The Orthodox Study Bible: Orthodox Tradition & The Scriptures (Brief): Satire Und Theology Version

The Orthodox Study Bible: Orthodox Tradition & The Scriptures (Brief)

Preface

Originally published 20181009, revised on Blogger for an entry on academia.edu, 20260126.

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

Purchased from my former employer, the Canadian Bible Society @ Cafe Logos, Vancouver.

This text review continues...

Five sources of Christian tradition (iv)

In this entry I will deal with the first (1) 

Five sources of Christian tradition (iv): 1. The Holy Scriptures 

Paraphrased:

The Old Testament and New Testament are viewed as the written record and experience of God's people via God's revelation to them. (iv).

I agree.

It is understood that the Church, therefore, wrote the bible. (iv).

I agree, but I hold to the view that the Holy Spirit, guided human writers to produce inspired, inerrant (without error) scripture. Admittedly, with the original autographs which are not extant. But thousands of copied manuscripts of biblical books in whole, or in part, are extant.

Houston Christian University: Dunham Bible Museum 

Cited 

'What is a Manuscript? 

A manuscript is a hand-written document. The word has its origin in Latin: manu (hand) and scriptum (written). There are approximately 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. In addition, there are 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and 9,300 manuscripts in other languages. The New Testament autographa, the manuscripts written by the original authors, are unavailable, but manuscripts have been discovered that are dated as early as the 2nd century. 

Parchment: writing material made from animal skin (might be lamb, goat, deer, or cow), or Papyrus: a reed plant that grows along the banks of the Nile. There are 1,276 New Testament papyri, the earliest copies of portions of the New Testament. 

Different Formats of Early Scripture

Scroll: a rolled piece of papyrus or parchment. All of the original scriptures were written on scrolls. 

Codex: a book made up of paper, parchment, or papyrus, with one end bound. 

Palimpsest: a manuscript page that has been washed off so that it can be reused./

End citation

---

Basically, my Reformed view agrees with Orthodoxy in a denial of dictation theory, in regard to biblical inspiration.

How Many Complete Greek New Testament Manuscripts Do We Have? 

Cited

'Bob Wilkin (ThM, PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) is the Founder and Executive Director of Grace Evangelical Society and co-host of Grace in Focus Radio. He lives in Highland Village, TX with his wife, Sharon. His latest books are Faith Alone in One Hundred Verses and Turn and Live: The Power of Repentance.'

Cited

'It has been well publicized that there are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the NT. The manuscripts we have today were created between AD 125 and AD 1516. Scribes copied by hand the books of the NT. The first copies were made directly from the original manuscripts. Then those copies were copied. 

The number of available copied manuscripts has grown as new copies are discovered every year. It is now commonly reported that there are about 5,800 manuscripts of the NT. In addition, there are 10,000 ancient Latin manuscripts (translations of the early Greek manuscripts) and 9,300 ancient manuscripts in other languages (e.g., Coptic, Syriac, Ethiopic). And the church fathers quoted nearly every verse in the NT in their writings.

The time between the writing of the original manuscripts of the NT and their earliest copies is between 100 and 200 years. Compare that to other major works of antiquity, whose earliest copies date to over 1,000 years after the books were written. 

One fact that has not been published widely is the number of individual books for which we have complete Greek manuscripts. We do not have 5,800 complete manuscripts of any book in the NT. Many manuscripts–such as the Gospels or Paul’s letters–contain only a portion of the book. 

I asked Dr. Wilbur Pickering, an expert on the text of the NT, how many manuscripts we have for the various portions of the NT. Here is his answer: 

There are around 2,000 manuscripts (MSS) containing the Gospels; because of fragments and lacunae, for any given verse (e.g., John 3:16) there are around 1,700. 

There are around 800 MSS containing the Pauline corpus. 

There are around 650 MSS containing Acts. 

There are around 600 MSS containing the General Epistles. 

There are around 300 MSS containing the Apocalypse.i

i Personal correspondence (email) from Dr. Pickering on December 25, 2022.'

The Orthodox Bible states that the scripture was inspired by God, but was not written directly by God. (iv).

