Logic

Some notes from Peter Kreeft’s Socratic Logic (pp. 28-33):

There are three kinds of thoughts, or three acts of the mind:

1. Simple apprehension [understanding a simple term--e.g., "man"]
2. Judging [relating two concepts by predicating one term of the other--e.g., "man is mortal"]
3. Reasoning [relating two or more judgments with a conclusion--e.g., "man is mortal; I'm a man; therefore I'm mortal"]

These three acts of the mind result in three mental products:

1. Concepts (the products of conceiving)
2. Judgments (the products of judging)
3. Arguments (the products of reasoning, or arguing)

Expressed logically these are:

1. Terms
2. Propositions
3. Arguments (most commonly, syllogisms)

These logical entities answer the three most fundamental questions:

1. A term answers what something is.
2. A proposition answers whether something is.
3. An argument answers why it is.

These logical entities also reveal three aspects of reality:

1. Terms reveal essences (what something is).
2. Propositions reveal existence (whether something is).
3. Arguments reveal causes (why something is).

These logical entities can be judged logically good or logically bad:

1. Terms are either clear or unclear (=ambiguous).
2. Propositions are either true or false.
3. Arguments are either valid or invalid.

To make a convincing argument you have to fulfill all three of the following conditions:

1. Your terms are clear.
2. Your premises are true.
3. Your logic is valid.

If you want to critique someone’s argument, you have to show an error in just one of the following:

1. They are using a term ambiguously.
2. They are using a false premise.
3. They are committing a logical fallacy (i.e., the argument is invalid; the conclusion does not follow from the premises).

Resist Temptation!

Oh, The Temptation from Steve V on Vimeo.

How Cain and Abel's Worship Demonstrates a Call to Missions

R. Ortlund writes:

Both Cain and Abel worshiped the Lord. Both brought Him offerings. But the Lord rejected Cain's worship and accepted Abel's. Why?

Not because Abel's was a blood-offering while Cain's was "of the fruit of the ground." The law authorized grain offerings (e.g., Leviticus 2).

Hebrews 11:4 tells us that Abel's worship was acceptable to God because it was "by faith." And "whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him" (Hebrews 11:6). Acceptable worship throbs with a heart-conviction that God is real and rewarding.

Cain did not worship God with the psychology of faith. His gift was safe: "Cain brought to the Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground" (Genesis 4:3). He worshiped God out of his income from past labors.

Abel worshiped God with the psychology of faith. His gift was risky: "Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions" (Genesis 4:4). He gave to the Lord from his breeding stock and from their best parts. He worshiped God out of his chances for the future, out of his capital.

When God rejected Cain's worship, he took his anger out on his brother. Murder in the cathedral (T. S. Eliot). The beginning of the divide between the true and false people of God who otherwise mingle together.

It is good to run from safe, no-risk worship. It is good to worship God with a practical demonstration that He alone is the future our hearts will be happy with.

"Let us offer to God acceptable worship" (Hebrews 12:28).

I am like Cain in that my strategy for worshipping God with my life involves job-related ministry and plans for service upon retirement. That means there is zero risk involved in my plans. Zero risk involves zero faith.

God make me like Abel with my very life, giving you the first-fruit of everything with zero guarantee that there will be more.

John Piper Discusses Spiritual Leadership

John Piper discusses spiritual leadership here.

Religious Relativism Creeps into the Church

This week, Newsweek magazine observes the rising trend towards religious relativism and ascertains that "We Are All Hindus Now"

Dr. A. Mohler of SBTS picks up on this article and responds to it here

Paul, Hell and Preaching

What role did warnings of eternal damnation have in Paul's evangelistic preaching? What would we surmise about Hell based on the book of Acts alone? I am wrestling with this question because the fullest treatment of hell in Pauline epistles is directed to believers, not unbelievers. Seems that this is also true of Jesus' warnings in the Gospels - directed to the religious not the irreligious.

After surveying the gospels, Acts and the epistles, the next best resource is Doug Moo's treatment of the subject here.