know I am always trying to analyze/assess myself daily as it is a responsibility as a human being who knows the Lord its appropriate to self assess...how could I grow, what ways... you know, we always have room for improvement and I think we can work on ourselves but to be careful if we are involved with someone that we should not let things slide but balance it with discretion to see if the person we are with brings out the best in us. This subject is so tough for the sake of subjectivity...however when I talk or think I also try to be objective. I know I want the best for myself and the best for others. My thinking and my heart is so finite, though, so I can only pray that the hopes and dreams are blessed by God that I would influence others for the purpose of witnessing and sharing who we are in the Lord and sharing that we all need Jesus. :)
DISCLAIMER: remember I am a little subjective. The thoughts above are gathered from a life time of observation of my own relationship and other people's relationship. Feel free to toss what I say over your shoulder though I would not encourage it so. For any one who gets mad at me, please: are you mad at me or someone else or something else? Feel free to post thoughts on the blog. Love you all!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
