tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-210545242023-11-16T01:23:28.460-06:00The NeocalvinistThis blog is an attempt to organize thoughts that I have on various subjects from a Neocalvinistic/Reformational perspective. The content contained in this blog is not intended to be complete theological/philosophical treaties suitable for professional publication nor a grade for a class.Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-91286277829063088152014-01-22T23:16:00.002-06:002014-01-22T23:18:48.510-06:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disk 22) This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<style type="text/css">P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }</style>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<u>Van Til, part 2 (Disk 22)</u></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
MY NOTE: Here Knudsen gives a very
complex answer to a question asked before the audio started.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Van Til does not have the aversion to
antinomie that Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven. An antinomie will have a
logical contradiction in it, but more than just a contradiction. It
arises due to a transgression of the bounds of the cosmos. Van Til
has never used the principle of the exclusion of the antinomies.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Some say Van Til did not have a workout
idea of the boundary as Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven did. But Van Til
did have a strong creator/creature distinction. MY NOTE: this
boundary may be implicit but not explicit. It is also in his view of
revelation.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Is Van Til closer to Bavinck?
According to Van Til, yes and Van Til is closer to Stoker than
Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Van Til does not develop the idea of
the cosmonomic structure that Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven have.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
MY NOTE: picking up from disk 21 here:</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The idea of the concreteness, all of
the items are present from the very beginning. The concrete idealist
was one who was aware of the context in which he was starting and
have everything there from the beginning and see everything in its
unity and aware of its presuppositions. Hegel introduced time into
logic itself in an attempt to overcome Kantian's notion of the thing
in itself. Van Til says they failed in this attempt.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The idealist says the God of theism
must be replaced by the absolute. Van Til questions that and he
admits that the idealist is correct in the idea of the unity of
thought and being. He (the idealist) is correct in rejecting
pragmatism and the idea of ultimate contingency. However a close
examination the concrete idealism shows that its presumed absolute
cannot embrace all of the facts and remains abstract. Absolute
idealism degenerates into pragmatism and pragmatism has already show
to be impossible.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Van Til is quite content to insists
that Christianity is a rational belief and has grounds for it and is
content to enter into argument and we begin with experience (MY NOTE:
not sure what he means here).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
There is a certain formal agreement
with idealism in that there is value in the concrete approach as far
as identifying presuppositions and he says that it is impossible to
argue directly for God. If you argue directly for God you are doing
what the idealists does, that you have to be able to get an
idea/essence of God before you can use it as a principle of
interpretation and that you have it under control.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
For Van Til the transcendental argument
is negative argument. You have to presuppose God (the God of the
Scriptures) and apart from whom your experience in unintelligible and
that would include this notion that if we have presupposed God we are
no longer in the situation where it is incumbent on us to define God
before we can use God as the ultimate principle of interpretation.
All of our thinking has to presuppose the creator/creature
distinction.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If there is any predication at all you
we have then to be able to unite, to gain a meaningful unity of our
experience but apart from Christianity there is no meaningful unity,
then we are left with brute, uninterpreted fact.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
A form of the argument (as Knudsen has
interpreted it) that if you abandon the true transcendent viewpoint a
process is set into motion in which one shows that he can get a
unitary view of things. Bavinck argued along these lines. If you
miss then the true God of the Scriptures, you are bound to worship
the creation rather than the creator.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Van Til has attempted to construct a
consistent reformed apologetic. He has moved then into a line of
transcendental argument. What does that mean? There will be this
negative type of argumentation, we argue for the impossibility of
contrary. If then one loses the transcendent standpoint and we cannot
get a unified position and this inability is an indirect proof of the
true starting point.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If you are going to have an apologetic,
you must have a point of contact (<i>anknupfunspunkt)</i>. The
expression in Romans 1 of having known God. The knowledge of God and
of ourselves are correlate. We are always in a position of accepting
the revelation or we suppress the revelation (covenant keeping or
covenant breaking). We are either obedient or disobedient. There is
no <i>tertium quid</i>. All these things are involved in Van Til's
idea of the analogical relationship between God and man.</div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-15625793168411665642014-01-19T20:11:00.003-06:002014-01-19T20:11:29.646-06:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disk 21)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<style type="text/css">P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }</style>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<u>Van Til, part 1 (Disk 21)</u></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Cornelius Van Til born 1895 (MY NOTE:
As of this recording, Knudsen states that Van Til was still living
and a frequent visitor to the campus).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
As he undertook his attempt to develop
a consistently Biblical and Reformed apologetic and found
(initially) a welcome ally in the Christian philosophy developed by
Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd (MY NOTE: Van Til would later become
critical of the philosophy school, but that will be covered later).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Early on his name appeared alongside
Dooyeweerd, Vollenhoven, Stoker, etc. in the <i>Philosophie
Reformata</i>.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
MY NOTE: Here bio information is given
on Van Til. This can be found other places on his education
credentials.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
1928 – 1929 he was an instructor of
Apologetics at Princeton Theological Seminary.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
From 1929 he was professor of
Apologetics at Westminster Theological Seminary.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The development of Van Til's
apologetics is based upon his criticism of Idealism (the topic of his
doctoral dissertation). The central idea of his thought is that of
analogy.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Van Til has sought to carry on Kuyper's
work of bringing the kingship of Jesus Christ should come to
expression in every area of life. The sovereignty of God is central
(along with the others in the school) and radical.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
He assumed a double stance to idealism.
Here is where Van Til is different. Van Til was faced with a
situation where he heard that Christianity and Idealism were unified
in their opposition to pragmatism and advocated a view of God and the
absolute of idealism was really a better expression of the Christian
idea of God. Van Til's position was that the God of Christianity did
not square with Idealism.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Van Til did appreciate the concrete
approach of absolute idealism where everything refers back to an
ultimate starting point. Van Til's method is Transcendental. Van
Til concluded that the starting point of idealism was a false one.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Idealists after Kant understood that it
was necessary to view the facts under an ultimate principle of
interpretation and attempted to go beyond Kant to overcome brute,
uninterpreted facts still remaining in the thing in its self (<i>Ding
an sich</i>). They attempted to avoid uniting the facts of our sense
experience and abstract principle of unity in an external fashion.
An attempt was made to arise to a new height to discover a concrete
absolute with a reconciliation of fact and logic. Hegel went to the
extreme of introducing time into logic.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Van Til was asking is this absolute of
the idealist is it really an improvement on the Christian idea of
God? The idealists have more of an eminence of God over against the
Christian view. Van Til insisted that this absolute had been
developed to overcome the split between facts and logic, you're
idealists principle is in effect abstract. The idealists has the
notion that he has to be able to get an idea of the essence of
something before he can use it as a principle of interpretation. If
he is going to use God as a principle, then he must have penetrated
into the essence of God and define who God is. Van Til regards that
as an expression of the autonomy of thought and under such a scheme
the only God you can get a hold of is an extension of your own
experience. This is a characteristic of idealism that Van Til wants
to avoid, the autonomy of man where he denies the creator/creature
distinction.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In Van Til's intent there is a
scriptural idea that he wants to make foremost. There is the idea of
God and Cosmos and the boundary between them. Van Til expresses a
thought that is extremely Calvinistic, you cannot grasp in your
thought the essence of God or God as he is in himself and you must be
content with God as he has reveled himself in revelation.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If instead of truly being the concrete
absolute union of principle and sense experience (fact and logic),
the concrete absolute is not really concrete and so there is always a
residue of brute fact and so there is a contingency that remains and
that in idealism there is a direct road to pragmatism where all
reality is confusion and brute fact rules and unity is not possible.</div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-63506129337490632982014-01-05T17:45:00.004-06:002014-01-05T17:45:38.892-06:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disk 19 and 20)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
MY NOTE: These lectures appear to be from the Fall of 1980. Knudsen eluded to the concession speech by President (Jimmy) Carter who lost the 1980 Presidential election to Ronald Reagan.<br />
<br />
<style type="text/css">P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }</style>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<u>Dooyeweerd, Part 5 (Disk 19)</u></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker continues more in the line of
Bavinck than did Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd (as does Van Til).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In Stoker we find an emphasis on
principles as the presuppositions of our life and thought.
Principles serve to give us <i>archai</i>. Then they give us
guidance establishing an area or sphere in which they hold. A sphere
would be established according to the principles of it. The spheres
have a cosmological character. As we act we are already involved in
the spheres. These spheres would also have to do with method.
Reflecting an idea that was very much alive in Kuyper's day you would
have sets of principles and according to Stoker the principle that
apply to a particular area have to do with the method. Method has to
apply to the particular sphere which pertain to it. It is the
principles that are universal and fundamental in contrast to fact or
what eventuates (actual). In addition we have value when a fact
answers to a principle.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
3 major categories</div>
<ol>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
principle</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
fact</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
value</div>
</li>
</ol>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In classifying the sciences he
distinguished between principle sciences and factual sciences.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker was never so critical as
Dooyeweerd was of the substance idea. Do we have to eliminate the
idea of substance. Dooyeweerd tried to eliminate the idea of
substance. If you define substance as something that exists in
itself, which God alone is existent in himself. In contrast
Dooyeweerd said the entire cosmos IS meaning. The idea of meaning is
set over against substance all the cosmos is meaning and substance
only pertains to God. The creation is meaning and this meaning is
not symbolic but it refers to the lack of self sufficiency of
everything within the cosmos. Something is only in reference to God
and the origin, only in its reference to the self as the
concentration point and the coherence of things. There is a complete
dependence upon God in the created order.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker attempted to retain the
substance idea and the cosmos HAS meaning.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
What are some of the consequences:</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If everything is meaning then by no
means can you think that there is then something in the cosmos that
is independent from its relationship to God.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker had set his notion of the
philosophy of the creation idea over against the idea of revelation
of Bavinck and the philosophy of the cosmonomic idea. Creation is
the archimedean point. He accepted Law as archimedean point if it is
not formal (everything in the cosmos is meaning).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker held it (creation idea)
depending on Genesis 1:1 as that which gives us the formal unity of
the cosmos. The cosmos then is the creation of God and God is the
sovereign creator. The peculiar thing about Stoker's position is
that the cosmos is more than revelation it is more than being subject
to the law. It is best spoken of as creation.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<u>H. Stoker (Disk 20)</u></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker held that his view can account
more for the abnormalism and the vicarious death of Christ. In this
idea it is revealed God's actual will and his love of God without
exclusion of the wisdom of God or the theoretical will (law
principle).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
MY NOTE: At this point Knudsen
expresses puzzlement at some of the ideas of Stoker. Knudsen does
not provide any answers.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The cosmos is subject to God but also
dependent upon God. Knudsen is hypothesising that Stoker is given
some nuanced meaning to 'subject.'
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
God preserves the cosmos.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker believed that the creation idea
was all inclusive that included all the others (others who held to
WdW). He continues to say that the service to God is also meaningful
subjection to law but according to ones own sphere.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Knudsen objects to this due to the
freedom of man being set over against the law of God.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
MY NOTE: Knudsen is doing a lot of Q/A
at this point.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker also spoke of the diversity of
the cosmos. There is sphere sovereignty and there is also a freedom
within the sphere. This principle is the same as sphere sovereignty
but applied to another dimension of reality than that of quality and
meaning. If one has freedom in own sphere, then it has a sort of
self identity which is a fundamental gift of God.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
MY NOTE: Knudsen is continuing his
perplexity with Stoker.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
When Stoker took the idea of creation,
he tried to make it relevant philosophically in a way that is
impossible. We have our religious stance with all the pattern's of
it. This is not philosophical but religious understanding. Stoker
attempted to take creation and make it philosophical and equal to the
law and an archemedian point.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The idea of creation was associated as
a guarantor of an area of freedom. Why? It gives better account to
being more than subject to law. There is free activity with ones own
sphere of competency.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
What is this more than? To what is Law
conformity to be contrasted? Can that to which it be contrasted have
meaning apart from Law conformity? Law conformity is just as much
created as freedom in contrast to Law conformity. It seem that the
idea of creation becomes meaningless in this respect. This does not
provide us a philosophical criteria for the development of concepts.</div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-42344886179949935662013-12-29T18:04:00.001-06:002013-12-29T18:04:37.056-06:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disk 17 and 18)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<style type="text/css">P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }</style>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<u>Dooyeweerd Part 3 (Disk 17)</u></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Dooyeweerd thought all along that
though itself has a religious root. The way we relate to our
presuppositions is through thought itself.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Dooyeweerd never considered the
religiousness of thought to be the subjection of thought to
metaphysically conceived axioms themselves of a scientific character
standing above thought itself.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In everything manifestation of thought
there is always a law order holding for it. Thought is shown to be
depended upon the divine law (<i>lex divina</i>).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The change from the earlier to the
later Dooyeweerd the change came when a critique of thought which had
always been present in his thinking but the change came when he said
this critique is required by the very structure of thought itself.
