Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Spending Our Way To A Better Economy?

DISCLAIMER: The following viewpoints are not those of the blogger, but a friend of his. If this point of view upsets you, you may vent, but don’t yell at the person who posted them. Start a discussion, express and opinion, but don’t yell at the person who didn’t write it, that is just senseless… These writings are the intellectual property of me, the Author, with permission granted to the blogger who is positing them. They may not be reposted or used in any form without express written consent by either myself or the blogger of Reformed Seth.

Spending Our Way to a Better Economy?

We often hear about how the government is trying to spend its way out of a recession, but can that really be done? Can we really raise the deficit by trillions of dollars, and expect to lower it at the same time and in doing so, secure our economical growth and standing as a world power, knowing so many other countries hold our debt?

It is ascribed that the Obama Administration, from the departed Larry Summers, to Tax Avoiding Timothy Geithner, and all of their ilk, follow Keynesian Economic theory, but what exactly is that theory, without getting a brain cramp trying to figure it out? Because let’s face it, if you want double speak, all you have to do is listen to a politician defend his position on things, like being for health care reform, that doesn’t reform health care.

In looking to the web, I found this link, [1]http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/KeynesianEconomics.html, which ascribes to be able to explain the theory, and how it is suppose to work. They say there are 6 points to it, and they break it down as such, (Italics are from the article, and the author or the article)

A Keynesian believes that aggregate demand is influenced by a host of economic decisions—both public and private—and sometimes behaves erratically.

According to Keynesian theory, changes in aggregate demand, whether anticipated or unanticipated, have their greatest short-run effect on real output and employment, not on prices.

Keynesians believe that prices, and especially wages, respond slowly to changes in supply and demand, resulting in periodic shortages and surpluses, especially of labor.

Keynesians do not think that the typical level of unemployment is ideal—partly because unemployment is subject to the caprice of aggregate demand, and partly because they believe that prices adjust only gradually.

Many, but not all, Keynesians advocate activist stabilization policy to reduce the amplitude of the business cycle, which they rank among the most important of all economic problems.

Finally, and even less unanimously, some Keynesians are more concerned about combating unemployment than about conquering inflation
.

So, even in following the above 6 items, you see that the policy that is being followed isn’t even agreed on by those who use it.

But the first line strikes me as being the most interesting, as the current Administration is trying to bury the business owners with the burden of taxes, regulations, and now forced health care, which is stopping them from hiring, expanding or doing what needs to be done IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, in order to supply the jobs for the theory to work.

So, what do we do? Can we fight Washington D.C. and get them to listen to our voices, to do what needs to be done, what has worked in the past, and get the people back to work, which will supply tax dollars for the elected to abuse?

Well, we can exercise our right to vote. To elect representatives, both locally and nationally, who can work to fix the broken economy, the broken system of checks and balances, because let’s face it, more than the economy is broken, the whole system is broken.

Instead of having judges who are concerned with Constitutional law, we supply the bench with people who are aligned with the party in power, and followed a prescribed doctrine, instead of what was written by the founding fathers.

So, as a capitalist society, we are concerned with the all might dollar, instead of the Almighty God, and we have lost the focus needed to fix what is wrong. From the Economy, to the Unemployed, to Middle Class, to the Ruling Class, to the Classless, we have divided our Country, not along the lines of race, but along the lines of economic viability, the haves and have-nots, and in doing so; have allowed those who have lied to us the best, to set the course for our own destruction.



These are my thoughts, and how Mark C’s it.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] THE CONCISE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ECONMICS Keynesian Economics

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Defense of the Trinity part 3


UPDATE: For a full explanation (parts 1 - 3) click here.


I'll continue the defense of the Trinity by finishing the explanation of the third person of the Trinity, i.e., the Holy Spirit. In the last post, I gave scripture references to the Holy Spirit as God. In this post, I hope to communicate clearly that not only does the Holy Spirit possess deity, but that he also has a differentiated personality. I'll give three reasons why the Holy Spirit has a differentiated personality. 


Personal Pronouns

Scripture refers to the Holy Spirit with personal pronouns (John 14:26; 16:13). 

He Does Things Only Persons Can Do

Teach (John 14:26; 1 John 2:27)

Convict of sin (John 16:7-8)

Be grieved by sin (Ephesians 4:30). 

Intercedes (Romans 8:26). 

The Holy Spirit has intellect (1 Cor. 2:10, 11), will (1 Cor. 12:11), and feeling (Eph. 4:30). 

