Prose – Page 16 – Poetry, Short Prose and Walking

Core—Six Sentence Story

As Bret walked to the beach to photograph the sunrise he saw the moon near the horizon and imagined the sun’s approach for the upcoming solar eclipse. His interests had less to do with astronomy, which he knew little about, than the flowing colors of the dawns and dusks across the sky.

As sea birds and tourists came to watch the sun rise seemingly right out of the core of the ocean, Bret saw a very young woman approach along the water’s edge from the south and a very young man come from the north. He figured they would pass each other by, but they stopped and hugged lingering almost directly in front of him.

Not wanting to photograph their display of affection Bret moved a few feet to the side to give his camera a people-free view of the horizon. Just before the sun rose, and likely oblivious to it, they walked on the wave caressed beach to the north while the sun rose from beyond the curve of the earth to brighten his day as it darkened the other side thousands of miles below him with night.

______

Denise offers the prompt word “core” to be used in this week’s Six Sentence Story.

The moon approaching the sun still beneath the horizon setting themselves up for the new moon which would look like an eclipse to those in its shadow

Outlet—Six Sentence Story

Neither my brother, Stephen, nor I liked Miss Walters, his old 3rd grade teacher at St. Joseph’s and my new one this year. No one liked the lady not even Mom and Dad who talked about her after they thought we went to sleep.

When Stephen walked up to Communion last Sunday behind Miss Walters and in front of us, he heard Jesus tell him that He loved the way Miss Walters’ heart moves when she sings, whatever that meant. Then Stephen whispered to me back in our pew that he and I had to give that message to Miss Walters because she wouldn’t believe anyone else.

I was hoping we might wait until next Sunday, but Stephen rushed me through the outlet of our pew to hers after Mass and quickly said, “Miss Walters, Jesus told us to tell you that He loves the way your heart moves when you sing.”

Miss Walters looked at us and then her eyes filled with tears and then Stephen’s eyes filled with tears and then Mom and Dad were there and then their eyes filled with tears when they heard the whole story (which I still don’t know) and then we all hugged and then I felt my own heart move and then I felt Miss Walters wipe away my tears.

______

Denise offers the prompt word “outlet” to be used in this week’s Six Sentence Stories.

Song of Solomon 5:8
I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, if ye find my beloved, that ye tell him, that I am sick of love.

Sunrise at Techny Park, Northbrook, Illinois

The Trinity and First Order Logic with Identity

In Logic: A God-Centered Approach to the Foundation of Western Thought Vern Poythress attempted to write a textbook on western logic from a Christian perspective. Although he discussed other logics, his main focus was on justifying first order logic with identity (FOL⁼) as a platonic reflection of “God’s logic” and, because of that, personal and loving.

This reflection bridges the Creator-creature distinction. However, when he sets up this reflection between FOL⁼ and “God’s logic” he assumes that FOL⁼ is not just another example of man’s desire for autonomy from God. This is where he makes a mistake.

To see why this characterization of FOL⁼ is problematic, consider that Poythress would not want to describe the Tower of Babel as a reflection of “God’s tower”. Because the Tower of Babel is an example of man’s desire for autonomy from God, it should not reflect anything from God.

Poythress knows that almost no one, Christian and non-Christian alike, thinks FOL⁼ is personal in any way. To counter this anticipated objection, he accuses those who might reject his argument as being “massively guilty” of “idolatry”. For example, consider this comment about guilt and idolatry on page 84:

Christians too have become massively guilty by being captive to the idolatry in which logic is regarded as impersonal. Within this captivity we take for granted the benefits and beauties of rationality for which we should be filled with gratitude and praise to God.

By committing to FOL⁼ Poythress blinds himself to seeing it as another attempt by man to gain autonomy from God. Given that commitment, perhaps better described as compromise, he now has to defend FOL⁼ even when it attacks the Trinity. We will see how that attack goes next.