Van Til called this the restriction and could not accept the
restriction.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The reference to the religious
foundation comes only in at the third step. Is this a sign that the
first two steps are carried out in a neutral way? No theoretical
axiom has been introduced dogmatically or any scientific prejudice,
he wants to show all a long a religious impulse all along. The false
starting point of apostate man causes him to introduce a prejudice.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Only from the Christian point of view
is one freed to apprehend the true starting point without introducing
prejudice. But this is completely religiously conditioned in either
a true or false direction.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If one objects to such argumentation he
must admit that he is obliged to render account of the general states
of affairs or one has to present methodologically the argument for
the consequences of opting against the christian position.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<u>Dooyeweerd, part 4 (Disk 18)</u></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Dooyeweerd's view of the soul</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
An outstanding characteristic of the
WdW has been the critique of traditional theological views of the
soul which have pretended to be scriptural. This goes for Dooyeweerd
and Vollenhoven (maybe Stoker, not Van Til). For Dooyeweerd it is
impossible to lift your theoretical views directly out of the Bible.
This includes a theoretical anthropology and it is impossible to
require philosophical view to square to scripture. If we've
understood the transcendental critique, any philosophical view of the
soul will have a religious depth and can be judged to its
scripturalness.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Dooyeweerd is certain however, that the
scriptures as they address man's heart teaching him that all reality
is created do not allow for dualistic philosophical notions that
would draw a line or antithesis in the cosmos. Let us say between
the rational soul and material body, intellect and sensibility, etc.
Scripture teach that man is created and an integral being before God.
So it is impossible to grasp what the soul is in contrast with
created reality.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In order to gain a proper understanding
of Dooyeweerd's view of the soul, this transcendental direction of
this thinking must be kept in mind. There is a centripital direction
of thought to the 'I' as the one who thinks. In the diversity of
cosmic time there is nothing to stop this reflection, there is not
thing in it for itself, there is always guidance by a theoretical
idea (Law Idea) and there is always reflection upon the
presuppositions of thought.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The soul, cosmic time, the various
aspects, the unity of the body cannot be grasped in a theoretical
concept. They appear in distinct horizons which provide a frame for
our experience.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In our total beings there is this
constant point back to our creator as covenant beings.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Dooyeweerd has spoken of the
supra-temporality of the heart. The heart of man is not contained in
within the cosmic diversity of time. If we seek to view the heart of
man from within time we'll end up with nothing. This does not mean
that then the heart should be sought as an entity outside of time.
What it does mean is that man in his integral unity could be
understood in terms of a transcendent reference interpreted by God
and His revelation.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
It is impossible to understand
Dooyeweerd's view of the soul apart from the transcendental direction
of the self and the transtemporality.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Philosophical thought is lead in the
transcendental direction to reflect upon the self and philosophical
thought can only point to this in the idea. In this reflection, it
critically acknowledges its inability to grasp what the self is apart
from God and his revelation (Calvin, Institutes I.i.1).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Now if there were a philosophical view
of the soul, then the transcendental direction would have been
abolished. There would be a line drawn through the creation, one
part of the creation over against the other in your self reflection.
In the reflection on itself it comes to reflection on its intergral
root and destruction of the universality in its own sphere.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If one is to learn what the soul is he
cannot lean on philosophy. He must listen to the word of God and
theology has to be dependent upon revelation (as is philosophy).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In Dooyeweerd's anthropology the basic
distinction was between the heart and the entire function mantle of
man's body. The heart is only in its relation to the true/false
concentration point. It is it point at which the various strands of
life are concentrated. This concentration point is not construable
in the diversity of time.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The situation is understood in terms of
God's revelation which speaks to the heart of man.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Dooyeweerd says the body is an act
structure in which all the aspects of the body function in an
centered unity. Dooyeweerd rejects the idea of substance in the
description of man.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Dooyeweerd called the development of
the theroetical anthropology as the crowning point of his philosophy.
He never did finish the development of this view.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Transtemporality idea</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<ol>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The fullness of meaning is not
found in anything that is temporal.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In our experience there will
always a tendency to dispers in a multiplicity of directions each of
which if allowed to develop unrestrained would mean a fall into
meaninglessness.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Meaning is perserved not by
following one of the dispirsed tendencies (#2) but by concentrating
on the fullness of meaning.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Concentrating on the fullness is
by way of a reflection on oneself in ones covenant relation to God
who has revealed himself in Christ.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
This reflection is a reflection on
the self in its total involved directedness to its origin.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Whether the self will stand in
this fundamental covenental relationship of obedient response is a
question of the true direction of the heart.</div>
</li>
</ol>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The tendency to dispurse in time is not
the result of sin, but becoming bound to it is.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
There is an end of the trail character
to the self reflection. One may not speculate, but be content in
knowing oneself in the revelation context.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<b>Hendrik G. Stoker</b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker for many years has been
sympathetic but critically oriented representative of the Calvinistic
philosophy.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker has been spoken of as the first
South African philosopher to have gained recognition in the US and
Europe.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In 1935 he published an article in the
Evangelical Quarterly (volume 7) called the possibility of a
calvinistic philosophy. In the article he said there was need on a
calvinistic basis for a calvinistic philosophy that is truly a
philosophy. He maintained that there was too great a confusion
between theology and philosophy. Furthermore, too much attention had
been given to detail work without basis of building of a
comprehensive system based on a reformed world and life view. There
was inclusion of elements that did not belong within this framework.
Stoker sought to erect a philosophy based on a calvinistic worldview.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stokers position reflects the same
spirit as Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd but it has its own cachet.
Stoker remained closer to the line preceding Dooyeweerd (stands
closer to Bavinck).</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Three differences</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<ol>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
We find in Stoker an emphasis on
principles.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Stoker has never been so critical
of the substance idea.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
He had difficultly with the idea
that the cosmos is mean (he would say it has meaning).</div>
</li>
</ol>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-9311697962965272532013-10-06T18:59:00.001-05:002013-10-06T18:59:29.771-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 16)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Dooyeweerd,
part 2 (disk 16)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Intergral
to this position that it is possible only from the law idea of the Christian
faith to conceive of the order God has placed in the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From any other position we cannot see
the cosmic coherence in its true proportions and relationship to the
origin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Apostate thinking will absolutize
one or more of the created aspects of reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That will lead to elevating one or more of these aspects to
the origin of meaning or we shall try to arrange to aspects under a logically
conceived denominator.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">We have the
idea of the origin, the deeper unity and the coherence of the meaning of the
cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The cosmos in its meaning
concentrates on the heart of man, man in his totality as he looks out on his
origin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Archimedean point is
found in the religious community in which one participates.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Given any
theoretical statement, an investigation by way of a transcendental critique is
in order to discover whether its underlying motives are in conformity to the
message of the scriptures.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">After the
publication of WdW in 1935-36, Dooyeweerd began sharpening his position.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
attempted to show that the critique is involved in very structure of the
theoretical attitude of thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>As soon as one thinks in a theoretical fashion he is already involved in
doing certain things that may be brought to light by a step-by-step
analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This step-by-step
analysis is a formalization of the less strict argument from before.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This step-by-step analysis is the transcendental
critique.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is in this form that
it has received the most criticism.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The critique
happens in 3 or 4 steps.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is
a certain progression and the number of steps is not the formal concern.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The argument proceeds in a certain way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The steps are intended to show the
following:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Show that theoretical thinking is
dependent upon a pre-theoretical structure of time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Every act of theoretical thinking in a particular kind of
abstraction from the temporal coherence of meaning will manifest its dependence
upon a pre-theoretical structure.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>What is abstracted from in the </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">gegenstand</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> relation and how is this
abstraction possible?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd
maintained that one who tries to maintain neutrality will try to suppress this
question.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Ask about the focus of the synthesis
of the abstracted aspects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What do
you do with them?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd
recognized that in every theoretical position, there is already a synthesis in
some sort of logical unity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From
what standpoint is it possible to unite in the theoretic synthesis the aspects
that are distinguished and set apart in the theoretical attitude of thought.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd attempts to account for
the pattern that this focus takes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>If we are able to find the focus only in reflecting upon ourselves can
we really find the focus of the theoretical synthesis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What is the character of this
self-knowledge and how is it possible?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
critique itself is not productive of the religious impulse underlying the true
or false direction of thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It
is only a way of bringing to awareness of what is actually the case in every
theoretical train of thought.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is an abstraction of the
coherence of the meaning of the aspects.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is a particular kind of
synthesis having its focus on the self.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">This reflection on the self is
always determined by a religious motive.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">MY NOTE:
Here Knudsen spends a lot of time talking about Dooyeweerd and Van Til’s
disagreement in Van Til’s </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">festschrift</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Jerusalem and Athens</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>ISBN: 0875524893.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Criticisms
of the Transcendental Critique</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Some in
Toronto (MY NOTE: my guess is that he is referring to the Institute for
Christian Studies) have rejected this transcendental critique.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A good number think they don’t need
this and develop their response based upon gut reaction. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
developed a bit of neutrality into his position to communicate it better and
lapsing into a kind of scholasticsm (Van Til’s criticism).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Douglass
Vickers spoke of a residual emmentism.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">This idea
of communication, that indeed you cannot communicate with the apostate thinker
until you have subjected his position and your own to a transcendental
critique.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Because only in terms of
depth understanding, do the concepts appear.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
is criticised of developing a second way due to his first being too dogmatic.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
is criticised of abandoning the starting point of the Calvinistic world-view to
one that is more accepted to non-Christian thinkers and having common
ground.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd was never that
way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd always wanted to
show to relation of theoretical thought and religious roots.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-60388133461732424072013-09-29T21:52:00.000-05:002013-09-29T21:52:04.265-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 15)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven,
part 9 Dooyeweerd part 1 (disk 15)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">If you do
not observe the boundary in God’s creation you have what happens you have
antinomies toward the law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
only way to eliminate it is to give proper attention to the boundary.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">MY NOTE:
Knudsen talks about the law spheres here but does not list them all on the
audio.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The following I pulled from
L. Kalsbeek’s </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Contours of a Christian Philosophy</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> (ISBN: 0-7734-6950-8) page 40-41</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Arithmetic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Spatial</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kinematic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Physical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">5.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Botic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">6.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Sensitive</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">7.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Analytic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">8.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Historical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">9.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Lingual</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">10.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Social</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">11.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Economic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">12.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Aesthetic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">13.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Juridical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">14.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Ethical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">15.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Pistic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Arithmetic
to Analytic are the non-normative above the Analytic are normative.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is
here an expression of sphere sovereignty in the aspects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If we look at the various aspects they
have fundamental irreducible nuclei (kernel) of meaning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This nucleus is not logical in
character, they resist logical analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Each one from its own perspective, there is a universality in its own sphere,
it reflects its own aspect of the entire cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So there are anticipating and retrocipating moments.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the biotic you have a nucleus of
mean and clustered around it are subsiderary moments of meaning in either
direction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We attempt to get
certain concepts and what happens we find that we obtain general logical
concepts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The question comes how
do we distinguish those from something else, Dooyeweerd says that as soon as we
get one of these concepts we discover that it is analogical in character
(multivocality in character).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
multivocality does not arise because the meaning has not been clarified in the
logical analysis, but because it goes beyond its basic sense.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In each one of these aspects you have
the nuclei of meaning, the analogies, and the law side and subject side
(subject and object).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">This occurs
against the background that there is a fundamental character of the reality as
meaning, all reality is meaning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Not in the sense of symbolic meaning, it is the sense that to express
the self in sufficiency of the temporal world or the lack of self-sufficiency
of the temporal world with respect to its origin.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">As we have
God speaking to our hearts and our lives radiating out toward the world at the
same time there is this reflection on ourselves and everything we do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is this lack of self-sufficency
that we are dependent upon the cosmos that then however every part of that
cosmos reflects every part of that creator.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We are constantly reflecting upon our own lives and our
covenant responsibility before God.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The meaning
character of all reality is set up against the idea of substance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Substance is self-sufficent to
itself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd would say God
is only self-sufficent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The cosmos
is meaning in all of its part.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There is nothing in the cosmos that is isolated from man’s being.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd’s
move toward a formalization of the Transcendental Critique. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
attempted to find the relevancy of his Calvinistic world and life view toward
the science of statecraft.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You
cannot simply lift theoretical concepts directly from the scriptures.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd had the idea that theory has
its own identity and structure over against naïve experience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All theory has to be conformable toward
God’s word at its root.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You have
to spiral down into your field to find the religious foundation (the
theoretical foundation of your field).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Getting down to the presuppositions.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">One can see
how the transcendental thrust is already there.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Given your theorizing, you cannot reduce it to something
else, there is already this transcendental reflection on what is already at
work in it.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
held that all developments of theoretical concepts by an idea of law, therefore
he gave his philosophy the name the philosophy of law-idea </span>(<i><span class="st"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic";">Wijsbegeerte der
Wetsidee</span></span></i> or WdW).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The law
idea was regarded by Dooyeweerd as an instrument to relate our (or link) our theoretical
thinking and our worldview commitment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This law idea is of a law order which given any experience is already
there.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That already there idea is
important because you do anything, it is already there and you have to reflect
transcendentally.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">This order
of law is meaning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It has no being
of itself but out and to its origin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There is this reflecting back (Romans 11:36: “For from him and through
him and to him are all things.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To
him be glory forever.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Amen.”