This disagrees with segments of Christian fundamentalism and dictation theory. A dictation theory reasoning the scribe/writer merely writes/transmits what God has dictated; but the denial of dictation theory is very reasonable considering the human aspects in writing the scripture. For example, the Apostle Paul, as a Hebrew Bible scholar, was chosen to write many of the more theological sections and books of the New Testament, such as Romans. Reasonably, even as Paul was guided by the triune God, including God the Holy Spirit, to write certain New Testament letters, Paul's mind was used in the writing process.

God verbally inspires all Scripture Erickson (1994: 219). Each human writer (or his scribe) had a distinctive human style. Erickson (1994: 217). But this does not make Biblical vocabulary and content, therefore exclusively human. Erickson (1994: 218). God inspires a certain author to write certain things, but as Erickson points out, God had been influencing and working on that author for a long period of time. Erickson (1994: 218). God definitely directed the writing of the author, but it is not dictation as if God was bypassing the education and thoughts of the author. The writers of Scripture were not persons without individuality. 

Thiessen states the dictation theory ignores the stylistic difference in authors. Thiessen (1956: 106). The stylistic differences are apparent with scriptural analysis of biblical languages. Thiessen dismisses the idea of a dictation theory of Scriptural inspiration, as the writers of Scripture were not persons that merely had divine information dictated to them. Thiessen (1956: 106). The writers of Scripture were not ‘mere secretaries’ that wrote words dictated to them by the Holy Spirit. Lindsell (1976: 32). It can therefore be reasoned it is not the Holy Spirit’s grammar being used. Thiessen (1956: 106). People were not robotically inspired to write Scripture. The distinctive style of Biblical writers based on the study of original languages makes the dictation theory quite unlikely. Erickson (1994: 207). 

The concept of Biblical inspiration, with the Holy Spirit serving as guidance for the Biblical writer, seems both orthodox and reasonable. Thiessen (1956: 106). Lindsell (1976: 30). The Biblical authors had full use of their intellect and used their own grammar, but were guided to write God’s word without error and omission. Thiessen (1956: 106). The Scripture was presented accurately via inspiration, states Erickson. Erickson (1994: 199). J.I. Packer reasons God and Christ sent the Holy Spirit to teach his people the truth and to save them from error. Packer (1973: 61). The Holy Spirit guided the thoughts of Biblical writers. Erickson (1994: 215). Shedd names this basic theory of Biblical inspiration as ‘plenary inspiration’ meaning writers were moved by the Holy Spirit in respect to thought and language and were kept from error. Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 72 Volume 1).

The Orthodox Study Bible explains that the scriptures did not fall from heaven, completed. (iv).

Agreed. Nor are the original autographs maintained supernaturally, but the scripture is maintained, reasonably via copying and scholarship.

They were written by human beings that were inspired by God. (iv).

Agreed.

The scriptures were written by God's people. (iv).

Agreed. As I have noted in my writings, the scriptures were written by those within the Christian Church community.

These scriptures need to be interpreted within the context of the Christian Church. (v).

Agreed. This same principle was taught to me with my Bachelor of Arts, degree in Biblical Studies at Columbia Bible College, within the Mennonite Brethren tradition.

For Orthodoxy, the Bible is the first source within the Christian tradition. (v). For example, Many conservative, Protestant traditions would also see the Bible as the first source, and final authority of religious truth, but would not generally emphasize tradition to the same extent as the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church.

Tradition, in my view, is especially downplayed in many modern, evangelical, charismatic and non-denominational contexts, that attempt to not be 'religious'. As if philosophically, the gospel cannot be presented within a religion, that is the true religion.

As I have noted online, I prefer the designation of Christianity as a religion as it provides credibility to Christianity within Religious Studies as an academic discipline. An academic discipline as is Philosophy of Religion, Theology, the Sciences, etcetera.

---

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1975) Philosophy of Religion, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1978) The Roots of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1996) ‘Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

GEISLER, NORMAN, L (1999) ‘The Problem of Evil’, in Baker Encyclopedia of Apologetics, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

LEIBNIZ, G.W. (1710)(1998) Theodicy, Translated by E.M. Huggard Chicago, Open Court Classics. 