I will close with an excerpt from an article written by John Macarthur:

In describing the Trinity, the New Testament clearly distinguishes three Persons who are all simultaneously active. They are not merely modes or manifestations of the same person (as Oneness theology incorrectly asserts) who sometimes acts as Father, sometimes as Son, and sometimes as Spirit. At Christ’s baptism, all three Persons were simultaneously active (Matt. 3:16–17), with the Son being baptized, the Spirit descending, and the Father speaking from Heaven. Jesus Himself prayed to the Father (cf. Matt. 6:9), taught that His will was distinct from His Father’s (Matt. 26:39), promised that He would ask the Father to send the Spirit (John 14:16), and asked the Father to glorify Him (John 17:5). These actions would not make sense unless the Father and the Son were two distinct Persons. Elsewhere in the New Testament, the Holy Spirit intercedes before the Father on behalf of believers (Rom. 8:26), as does the Son, who is our Advocate (1 John 2:1). Again, the distinctness of each Person is in view.

There is only one God. The members of the Godhead are co-existent, co-equal, one in essence and yet three in person. Remember the mathematical illustration of 1 x 1 x 1 = 3, and the love illustration to help you with understanding the doctrine of the Trinity. It is a monotheistic belief rooted in scripture; not a belief in three gods in one or a belief of one person manifesting himself in three ways. Norman Geisler puts the Trinity in words as, "while God is one and many at the same time, he is not one and many in the same sense. He is one in the sense of his essence, but many in the sense of his persons."


Sources:
Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics

John Macarthur, "Our Triune God."

Related posts

Explaining the Trinity contains all of my posts on the Trinity


For further study:
R.C. Sproul, "Mystery of the Trinity."
 
William Lane Craig, "The Trinity and God's Omni-Attributes
 
William Lane Craig's "higher learning" article on the Trinity

Walter Martin Video What is the Trinity? 

Excellent article, "What is the doctrine of the Trinity?" by Matt Perman

The Trinity: One What and Three Whos by Ken Samples

R.C. Sproul: The Mystery of the Trinity Study Guide


Ligonier Ministries has free resources for study and I just found a great free resource that is related to the area of study here at 'Reformed Seth,' that is, the Trinity. R.C. has a series called, "The Mystery of the Trinity" which can be viewed for free here, and the free study guide can be found here. You can save the study guide to your computer so you can study it anytime you want, instead of going to Ligonier's website each time you want to study it. 
The video series has six lectures, the study guide goes right onlong with the lectures, so you can bring up the video lectures and use your study guide along with them to have a good study of the Trinity. Whether it answers questions, or brings up more questions, you'll definitely be thinking more openly about the Trinity. 

For more R.C. Sproul resources click here.

Walter Martin's short defense of the Trinity here.

John Macarthur on the Trinity here.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Defense of the Trinity part 2


In yesterday's post I discussed the logic of non-contradiction and how the trinity does not violate that law. The trinity, to review, explains that God is one in his substance, the unity is in his essence (what God is) and the plurality is in his persons (how he relates within himself). Today, I'll give some illustrations of the trinity and a scriptural defense of it as well. 

Illustrations of the Trinity

The illustrations given will be my attempt to show the unity of God while showing a simultaneous plurality. Hopefully, the following analogies will shine light on some misunderstandings. First, there is a misconception that believing in the Trinity is believing in three gods; doesn't 1 + 1 + 1 = 3? It does if you add them, but what if you multiplied one three times? Will you not get one? God is triune, not triplex. So, we can see from this that there is no mathematical contradiction to the Trinity. 

Another illustration is the triangle, probably the most popular illustration of the Trinity. A triangle has three corners, inseparable, and simultaneous to one another. This explains the Trinity well in a simple way that is easy to remember. There is also a moral illustration suggested by Augustine. *The Bible informs us that "God is love" (1 John 4:16). Love involves a lover, a beloved, and a spirit of love between lover and loved. The Father might be likened to the lover, the Son to the beloved, and the Holy Spirit to the Spirit of love. This is a strong example because it is personal, in that it involves love, which comes from persons. 

There is also an illustration based in human nature; the relation of the human mind, to its ideas, and the expression of those ideas in words. So we have mind to ideas to words. There is a unity among the three without having an identity, in that sense, the three illustrate the Trinity.* So I hope the above illustrations give a better understanding of the Trinity. In my opinion, they are great examples to share with others for their simplicity and they are also very illustrative. 