(ESV)).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This law idea reflects
back on God as the origin of meaning and manifests its dependency upon God and
his revelation that centers in Jesus Christ.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The Law is
not conceived of on the set of theoretical axioms from which you could deduce
things or that would be norms or imposed <i>a priori</i> upon experience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nor are they on the order of
generalities the result of theoretical abstractions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Every theoretical axiom, each one must be understood as
revealing this law order.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This
order is not that of a theory based on logical or logos world order.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
original form the transcendental critique.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">No
conception of any theory is neutral.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It is impelled by an idea of cosmic coherence and the origin of
meaning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This idea is not one
derived from theoretical thought it is of religious origin and will determine
the direction of the thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Therefore given any theoretical conceptualization it is necessary to
reflect upon the idea impelling it and on the religious content of the idea.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-53975176613076945662013-06-05T21:46:00.001-05:002013-06-05T21:46:21.039-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 14)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
panose-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Bold";
panose-1:0 2 2 8 3 7 5 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1652752603;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-828734250 1229115616 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven
part 8 (disk 14)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
subjectivist has to take position in regards to myth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Universal subjectivist for example would be mythological or
non-mythological.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The mythical
thinker thought in terms of becoming of the gods and the world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They were cosmogonic-cosmological and
purely cosmological thinkers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So
there is a method of development.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">By way of
criticism of Vollenhoven’s method</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Knudsen holds that this is a good
method.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It has been employed to
some degree in the history of ideas.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Very important is how the distinctions are made with which the
investigation is carried on.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When
you try to compress a thinker, sometimes they don’t fit.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Thinkers are typed according to what
appeared to be rigid and minute classifications and we must state this,
determining that a thinker stands in a particular line doesn’t explain
him.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How does one account for influence
of one thinker on another?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven didn’t want to fall into
the trap of categorizing ancient philosophers in terms for modern times, but
does he make distinctions of modern philosophers into ancient molds?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">It remains
that Vollenhoven tried to erect a history of philosophy on a consistently
Christian basis.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Bold"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Heman Dooyeweerd (1894-1977)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Born in
Amsterdam, his father was a follower of Abraham Kuyper (</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Doleantie</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His mother was influenced by the German leader
Kohlbrugge,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd’s father read
from </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">De Heraut</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd entered the
Free University of Amsterdam in 1912 unsure of what to study.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A friend recommended the study of
Law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On July 2, 1917 he defended
his doctoral dissertation (</span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">De Ministerraad in het Nederlandsche Staaatsrecht</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> or Cabinet Ministers under Dutch
Constitutional Law).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">He first
worked in matters of Jurisprudence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In 1922 he was invited to be the adjunct director of the Abraham Kuyper
foundation in </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">De Haag</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This foundation was
developed to study principles of the Anti-Revolutionary party (today absorbed
into the Christian Democratic Appeal or </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Christian-Democratisch
Appel</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In 1926 he
became professor in the department of Jurisprudence at the Free University of
Amsterdam.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd’s
philosophy must be understood as a Christian Transcendental Philosophy and when
we speak of its character we do not only have the transcendental critique.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The first real suggestion of this form
occurs in 1939, the transcendental critique of theoretical thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The earliest appearance in English is
in the evangelical quarterly volume 19 pages 32-41 called introduction to a
transcendental criticism of philosophical thought.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">We affirm
that Dooyeweerd’s thinking had a transcendental thrust.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This transcendental thrust was
virtually assured by the first steps in developing his philosophy and
transcendental critique from the very beginning.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">During
1922-1926 Dooyeweerd wrote a series of articles and he wanted to show the
relevance of the Calvinistic world and life view to statecraft.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd believed that this worldview
was fundamentally rooted in the Scriptures but did not believe that a theory of
statecraft could be read directly out of the Scriptures.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Like
Vollenhoven, Dooyeweerd believed that the Scriptures speak to the entire
man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Furthermore as Kuyper
presented Calvinism was a world and life view.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As such it requires the undivided allegiance of the entire
man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now then one then cannot read
out a Christian statecraft from the scriptures, one cannot derive from them the
fundamental principles on the order of theoretical axioms to which statecraft
must conform.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is where
Dooyeweerd stands apart from a major emphasis of the Kuyperian tradition.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">While
statecraft could not be read out of the scriptures but the principles must
conform to it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd had to
fix on something that would present a meaningful criterion for his scientific
studies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The idea of Law, the law
in this sense is not deduceable from the scripture but if you live according to
scripture it will manifest itself with respect to the law idea somehow.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So Dooyeweerd came to the conclusion
that all of your theoretical concepts are going to involve one or another idea
of Law and the idea of Law becomes the instrument that gives you this
connection.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is
then a divinely given order of law (</span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Lex Divina</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">) to which every fact is subject in
the keeping or in the breech.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
developed a theory of law spheres.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>These are modes, how things appear to the what.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These were related to one another by
anticipations (protentional) and retrocipations (retentional).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd called these together
analogies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In our naïve
experiencing these are held together in a systatic unity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In theory they are distinguished and
set it apart one from another.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-84695895962254394522013-05-20T22:24:00.002-05:002013-05-20T22:24:37.352-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 12 and Disk 13)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">panose</span>-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">charset</span>:0;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-generic-font-family:auto;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-pitch:variable;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">panose</span>-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">charset</span>:0;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-generic-font-family:auto;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-pitch:variable;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Bold";
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">panose</span>-1:0 2 2 8 3 7 5 5 2 3;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">charset</span>:0;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-generic-font-family:auto;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-pitch:variable;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormal</span>, <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">li</span>.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormal</span>, div.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormal</span>
{<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormalTable</span>
{<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-header-margin:.5in;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-footer-margin:.5in;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven,
part 6 (disk 12)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Interfunctional
connection is a connection between two or more </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">systasis</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Intrafunctional connection is a connection within a </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">systasis</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, example is a lack of desire to
work due to sorrow.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>More
complicated instances occur in objectification.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is the activity that Vollenhoven called </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">patentizing</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> and </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">latentizing</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The latent functions of iron are bought to light by the
activity of man in making it into a machine.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is a second think called an actualizing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">patentizing</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> you take something that is a
subject and you bring its latent possibilities and you make them patent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In actualizing you have an objective
qualified thing, a machine is objectively qualified, a machine is actualized
when it is put to work.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Both
patentizing and actualizing are possible only then when the necessary
presuppositions and substrate are present.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It must be on the foundation of the substrate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is this connection, which
presupposes the successive realization of the presupposition of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>actualizing and patentizing would
be called objectification.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In man all
functions are present in a subjective way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Therefore, in man we can speak only of patentizing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We may speak of man realizing his
subjective possibilities.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven did not speak of actualizing in terms of man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd developed later that mans
potentialities could be objectified.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He can never be objectified in his whole being.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now that has a relationship to
existential thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Your
existentialist is concerned with the objectification of man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The idea is that man as a whole you can
be understood within a pattern that pertains only to nature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In this way of thinking you want to
redeem him of this and we see him in terms of freedom of himself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Man according to his structure it is
impossible to objectify him, only certain capabilities of man can be objectified
but not the whole man.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now in
spite of the fact that you cannot talk of actualizing in regards to man; men
may indeed work together with the power available to them in associations and
so forth having objectified things.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>These things have a founding and leading functions; in business the
leading one is the economic, the state the juridical, the family, the ethical,
etc.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now in
addition to the this-that and thus-so scheme, Vollenhoven distinguished the
dimension of the religious.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For
the religious the leading of the creation by the spirit of God in relation to
the word of God is fundamental.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven will insist strongly as he has upon this faith relationship
that we respond to the word of God by the power of the Spirit of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Religion presupposes the created being
of men with all their functions in mutual connection according to the image of
God so that man reflects the glory of the LORD.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In this position as one looks at the religious there is
always a tendancy to look at it in a structured fashion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven, said on the side of the
subject man is a correlate of the triune God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The structure of man presupposes the three-fold office of
Prophet, Priest and King.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But in
order to understand Religion one must understand the opposition of good and
evil.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven said that with
man there is the question of good and evil in the analytical function.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is only here where we distinguish
subjectively between good and bad.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The logical law is the first within the cosmic order that has the
characteristic of norm.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Correlate
with the norms on the law side is choice on the subject side.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You may choose to think properly or not
think properly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The choice is that
of obedience or disobedience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If
we are going to understand this normative properly, one must be careful to
think in terms of the fundamental religious commitment of man.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
says this duality existed before the fall of man in the realm of angels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>At first for Adam and Eve it was
indicated danger.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The fall into
sin Adam and Eve were bought into experience this duality as a reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Good stands over against evil, now man
is inclined to evil by nature and he is guilty before the requirement of
obedience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Christ was obedient and
atoned for sin and Christ has reconciled us to God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now the function that has been turned to the left (toward
evil) has been turned to the right (toward good).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With sin, there is not a loss of the ontological character
of anything ontological in the creation, but rather the creation is still there
but nevertheless it is turned away and man worships the creature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Christ has reconciled us to God and
turns it toward God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
distinction between good and evil presents us with the difference between right
and left and this difference refers to the direction in which a particular
function turns.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This difference of
functioning cannot be reduced to the thus-so and this-that.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven insisted that the fall did
not remove any part of the creation but it brought the religious direction to
the left, away from God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In this
way the antithesis came also among the earthly subjects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The antithesis was in the unseen
creation and now through the fall it is manifest in the seen creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven’s
view does not allow for an easy solution to the sin problem, for example of the
loss of the image of God interpreted as the illumination of certain human
functions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It does not allow us to
point to some functions as good and some as evil and to raise the good over the
bad.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
spoke further about knowing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
pre-theoretical and the theoretical, theoretical is based upon pre-theoretical
knowing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is important
for our understanding of the scriptures, at first our reading of the scriptures
is pre-theoretical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All of our
theologizing in the theoretical is based upon our understanding in the
pre-theoretical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As we have seen
all know involves a connection between the knower and what is known.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now here is
where the followers of Vollenhoven differ from those of Dooyeweerd.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd is going to say that if an
act of thought is analytically qualified, that in theoretical thinking the
analytical is deepened.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven makes further distinctions of more refined spheres than in
pre-theoretical thinking; furthermore it deals with a single law sphere and it is
the analysis of a non-logical aspect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>To make this possible the aspect must have been isolated and you
distinguished the aspects in this way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>You don’t do it and your principle of the exclusion of antinomies
apply.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now he talks about vertical
isolation, isolation of a part of a field (example: animal psychology and human
psychology).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In horizontal
isolation there is concentration on retrocipations and anticipations, from the
psychical you anticipate the social, in the social you retrocipate the psychical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Furthermore in theoretical thinking
there is no single method, because the method is dependent upon the particular
function being investigated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Method in theology is not the same as method in psychology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The most important thing for
Vollenhoven is that the special sciences exist because of modal fields of
investigation and not because of manifold points of view.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The result
of theoretical activity is a statement that is not altogether analytic and not
altogether non-analytic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It
squares with the scheme of modal aspects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The mathematical axiom is not just mathematical but has also a logical
character demanding a bridging of the logical and numerical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Theoretical synthesis is characteristic
of the theoretical concept.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now that
epistemology rests upon ontology then is implied that in knowing the boundary
between God and cosmos must be recognized and thus knowledge about God and the
cosmos must be distinguished.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now with
respect to pre-theoretical knowledge, one must distinguish between the various sources
of knowing, nature and word revelation of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For knowledge about God, word revelation is the primary
source and correlate with this knowledge is the pistical function of man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the knowledge of the cosmos two
activities must be distinguished, knowing the cosmos in terms of the cosmos and
with word revelation of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All
knowing from the word of God is pistical activity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now there is also the activity of knowing the cosmos in the