FOL⁼ is Non-Trinitarian

If I assume the Trinity in FOL⁼, I can derive a contradiction using rules for manipulating equality. Here is how such a proof might look:

(1) Assume the Father is God.
(2) Assume the Son is God.
(3) Assume the Father is not the Son.
(4) Derive from (2) that God is the Son using symmetry.
(5) Derive from (1) and (4) that the Father is the Son using transitivity.
(6) Derive a contradiction from (3) and (5).

Note that the above is a presuppositional argument that could be used by an atheist to undermine belief in the Trinitarian God. The atheist assumes the Trinity since it would be my admitted presupposition. Then he uses FOL⁼ to derive a contradiction. Finally, the atheist insists that I reject my belief because it is irrational.

Since FOL⁼ forces me to reject the Trinity (or else reject parts of FOL⁼ itself), I can characterize any mathematical formalization of this logic as non-Trinitarian. A non-Trinitarian logic does not “reflect” the Trinitarian God.

Poythress is aware of the contradiction, but he tries to get around it by invoking “mystery”. He writes on page 67:

The Bible also teaches that God is one God, in three persons. How do we understand how these things can be? Do these mysteries violate the laws of logic? Though there is mystery here for us as creatures, there is no mystery for God the Creator. If logic is ultimately an aspect of God’s mind; what for us is a mystery is in full harmony with the logic that is in God.

Call it what you like, a “mystery” is nothing more than a contradiction in FOL⁼. In the context of FOL⁼, the laws of logic are the laws of derivation in FOL⁼. Accepting a contradiction as true would violate the laws of FOL⁼, hence the laws of logic.

How does one get around this? Easy. Don’t take FOL⁼ so seriously. Don’t commit yourself to it the way Poythress does. Don’t think it is neutral ground upon which you can safely compromise. Recall that FOL⁼ is a work of man. It is not a work of God. It can change just as any other man-made philosophy or scientific theory can change when there is something wrong with it.

And, besides, as I will point out next, theologians seeking to rationalize the Trinity are not the only ones who have problems with FOL⁼.

There Are Alternatives to FOL⁼

CONSTRUCTIVIST LOGICS

Although FOL⁼ cannot derive the Trinity it can derive the existence of sets whose cardinalities represent ever increasing transfinite numbers. The logical rules used to derive these sets are the same as those used to reject the Trinity: (1) assume the contrary to what you want to show, (2) derive a contradiction, and (3) given that contradiction, reject the unwelcome assumption as false.

Poythress approves of these set theoretic proofs in part E2. They derive a “ladder” or sequence of sets with each set having a strictly greater infinite cardinality than the one below it. He remarks on page 630,

The ladders reflect the glory of God, who is transcendent. They reflect the original imaging and creativity in the Father eternally begetting the Son.

Rather than seeing these sets as representing an “imitative transcendence” (page 630), Poythress should have warned the reader that such derivations can also be viewed as a red flag that something is wrong with FOL⁼ especially given that FOL⁼ rejects the Trinity.

Constructivists are mathematicians who want nothing to do with these ladders. They see the red flags waving. One of the logics they have created is intuitionistic logic. This logic modifies FOL⁼ to prevent the derivation of such infinite sets.

Although constructivist logics won’t help us rationalize the Trinity they do demonstrate that FOL⁼ is not the only game in town.

QUANTUM LOGICS

FOL⁼ doesn’t handle quantum particles any better than it handles the Trinity. Absolute identity in FOL⁼ requires that we can tell the difference between individual members of a domain, the set of elements which FOL⁼ will range over.

Absolute identity is defined as A = B if and only if all properties of A are also properties of B and all properties of B are also properties of A. A and B are identical because they are indiscernible based on checking all of their properties. Such discernment can’t be done with quantum particles. To get around that some have proposed quantum logics as a modification of FOL⁼.

Although the statistical solutions quantum logics provide don’t help rationalize the Trinity they do point to absolute identity as the problem with FOL⁼ that those attempting to rationalize the Trinity have to face. They also help us see that rationalizing physical reality in FOL⁼ is as problematic as rationalizing the Trinity.