LINDSELL, HAROLD (1976) The Battle for the Bible, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

PACKER, J.I. (1996) ‘Regeneration’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

PACKER, J.I. (1973) Knowing God, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Briefly on Religion or not?: Satire Und Theology Version

Briefly on Religion or not?

Religion or Christ, What's the Difference? (2001), Martin R. De Haan II, RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Preface

Another useful free resource from my former employer, the Canadian Bible Society, @ the former Cafe Logos, Vancouver.

Originally published on Blogger 20181101, but revised for an entry on academia.edu, 20250118.

Religion or Christ

Headings include

The Danger of being religious (2)

Our worst errors are always religious ones (2)

Danger follows those who trust God on their own terms (3).

Religion is something to believe and do (4)

Christ is someone to know and trust (5)

Importantly for my review within the Defining Our Terms (32) section is

Quote in italics:

Religion-a system of thought and conduct expressing a belief in God (32)

From this booklet, Biblical Christianity is not a system of thought and conduct expressing a belief in God? This booklet is helpful, but as does sometimes occur on this website, here we see a difference of approach within biblical Christianity. With this brief review, we see a divide between this type of evangelical, and in this case, I would deduce, possibly, fundamentalist, views on religious philosophy, theology and doctrine. This opposed to my Reformed, theological and philosophical views. By this booklet's own definition above, for clarity, in my humble opinion, Christianity too would be a religion.

Hopfe defines religion, as the English word religion, that is derived from the Latin religio. (3). Religio refers to the fear or awe that a human being feels in the presence of a spirit or a god. (3). From a Western approach, religion can be defined as a set of beliefs. (3). But Hopfe states that this includes belief in gods (3), but within a monotheistic system, there is one God. Hopfe correctly explains that a religion will have a set of beliefs within a moral system. (3). I would reason that Christianity is a religious worldview with a belief in God, morality and doctrines. It is a religion.

Nigosian also explains that religion comes from the Latin word religio. (1). But he writes that the etymology is disputed. (1). It is explained that 'Some scholars have tried to connect religio with other Latin terms, such as relegere (to reread), relinquere (to relinquish), and religare (to religate, to unite, to bind together' (1). According to Nigosian many within scholarship view religare as a classic understanding. (1). Interestingly, he writes that a Western understanding views religion as a concept of a person (2), I would add, that God is viewed as personal. The author writes that God as a person implies a relationship between God and human beings. (2). In my mind, biblical Christianity would be a religion, a religious worldview, where the triune God has a relationship with those predestined (Ephesians 1, Romans, 1 Peter 2, as examples) to be covered in applied salvation (justification, sanctification) by the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, through regeneration (John 3, Titus, 1 Peter 1 as examples).

I reason, Christian, faith, theology and philosophy has within its core doctrines, sound, reasonable, true premises and conclusions. It is a system of thoughts, ethics, morals with beliefs in regard to God. I, as well reason that core Christianity contains more truth in its premises and conclusions than any other competing worldview, religious or non-religious. 

In denying Christianity is a religion, this booklet, most notably, negates Christianity from the legitimate academic disciplines that use the word Religion, such as Religious Studies and Philosophy of Religion and places Christianity in the personalized 'I know Jesus Christ personally' intellectual category. In contrast, I view Christianity as reasonably supported within the academic disciplines of Religious Studies and Philosophy of Religion, and of course as well, Theology and Biblical Studies and academic disciplines such as History and Archaeology, as examples.

The triune God, Father, Son, Holy Spirit is personally known within a true biblical Christian walk through grace alone, by faith alone. For good works, not by good works. God is known personally, yes, and also known about though religious history and reason, sometimes within academic disciplines. 

Stop saying Christianity isn’t a religion: By Jackson Posey February 28, 2024

Cited 

“It’s a relationship, not a religion.”

---

In my mind it is both a relationship and a religion. It is a religious, relationship.