terms of the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In this
connection this knowledge is modally conditioned, this knowledge possesses a
direction, it establishes a certain path.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven,
part 7 (disk 13)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Knowledge
is modally conditioned implies that there can be talk of knowledge when there
is the presence of the analytical function, an animal cannot know.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The logical norm is also modally
conditioned and in the analytical I recognize the principle of contradiction as
a normative law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If we acknowledge
that God has set everything under its corresponding laws, then nothing may
transgress these creational laws.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
direction in our knowing; there is obedience to the norm or disobedience to the
norm.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here for the first time we
have for the first time the distinction on the analytical level between good
and bad.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are mistakes in
remembering and in logical mistakes and it is not meaningless to recognize
error, it is the disruption due to sin.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The present
is dependent on the past and it is also directed toward the future.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The second
source of knowledge is the word of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This knowledge is gained by the restored pistical function.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You don’t loose faith, it is just
directed in the right or wrong direction and only when it is directed in the
right direction that you have the eyes to see what God has in his cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This can only be said by Christian
epistemology but it is truly possible only for a Calvinistic epistemology,
which arranges under nature all the cosmos accept the word of God itself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Calvinist sees nature as a totality
and the entire created state is a natural state restored by the grace of
God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now
Vollenhoven saw the pistical function resting upon all the others.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is not set antithetically over
against reason.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is not that the
pistical gives us additions and corrections over against reason.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The pistical is a part of nature and it
is corrupted by sin and must be restored to its natural state.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Differences in function may not be
paralleled with the difference between good and evil.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">No concrete
knowledge of the cosmos is possible unless both activities of the pistical and
everything else operate together.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Only when knowledge is religious in character does it become concrete (</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kennis</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Self-knowledge is only possible as your restored pistic
function is turned to the word of God and lived out of the word of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Man can get knowledge of God from
nature as well (MY NOTE: Romans 1 does give indication that the heathen knows
God through the cosmos but due to his sin suppresses that knowledge, Knudsen
does not bring out if Vollenhoven acknowledges that or not).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The role of this knowledge is the
search of faith for the agreement of knowledge gained through the cosmos to
what the word of God says about it.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Transition
thoughts about Vollenhoven:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
in collaboration with Dooyeweerd developed the WdW.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They have the modal doctrine in common.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The argument comes who developed what
first?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There were nuances in each
of their thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven’s
philosophizing doesn’t have so explicitly the transcendental cache of
Dooyeweerds method.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Even though
Vollenhoven rejects the logos idea and sees logic as an aspect among others and
as he sees in theory the combination of the logical and non-logical and sees a
synthesis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nevertheless he uses
analytical distinctions too freely and indiscriminately.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">It seem
that this type of thing will show up in his way of thinking about the history
of philosophy.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Bold"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven’s Consistent-Problem Historical Method</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Much of
Vollenhoven’s career was taken up by the development of this idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The application of this method lead to
the publication of the first volume of a projected greater work on the history
of philosophy, in which the first volume dealt with Greek Philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This was a blow to Vollenhoven
and his publications never again reached book form.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Knudsen
noted that Vollenhoven who has attracted a large number of followers and
scholars to the Calvinistic Philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This is due in large part to the influence of H. Evan Runner (Philosophy
professor at Calvin College).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One
of Runners students Calvin Seerveld (Professor Emeritus, Institute for
Christian Studies) prefers Vollenhoven’s method for the history of philosophy
to that of Dooyeweerd’s method.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The method
proceeds on the notion that similar ideas occur over and over again in the
history of philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As Calvin
Seerveld says, as his working hypothesis was molding his judgments Vollenhoven
was struck by the similarity of certain conceptions of Edington, Einstein, and
Archimeadies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He hit upon the idea
that there were perhaps definite types of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>philosophical conception, certain systematic interpretations of reality
that keep occurring in the history of thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven went to find out if this were true, so as not to
read modern conceptions back into earlier ones, Vollenhoven began at the simple
beginnings of Greek Philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
asked what each person had to say about the structure, origin, the troubled
state and the meaning of reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Out of this study rose one main categories for interpreting Greek and
subsequent western philosophy and evidence that there are recurring
philosophical positions since the beginning of philosophical reflection.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These were arraigned according to
types; the materialistic monism of Thales is held for example by Leucippus,
Democratus, Arstippus, Epicurus, Lucretius, Casendy, and Jean-Paul Sartre.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now there
were major distinctions in the history of philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He sought to bring out the major divisions under a Christian
interpretation by distinguishing philosophy from before the synthesis, during
the synthesis and after the synthesis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Again the modes of being are recognized in full by the Christian faith
(God, Law, Cosmos).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A full
ontology must speak of all these modes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Ancient ontology could not be complete.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In ancient ontology there was only an eye for the Law and
the Cosmos and interpreted in an erroneous fashion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Where do you find the law?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The realist answer that it was outside the cosmos and the
non-realist that it was in the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>At the first the non-realist held sway in ancient Greek thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The objectivist seek to discover the
law in the object.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
subjectivist seek to discover the law in the subject, they attempt to reduce
the object to the subject.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In
subjectivist orientations Vollenhoven distinguished for one universalism,
individualism, and partial universalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In a Christian the universal and the individual always appear
together.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In non-Christian thought
one is attempted to derive the one from the other.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-8677078814985651912013-05-19T20:54:00.002-05:002013-05-19T20:54:52.011-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 11)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
panose-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
--></style><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven,
part 5 (disk 11)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The modal
distinction of thus and so and the additional distinction of this and that may
be distinguished but never separated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>A particular number always has the characteristic of number.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The same is true for all other
modalities.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now Vollenhoven
said there are connections within the modes and between the modes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The simplest case is a relation within
the same modality, for example, the relationship between the numbers 3 and 4.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the analytical, the relationship
between premises and a conclusion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This relationship is called </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">samenhang</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is a irreversible order, the spatial presuppose the
arithmetical and not vice-versa.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The economic presupposes the social and not vice-versa.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>More complex presuppose the less
complex.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Substrate</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> (all functions that are
presupposed) and the higher functions are the </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Superstrate</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The connection between modalities also consist of the fact
that the more complex functions follow the less complex functions but they also
refer back to them, this is </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">retrocipation</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All modes look back to
the modes that come before it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A
line is always a line, it can be measured and number.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It looks back to the arithmetical, but it is not to be
reduced to the arithmetical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
higher functions take up into themselves the lower functions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The lower modes look forward to the
higher ones, this is called </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">anticipation</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An illustration of this
is an irrational number in which a series of numbers anticipate space (MY NOTE:
Knudsen admits ignorance here due to his lack of mathematical knowledge,
however I think what Vollenhoven was getting at with irrational numbers were
numbers that were used to explain a ratio: Pi, Eulers Constant, the golden
ratio, etc).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In differential and
integral calculus a series anticipates the mechanical.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In all the
modalities with the exception of the highest and lowest you have both </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">anticipations</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> and </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">retrocipations</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In faith, there are no </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">anticipations</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> and in the arithmetic there is no </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">retrocipations</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now because of the fact that the </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">substrate</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> and </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">superstrate</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> differ in man and in the animal,
there is no function that man and animal have abstractly in common.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Man and animal do not abstractly share
the same functions in the psychical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In the anthropology you always get a holistic point of view, every function
in man has a specific individuality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In animals each function is unique to the animal and not shared with
other functions.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
called a particular thing that embrace two or more subject-functions a subject
unity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Something having various
mutually anticipating and retrocipating functions it is a </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">systasis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The word </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">systasis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> is to refer to a thing in its concreteness.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">systasis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> may be designated according to its highest function.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A circle would be a spatial </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">systasis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A man is a pistical </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">s<i>ystasis</i></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What qualifies a man as a totality in its entire
individuality is that he then depends upon reaches out toward a firm ground of
belief in God and his promises.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
and Dooyeweerd thought of man as qualified as a subject in his leading
function, the pistic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd
differed later in his thought and said man is not qualified by any function,
man is free.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nevertheless
individual acts of man may be qualified modally.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One of the consequences of this would mean a move in
Dooyeweerd’s thinking that mans life is ruled or that we understand man in
terms of principles in which one vests his assurance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyweerd will look deeper and will try to see all
principles from a deeper background.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Man is carried along by religious driving motives.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Systasis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> might be a thing or it might not be a thing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He said it would be a thing if it had a subject function
that was active.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Is a circle a
thing?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Not according to this
definition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A rock and water are
active.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The subject function of
the thing, the highest function is its leading function.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Man functions subjectively in all the
modalities, when you describe the man as a thinker, he is qualified
analytically.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since a <i>systasis</i>
cannot exist apart from its manifold connections, it is not a thing in itself (</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Ding
an sich</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now the </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">anticipations</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">retrocipations</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, the relations between the modes,
the connections and connections within the modes cannot be reduced one to
another.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-75350915182925991862013-05-14T23:02:00.002-05:002013-05-14T23:02:29.762-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 10)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
panose-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:802234998;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:667991944 -957464572 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1438217263;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-240232876 1118349648 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven,
part 4 (disk 10)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
began to distinguish between cosmic unities and modal differentiations that
intersect the cosmic unities.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There are cosmic unities such as man, animals, etc which intersect the
cosmic unities.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These unities are
ordered in a particular order and may not be subordinated to another.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
attempted to develop his own understanding of the world and he came on stream
with this in October 1930 in his syllabus in which he developed his </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><i>Isagoge
Philosophiae</i> </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">(Introduction
to Philosophy).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He distinguishes
between philosophy as an act and philosophy as a result.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Philosophy is a human effort and the
result of the human effort and he makes a sharp distinction between ontology
and epistemology and ontology has the primacy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now he took the position that his method had to be
thetic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It had to present his own
thesis and only then critical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Furthermore, one must take into consideration also the position of those
who have gone before and position of contemporary, on must see whether they see
the problems correctly.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In this
writing Vollenhoven said that philosophy is not the only kind of theoretical
knowledge, there is also knowledge of the special sciences, but all theoretical
knowledge is distinguished between the pre-theoretical knowledge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Theoretical knowledge presupposes the
pre-theoretical and is dependent upon it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven opposed the position that everything must be explained in
terms of theoretical knowledge.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Philosophy
may not be considered apart from the special sciences.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Neither may it come into conflict with
pre-theoretical knowledge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now to
the latter belongs the knowledge of faith.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Faith is a pre-theoretical insight, it may be refined
theoretically, but is not dependent upon it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For a Christian belief in God’s word revelation and
rejection of any other revelation, is a pre-theoretical matter.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now a Christian philosophic system is
required to include thoughts about scriptural beliefs, but it must be
completely in agreement with that faith and scriptural in character.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Scriptural
faith is presented with the following problems</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Who is the creator?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The answer is God who is sovereign in
his creation, revelation and providence.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">What is the creation in relation to
God?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The answer is the creation is
dependent upon the creator and is subordinate to his sovereign law, revelation
and providence.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Where does the boundary between the
two lie?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The law is the boundary
between God and the cosmos.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Only God is
the sovereign lawgiver and the creation is subject to his law.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now the
task of philosophy is to think about the creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Philosophy may not deny the states of affair of
creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The field of the
investigation of philosophy is the entire extent of the cosmos and may not
transgress the boundary or the law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Philosophy must retain its own character and it may not pass over into
theology or empty speculation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">What is the
relationship of Theology and Philosophy?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Theology is among the special sciences, it is among the other special
sciences and must explore its philosophical foundations.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
distinguishes between the heavenly creation and the earthly creation and he
