Any study of ethics and ethos must include a visit into the world of philosophy. Briefly, we consider several philosophy contributors: Aristotle, Kant, Descartes, Augustine, Sartre, Spinoza, and Jesus Messiah. We limit our philosophical giants to this august group in consideration for time and space. The biblical Jesus, of course, receives inclusion: without whom this article would lack purpose.
Aristotle, the Peripatetic, advocated the syllogism as means to establish truth; which process prefers an input from major and minor premise and thus to an acceptable conclusion. Aristotle's syllogism was akin to theocratic ordinances requiring two witnesses for God ordinance infractions or to adjudicate theocratic rules resident in God ordinances. Such influence to God existence and theocratic rule over the twelve tribes cannot be denied. Thus, we establish a means to reliable conclusion.
Roughly quoted, Immanuel Kant observed: 'No man has the intellect to deny another man's God.' Astutely, he posited limitations to enquiry's broader scope as it might pertain to the intangible. Then, Descartes coined the renowned adage, "I think, therefore I am." The two observations not only reinforce each other but establish immutability in God existence in its basic legal-historicism (atheists take note); even so, such does not prove the omnipotence claimed (theists take note). However, such philosophical profoundness leads to yet another great insight.
Jean-Paul Sartre extended Descartes astute observation to existentialism dimensions. Sartre observed contemporaries exercising freedom of choice and therefore earning the burden for any fateful consequences: witnessed where ordinary men assume roles best suited to their own occasion or purpose; thus, we address existentialism's definition. Simply, existentialism defines man's tendency to innovate existence-to adopt self-determination. This self-reliance was the one fault preventing righteousness for the patriarchs in Hebrews 11, though they had abundant faith. Existentialism attains better definition in a more familiar example: where, Christians play a sympathetic role during fellowship but regress to a lesser role outside Church auspices. We might recall, self-determination was the downfall of Eve and Abraham's descendants, who sought Paul's 'better thing' advocated in Hebrews 11:40; which better thing awaited the 'Grace' opportunity posited at Romans 11:6.
We find then, these great philosophers did much to limit and define the language used for principals and principles in biblical subtlety.
At his own intellectuality expense, Saint Augustine noted an existential failing when he answered a friend's enquiry: "What is Grace? He answered: "I know what Grace is until you ask me; but when you ask me, I do not know." Such admission might prompt further enquiry: What uncertainty in Grace definition elicited pause from the renowned Saint Augustine? Such candor prompts enquiry into the non sequitur conclusions rampant in modernist exposition and sermon. To be sure, Bible language is difficult; and the cause for Augustine's incertitude magnifies the Romans 11:6 formula for attaining election status; we paraphrase Bible text: 'If by grace, then is attainment no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if attaining election be of works then is it no more grace; otherwise work is no more work.' We commiserate with St. Augustine's uncertainty! And you think Paul is easy to understand? Paul is saying: 'works and grace are incompatible'! Works cannot be the 'stars in your crown' nor is 'grace' the 'unmerited favor' so popularly envisioned.
Problematic, modern definition compromises the 'grace' extent in Romans 11:6; here, Grace is a 'time expression' and not tradition's mistaken 'material benefit.' Such misunderstanding evoked Messiah's displeasure at Mark 8:21 for his Disciples when they failed to understand the time, progeny, and Ages semantic in loaves, fishes, numbers fed, and baskets of fragments. Do exegetes know? Actually, time is the single most urgent Bible topic. How would you respond if present at the Mark 8:21 query? Would readers respond differently today?
We have a duty to extract Bible semantics, to transcend mediocrity, and to further interpretive excellence. However, excellence is rare. Spinoza convincingly summed it all up when he said, "Excellence is as rare as it is difficult." But we can and must seek excellence in whatever our endeavor. You can fall short of pure excellence, but any degree of excellence is superior to its opposite.
Schopenhouer gave would-be philosophers their due when he accredits Spinoza: 'To be a philosopher is to be a Spinoist.' If you strive for excellence, we invite your attention to further readings delving into the philosophy of religion. Truth is stranger than fiction - stranger than the misinterpretation still holding forth in traditional teachings.
Ben Winter, particles physicist, Bible scholar, and author of "THE GREAT DECEPTION: Symbols And Numbers Clarified," reveals there 'is' something new under the sun - that is, for modern Bible students. He addresses correctness of language and true intent of the major Bible topics: solves Bible mysteries, defines Gog and Magog, reveals Daniel He-goat's surprising identity, and dares to number the all important Ten Ages. Sign up for FREE book critiques at http://www.winterbriar.com/ and view more articles in blog format at http://blog.thegreatdeception.net/.