Cited 

'“Christianity is not a religion or a philosophy, but a relationship and a lifestyle” has become common parlance among college-aged Christians. But it’s also wrong and misleading.'

---

It is error, agreed.

Cited

'...proponents of what I’ll call “relationship theology” are completely correct that the core of Christianity is relationship. Their decrials of legalism are often sharp and necessary. But presenting relationships as antithetical to religion itself is a false dichotomy, and its imprecise use of language is completely foreign to historic Christianity.'

---

Agreed, there is a false dichotomy, a false distinction, presented with that type of typically evangelical theology.

Cited 

'Put simply, Christianity is a religion. The biblical author James says, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.”'

Cited

'Both biblically and historically, then, we can recognize that claiming Christianity as a sort of uniquely nonreligious worldview is untenable. Virtually all of Christianity’s historic proponents, from the authors of scripture up through the 20th century, agreed on this fact: It’s a religion.'

---

James 1: 26-27, New American Standard Bible (NASB)

26 If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless. 27 Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.

Bible Hub: James 1: 27 

Cited 

'θρησκεία is religion' 

Bible Hub: 2356. thréskeia 

'θρησκεία (thréskeia) is Religion, Worship' 

Cited 

'Definition: Religion, Worship

Meaning: (underlying sense: reverence or worship of the gods), worship as expressed in ritual acts, religion. 

Word Origin: Derived from a derivative of θρησκός (thrēskos), meaning "religious" or "devout." 

James 1:27 N-NFS (Noun, Nominative, Feminine, Singular. my add) 

GRK: θρησκεία καθαρὰ καὶ (religion pure and, my add)

NAS: and undefiled religion in the sight' 

Note

Bible Hub: James 1: 26 

James 1: 26 

θρησκὸς (thrēskos) is religious 

θρησκεία (thrēskeia) is religion

---

Summary

The Book of James views New Testament Christianity as religion. The New Testament itself appears to answer the question, Religion or Christ, with Religion and Christ, and/or Religion in Christ. The New Testament itself and some other reasonable points presented in this brief review, answer the question.

Religion or Christ, What's the Difference? (2001), Martin R. De Haan II, RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

---

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 2: God and Creation, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

EASTMAN, ROGER, Ed (1993) The Ways of Religion, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press.

FRANKE, JOHN R. (2005) The Character of Theology, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

HOPFE, LEWIS M. (1991) Religions of the World, New York, Macmillan Publishing Company. 

MURRAY, JOHN (1937-1966)(1977) Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2: Select Lectures in Systematic Theology, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust.

PACKER, J.I. (1996) ‘Regeneration’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

NIGOSIAN, S.A. (1994) World Faiths, New York, St. Martin’s Press.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

WEBER, OTTO (1955)(1981) Foundations of Dogmatics, Volumes 1 and 2, Translated and annotated by Darrell L. Guder, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books.

PhD and MPhil theses linked

2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter 

PhD Full Version: PDF

Requires sign in

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

MPhil 2003: Wales, Bangor 

With amendments from PhD work in red

Value of Symbolic Logic for Science & Philosophy: Satire Und Theology Version

Originally published: Wednesday, January 01, 2025 Value of Symbolic Logic for Science & Philosophy 

I am hoping to bring more new traffic to my second Blogger website, Satire Und Theology, so I will be publishing second versions of articles from Dr. Russell Norman Murray, with bonus work I do not want to lead with.

Value of Symbolic Logic for Science & Philosophy

LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy).

Preface

Unlike with my review of the Pirie text, the Langer review text never ended. But I will end this non-exhaustive review with this article, and of course continue to use the book as reference. My PhD was in philosophical theology and philosophy of religion, and my website work consists mainly of these academic disciplines along with biblical studies and philosophy. I am not a scientist or mathematician, but I have reviewed symbolic logic, which has mathematic symbols, for presenting propositions and premises.

Of course when I use science and mathematics, it needs to be accurate. This book review has strengthened my understanding of formal logic as a system, just as the Pirie text review has helped me to better understand informal logic. 

