Selected Essays And Book Reviews

APOL 500 Midterm Study Guide {2,220 words}

A. Be able to state the factors which led to the demise of biblical Christianity and the results of the present crisis of mindless Christianity in the Church and society. Prior to the modern era, 1776-1865, Christians flourished mentally. During the modern era, 1865-present, Christians lost touch with their heritage, and they stopped using their minds. Currently, there is not much good challenging Christian writing. This demise began in Philosophy with Hume and Kant, in Science with Darwin, and in biblical studies with Bultmann. Because of Hume and Kant, religion took on a subjective twist and became a guide for living. People began doing what was right in their own eyes. Because of Darwin, naturalists had a way to explain life without agreeing to the existence of a designer. Because of Bultmann, Old Testament miracles were challenged, and New Testament scholars began questioning the Gospel. Bultmann claimed that people cannot know much about Jesus. The results of this demise is that Christians withdrew and accepted the rise of a subjective way of knowing (epistemology).

In the Church, Christians started living a secular/sacred dichotomy, became more isolated and private with their views, and began to accept the Gospel as something that works. We should accept Christianity not because it is better than anything else but because it is TRUE and REASONABLE. In society, we have moral and religious relativism where people debate right and wrong. We also have scientism which says that only Science is correct, and we have Narcissism where more and more people are only living for themselves.

B. Be able to define apologetics and defend apologetics biblically. Apologetics is the act or skill of giving a defense of Christianity through reasoning against objections no matter where the objections are focussed. Jeremiah 20:12 uses the Old Testament word in a verse that talks about pleading or setting forth a case. Ecclesiastes 6:10 uses the word as a legal dispute. Luke 12:11 shows Jesus talking about relying on the Holy Spirit when we are accused. Acts 24:10 shows Paul presenting his defense. Acts 25:8, Acts 26:1, and Philippians 1:7 again show Paul giving his defense. I Peter 3:15 says to be ready with your reason for being a Christian, and Jude 31-32 says that a person should be able to justify their belief with knowledge and evidence (or logic). Psalms 19:1 appeal to God through nature, Ezekiel 6 to God through history, and I Kings 18 to God through miracles. Jesus taught to be kind to your enemies, and Paul gave thorough evidence without scolding. Colossians 2:8 and I Corinthians 1:18-2:5 present objections to apologetics (vain and empty philosophies).

C. Be able to state the difference between God's infinity, a potential infinity, and an actual infinity. Actual infinity (aleph nought) is actually infinite, cannot change size by addiing or decreasong members, and can have a part of itself be in one-to-one correspondence with the whole. A potential infinite is finite, can change size, and cannot be made equal to a subset of itself. God is the pure actual infinite.

D. Be able to state and defend the Kalam cosmological argument. The Kalam argument considers three premises. First, either the universe had a beginning or it did not. Either the beginning had a cause or it did not. Either the cause was personal or it was not.

E. Be able to recognize the kinds of design used in the design argument and to state how this data -especially cosmic constants - should be used in this argument. The kinds of designs are Order, Purpose, Simplicity, Complexity, Beauty, Sense and cognition, and Cosmic constants. Einstein was amazed by the order of the universe. Plan and purpose refer to the watchmaker's plan or a purpose that does or does not promote human life. Complexity is seen in the cell. Beauty is God's Creation. Sense and cognition are sensory and mental faculties that tell us what is true about the external world. A reliable designer created these things. Cosmic constants refer to the Big Bang theory, the weight of a protein, and so forth. These factors were put together by a designer.

F. Be able to recognize different forms of the design argument, and answer criticisms of the design argument. The synthetic a priori form is true in all cases without further investigation. All triangles are 180 degrees. The analogy form says that human machines have order, complexity, simple, mutual cooperation that suggest a designer like a machine. There are three probability forms. The equipossible form focus on one of "n" possible ways (i.e., the roll of the dice). The frequency view must investigate repeated cases (i.e., one hundred out of one thousand men are bald). The evidential view is not numeric but says that something is reasonable. All examples with design must have a designer. All examples with meaning must have a designer. David Hume argued that the universe is unique, that there is an infinite regress problem, that the kind of God postulated cannot infer Christian God, and that other hypotheses are equally viable. Some answers to his criticisms are that nonbiological examples can be used to suggest a designer, that the eye is very special and requires design, and that much in the world lacks design but does not refute a designer.

G. Know the difference between substance and property dualism and be able to defend the fact that the Bible teaches dualism. Dualism considers the question of whether or not human beings are matter only or matter and soul. Property dualism considers properties such as redness, hardness, roundness, and humanness. Substance dualism considers things like apples, atoms, and human beings. With property dualism, things are universal and can be in more than one place at the same time. This is not the case with substance dualism. Properties are immutable and cannot change while substances can change and still be the same substance. Property dualism says that the mind is a property of the brain but different than just matter. Complex matter can become a mind, and when the brain is destroyed, the mind is destroyed. With property dualism, the properties are not efficient causes, but with substance dualism, the substances are. Epiphenomenalism says that the mind does not cause anything or interact on the brain or the body. Every time someone has a different thought, the mind changes so the person changes. In substance dualism, the self does not change when thoughts change.