RELATIVE IDENTITY LOGICS

P.T. Geach offered relative identity as an alternative to absolute identity to correct the problem of the falsification of the Trinity in FOL⁼.

Daniel Molto, who continues Geach’s work in support of the consistency of the doctrine of the Trinity, drew the following conclusion in “Relativizing identity” (page 9):

Most actual languages can express no universally reﬂexive relation that satisﬁes the Indiscernibility of Identity without contradiction.

We now have the possibility of a logic that can rationalize the Trinity. This blocks the atheist’s objection to Christianity.

Taking FOL⁼ Too Seriously

One of the dangers of taking FOL⁼ too seriously is that it leads people to think it holds the essence of intelligence. Proof assistants mechanize the search for and validation of FOL⁼ derivations. If we can mechanize the derivations of proofs and intelligence can be reduced to FOL⁼, then we should be able to mechanize intelligence. But if we were able to do that (which we are not), that would reduce us, who have been made in the image of God, to machines.

The use of the term “artificial intelligence” exposes the real “idolatry” with regard to logic that Poythress warned about. He thinks this idolatry has to do with us not seeing FOL⁼ as personal and loving. Just the opposite is the case.

FOL⁼ is an impersonal, even unintelligent, tool that can be mechanized. It gives the atheist hope that he can reduce men and women, made in the image of God, to machines. It also gives the atheist a means of expressing his autonomy from God.

Why Bother Rationalizing the Trinity?

The benefit of rationalizing the Trinity is not to learn anything about God. We already know God is Trinitarian from Scripture. The benefit comes from deflecting presuppositional arguments coming from atheists that Trinitarian theism is irrational because one can derive a contradiction from it in FOL⁼.

It also helps us see the difference that a logic offers, even one that can rationalize the Trinity, from what we have as born-again Christians. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit makes truth very personal for the Christian. Logic by itself does not. As John 14:6 reveals, Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. Christians after Pentecost follow a truth-filled way of life by obeying the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.

Conclusion

Since FOL⁼ has decided against the Trinity, I am faced with a choice: Do I accept the Trinity or do I accept FOL⁼ which rejects the Trinity? Let me make sure my decision is clear:

I choose the Trinity over FOL⁼.

Choosing the Trinity means I will not attempt to view FOL⁼ as reflecting the Trinitarian God. It also means I need to be aware of the limitations of FOL⁼ so I am not deceived by any presuppositional argument coming from atheists.

Because I do not want to encourage fantasies that we can be reduced to machines, I will also not characterize FOL⁼ as loving or personal. I will not create an idol out of it. Atheists have done enough damage already with their promotion of “artificial intelligence”.

If you are a born again Christian, remind anyone who speaks massive guilt over you that you have been redeemed by the blood of Jesus.

Slide—Six Sentence Story

George picked up the couple near the entrance to the interstate knowing there would not likely be many cars going north at this hour of the evening. Clearly, the woman was pregnant, but when he found out they needed to go a hundred miles out of his way, George hesitated, but it was getting darker and she was pregnant.

Over two hours later George dropped them off at their apartment in a small town in the timberlands of Maine. As George started his truck to leave noting the fuel gauge with confidence that he had enough gas to return and getting ready to slide back into his normal routine that had been going nowhere, the man offered him the only thing he had besides his thanks: “May the Lord bless you.”

Decades later when George and his wife were hosting an Easter dinner with their children’s families and their children’s children’s families including their new great granddaughter, he remembered that young couple and told all of them the story.

When George said, “Their child would be more than sixty years old by now,” he realized, with the love of his family all around him, that, indeed, he had received over all those years blessing upon blessing with overflows of blessings to share.

______

Denise offers the prompt word “slide” to be used in this week’s Six Sentence Stories.

Matthew 25:40
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Does the Lord Know Everything?

Hebrews 8:10-12
¹⁰For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
¹¹And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
¹²For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

For those in His new covenant, the Lord remembers our sins and our iniquities no more.