A formal fallacy occurs when a logical form is not used, and therefore is illogical in structure, and an informal fallacy occurs when there are errors in reasoning with a premise (s) and conclusion. In the similar way, formal logic is concerned with a logical form, to follow the rules of a logical system, to avoid being illogical. Informal logic is attempting to avoid fallacious reasoning with use of premise (s) and conclusion. 

Key symbols from Langer text

≡df = Equivalence by definition 

: = Equal (s) 

ε = Epsilon and means is 

⊃ = Is the same as 

⊨ is Entails

˜ = Not ∃ 

= There exists 

∃! = There exists 

 ∴ = Therefore 

. = Therefore 

< = Is included

v = a logical inclusive disjunction (disjunction is the relationship between two distinct alternatives) 

x = variable

. = Conjunction meaning And

0 = Null class

cls = Class

int = Interpretation 

∧ = Logical conjunction

# = Higher in pitch

---

The Value of Logic for Science and Philosophy

Langer opines that the development of logic, such as is used within symbolic logic, is not dependent on psychology or metaphysics. (332). In contrast, the author reasons that logic has greatly influenced the development of science (332-333), and at the same time has 'shifted many a philosophical point of view' (332-333). Using logic it is asked, what are the presuppositions of a view? (333). What are the premises of a view? (333). I agree that presenting logical, reasonable and true premises is crucial within credible academic work.

Langer explains that philosophy, unlike science, does not use sense experience to check errors all the time (333). My add, philosophy is not empirical, at least primarily. It is using reason. I would not go so far to state that the empirical does not at times influence reason, of course it does. Theology may be considered 'philosophy in regards to God', my Reformed, biblical, Christian theology holds to the post-mortem doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus Christ (the gospels/Acts/Revelation, as examples) and the future post-mortem resurrection (1-2 Thessalonians, Revelation 20-22, as examples) of regenerate (John 3, Titus 3, 1 Peter 1, as examples) believers based on the historical, empirically viewed resurrection of the God-man, Jesus Christ.

Cited

'Here let it only be said that general logic is to philosophy what mathematics is to science; the realm of its possibilities, and the measure of its reason.' (334).

Author summary of book

Langer writes that logistics is a specialized system of logic (334), with the purpose to show that the fundamental assumptions of mathematics are all purely logical notions (334), and therefore all mathematics may be deduced within a system of logic. (334).

A number is defined as a class of classes having a certain membership (335). That ''0" is the number in the class of empty classes (335). That "I" is the class of all classes with only identical members (335). 

Cited

'The process of forming a "member" is to define the numerosity of a given class without reference to the number, and then establish the class of all classes similar it. Two classes are similar if the members of one may be put into one to one correspondence with the members of the other. The concept "number", itself, denotes the class of all such classes of similar classes.' (335).

Generalized System of Classes 

Earlier in the Langer text, I reviewed the following: 

Monday, December 11, 2017: An empty class 

This review has progressed where we are now at the point in the textbook where philosopher, Langer explains that we have passed from a system of individuals and predicates, such as a class of white houses (wt) and a class of brick houses (bk). (171). 

This leads to a system of certain classes

< = Is included as in houses = white houses and brick houses. (171). 

Etcetera, including red houses (rd), green houses (gn), wood houses (wd). 

This means that in any universe whose elements are classes there is one class having the logical properties of 'the class of no houses'. (172). This is also known as an empty class, and this class is included in every class of the universe. (172). Langer explains that in each universe there is one 'greatest class' which is analogous to 'the class of all houses'. (172-173). This includes every class is the universe. (173). Langer means in this context, the universe of discourse for symbolic logic. 

Therefore, for any class, there is at least one class 0 included. Therefore, for any class, there is at least one class 1 included. 

(∃0) (a) : 0 < a 

There exists at least one class 0 that for any class a, 0 is included in a. (173). 

(∃1) (a) : 0 < a 

There exists at least one class 1 that for any class a, 1 is included in a. (173). 

0 represents there is a class of no houses in this universe of discourse. 

1 represents there is a class of houses in this universe of discourse. This specific system. (173). 

For any Universe of discourse, such as K (houses) whose elements are classes contains a 0 and a 1. (173). There are houses and non-houses. 