Scriptural Defense

Ah, here comes the part the critics have been salivating at the mouth for me to get to: the evidence in scripture. Are you ready? I'm ready to get into it too because there is good evidence in the Bible for the Trinity. I'm quite sure most Christians understand God as Father, there really isn't much debate on that so I'll start with the deity of Christ, or the Son of God and then end with the Holy Spirit. 

The Son is God

Jesus claimed to be Yahweh God; YHWH translated in some versions Jehovah, was the special name for God revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14, the "I AM WHO I AM," scripture. Jesus declared "Before Abraham was, I am," in John 8:58. That declaration claims equality with God and existence before Abraham. Also, when you couple the verses Luke 4:8, "And Jesus answered him, "It is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve." and Hebrews 1:6, "And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him," you see that God is the only being to be worshiped, yet the Son is worshiped in Hebrews 1:6, along with Joshua 5:13-15; Mark 5:6; John 9:38; Luke 24:52; Rev. 7:9, 10; and Phil. 2:10,11. In those verses the Son is worshiped, yet God alone is to be worshiped, so we can see that the Son is God. 

Now, it's important to note that the Son and the Father are not two separate beings, for God is one being: "The Lord our God, the LORD is one" (Deaut. 6:4). Both Jesus (Mark 12:29) and the apostles repeat this formula in the NT (1 Cor. 8:4, 6). So, there is one being and that is God. 

The Holy Spirit is God

The Holy Spirit is called "God" (Acts 5:3-4). Walter Martin explains the verse well, "The literal force of the Greek verb translated "to lie" is to impose a lie upon someone. In this case the someone was not men (verse 4) nor even Peter, but God in the Person of the Holy Spirit. The parallel of verses 3 and 4 clearly indicates that the Holy Spirit is a person and is God."

*The Holy Spirit possesses the attributes of deity: omnipresence (Ps 139:7-12) and omniscience (1 Cor. 2:10, 11). He is associated with God the Father in creation (Gen. 1:2). He is involved with other members of the Godhead in the work of redemption (John 3:5-6; Rom 8:9-17, 27-27; Titus 3:5-7). He is associated with other members of the Trinity under the "name" of God (Matt 28:18-20). Finally, the Holy Spirit appears, along with the Father and Son, in New Testament benedictions (for example, 2 Cor. 13:14). 


Due to time constraints, I'll have to finish the rest of the Holy Spirit explanation in tomorrows post. I hope this survey of the Trinity has helped those of you out that are critical of the Trinity or skeptical about it because once understood, the doctrine of God is much tighter. Let me know if you have any questions in the comment section. Please comment on this post or the other post, "Logic of the Trinity." I'm always available because my phone alerts me of comments. 

Sources

* Augustine, On the Trinity

* Walter Martin, King James Study Bible

* Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics


How Mark C's It...Personal Responsibility, Compromise, and Failure

DISCLAIMER: The following viewpoints are not those of the blogger, but a friend of his. If this point of view upsets you, you may vent, but don’t yell at the person who posted them. Start a discussion, express and opinion, but don’t yell at the person who didn’t write it, that is just senseless…

Personal Responsibility:

Now here is a topic that can cause some problems, in our own lives, as this has been a big one in mine.

What exactly IS Personal Responsibility? Well, wouldn’t we just accept the premise that it is being responsible for one’s own person? That would make sense, but making sense isn’t what seems to be the big thing, or the right thing to do any more.

Why accept responsibility when we can blame other people? It makes us look good, and we feel better about it also. It isn’t MY fault that the economy sucks and I can’t get a job, right? It isn’t MY fault that I live in a small town with no real opportunities, or real growth, right? It isn’t MY fault…, but what if it is?

How many times have we found ourselves on the slippery slope of self pity? Saying that it isn’t our fault, when if we look back at the circumstances that brought us to our current location in life, maybe had we done something different, as we KNEW we should have, the result would have been different, and we might be in a better position?

But it is easier to blame others for our misery, instead of sucking it up and saying NO MORE.

My mother walked out on three different husbands, but it was never her fault. To her it never mattered that she married two of them to get out of circumstances that she put herself into by poor decisions. Her third husband put up with her because he was tired of being alone. He deserved better than that, as did she.

So along with personal responsibility, we have to look at compromise. What have we done in our lives to compromise our thoughts, beliefs, or values, that may have helped lead to our lack of responsibility?