The important questions are Whom do we know? Has His laws been written in our hearts? Are they in our minds? Are we in His new covenant?

Bank—Six Sentence Story

Anticipating the eventual manifestation of his healing Sam began singing a happy song which he made up as he went along mainly repeating the words, “Hallelujah”, “Thank you, Jesus” and “I am healed” over and over and over again.

Sensing an opportunity to get a word in edgewise and expecting Sam to know the difference between the play money of an “eventual manifestation of healing” and an actual testimony one could take to the bank, the devil said, “You’re not.”

When Sam’s wife heard him suddenly stop singing, she asked, “Did the devil say you weren’t healed?”

“Yes.”

“That devil’s a doofus.”

HA ha ha ha—HA ha ha—HA ha ha ha—HA ha ha—which offended their high maintenance devil so much that it threatened to leave and when it finally did even the bankers recognized Sam’s testimony as golden.

______

Denise offers the prompt word “bank” to be used in this week’s Six Sentence Stories.

Remote—Six Sentence Story

While on vacation Willard and Matilda visited a notorious, but remote, congregation their pastor warned held services “too indecent for decent worship” so they could report back a few good words of condemnation against them.

With the service having gone on for hours and with no end in sight, Matilda told Willard, “Tell that girl behind us to stop giggling so much so I can hear the heresies the preacher is preaching.”

Willard said that for the past God knows how long the preacher hasn’t said anything worth noting but merely wandered up and down the rows of people touching some, here and there, who’d fall back laughing like idiots too dumb to stop.

“I have a mind to give him a piece of my mind before it’s too late,” Matilda said.

Willard wanted to say something, perhaps that it might already be too late, as Matilda, with eyes and mouth wide open, watched her husband giggle uncontrollably. Then, sensing the heavy ashes of mourning she didn’t know she was carrying transform into beautiful garments of praise, she herself began to laugh with tears flowing down her cheeks grateful that even she was loved enough to be anointed with the oil of gladness.

______

Denise offers the prompt word “remote” to be used in this week’s Six Sentence Stories.

Isaiah 61: “…beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning…”

Ace—Six Sentence Story

Although Jairus knew that Jesus had healing power, as a ruler of the synagogue he didn’t want to expose his belief by playing the only real ace in his hand until it became clear that his beloved twelve-year-old daughter would likely die that very day if he did not. At his request Jesus followed Jairus to his house, but on the way a woman with a twelve-year issue of blood which no physician could cure crept close enough to Jesus to just touch the border of His robe without being noticed. Jesus stopped, asked who touched Him and after the woman revealed herself He told her that her faith had healed her.

While Jairus waited impatiently for this testimony of the woman to be over, people from his house told him what he feared that his daughter had died, but Jesus told him to only believe and she would be made whole.

At the house Jesus allowed Peter, James, John, Jairus and his wife to go in with Him where the child lay. Then Jesus said, “Maid, arise.”

______

Denise offers the prompt word “ace” to be used in this week’s Six Sentence Stories.

Luke 8:41-56 KJV
41 And, behold, there came a man named Jairus, and he was a ruler of the synagogue: and he fell down at Jesus’ feet, and besought him that he would come into his house: 42 For he had one only daughter, about twelve years of age, and she lay a dying. But as he went the people thronged him. 43 And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any, 44 Came behind [him], and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched. 45 And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press [thee], and sayest thou, Who touched me? 46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. 47 And when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately. 48 And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace. 49 While he yet spake, there cometh one from the ruler of the synagogue’s [house], saying to him, Thy daughter is dead; trouble not the Master. 50 But when Jesus heard [it], he answered him, saying, Fear not: believe only, and she shall be made whole. 51 And when he came into the house, he suffered no man to go in, save Peter, and James, and John, and the father and the mother of the maiden. 52 And all wept, and bewailed her: but he said, Weep not; she is not dead, but sleepeth. 53 And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead. 54 And he put them all out, and took her by the hand, and called, saying, Maid, arise. 55 And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat. 56 And her parents were astonished: but he charged them that they should tell no man what was done.