investigated the distinction and connection between these spheres.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">H.G. Stoker
believed that one may philosophize about parts of the creation that is
unseen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Stoker and Vollenhoven
differ between Dooyeweerd on this point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Dooyeweerd thinks of the limits of science within our experience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The method that has come out of
Dooyeweerd’s thought is an empirical transcendental method.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
maintained that there are unseen things that we may philosophize about (heaven,
angels, etc.).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In
reference to the earthly creation, Vollenhoven attempted to make the least
complicated distinctions to build up to more complicated distinctions by making
further distinctions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The primary
distinction is the “thus-so” distinction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>You talk about an earthly being in a particular way, and we refer to it
arithmetically, spatially, physically, organically…thus and so.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now Vollenhoven originally distinguished
15 modal aspects of the created cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Each of the aspects were irreducible to the other.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If one does not keep this in mind he
falls into anatomies, that is into logical contradictions that cannot be
resolved by being more clear, the boundaries are being transgressed and can
only be resolved by making proper distinctions within the sphere.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven’s
original 15 aspects</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Arithmetic </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Spatial</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Mechanical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Physical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">5.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Organical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">6.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Psychical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">7.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Analytical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">8.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Historical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">9.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Linguistic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">10.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Social</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">11.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Economic</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">12.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Aesthetical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">13.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Juridical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">14.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Ethical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">15.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Pistical</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Over the
course of time, by various individuals in this school these have be changed,
rearranged, deleted etc.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is
the idea that when we examine the created cosmos we have to give attention to
the states of affairs and we may not impose distinctions or take the place of
the difficult effort of ferreting out truths that exist within the cosmos as
God has created.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is different
from the task of the Theologian who’s job it is to engage in the special
science of Theology.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now if a
particular subject exists in a particular mode we must also hold that there is
a corresponding particularity of law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>You have the law side and a subject side.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A psychical subject must have a psychical law that applies
to it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It implies that there are
particular laws that hold for the particular law spheres.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now here we
find the outworking the principle that the logical is not considered an all
embracing a common denominator.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It
too is embedded in the cosmic diversity.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The second
simplest distinction in the cosmos is the ‘this-that’ distinction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This occurs in all the modal aspects of
reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All the ‘this-that’ for
which the same law pertains constitutes a sphere of the particular law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since there are many laws there are
many law spheres.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
‘thus-so’ and the ‘this-that’ may be distinguished from one another and yet
intersected with modal distinctions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>A particular number has the characteristics of number.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You have the number and it is this-that
number.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are connections within
and between the modes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You can
have relationships within the arithmetical between the numbers 3 and 4.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Another case in the Analytical is a
conclusion following from two premises.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven calls such a relationship </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><i>samenhang</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">(My note: I don’t know if this is the correct
Dutch word, the online translator I used translated this as connection).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are relationships between the
modes because there are a natural order of subject functions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Spatial characteristic presupposes the
Arithmetical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Analytical thought
presupposes emotional relationship.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The more complex relationship presuppose the less complex
relationships.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The functions that
are presupposed are the substrate (all functions have substrate, except the
arithmetical).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-17032130998043920142013-05-13T23:07:00.000-05:002013-05-13T23:07:04.711-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 9)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
panose-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven,
part 3 (disk 9)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
and Dooyeweerd both break with the traditional view of subject and object in
which the object is identified with what is called the </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Genenstand</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This break is significant for them and necessary to their
ideas that the logical is an aspect with its unique subject-object
relation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are other aspects
that have their own subject-object relation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The eminence position is the starting point within the
subject-object relation of the aspects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Dooyeweerd called the </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Gegenstand</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> or antithetic relationship.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The attempt then is to get behind this </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Gegenstand</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> relation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">According
the Vollenhoven this logical subject-object relationship is not ultimate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If indeed it is only an aspect you
would not expect it to be ultimate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>More basic is the relationship of the ‘I’ (concrete ego) to what is given.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Then we do not have an agreement
between thought and being, our knowing comes roughly by working over what is
given by the ‘I’.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Article
before Free University appointment, A few fundamental principles of
Epistemology:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Knowing or
in the Dutch </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kennin</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> is a relation and he wanted to come to a clear distinction between </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kennin</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> (or </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Larenkennin</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">) or Theoretical thought and </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><i>Denken</i>
</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">or pre-Theoretical
thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kennin</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> refers to a state that of the
possession of truth by the subject that knows.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Truth about something in possession of the subject is </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kennis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now this truth can come either by have it communication or
by investigation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kennis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> there’s always a connection of the
truth with the subject.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In order
to understand truth one must understand man and his task. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One comes to the possession of </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kennis</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> by way of discharging his vocation
to be a subject that is by way of obedience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Knudsen believes this is important because we see in the
understanding of knowing we have this religious covenantal direction and that is
exactly what the movement of Kuyper wanted.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In the same
article, Vollenhoven also treated of the logos idea again.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If the entire creation is called the
cosmos then to this is cosmos the unformulated truth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If we call this logos then we have to say the logical and
the a-logical are parts of the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>So you have the idea from the Scriptures that the Logos that creates the
cosmos, you do not have that everything in the cosmos is of a logical nature.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Truth and
being cannot be regarded as being on one line.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Thought may not be confused with the divine cosmic order.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">According
to Vollenhoven, there is a harmony between the logical and a-logical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A particular truth always points to the
a-logical, truth is always truth about something.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Furthermore, if truth is always truth about something it
must always be distinguished from the truth.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In a very
elaborate discussion of Vollenhoven, a South African van der Merwe sees in the
distinction of the logical as an aspect and the remainder of things (a-logical)
the first step of the development of the scheme of modalities.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
developed this idea in opposition to a very widespread form-content scheme
(subject = form, object = content).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>If we have <i>Kennis</i>, it presupposes a 3-fold relation and in developing this
idea he gives this subject-object understanding a new interpretation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead of thinking of form and
content, this scheme is restricted to the logical aspect so both the form and
the content are logical and it is within the logical aspect that there is a
connection by which the logos is related to that which is a-logical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This side he called states of affairs
(side that relates to the content).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The form is oriented to the subject, we have to reflect on the
subject.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is thought that brings
form and content together.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A
particular truth is always a joining of form and content.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In thought the subject brings into
being a connection contentful truth and states of affairs.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven,
in taking this position, when he says for example if your in this situation
where you are thinking there has to be a reflection on the a-logical self, it
is the self that thinks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is not
an abstract consciousness.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Furthermore, it cannot be identified with the center of man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In our thinking, there is a direction
to the self, the reflection on the self is not the self itself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The logical remains an aspect of human
activity, it is not the heart of man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Thus we
have the position of the WdW in general.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>All human activity has its logical side to it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Our thinking is a logically qualified act.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If so, it is an act among other acts
and one must reflect on the total self which is active in this total thought.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven’s
Inaugural speech at the Free University (</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Logos en
Ratio</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, Oct 1926):</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
used the results of this previous study in order to give a critical review, to
show what effects have issued for western epistemology from the failure to
distinguish between God and the cosmos and the law spheres.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now at this time he had already begun
to distinguish the law spheres.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-45179999058795678172013-05-11T20:01:00.000-05:002013-05-11T20:02:22.512-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 8)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Vollenhoven,
part 2 (disk 8)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
and Dooyeweerd began the development of WdW with the analysis of the particular
modes of reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd set
his attention to the legal and the moral.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This had been the major focus in Jurisprudence as well as Philosophy and
Theology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd had called
this the Cape Horn of Jurisprudence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven approached matters from the point of view of the problems
dealt with in his dissertation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
dealt with two problems 1) The relationship between mathematics and logic and
2) The relationship of mathematics to natural science especially to physics.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
sought in his dissertation that certain lines of thought in the theory of
mathematics are a direct result of positions are taken in respect to
metaphysics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He talked about
Empiricism, Formalism, and Intuitionism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He viewed the Empirical and Formalistic as monistic and Intuitionism as
dualistic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Monism starts with the
1 to explain the many.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dualism
starts with the many to explain the 1.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven takes the position that the theistic standpoint that is able
to develop a consistent dualistic viewpoint.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reason is that it does not have to deny the peculiarly
of mathematical knowledge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here
you get the sphere sovereignty idea creeping in.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How are we going to understand the diversity of the cosmos
in relation to its unity?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Our
Christian viewpoint does not have to deny the peculiarly of mathematical
knowledge by making it subject to logic or natural science.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Thus, we attempt to show that theism
accounts for multiplicity in the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>We note the refusal to base mathematics in logic is in both Vollenhoven
and Dooyeweerd and this denial was crucial for the development of the law
spheres.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is opposed to the
attempt of Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead in </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Principia
Mathematica</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, to
understand the foundation of mathematics in logical terms.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">According
to Dooyeweerd, all of these aspects are going to be empirical in a broad sense
of the term, because they are going to fall in our experience and modes of our
experiencing.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">With
respect to Vollenhoven’s idea that Christianity offers a most consistent
dualism, did he distinguish sufficiently between the creator creature
distinction and a philosophical dualism within the confines to the cosmos?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
concluded that monism in the guise of materialism or psycho-monism was not able
to provide mathematics a solid basis in a system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dualism saw distinctiveness of the psyche, it had to be
distinguished from the physical and both make contribution to the knowledge
situation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In contrast monism
discovers an all-inclusive principle in the empirical.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
included that intuitionism had brought to light a truth that even though those
not of the household of faith they can come up with truth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven said that thought play a
part with respect to that which is not thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In mathematics that which is non-mental is never absent from
thinking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>WdW later in the
development of the idea of the concept; a theoretical concepts involves the
logical and non-logical (synthesis).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
maintain that if intuitionism had come up with insight and if he agreed monism
either sacrifices the mental to the non-mental or the non-mental to the mental
(reductionism).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In
Vollenhoven’s stance there is a departure from the idea of the objective
logos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vigorous departure from the
idea that what is amendable to thought, logical forms embedded in reality by
the divine Logos.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Furthermore,
intuitionism has room for the normative.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It can recognize the peculiarity of mathematical principles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It does not fall into the problems
connected with actual infinity as logicism does.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If you absolutism the logical and if you do not see in its
distinction from the mathematical you can fall into problems with actual
infinity.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
insisted that there is no reduction of space to number and he resists subordinating
mathematics to logic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Logic may
not be reduced to number.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Axioms
are not purely mathematical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Axioms presuppose the norm of the logical.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Norms are
not simply methodological, but are divinely ordained.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven in his dissertation opposes Neo-Kantianism,
which gave undo place to methodological procedure.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Neo-Kantianism the object of your thought is developed in
the process of thought itself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven distinguishes the logical object from other objects, there
is a logical subject-object relationship which has its own identity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Generally speaking in the
subject-object relationship you have the subject (observer) over against the
object (observed), the thinker over against the object of thought in which
there are these objective logical forms.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
subject-object relation exists in each aspect of reality (subject to the law
that holds for that aspect).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven begins here; the logical object is distinguished from all
other objects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When you have a
logical object, you don’t have reality as a whole but just a part that must be
seen within the whole.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All norms
are divine in origin and that divine authority is the ground of the norms of
thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Norms are not purely
methodological.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The norms are