Compromise


Wow, now two topics, Compromise AND Personal Responsibility. And yes, it is easier to point to others and see their faults, but what about ours? How would life be if we were more concerned about dealing with our own lives, and our own faults instead of how celebrities have screwed up THEIR lives this week?

I do a lot of complaining myself about my location in life. But if I am honest with myself, I have to admit, that I am personally responsible for where I am. Had I treated my last employer back home with more respect, then the same respect they had shown me, I wouldn’t have been fired. They wouldn’t have told lies at my unemployment hearing, and I wouldn’t have been forced to move to where I have family and a place to go. (Their treatment of me included a vice president of the company cussing me out in my ear because I wouldn’t move from my home in Orange County to Los Angeles)


Failure

So, I failed in my responsibility by allowing myself to get sucked into a disrespectful work environment. I should have sucked it up, dealt with it, WHILE getting a better job.

My personal responsibility to my faith, I have failed BIGTIME there, and allow myself to be sucked into the pity party of feeling deserted by God. And I know in my heart of hearts that God is right there, is right HERE with me, even as I type this. I am not saying that I am contemptuous of God, but of myself. Allowing myself to go to the depths of despair when all I have to do is make the simple steps to right my faith, and trust in God again.

True, we all feel that, at times, God has failed us, and some just walk away. I cannot, my faith, or lack thereof, has been a part of my life since early childhood. I joke that I was raised Southern Baptist, but God forgave me. Baptized at 12, went to a Christian College, where again, I took a stand that got me kicked out. Personal Responsibility to me should have been completing my education, not taking a stand that if God says I can lift my hands in prayer, Azusa Pacific’s Tim Purga couldn’t tell me I couldn’t. Pride took me down a road that got me kicked out for taking a ‘righteous’ stand.

So, here I sit, at a crossroads in my life again, looking for work, not wanting to be in my current location, and just complaining, instead of taking the time, of which I have more than an abundance of, and listing to the, sometimes, small still voice of God, as to what direction HE wants me to take, instead of flailing like a drowning man in two feet of water, who doesn’t realize, all he has to do is stand up.

So, where does this leave me? Some may see this as a pity party, but I am using my own life as an example, or a warning, but it is also a kick in the butt to get things going in the right way, and manner, that I know I am called to do, and in a direction that is far better then what I have been doing.

I encourage any and all who may read this to do the same. Challenge yourselves to let go of the pity, accept the responsibility, and go forward. For, I have found in the past, when we accept our own responsibilities in life, we lift our heads a little higher, stand a little straighter, and can do more, with less, then we had thought we were capable of.





These are my thoughts, and how Mark C’s it.





William Lane Craig offers personal experience and hardships with failure; click here.


Bruce Little speaks on the topic: God, Evil and Suffering. Check it out here.


More resources here.


Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Logic of the Trinity


Hi all. I'm starting a weekly blog post called "Theology Wednesday," I'll do my best to keep it posted on every Wednesday, but I know I can at least keep it weekly (the days might change). Also, before I get into this post, I apologize for not starting the morality posts; I really wanted to start the series of posts, but with college and work going on, time can slip away quite easily. Theology Wednesday will most usually have a long post by me, however, there might be some days when I will have resource links you can check out. 

This weekly post will start with the Trinity. The trinity is one of the great mysteries of the Christian faith. Mystery, unlike antinomy and paradox, does not mean contradiction, rather it means beyond reason, but not against reason. It is known only by revelation. The word trinity does not appear in the Bible, however, the concept is taught in the Bible. What is the concept? Simple:

1. There is one God
2. There are three distinct persons who are God: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 

I'm quite certain that Christian and Jew alike agree that there is one God, no problem, yet there is some disagreement on the second part of the trinity concept: three persons who are God. This is quite controversial. On the surface, one might think it's even contradictory. Before I dive into scriptural proof for the trinity, I want to focus on the logic of the trinity; a philosophical defense of the trinity you could call it.
 

The Logic of the Trinity

There are principles of knowledge, one of which is the law of non-contradiction and it is the fundamental law of all rational thought. The law of non-contradiction informs us that something cannot be true and false at the same time and in the same sense. The doctrine of the trinity does not violate this law. To show this, I will state what the trinity is not. Taken from the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics:

"The Trinity is not the belief that God is three persons and only one person at the same time and in the same sense. That would be a contradiction. Rather, it is the belief that there are three persons in one nature...Further, the Trinity is not the belief that there are three natures in one nature or three essences in one essence. That would be a contradiction. Rather, Christians affirm that there are three persons in one essence. This is not contradictory because it makes a distinction between person and essence. Or, to put it in terms of the law of non-contradiction, while God is one and many at the same time, he is not one and many in the same sense. He is one in the sense of his essence, but many in the sense of his persons. So there is no violation of the law of non-contradiction in the doctrine of the Trinity."