There are Christians and non-Christians, there are Canadians and non-Canadians, etcetera. 

(∃!) (cr) : 0 < cr 

There exists at least one class 0 that for any class cr (Christians), 0 is included in a. 

There is a class of no Christians, in this universe of discourse. 

(∃!) (cr) : 1< cr 

There exists at least one class 1 that for any class cr (Christians), 1 is included in a. 

There is a class of Christians, in this universe of discourse.

---

Boolean

Boolean is an aspect of algebra that is not powerful enough to support mathematics (335). But is used to present values instead of numbers, such as in symbolic logic. I reason symbolic logic also lacks the complexity of premise based, written argumentation. Similarly to symbolic logic, having developed and presented one sentence propositions for both MPhil and PhD questionnaires and surveys, these lack the context needed to develop deeper, sophisticated ideas. When answering these types of questionnaires, one is often left with filling in context and answering based on those deductions. The same could be stated for reviewing argumentation that is strictly using symbolic logic.

The calculus of elementary propositions

The calculus of elementary propositions is extended to general proposition by asserting that the function in an analyzed proposition is true. (336). Not with any specific argument (336), this has to do with format (my add). Because it is format, it has to do with the individual argument, presented this way (336). The calculus of elementary propositions is found to follow the pattern of the elementary calculus. (336).

Any individual, as in the quantifier (x) (336) is taken as primitive (336). Based on what Langer wrote, 

(x) : ax . ⊃ . bx

x equals ax therefore is the same therefore as bx

ax entails bx because the symbols that serve as functions are interchangeable. (336). Every function defines a class, 'namely the class of arguments which it is true.' (336). This class is its extension. (336).

Every function defines a class, namely the class of arguments for which it is true. (336). The class and its extensions. If a class is taken in extension, it can then be stated to be in classes. (336). Therefore, the calculus of classes may be derived from the calculus of general propositions. (336).

Relationship

Defining the relation between classes (336), the author explains that transitions from one sub-system to another have created some difficulties which have been met by developing the 'theory of logical types'. (337). This concept back to Properties of Relations is section 2 in Chapter X: Abstraction and Interpretation. 

With a general or abstract proposition, it is stated 'there is at least one relation, R having certain properties; and the form of the proposition to be expressive of those properties. Relations which have all their logical properties in common are of the same type, and are possible values of the same variable R.' (246). 

The most fundamental characteristic of a relation is its degree. (246). Forming dyads, triads, tetrrads, etc.. (246). Sets of 2, 3, 4, etc..my add. 

A symbol of R2 (246) is also in the form of a R b. (246). The symbolic logic symbols of 'a' and 'b' here are considered identical. (246). These are known as reflexive. (246). Taking one of the examples:

(a) . ˜ (a nt a) (247).

(A) therefore not (house 'a' is north of house 'a') 

In other words, house 'a' is not north of itself. A non-reflexive symbol possibly, but not necessarily, combines a term with itself. (257).

Langer example: 

(∃a) . a likes a (247). (A exists) 

therefore 'a' likes 'a' 

(∃a) . ˜ (a likes a) (247) (A exists) 

therefore 'a' does not like 'a' 

Langer implies that a creature may or may not like itself. (247). 

A transitive relation is such that if it relates two terms to a mean (average my add), it relates the extremes to each other. The significance of this trait lies in the fact that it allows us to pass, by the agency of a mean term, to more and more terms of which is thus related to every one of the foregoing elements. This creates a chain of related terms; in ordering a whole universe of elements, such a relation which transfers itself from couple to couple when new terms are added one at a time, is of inestimable value (too great to accurately calculate in value, my add). This is the type of relation by virtue of which we reason from two premises, united by a mean or "middle terms," to a conclusion''. (248). 

I will not use Langer's now non-politically correct and offensive to many in 2021, language, that was used commonly in the 1950's and 1960's. But the following is based on Langer on page 248. 