divine in origin because of the subject-object relationship.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">You have a
logical subject-object relationship, you have other subject-object relationship
and they then are on the subject side and subject to divine law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The object then can occur in relations
other than that of the </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Gegenstand</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> relation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven (and
Dooyeweerd) hold that there is a subject-object relation outside the <i>Ge</i></span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">genstand</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> relation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They make a distinction between the subject-object relation
in all of our activity and the </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Gegenstand</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> relation where we abstract a side of it.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Examples
given:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">A
chalkboard eraser – it is for something and used by me (Knudsen).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">A table –
it is constructed for something</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">A bird’s
nest – has meaning in the life of the bird.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-83617198261681543272013-05-10T22:53:00.004-05:002013-05-10T22:53:37.754-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 7)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">panose</span>-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">charset</span>:0;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-generic-font-family:auto;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-pitch:variable;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">panose</span>-1:0 5 2 1 2 1 8 4 8 7;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">charset</span>:2;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-generic-font-family:auto;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-pitch:variable;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-signature:0 0 256 0 -2147483648 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">panose</span>-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">charset</span>:0;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-generic-font-family:auto;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-pitch:variable;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Bold";
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">panose</span>-1:0 2 2 8 3 7 5 5 2 3;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">charset</span>:0;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-generic-font-family:auto;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-pitch:variable;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormal</span>, <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">li</span>.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormal</span>, div.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormal</span>
{<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">MsoNormalTable</span>
{<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-header-margin:.5in;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-footer-margin:.5in;
<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% yellow;" class="goog-spellcheck-word">mso</span>-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Stoker,
part 2, Vollehoven, part 1 (disk 7)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Stoker
indeed criticized Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd for advocating the idea of Law as
the boundary between God and the cosmos and he substituted his own idea of
creation as the boundary between God and the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Knudsen did mention a type of criticism of the law idea as
being formal and empty from a Christian point of view.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Stoker did not critique from this
point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It was not because he
thought the V & D advocated that the law as abstract from creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That possibility is already excluded in
that Stoker allows for the law to be a legitimate boundary idea (God is one
side and the cosmos on the other).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">J.M. Spier
(</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Introduction to Christian Philosophy</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">) comments on Stoker’s substitution
of law idea with creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One
should not think that there is an opposition here because the idea of law
includes the idea of creation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Stoker’s
reason for questioning V & D use of law as boundary lies elsewhere, their view
(particularly D) it involved the idea that there is nothing in the cosmos that
is not subject to law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Freedom is
freedom in subjection to law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now Stoker
took another path, he wanted to assert that the being of the cosmos is not
exhausted in being subject to law, there is something more.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The service of God is not simply
obedience but free activity with one’s own sphere of competency.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">When Stoker
uses creation in this way he attempts to make it philosophical relevant that is
questionable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How do you make the
creation idea philosophically relevant?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Stoker associates the creation idea with an area of freedom, it acts as
his guarantor; we are not only subject to law but to freedom in the sphere of
competency as well.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The problem
enters in where you address this “more than” mean.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To what is law conformity to be contrasted?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And this thing we’re contrasting can it
have any meaning apart from law conformity?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The creation involves everything including law
conformity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Freedom is just as
created as law. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Creation applies
to the entire cosmos.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">How is this
universal creation idea philosophically relevant?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How does it present us with criteria for the formation of
religious concepts?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Stoker has
contrasted his view with law as if it were a question of one boundary idea over
against another.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd from
the first held to the notion that creation idea is encompassed by the law
idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
began he philosophical reflections in a conscious effort in the spirit of
Abraham Kuyper to make relevant the reformed world and life view in particular
to the formation of Christian statecraft.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>To this end he chose the idea of law as the instrument.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He sought a philosophical relevant
criterion, which could be used as a universal principle for the interpretation
and criticism of philosophical positions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The criterion had its point of origin and point of reference in a
radically Christian worldview.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This was the idea of law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>For V & D the law was the boundary between God and man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd held that every philosophical
position is ruled by a law idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This law idea was first of all an idea of origin and the coherent of the
cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Later on he developed that
radical unity was a part of this law idea ruling every philosophical system.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">For
Dooyeweerd the Archimedean point was not the law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It was the point from where the entire cosmos could be
viewed as it came to its point of concentration in the heart of man standing
before his origin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A key to
Archimedean point is understood in terms of the redeemed humanity in Jesus
Christ.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Knudsen
believes that Vollenhoven does not have a clear distinction of what the
boundary is.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>God </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Wingdings; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;">à</span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> Law </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Wingdings; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;">à</span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> Cosmos for Vollenhoven were just 3
analytical distinctions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Does the
boundary belong to God or the Cosmos.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Interestingly
enough (as far as Knudsen understands it) Van Till holds that God is the
Archimedean point.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Bold"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dirk Hendrik Theodore Vollenhoven (1892 – 1978)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven
was born in Amsterdam November 1, 1892.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In 1918 he became a pastor in the GNK in Oostkapelle.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In 1920 he took Psychology lectures in Leipzig
and in December of 1920 he came back to the Netherlands and became a pastor in
Den Haag in May of 1921.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In 1926
he was called to be a professor of philosophy and theoretical psychology at the
Free University.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Important in
the development of Vollenhoven was contact with Antheunis Janse , between 1918
and 1921.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Janse was head of the
school in Biggekerke.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Janse read
Vollenhoven’s doctoral dissertation and wrote Vollenhoven a letter.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven and Janse wrote a paper on the
activity of the soul in the teaching of arithmetic.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The two
became in more intimate contact when Vollenhoven moved to Den Haag.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Discussions continued to a discussion
of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>anthropology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the interm Janse came to a different
insights concerning the soul.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Vollenhoven said, Janse freed him from many fruitless speculations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Janse began to gain new insights into
God’s revelation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Janse held that
the scriptures speak in concrete language and not in a theoretical
fashion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This insight increased
his regard for the Bible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Janse
believed this gave him insight into every situation without having to
theorize.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This view was not
regarded to replace child-like faith with inner experience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Vollenhoven’s
dissertation had been on the theme of the philosophy of mathematics from a
theistic point of view.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He began
with a study of the foundation of mathematics; the principles that would rule
in the sphere of mathematics.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-80625292667536925662013-05-10T01:08:00.001-05:002013-05-10T01:08:46.041-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 5 and 6)
This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Bavinck,
part 2, J. Welcher (disk 5)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Bavinck’s
position required that certain forms be in reality and that would be according
to the Logos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The mind abstracts
the logical form that resides in the thing by nature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd reject this idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They say that reality is not logical in
nature and they reject the idea that forms are embedded in nature.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now
(Cornelius) Van Til has certain criticism of Bavinck.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Van Til follows Bavinck’s idea that God in his
self-consciousness is the first principle of knowledge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Van Til does criticize Bavinck of going
on from that point and forgetting that he made God the first source of
knowledge (Knudsen, at this point refers students to the writings of Van Til
and to William Young’s treatment in <i>Towards a Reformed Philosophy</i></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Bold"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">J. Welcher</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">(J. Welcher
taught philosophy at the Free University at the same time as Kuyper was
teaching theology) </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
said that the line he discovers in Kuyper namely that Kuyper not only had the
idea that all of thought is subject to Jesus Christ and that one then must
reform all of thought according to Christian principles but that he also in
contra distinction to that did allow for a common ground and did allow for
certain notions that were not completely dominated by a Christian point of
view.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
said that this synthetic line is continued in a more consistent form by
Welcher, because the latter builds his philosophy on the idea of the
Logos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dooyeweerd maintain that
this was a secondary point with Kuyper but a major point with Kuyper.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>According to William Young discussion,
Welcher referred to the treasure of science that is the spirit of man espiers
after the knowledge of uniting love.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This has a platonic ring about it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Welcher tried to discuss the ideal and the real and that there was no
opposition between.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The ideal is
also real but in a higher degree.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>What is knowable in material things are just the ideas.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He differed from Kant in regarding
these ideas as having objective reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Young says Welcher holds that the universals exists in the divine mind
and in the thing.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">For
Welcher, time is the measure of reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Unity was more real than multiplicity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Freedom is more real than being bound.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The genus is more real than the
individual.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now the
question Young discusses and the type of question Dooyeweerd asks of this is
rather significant because is it possible in the terms of the Christian idea of
creation that God created all things, is it really correct that we begin to
distinguish by some criteria that some things are more real than others in the
cosmos?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Does this introduce
dualism, Dooyeweerd says yes.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Bold"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Valentine Hepp<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>(Bavinck’s successor at the Free University)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Hepp also
followed in the line of Abraham Kuyper.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Hepp held that science is not self-sufficient but based upon principles
and these are not gained by way of experience but by way of revelation in
scripture.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There’s need for
scripture because of the blindness of man caused by sin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now, Hepp stated that the created order
is not known apart from special revelation, the principles of the philosophy of
nature too resided in the witness of the Holy Spirit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The data of nature are not contained in scripture, the
scriptures are not a manual of science.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>No scientific theory might violate a principle.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now a
non-Christian may attempt to conceal their presuppositions, but nevertheless
bound by his imagination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
non-Christian becomes mythical in his thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A Christian on the contrary lives by revelation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is the divine Logos who has made all
things and reveals himself in them.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Hepp’s view
of the testimony of the Holy Spirit, he thinks in terms of a distinction of
subject and object (Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd will criticize this).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I as the viewing subject views the
object of viewing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hepp maintain
with regard to all knowledge there must be a point beyond subject and object. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Within that terrain we have the
testimony of the Holy Spirit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There is a testimony of the spirit within the Godhead and </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">ad
extra</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hepp thought in terms of God
objectifying himself in his son and returning to himself in the Holy
Spirit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hepp maintained that all
of our knowledge rests in the spirit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>All of our knowledge depends upon the spirit of God, the testimony of
the Holy Spirit so all of our thinking beyond subject/object relation and guide
it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">It is the
general testimony of the Spirit that imparts certainty to man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Certainty is a subjective correlate of
objective truth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now for Hepp,
immediate certainty is of the highest grade.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is not found in the subject nor the object.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Certainty is found beyond the creation
(God).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Brief
review of thinkers between Kuyper and WdW</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In these thinkers the idea of the
antithesis was continued.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There’s
the attempt to erect thought upon a Christian foundation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This takes the form that science requires
principles.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They carry on the idea that this
antithesis relates to the sovereignty of God, the heart of man and the radical
influence of sin and redemption.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is some continuation of the
idea that refused to exalt the intellect.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They examined presupposition and
their need for science.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">5.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They continue on the notion that
religion is the service of God with one’s whole heart in all terrains of life.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">6.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They continue on the idea of
Sphere-Sovereignty with reference to the structures of society.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Criticism
from the standpoint of WdW.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This
philosophy comes with the claimed to have proceeded further along the line of
the reformation of philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How
the WdW has attempted to go beyond</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They did not break with the
Subject/Object scheme.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They did not break with the Logos
idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The issue is whether the
cosmos is logical in nature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Idea’s exists in the divine mind and in the thing itself.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They did not break with the
opposition of realism and idealism.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They did not break with the
dichotomy of body and soul.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They
did not place logic within reality as one human function among others.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">5.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">They did not go beyond Kuyper in
Sphere-Sovereignty (did not go beyond societal spheres) and place it on a
firmer ontological foundation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>The
Problem of a Starting Point, Stoker, part 1 (disk 6)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The common
thread (effort) to bring to expression the radical significance of the
Christian world and life view for the reformation of thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In each of them is an attempt to
criticize and suppress anything that does not meet this standard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd strove for a
philosophy that is always in the process of reforming.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A philosophy that is reformed and
always reforming.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>H.G. Stoker
