ellauri096.html on line 233: Those who believe that the Church-Fitch result is a genuine paradox can respond to Williamson with paradoxes that accord with common sense (and science –and religious orthodoxy). For instance, common sense heartily agrees with the conclusion that something exists. But it is surprising that this can be proved without empirical premises. Since the quantifiers of standard logic (first order predicate logic with identity) have existential import, the logician can deduce that something exists from the principle that everything is identical to itself. Most philosophers balk at this simple proof because they feel that the existence of something cannot be proved by sheer logic. Likewise, many philosophers balk at the proof of unknowables because they feel that such a profound result cannot be obtained from such limited means.
ellauri100.html on line 331: I have noticed that a leftist will accuse you of “hate” just for saying something contrary to the left-wing orthodoxy of the day. If you disagree with what I have to say here, but prefer to spew invective instead of offering a reasoned response, don’t bother to submit a comment — at least not until your rage has passed or your medication has taken effect. (My medication is working fine. It is curious how small the distance is between considered opinion and gobbledygook madness.) As it says in the sidebar, I will not publish incoherent, off-point, offensive, or abusive comments except my own. Nor will I lose any sleep for having denied you an outlet for your incoherence, irrelevance, offensiveness, or abusiveness. You can post it on your own blog or on any of the myriad, hate-filled, left-wing blogs that view murder as “choice,” government dictates as “liberty,” self-defense as a “war crime” (when it’s practiced by the U.S. or Israel), and the Constitution as a vehicle for implementing current left-wing orthodoxy.
ellauri198.html on line 123: Robert Penn Warren (1905-1989) oli yhdysvaltalainen prosaisti, runoilija ja kriitikko. Hän on kirjoittanut muun muassa suomennetun romaanin Kaikki kuninkaan miehet. Kriitikkona hän edusti uuskritiikkiä. Warren and Brooks helped to establish the New Criticism as “an orthodoxy so powerful that contemporary American fiction and poetry are most easily defined by their rebellion against it.” Hän kirjoitti selkä kaarella eri kirjallisuudenlajien teoksia.
xxx/ellauri186.html on line 803: a) Good reasons existed for rejection of canonicity for the spurious book. The book failed to meet the 5 requirements for canonicity: 1) apostolic authority (Was it written by the apostles or early eye witness news?), 2) orthodoxy (Does it line up with clear OT and NT teachings?), 3) antiquity (Has it been used within the covenant community for an extended period of time?), 4) inspiration, (Does the book make a tangible and testable claim of divine inspiration?) and 5) usage (Was it accepted by the catholic church at large?). 6) The early Church also viewed their discussions and debates surrounding the issues of canonicity as being directed and superintended by God. The determinations and deliberations concerning the canon were in some sense within the will and superintending of God working through his church.
xxx/ellauri261.html on line 631: The field of secular theology, a subfield of liberal theology advocated by Robinson somewhat combines secularism and theology. Recognized in the 1960s, it was influenced both by neo-orthodoxy, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Harvey Cox, and the existentialism of Søren Kierkegaard and Paul Tillich. Robinson, along with Douglas John Hall and Rowan Williams, see that Secular theology had digested modern movements like the Death of God Theology propagated by Thomas J. J. Altizer or the philosophical existentialism of Tillich and eased the introduction of such ideas into the theological mainstream and made constructive evaluations, as well as contributions, to the problems caused by the demise of out heavenly father.
5