Nail—Six Sentence Story

Although Sam’s wife was ready with cough drops, apple cider vinegar and honey she was getting annoyed with his colds. After they rebuked any spirits of infirmity, she opened an audio Bible on her phone, selected the Book of Psalms and set them to play continuously throughout the night.

Sam would pop out of dreams to hear a psalm he was familiar with and then seemingly moments later one he didn’t remember hearing before. The cooling perspiration on his chest in the morning made him realize: he was healed!

The demons who tried to nail him down and make him useless couldn’t get a moment’s worth of peace with those psalms playing. However, considering their defeat at the battle of the Resurrection, those psalms were better than what they’d have to face when the end finally came.

______

Denise offers the prompt word “nail” to be used in this week’s Six Sentence Stories.

Sunrise, Atlantic Ocean, Southern Florida

Star Formation vs Star Creation

SlimJim reviewed a book by R.J. Rushdoony, The Word of Flux, so I searched to see if Rushdoony believed in a six-day creation as reported in Genesis 1. Not only did he support it (see The Mythology of Science), but he clarified what was at stake. God performed a creative act in Genesis 1. What He did NOT do was participate in a creative process involving natural laws.

If God were merely guiding some natural processes, what were those processes? There is no point in claiming, as Alvin Plantinga has done, that God guided natural processes, if those natural processes do not exist.

In the video from Answers In Genesis below Dr. Terry Mortenson brings home the point that the problem with star formation is that there are no natural processes that permit star formation. In particular at (20:00), he quotes Neil deGrasse Tyson:

The scary part is that if none of us knew in advance that stars exist, frontline research would offer plenty of convincing reasons for why stars could never form. (Neil deGrasse Tyson, Death by Black Hole and Other Cosmic Quandaries, New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2007, p. 187)

On the other hand, the origins of stars as a creative act of God, as Rushdoony would put it, is not a problem. An act of creation (when God does it) does not require a natural process to explain it. All it requires, which is more than any atheist and even some Christians can tolerate, is accepting a Creator Who can do what He says He did in Genesis 1.

Some people I know are attracted to the creative process (rather than creative act) views of Hugh Ross. They like to think they are being “rational”. Dr. Mortenson puts a special focus on Ross (starting about 3:30) showing how he exaggerates what naturalists themselves claim they know to justify his own handwaving. If one takes being rational seriously, one would no longer trust anything someone had to say who is willing to exaggerate.

Bottom Line

If you want to accept the atheist fairy tales, the handwaving stories, that naturalists and Ross want you to believe, then you might as well give up on Christianity as many have already done as a result of such philosophical diversions.

Why? Because Jesus said “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.” (Mark 10:6 and other verses).

If the fairy tales are right then Jesus got that wrong, because the beginning of Ross-style process creation happened a god-awful number of years prior to the appearance of men and women.

Now continue that deductive chain to see what else it entails.

If Jesus got something wrong, then He is not God.
If Jesus is not God, then the Trinity is false.
If the Trinity is false, then the death of Jesus could not have been the sacrifice that Christianity has made it out to be.

So, who are you going to believe?

If you are at all tempted to believe atheists because they like to portray themselves as “scientists” (more accurately, pseudo-scientists which is all one is when someone abandons operational science) consider that the earliest “historical date of any real certainty” goes back no further than 5000 years which falls in line with a global flood of about 5300 years ago.

If you are tempted to doubt that a global flood occurred, consider the signs of a global catastrophic water event: glaciers, continent wide sedimentary strata, catastrophic plate tectonics, planation surfaces.

If you are still tempted to think that naturalistic processes can pop a universe into existence, then which natural process gets us something from nothing? And which natural process takes us from pond scum to human beings before the observable natural process of genetic entropy drives humanity to extinction?

______

And if you are still tempted after that, remind the devil (for me) that he’s a doofus and soon it will all be over.