attempted to make the principles of the reformation bear on the philosophy,
science and problems of higher education.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">With all
due recognition of the unity of the movement, it is becoming increasing
important to get back to the origins and to pay attention to the differences in
their starting points.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Van Til has
highlighted the difference between the earlier and later Dooyeweerd
thinking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This goes along the line
of all the thinkers.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In recent
studies (as of the lectures) there has been critical reflection upon the
foundations and an attempt to go beyond the founders.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In 1933,
H.G. Stoker at the University of </span>Potchefstroom, heralded the advent of
the Calvinistic Philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In his
writing he discussed the problem of the starting point and presented several
alternatives.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He discussed what he
called the Archimedean point of Revelation (Bavinck), Law (Vollenhoven and
Dooyeweerd), and Creation (Stoker).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Stoker maintained that God may not be regarded as the
Archimedean point of Christian philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To make him such would be to destroy his sovereignty.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Archimedean point must be a point
where the cosmos can be viewed in its extrinsic unity in relationship to
God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It must therefore have a
boundary character.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Revelation qualifies as a Archimedean point for a Christian
philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It presupposes God as
the revealer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Revelation is a
boundary between God and the cosmos and it gives to the cosmos a complete
revelation of the thoughts of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>If it is an Archimedean point, it can grasp the unity without doing
violence to the diversity of the phenomena within the cosmos by destroying
their individuality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Bavinck
attempted to show this in his Philosophy of Revelation, where he presented the
idea of revelation as a means of avoiding on-sidedness of
idealism/realism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Stoker adds that
revelation is a starting point of a reformed epistemology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It involves a revealer, content and
apprehension without destroying the individuality of any.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, Stoker did not accept
revelation as the Archimedean point, it does fulfill the idea of boundary idea
between God and the cosmos.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Law also answer to the requirement of being a boundary
between God and the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It includes
a lawgiver and that which is subject to the law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It can give account of the formal unity of the cosmos to God
and its distinctness from God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In
being subservient to the law everything is subservient to God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The law idea preserves the original diversity
within the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here God’s
sovereignty comes to clearer expression than in the idea of revelation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This boundary idea is not appropriate
to epistemology, but it is appropriate to the cosmos in its entire extent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The philosopher is bound by the law; he
cannot know God as he is in himself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It is idle to speculate concerning God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To know God as he is in himself, one would have to rise
above the Law and become like God but this would mean the destruction of his
being.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Stoker had criticisms of law
as Archimedean point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The law idea
as boundary becomes a formal idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Stoker believed that any Archimedean point must include both God and the
cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This would disqualify the
law given that God is not bound to the law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If Stoker would allow for law as Archimedean point, a point
of diversion would be eliminated between Stoker and Vollenhoven/Dooyeweerd.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the estimation of Stoker, the creation idea rests in the
revelation of Genesis 1:1 and it accounts for the formal unity of the
cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The cosmos is the creation
of God and God is the sovereign creator of the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The cosmos is more than revelation and
more than being subject to law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The cosmos is creation, the Archimedean point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The creation idea answers to the requirement of being an
Archimedean point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It connects the
creation to God but the creation is not God himself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It maintains at the same time the sovereignty of God over
the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Stoker thought that in
developing the creation idea, he thought he was including both revelation and
law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The deepest sense of the
cosmos is religious and the deepest essence of being is the service of
God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Stoker goes on, the service
of God is not exhausted in the idea of meaningful subjection to law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is more than being subject to
law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is free activity according
to ones own sphere of competency.</div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-86150525461155521062013-05-08T22:54:00.000-05:002013-05-08T22:54:22.703-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disk 4)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy
given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As
before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated
for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Bold";
panose-1:0 2 2 8 3 7 5 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:943002486;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:2051724404 348010200 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Kuyper:
The Heart of Man, part 2, Bavinck, part 1 (disk 4)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">It is the
task of the Christian to track down the Christian principles for the various
spheres, then by ones own personal commitment and devotion to the Christian
cause to bring every sphere of life into subjection to the service of God.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuypers
political activity was animated by the consuming desire that the people of
Holland (the Netherlands) should live by the divine ordinances.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In every
sphere then should be realized the idea that all things are of God, through God
and to God and that then should be realized in every sphere.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Outstanding
points of Kuypers position:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Science is dependent upon
philosophical considerations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Kuypers view of philosophy was that it gives a synopsis of the
sciences.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It does not simply give
us a catalog of the results of the sciences but it gives us a total view.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">If one is going to attain a view of
totality he must have an Archimedean point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sin affects the scientific endeavor here and we have then to
observe that affect and seek to remedy it.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">A non-Christian philosophy cannot
obtain a true transcendent standpoint in which it will be elevated above the
cosmos and see it in its totality.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuyper held that philosophy was not
the handmaid of theology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Philosophy is to have an independent position.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Philosophy is not to develop a doctrine of God and theology
limits itself to the Word revelation of God.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">5.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuyper developed the idea of Faith
as a function.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You have in every
person faith and that becomes a quality of everyone’s life that he has a firm
assurance of something.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Faith as
it answers to its true nature is dependent upon the revelation of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Faith in the false direction attempts
to suppress the revelation of God.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">6.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Thought is a function as well.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Thought for Kuyper is ruled by
faith.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is embedded in the
cosmic order, it is part of that order and is subject to that order.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The subject of knowledge is a community
of minds, it is not an abstract, transcendental “I think.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We should not abstract from the
thinking subject or God.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">7.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is no elevation of logic to be
the judge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Logic in the wider
sense of Epistemology it is not neutral.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In the narrower sense of Epistemology (ordering of thinking) it is.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Bold"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Herman Bavinck (1854 – 1921)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">According
to William Young, Bavinck sought to find a position between Rationalism and
Empiricism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Idealism (Included
under Rationalism) held that being is of the nature of idea, thinking is the
source of knowledge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is a
pattern that is criticized by the WdW.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Bavinck held that Idealism confuses the instrument of knowledge with the
source of knowledge.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Idealistic
positions (according to Bavinck):</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Plato’s
forms (Knudsen talks here about Plato’s forms, I am not including it here
because it can be found other places).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kant the
mind gives unity to experience.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Bavinck
said that the dualistic/idealistic positions were untenable and one always
tended always tended to an identity of thinking and being (dualism).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Bavinck was
also critical of monistic position:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Spinoza
(God or Nature)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Hegel
(everything is of the nature of idea)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Empiricism
on the other hand, held there is something not of the nature of idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Being is not identical with mind.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Empiricist would insist that we not
minimize perception because it is the source of the material of our
knowledge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Man is dependent on our
senses and nature.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Bavinck –
Man’s mind is not the source of truth but it is an instrument.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is man who is active in his
knowing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is an a priori
element in every science.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Science
is interested in the universal and necessary.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It cannot be restricted to the domain of the exact sciences
but needs something that goes beyond, in science there must be a philosophical
element.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Furthermore, it is
impossible to deal with the more important matters in an exact fashion.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Now Bavinck
was quite sure that there was no knowledge apart from sense experience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He followed Thomas Aquinas, Augustine
as saying that there is mediate certainty of the reality of the external world
and we have a mediate certainty.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There is no need of proving that there is an external world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yet, in this situation, mind makes its
contribution in that the mind is active in this realization.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Bavinck
held to a Moderate Realism.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Bavink’s
Epistemology requires that the forms be in reality and our mind extracts them
from reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>According to the
Logos places the forms in reality and then the mind abstracts the form.</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-11537152389056507512013-05-06T23:35:00.000-05:002013-05-06T23:35:27.050-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disk 3)This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. As before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated for accuracy (use at your own risk).<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
panose-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
--</style><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Kuyper:
The Heart of Man, part 1 (disk 3)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">This
central character of heart and its meaning of the service of God also effects
the conception of sin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sin has a
radical character affecting the radix (root) of existence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We cannot setup one aspect of the
cosmos as sinful over against another.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>We have to see sin as affecting the entire cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sin affects man in his thoughts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The noetic effect of sin reaches to all
man’s </span>endeavors.<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There are
two kinds of consciousness: one affected by sin and one restored by grace.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no common undivided
consciousness of man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">One who
denies the noetic effect of sin Kuyper called a normalist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The opposition to these are the
abnormalist.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuyper and
his followers stressed the antithesis and made a point to distinguish the
difference between the Christian and non-Christian consciousness.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no dualism that would relegate
a part of the creation to evil.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Creation as
a whole was created good.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It has
been corrupted as a whole in connection in the alienation of the heart of man
from God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the fall of man the
entire cosmos is corrupted.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
conception of sin is correlate with the conception of salvation in that it is
radical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is personal and also
has a cosmological significance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Through sin the entire creation is distorted (Genesis 3:17-19) and after
the fall the work of man became a burden.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The effect is seen in the decline in human longevity (Genesis 6:3).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In salvation there is personal and
cosmic significance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Salvation
affects the very </span>center<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">
of man and through him, the entire cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">If we are
going to have a Christian philosophy we have to see the meaning of Creation,
Fall and Redemption for the inner concerns of philosophy.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Palengensis
– a restoration, repristination of the cosmos.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It isn’t a new creation ex nihilo.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is a restoration of the cosmos that was disrupted by sin.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">There is a
redeemed consciousness and Kuyper said it is only this redeemed consciousness
that can see the cosmos in its true proportions.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Armed with
the idea of the redeemed consciousness Kuyper pleaded for a Christian
scientific endeavor and strove for an institution of higher learning where a
Christian learning could be carried out (this was the Free University of
Amsterdam).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuyper
stressed the antithesis in theoretical work (</span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Wissenschaft</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> or </span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Wetenschap</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no common ground for which a Christian and
non-Christian foundation for science.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">For Kuyper
the redeemed consciousness did not mean that there should be a Christian
attitude toward a neutral subject matter or that there is a personal Christian
influence in its teaching nor did it mean that the Christian consciousness
should be productive of truth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One
the one hand what is Christian extends to the subject matter itself, the
subject matter is taught/studied from a Christian point of view.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the other hand this subject matter
had to be discovered by examination of the field in question.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So we get the idea that the creation of
God is understood rightly by one who is lead by Christian understanding, led by
the principle of regeneration, and must go and examine that field of endeavor.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Sphere
Sovereignty (</span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">soevereiniteit in eigen kring</span></i><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">) was founded upon the absolute sovereignty of
God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Religion is a service of God
with ones whole heart.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If one has
the idea that only God is the absolute sovereign, then the thought is that the
authorities of this world are limited.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Kuyper developed the conception that there are various spheres of life
each with a derived sovereignty in its own sphere answerable only to the
sovereign God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Each sphere exists
by divine mandate and it is not dependent upon other spheres for its
existence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Each sphere has a
competency in its own sphere and may not transgress its boundary into another.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">This
position concerning sphere sovereignty, which he developed with respect to
social groupings, brought him to break with social configurations of
longstanding, you had to break with the ideals of individualism (we are bound
in God ordained bonds).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You could
not, on the other hand, embrace the idea of socialism where the spheres were
parts of a greater whole.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
center was in the sovereignty of God and in man’s calling (serving God with the
whole heart in all of life).</span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-65286542167545984232013-05-05T22:01:00.000-05:002013-05-05T22:01:36.114-05:00Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disk 1 and 2)I will be posting my notes from listening to lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy given by Dr. Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary. The date of these class lectures is unknown to me. I purchased the lectures from the WTS bookstore. The notes are "as is" from the audio as I have not validated any of the information contained (use at your own risk).<br />
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Courier New";
panose-1:0 2 7 3 9 2 2 5 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:0 5 2 1 2 1 8 4 8 7;
mso-font-charset:2;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:0 0 256 0 -2147483648 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
panose-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.st
{mso-style-name:st;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:980185312;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1115413684 -211648314 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:-;
mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-font-width:0%;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:2016837406;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-221897168 698760744 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Introduction (Disk 1)</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
When Herman Bavinck retired two
professors were appointed in his place at the Free University of
Amsterdam.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Bavinck had taught
philosophy and theology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In
theology he was replaced by Valentine Hepp; Philosophy was given to D.H.Th.