All Canadians are human beings 

All human beings are mortals 

----------------------------------- 

Therefore all Canadians are mortals 

--- 

Related equations 

Canadians=c 

Human beings=h

Mortals=m 

(∃c) < (∃h) ∴ (∃m) 

Canadians exist, is included in human beings exist, therefore mortals exist 

(∃c) ⊨ (∃h) = (∃!m) 

Canadians exist, entails human beings exist, equals mortals exist 

Practical philosophy 

The use of a class (term) and related classes (terms) as transitive can assist in the development of valid, logical, reasonable, premises and conclusions (arguments).

Langer finale

For the author, symbolic logic for science is a close relation to mathematics. (337). Logic is indispensable for philosophy because analysis of concepts is the only practical check for error. (338). I agree that propositions/statements always need to be checked for error. I agree that premises and conclusions need to be checked for errors. Symbolically presenting these premises may or may not add clarity to a situation, depending on the writer and as well, the reader. But admittedly, at times, I have found it useful to review premises individually before placing them within an argument in prose form, especially on website work. Such premises could theoretically be presented with symbolic logic and I have done so. Langer opines that symbolic logic 'offers a great deal of direct philosophical material'. (338).

ANDERSON, RAY S. (2001) The Shape of Practical Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 2: God and Creation, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

DARROW, CLARENCE (1928)(1973) ‘The Myth of the Soul’ in The Forum, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

FLEW, ANTONY, R.M. HARE, AND BASIL MITCHELL (1983) (1996) ‘The Debate on the Rationality of Religious Belief’, in L.P. Pojman (ed.), Philosophy, The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company. 

FRANKE, JOHN R. (2005) The Character of Theology, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

GEBARA, IVONE (2002) Out of the Depths, Translated by Ann Patrick Ware, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

KAVANAGH, AIDAN (1999) ‘Initiation, Christian’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

KIERKEGAARD, SOREN (1847-1848)(1955)(1966) On Authority and Revelation, Translated by Walter Lowrie, New York, Harper and Row, Publishers, Incorporated.

KIERKEGAARD, SOREN (1848-1849)(1961) Christian Discourses & The Lilies of the Field and The Birds of the Air & Three Discourses at The Communion on Fridays, Translated by Walter Lowrie, New York, Oxford University Press. 

KLEIN, WILLIAM W., CRAIG, C. BLOMBERG, AND ROBERT L. HUBBARD, JR. (1993) Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, London, Word Publishing. 

LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy).

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd. 

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

MURRAY, JOHN (1937-1966)(1977) Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2: Select Lectures in Systematic Theology, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust. 

PACKER, J.I. (1996) ‘Regeneration’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (2005) The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis. 

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

SCHLEIERMACHER, FRIEDRICH (1799)(1961) On Religion, in Elie Kedourie, Nationalism, New York, Praeger University Series. 

SCHLEIERMACHER, FRIEDRICH (1821)(1928)(1976) The Christian Faith, Edited by H.R. Mackintosh and J.S. Stewart, Philadelphia, Fortress Press.

SCHRECK, ALAN (1984) Catholic and Christian, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Servant Books. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

WEBER, OTTO (1955)(1981) Foundations of Dogmatics, Volumes 1 and 2, Translated and annotated by Darrell L. Guder, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books.

---

A version of this article to be placed on academia.edu on 20250101

---

Bonus work

I pray that my life will not be tragic. 

I pray that my death will not be tragic. 

In the name of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit

The Gambler's Fallacy: Satire Und Theology Version

Originally published: Monday, March 06, 2017 The Gambler's Fallacy

I am hoping to bring more new traffic to my second Blogger website, Satire Und Theology, so I will be publishing second versions of articles from Dr. Russell Norman Murray, with bonus work I do not want to lead with. 

The Gambler's Fallacy

My photo 2017-01-03

Preface

An entry in the Pirie book review. Originally published on 20170306, edited on Blogger for an entry on academia.edu, 20250105.

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

The Gambler's Fallacy 

Cited

'Gamblers, and others, are led into this fallacy by confusing the odds against a whole sequence with the odds against any event in that sequence.' (113). The odds against a coin landing heads five times in a row are therefore: 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 or 1/32 (113).

Very importantly...