So, one could say that God has one "What" and three "Whos." The three persons (Whos) share the same essence (What). Norman Geisler stated, "So God is a unity of essence with a plurality of persons. Each person is different, yet they share a common nature." God is one in his substance. The unity is in his essence, while the plurality is in God's persons, or how he relates within himself. Descriptions of this relationship are within the Bible, showing how the Son and the Father relate, and how the Father sends the Spirit as a Messenger, and the Spirit is a Witness to the Son (John 14:26). Reading descriptions like that help us to understand the functions within the unity of the Godhead. "Each is fully God, and each has his own work and interrelational theme with the other two. But it is vital to remember that the three share the same essence, so that they unify as one Being," (Geisler). 


I hope this helps to see the logic and model of the Trinity. Think of this post as one to wet your appetite for more study (there will be more). If I have time, I'll probably continue this in tomorrow's post with some illustrations and scriptural defense. It's important to know that the Trinity is not at all a contradiction, so that's why I laid the foundation as I did. 


Source:

Norman Geisler, "Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics."

 

Monday, September 20, 2010

The iPad: A Review


It's actually a new device made by Apple (all the Apple fanboys start singing) and I have to admit that I, well, I like it. I tested one out recently and my expectations were reched. It's very cool, not revolutionary, but very cool in its execution and style. I'll lay it out for you.


Why do I like it?

Honestly, I didn't like the idea of it at first because I didn't understand Apple's target. I thought Apple was trying to attack the laptop industry, to a degree they still are, at the business level and try to replace laptops. Boy, I was wrong. I started researching and found out that Apple is finding the "in-between" device for consumers and some business users.

Seth, what do you mean by "in-between" device? I mean between laptop and smartphone. Now, if you want to go on a trip, you take your laptop along with your smartphone (if you have one). Yes, you can surf the web on your smartphone, but you can't get the full experience of the website, so you lug your laptop with you too. Taking your laptop is much better than your desktop, but hey, it can get in the way. Your answer is the iPad.

1. The size.

This baby is about the size of a tablet (hence, Pad is in the name) and weighs just a little bit more than a tablet. Very convenient.

2. OS

You know how when you want to check out a website really quick to make an annoying comment and you got to wait for your computer to load? Wouldn't it be cool if you had a device that was just as quick as your smartphone? Well, the iPad is here for you my friend. No load times at startup...very cool! It turns on very quick, like a phone, maybe even faster. It uses the iPhone's mobile operating system.

3. Sleek

Great design. Flashy. Some would say sexy, but I don't like using language like that for devices, it's just weird.

4. Great for content consumition users.

If you don't do a lot of "creating" on the web, the iPad could replace your desktop computer. If you don't post things (like blogging), create/maintain websites, or any other thing like that, and you just read well the iPad is for you my friend.

5. Speakers are great.

I listened to some music on the iPad and it sounded just as good as the speakers on my desktop. I have no complaints with the speakers.

What I Don't Like

1. No USB ports.

If I want to use some USB ports, then I have to attach a dongle, which eliminates the convenience of being a better portable device than the laptop. Apple, that was kind of stupid. Sorry, it's true. Why didn't you put some USB ports on this baby?

2. Flash?

No flash on this iPad? Ah, leaving some room open for Android to do that? Apple, why?

3. Virtual Keyboard

Of course, this is not a fair dislike, but I have to post it because it bothered me. I don't care for virtual keying so it will keep from wanting to buy one. However, like I said, you won't be making long posts with this device anyway, so it's not a strong argument, but for me it's a big deal.


Those are my only complaints because this is a device for the web surfing user that likes to do just that: lurk around on the web. You know, check out status updates on social networking sites, read some yahoo! articles, or read some posts on Reformed Seth; a content consumer, not doing anything flashy and this is the typical computer user. So, once there is an excellent Android release (Dell Streak? Please) then we can see the price war begin and I'll probably go with an Android device. I'm not saying the iPad isn't good, it's a great product, but I'm holding out for the competitor. I would like to have some USB ports on my tablet (for extra storage), and for flash.


What do I give the iPad? A 8/10. It's a good device. Go borrow your friend's iPad now and see what I'm talking about.
Some iPad videos here.