Vollenhoven.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Also, in 1926 in the
faculty of law, Herman Dooyeweerd was appointed.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd (who
were brothers-in-law, Vollenhoven was married to Dooyeweerd’s sister) developed
a Christian philosophy known as the philosophy of the law idea or cosmonomic
idea (<i><span class="st"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic";">Wijsbegeerte
der Wetsidee</span></span></i> or WdW).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
Soon this philosophy began to draw
the interest of others who were in the Calvinistic tradition (outside of the
Netherlands). H.G. Stoker who was a student of Max Scheler (German Philosopher)
and he attempted to give individual expression to WdW in South Africa.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the USA Van Til expressed interest
in WdW for reformed apologetics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Josef Bohatec an Austria Calvin scholar.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This philosophy is of interest to use because of the
following considerations</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span>It claims to be the first attempt to erect a consistent
Christian philosophy base on the principles of the Reformation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span>It had been able to attract a number of able followers and
form a school that has attracted notice has been influential in Calvinistic
circles and beyond.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This influence
will grow.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span>The philosophy is undergoing development, new statements being
made and old positions elaborated in vital areas.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The examples give are the relation of theology and
philosophy and philosophical anthropology (Dooyeweerd called this the crown of
his philosophy).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are
questions relating to law, technology, etc.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span>The movement is subject to discussion and criticism in
Christian circles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This discussion
is swelling rather than diminishing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Places such as the Institute for Christian Studies, Dordt College,
Calvin College, Westminster Theological Seminary, The Christian Study Center
(Memphis, TN), the Association for Public Justice (The Center for Public
Justice).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This philosophy is
worthy of critical examination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Knudsen attempts to present each item accurately as he can and then a
critical stance.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
WdW is seeking to erect for the first time a philosophical
framework (Ontology, Epistemology, Ethics, etc.) based upon the principles of
the reformation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If philosophy is
an attempt to gain by theoretical means a universal view of the world and all
of its aspects and their mutual interdependence and coherence does it not assume
a universal adequate agent of philosophic inquiry?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If philosophy is what we say it is, does it not assume a
universal adequate agent?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Criticisms of WdW</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span style="mso-font-width: 0%;">-<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>Etienne
Gilson</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1.0in; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo2; tab-stops: list 1.0in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>It
is impossible to erect a philosophy on a Reformational basis.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1.0in; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo2; tab-stops: list 1.0in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>The
view that man is totally depraved, and that truth can only be arrived at based
upon revelation from God makes it impossible to erect a Christian
philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Totally depravity
disqualifies the philosophical agent.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1.0in; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo2; tab-stops: list 1.0in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>Philosophy
on the basis of Divine revelation you are not philosophizing but
theologizing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It would destroy
philosophy in any true sense.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1.0in; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo2; tab-stops: list 1.0in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>RCC
there is universal reason that is injured by the fall into sin it is
essentially sound and it can be aided by Grace.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is possible for reason to act as a preamble of grace.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span style="mso-font-width: 0%;">-<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>Karl
Barth</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1.0in; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo2; tab-stops: list 1.0in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>Rejected
the idea of a Christian philosopher.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1.0in; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo2; tab-stops: list 1.0in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>Barth
was dependent upon Soren Kierkegaard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Kierkegaard held that the truth can be framed in such a way that
everyone can grasp by everyone directly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He came to the conclusion that Christianity could not be grasped
directly but only indirectly through the consciousness of sin and
acknowledgement of guilt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
thought Philosophy and Christianity were diametrically apposed to one another.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1.0in; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo2; tab-stops: list 1.0in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span>Barth
claimed that a Christian philosophy is a bastard concept.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There cannot be a wholesome wedding of
Christianity and philosophy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
admitted Theology employs philosophical concepts but, theology if fundamentally
aloof from them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Freer still is
God and His revelation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To suppose
otherwise is to leave evangelical truth.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
The situation is further complicated
by the dialectical theology of Barth and the view of the antithesis between
theology and philosophy claim to be following in the line of the pure motives
of the reformation and its opposition to the analogy of being idea of RCC.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It denied that there can be a general
philosophical framework that can embrace both God and man. Barth was against
this.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Furthermore contact with God
could only have had by an encounter apart from general philosophical considerations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It can only be had in a once for all revelation
in Jesus Christ.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
It has been pointed out by William
Young (<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><i>Towards a Reformed
Philosophy: The Development of a Protestant Philosophy in Dutch Calvinist
Thought Since the Time of Abraham Kuyper.</i></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">) the dialectical theology of Karl Barth stands
on the side of Martin Luther than of John Calvin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Although Martin Luther confessed the central signficance of
the sovereignty of God and the claim of the grace of Christ to penetrate all of
life, he never overcame the influence of the nominalistic training at
Erfurt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The nominalism of the late
middle ages had replaced the attempt of synthesis that characterized the high
middle-ages.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If nature had been
regarded to be a relatively independent permeable to grace and grace as a
completion of and not a contradiction of the truths of reason; nominalism grace
and revelation stood against nature and reason.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This dualism ran throughout Luther’s thought.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Luther according to Dooyeweerd did not admit there was an organic
connection between nature and grace.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He emphasized the freedom of the Christian man inwardly is free from the
world with its orders and its laws.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In the estate of sin man is bound to the temporal ordnances and laws; to
them he subjects himself to the will of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We must suffuse the world with our Christian love.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nevertheless he is not subject to the
world in his deeper self.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Dooyeweerd maintains that Luther maintained this dualism in the church.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The organization of the visible church
was something indifferent to be left to the state.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An antithesis was drawn between the spiritual and natural
with a depreciation of the latter.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Dualism permeates Luther’s thought.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> <style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Italic";
panose-1:0 2 2 5 3 5 4 5 9 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman Bold";
panose-1:0 2 2 8 3 7 5 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.st
{mso-style-name:st;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:437605349;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1825413618 73027304 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:942689200;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-383380548 -453765342 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><u>Calvin’s
View as Interpreted by the Calvinistic Philosophy (disk 2)</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In Luther
you have an inherent dualism between law and the Christian in his inner self
and is not subject to it.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">WdW
proceeds from the very idea that ourselves in our innermost being we are
subject to the law.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Dooyeweerd
goes on to say that Luther’s nominalism did not allow him to have a reformation
of all scientific endeavor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Luther moved in the Ockamistic sphere of the separation of faith and
science with a depreciation of the latter.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Luther said
science was the whore of reason.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He condemned all of ancient philosophy and the scholastic attempt at
synthesis of faith and reason.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Calvin
avoided the statements of Luther and influence of late medieval thought.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Calvin’s
view as interpreted by the proponents of WdW:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<ol start="1" style="margin-top: 0in;" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Calvin confessed the
sovereignty of God over all aspects of life.</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In line with the Christian
doctrine of creation he denied that man is independent and God is not set
over against man in an either-or.</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Calvin had an understanding of
the radical sense of the fall and redemption.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That means that if we have these dislocations in the
world, it is due to the radical effect of the fall and the redemption of
God needs to penetrate these things.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Redemption is just as radical as the fall.</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Calvin’s position is without
the dualism of Luther and had a clearer notion of the wholeness of created
reality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>God created the
world as a unity and if dualisms arise they are because of sin and in need
of redemption.</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Calvin did not have any
opposition of law and gospel.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He did not have a spiritualistic position, as if there were a realm
of the spirit that is separate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Between God and man is the
boundary of the law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is
a major point of WdW.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Man in
all his endeavors may not transgress this boundary.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We may not speculate about God
past what he has revealed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Everything in the creation is subject to God’s law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>God himself is free from the
law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">This is within the spirit of Calvin.</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Calvin held a fundamental unity
of the divine ordinances.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There is no basis for a natural theology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Everything is dependent upon God and his revelation and
subject to the law.</span></li>
</ol>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The
reformational emphasis of Calvin was lost again in an attempt to erect a
synthesis between Christianity and autonomous human though.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Melancton tried to synthesize
Christianity with revived scholasticism of Aristotle and then humanism and this
spirit of synthesis came to dominate the spirit of learning and that eliminated
considering all of life from a radically Christian standpoint.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The law boundary was forgotten and
elevation of human reason.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Does
reason have an independence from revelation?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A synthesis thinking attempts to interpret Christianity in a
way conformable that arises outside the foundation of restoration by Jesus.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A radical Christian reformational
position will see all of thought in the light of the radical restoration of
Jesus Christ.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Bold"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Abraham Kuyper (1837 – 1920)</span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> (NOTE: Here Knudsen gave a lot of biographical on Kuyper. I have not included it here given that the same information can be found in many places on the net, books, etc.)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">According
to WdW he was the person before all others who discovered the radical Christian
standpoint from which a radical Christian philosophy could be constructed.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuyper
thought to present a Calvinism appropriate for his time; it has therefore been
called Neocalvinism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>According to
Dooyeweerd, Kuyper's major contribution is the </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Times New Roman Italic"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Lecutures
on Calvinism.</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These were the Stone Lectures given at
Princeton Theological Seminary in 1898.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuyper’s
central principle is found in the absolute sovereignty of God over his
creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This for Kuyper was not
just in terms of election and predestination, but rather it was the general
cosmological principle of God’s lordship over his creation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Kuyper’s central principle is found
in the absolute sovereignty of God over his creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is the general cosmological principle of God’s lordship
over his creation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">A second
principle is that the heart of man is the focal point of all his
activities.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Where does our being
come to a focus?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the heart of
man is the focal point of all his activities.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>God is not sovereign of just part but all of man’s being.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Every
legitimate area of life potentially is a calling from God.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The heart
of man is to be turned to God and will implicate all his activities in services
of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The meaning of religion is
the service to God with all one’s heart in every area of life, all of life is
religion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no
sacred/secular distinction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There
is no dualism between the sacred and secular.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All of life must be put into service of its make and it must
also be seen as it points back to its maker.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This service must be in accordance with our calling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One must not think of his daily task as
along side service to God and religion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The Christian layman has as much responsibility to honor Christ as one
who is ordained as a minister.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One
must not think of his daily task as parallel with their service to God.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Two
meanings of the word ‘Religion.’</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The service of God with his/her
whole heart in every area of life (all of life is religion).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .75in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .75in; text-indent: -.5in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The worship of God at a particular
place in time accompanied by the elements of worship (Cultic side of religion).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">If we
reserve the word religion to the latter rather than the former and we restrict
it and withdraw part of life from it; the idea of the heart of as the focus of
all his activities is the correlate of the idea that God is as sovereign over
all of life and that requires allegiance in all of life belongs to God and that
is the meaning of religion.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-9555128681007057062013-02-04T15:22:00.000-06:002013-02-04T15:24:17.581-06:00A conversation between C.S. Lewis and Herman DooyeweerdThis is a fictional conversation between a well known intellectual from the 20th Century and one who probably should be more well known. This conversation is imagined by a member of the Thinknet listserv dedicated to the discussion of Reformational Philosophy.<br />
<br />
Definitions<br />
NCoTT - New Critique of Theoretical Thought. This is Dooyeweerd's Magnum Opus.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
A Conversation Between CSL and Herman Dooyeweerd:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
CSL - Good evening Herman. Welcome to Magdalene College. Feel yourself
comfortable. By the way, I just completed reading the first volume of
your splendid and prolific NCoTT and I very much liked your concept of
“meaning as the mode of being of all that is created.” It reminded
me of a discussion I had with Prof. Tillyard in which I said to him:
"Either there is significance in the whole process of things as well as
in human activity, or there is no significance in human activity
itself.... If the world is meaningless, then so are we; if we mean
something, we do not mean alone."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
HD – Oh, yes Jack, that is great and reminds of a point you made in The
Abolition of Man – that “If nothing is self-evident, nothing can be
proved – that there are some premises that can't be reached as
conclusions.” - - - I made that very clear in all my writings. But we
need to go further and affirm that “the direction of philosophical
thought to the totality of meaning implies critical self-evaluation.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
CSL – Indeed, Herman - - - -Would you like some tea or a stronger drink?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
HD – I would love some whiskey, if I could. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
CSL – Oh, yes - that will gives us the tonic we need for continuing our
conversation. [going to get the whiskey] - - By the way, when I gave the
Gifford Lectures in Scotland I got a certificate for an honorary doctor
– I wish they had presented me with a box of whiskey.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
To be continued </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-26459296558922605122012-05-03T10:07:00.003-05:002012-05-03T10:15:13.101-05:00Happy Birthday Cornelius Van Til<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-0_FWyma-V4-eXPuN8TctcOpNURN8FAxqnpNrhgSFEqkPVFlRL4yP3GGVYjKNawKZe6UW1dTVPRI3pBFqFiSE678EYewOyavByw444D4IYdMVIHnsP2HWRRQdB4w45TcA_pDYjQ/s1600/Van+Til.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 299px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 234px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5738324562868521042" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-0_FWyma-V4-eXPuN8TctcOpNURN8FAxqnpNrhgSFEqkPVFlRL4yP3GGVYjKNawKZe6UW1dTVPRI3pBFqFiSE678EYewOyavByw444D4IYdMVIHnsP2HWRRQdB4w45TcA_pDYjQ/s320/Van+Til.jpg" /></a><br />Happy 117th Birthday to Cornelius Van Til.Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-51632449821208464952012-04-06T22:48:00.002-05:002012-04-06T22:52:50.913-05:00The Lord's Prayer (Old English)Here is a link I found to the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wl-OZ3breE"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Lord's Prayer in Old English</span></a>.Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-75633838090773168022012-04-01T17:11:00.003-05:002012-04-01T17:23:03.746-05:00What is Neocalvinism?The purpose of my blog is to workout ideas in my own thinking, I may from time to time post things to explain certain buzzwords you may see in my posts. Readers of my blog might be asking "What is Neocalvinism?" Well over at <a href="http://vanguardchurch.blogspot.com/">Vanguard Church</a> there is a helpful article written on Neocalvinism. You'll find the link <a href="http://www.vanguardchurch.com/neo-calvinism_101.htm">here</a>. A couple of years back Time magazine published an article on the "New Calvinism." In this article, the author equated the term New Calvinism with Neo Calvinism. Once again Bob Robinson at Vanguard Church helps bring into focus the distinction between the two movements. You can find that article <a href="http://vanguardchurch.blogspot.com/2009/04/which-is-new-calvinism-neo-puritanism.html">here</a>.Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21054524.post-38994118013791569532012-04-01T16:26:00.002-05:002012-04-01T16:35:22.722-05:00Welcome (again, lol)Over the past 6 years I have made various attempts at "blogging." I would be faithful at tending to my blog for a few weeks and then the business of work AND graduate school got in the way. Well, now that I am out of graduate school (finished Dec 2010) I now find I need this type of outlet and thus, starting up my blog again. It is my goal to post often enough to keep peoples interest in following while at the same time not posting just for postings sake. The postings are my own and not intended to be cited in professionally published works or works to be turned in for a grade (no matter how dazzling they may be, lol). I welcome all to post comments on my entries but be mindful of the rules posted.Chris Bryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10939955195864939641noreply@blogger.com0