Cited

'If the first four tosses, despite the odds, come down to heads, the chance of the fifth toss being heads is not 1 in 32, but 1 in 2.' (113). The odds for each individual toss remain the same! The previous tosses do not somehow effect the next. (113).

Pirie correctly reasons that philosophically, the odds remain the same. Luck will not improve or get worse. (114). Luck will not 'even out'. (114). The coin toss is random and heads or tails occurs by chance.

Judit Balla, Google+ Shared publicly

Investpedia

Cited

'What is the 'Gambler's Fallacy'

The gambler's fallacy is when an individual erroneously believes that the onset of a certain random event is less likely to happen following an event or a series of events. This line of thinking is incorrect because past events do not change the probability that certain events will occur in the future.'

Investpedia References

University of Wisconsin. "The Gambler's Fallacy: On the Danger of Misunderstanding Simple Probabilities," Page 1-2.

Online

American Statistical Association, Chance. "The Mathematical Anatomy of the Gambler's Fallacy.

Online

My Example of this fallacy

'The  Vancouver Canucks are likely to win the Stanley Cup in the next few years, because they have not won it since entering the League in 1970.'

Professional oddsmakers can create reasonable odds of a particular team winning the Stanley Cup in a given year. It has nothing to do with any concept that the odds will even out, or with fairness.

Pirie explains that in this context, the universe is not fair. (115).

Rather, from a Christian theological perspective, God has established laws of the universe and within that is mathematical chance which can be logically explained in equation. From a theological perspective, this is no way negates the concept of an infinite, eternal, sovereign, providential God that created and maintains natural laws and can interfere supernaturally within divine will as first and primary cause.

Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, Volume 83, Issue 1, June 2012, Pages 118-124

From Science Direct

The gambler's fallacy and gender

Cited

'Abstract 

The “gambler's fallacy” is the false belief that a random event is less likely to occur if the event has occurred recently. Such beliefs are false if the onset of events is in fact independent of previous events. We study gender differences in the gambler's fallacy using data from the Danish state lottery. Our data set is unique in that we track individual players over time which allows us to investigate how men and women react with their number picking to outcomes of recent lotto drawings. We find evidence of gambler's fallacy for men but not for women. On average, men are about 1% less likely to bet on numbers drawn in the previous week than on numbers not drawn. Women do not react significantly to the previous week's drawing outcome.'

Science Direct References 

M. Bar-Hillel et al. The perception of randomness Advances in Applied Mathematics (1991)

T. Dohmen et al. Biased probability judgment. Evidence of incidence and relationship to economic outcomes from a representative sample, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization (2009) 

C. Eckel et al. Forecasting risk attitudes: an experimental study using actual and forecast gamble choices Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization (2008) 

L. Farrell et al. The welfare effects of lotto: evidence from the UK Journal of Public Economics (1999) 

M. Kearney State lotteries and consumer behavior Journal of Public Economics (2005)

K. Wärneryd Risk attitudes and risky behavior Journal of Economic Psychology (1996) 

G. Charness et al. When optimal choices feel wrong: a laboratory study of Bayesian updating, complexity, and affect American Economic Review (2005)

C. Clotfelder et al. The “gambler's fallacy” in lottery play Management Science (1993)

R. Croson et al. Gender differences in preferences Journal of Economic Literature (2009)

R. Croson et al. The gambler's fallacy and the hot hand: empirical data from casinos Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (2005)

P. Delfabbro et al. It's not what you know, but how you use it: statistical knowledge and adolescent problem gambling Journal of Gambling Studies (2006) 

M. Griffiths et al. The psychology of lottery gambling International Gambling Studies (2001) 

---

If gambling foolishness and the gambler's fallacy is more prevalent in males than females, I am glad I have no interest in gambling, as a male.

References

LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy). 

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

----

Bonus work

I pray that my life will not be tragic.

I pray that my death will not be tragic.

In the name of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit

Billy Cobham/George Duke Band @ New Orleans, LA (February 18, 1976)

 

Fast drum solo/meltdown 12: 20 forward 

Apology 24: 00 forward