Descartes formulated Cartesian dualism which says that the mind is abstract existence and that the soul is like a point without dimensions and not part of the body. Thomas Aquinas countered with Aristotelian or Thomist dualism, which says that the soul is throughout the body and fully present. The soul makes the body human and gives it life. In the Old Testament, Genesis 35:18 and Ecclesiastes 12:7 support dualism. In the New Testament, Matthew 6:25, Matthew 10:28, Luke 8:55, Luke 12:19, Luke 23:46, Acts 7:59, Acts 15:26, I Corinthians 7:34, I Peter 3:19, Hebrews 12:23, Revelation 6:9, and Revelation 20:4 support Thomist dualism by teaching about two components. Similarly, II Corinthians 5:1-10, Luke 9:29, Luke 23:43, and Philippians 1:23 support dualism by teaching about an intermediate state. In II Corinthians 5:1-10, the Apostle Paul does not want to be unclothed in a disembodied state. Therefore, the Bible maintains a dualism viewpoint and teaches that the soul is a substance of the body that can survive the death of the body.

I. Be able to criticize the belief that mind could emerge from matter. Wetness emerges from hydrogen and oxygen even though wetness is not identical to the structure. The emergent property view (EPV) says that the mind is not the same as the brain's structure, but it supervenes over that structure as a genuinely new entry. However, something cannot come from nothing. Aristotle taught that something can come from potentiality. But if one accepts this, then they can no longer hold that reality is exhausted by the spatio temporal physical universe. Also, physical laws would no longer describe the causal processes of the universe. The emergent property view also would not rule out the future existence of God. Finally, a person would have difficulty identifying the potential mental properties.

J. Be able to define metaethics, list the different metaethical theories, and explain issues involved in clarifying the question, "Why should I be moral?". Metaethics is a second order discipline that studies about ethics. Physics is a first order discipline that studies things in the world. Philosophy of Science, as another type of second order discipline, studies physicists. Metaethics looks at moral thinking and asks questions about morality. Metaethics is described by two types of theories, noncognitivist theories and cognitivist theories. Noncognitivist theories are subject predicate sentences that are trying to express things that are true (Fido is brown). They can take the form of emotivism, which means that they are sentences that express feelings rather than something that is specifically true or false (ugh! Abortion is wrong.). Or they can be imperativist, which means that they give orders rather than being of the true/false variety (abortion is wrong. Stop aborting.). Dr. Moreland says that emotivism and imperativism are wrong. In his words, a person can express a moral judgment (capital punishment) without expressing a feeling or issuing a command.

Cognitivist theories can be subjective theories (private subjectivism and cultural relativism), or they can be objective theories (ethical naturalism or ethical nonnaturalism). Private subjectivism expresses individual feelings and attitudes that are either true or false. Cultural relativism expresses the feelings of a whole culture, and they are also either true or false. According to Dr. Moreland, most people are emotivists, private subjectivists, or cultural relativists. Objective theories make true/false statements about people or events. Moral reductionism says that moral properties can be reduced to and identified with non-moral properties. Ethical naturalism accepts moral reductionism, and ethical nonnaturalism says that moral properties are unique and cannot be reduced to nonmoral properties.

A person should be moral because (1) they can distinguish specific moral acts from what philosophers call the moral point of view (the question becomes "why should I accept the moral point of view?"), (2) they can distinguish between motives and reasons for adopting the moral point of view (the question is what motivates one to adopt the moral point of view), and (3) the question uses a rational "should" rather than a moral "should" (the question is being asked outside the moral point of view altogether). Therefore, the question asks why someone should adopt the moral point of view as a part of a rational plan of life.

K. Be able to analyze the four answers given to the problems of the meaning of life. Nihilism and naturalism is a very pessimistic view. It assumes no God, human life is meaningless and absurd, no reason to live, no life after death, and no values. This view usually falls under private subjectivism, cultural relativism, or one of the noncognitivist (emotivism or imperativism) theories. The temporal purpose and optimistic humanism view is optimistically humanistic. With this view, there is no reason why something exists, humans are modified monkeys, no real objective, and no point to life. However, a person can still pursue satisfaction. The immanent purpose and transcendentalism view denies God but accepts the existence of real moral values. This view says that no reason for human existence, no life after death, and no meaning to life. But real objective moral values exist. The cosmic purpose and Christian theism view says that God created all things, that humans are special, that morals exist, and that there is life after death.