James White vs. Michael L. Brown
Here are links to their FIRST "debate" which took place on their respective radio show and podcast. Two days on Brown's show, then two days on White's show.
Their SECOND debate
This debate took place at Southern Evangelical Seminary, February 14, 2013.
(another version can be viewed HERE)
Who Controls Salvation?
James White vs. George Bryson
https://youtu.be/O1KJY-PpKFs
Freedom of the Will vs. Bondage of the Will
James White vs. Steve Blakemore
https://youtu.be/r9BEqpiQHDo
James White vs. George Bryson
https://youtu.be/O1KJY-PpKFs
James White vs. Steve Blakemore
https://youtu.be/r9BEqpiQHDo
AP,
ReplyDeleteThread was a bit off-topic for the T-blog post, so I moved the discussion to your blog. Hope you don’t mind. Feel free to delete the comment if you don't want it here.
{{Not believing a proposition is unbelief. [T]hat's different than doubting a proposition.}}
To doubt a proposition is to not believe a proposition.
{{Doubting can include belief and vice versa.}}
You can’t simultaneously doubt a proposition and believe a proposition.
{{Also, belief and doubt can both have different strengths.}}
Define strong belief and weak belief?
{{Additionally, people can move from one of those three mental states into any of the other two repeatedly in a very quick fashion when it comes to a proposition. At the speed of thought.}}
To say that there are three mental states begs the question as to whether doubt is different than unbelief.
{{And so, it can appear to others and to one's self that one is simultaneously believing a proposition and not believing the same proposition.}}
You can know your own mental states.
{{Belief is often based on evidence and the strength of it. But the interpretation of the evidence is itself affected by one's prior beliefs and worldview. Moreover, humans are often irrational, emotion driven, selfish and pragmatic and those things must also be factored into the equation. Those biases also affect one's search for and examination of the evidence as well (hence the phenomenon of confirmation bias and other types of biases).}}
Sure.
... so I moved the discussion to your blog. Hope you don’t mind.
DeleteI don't mind at all :o)
To doubt a proposition is to not believe a proposition.
It's true that you can believe a proposition to be true and have no doubts about its truth. But you can also have doubts about it's truth even though you believe it to be true. It's such a common phenomenon that I'm surprised that I have to explain myself. There are many actual and hypothetical situations in which one can imagine this is the case. For example, a really rich husband can, for the most part, believe that his wife loves him for who he is and not for his money. But there can also be some small doubt in his heart. If it's true that one can ONLY believe a proposition or not believe it, then when Christians doubt or have doubts about the truth of Christianity, they cease being believers (i.e. Christians).
Define strong belief and weak belief?
Some, like J.P. Moreland, define belief as something you take to be true somewhere between 50% and 100% certainty. In the case of the husband above, he may have 90% assurance and certainty that his wife really loves him, while 10% might doubt or call into question the truth of the proposition that his wife genuinely loves him. Moreland has many lectures on YouTube where he discusses this issue of percentage of believing something.
HERE'S AN MP3 LINK where I believe (rightly or wrongly) he discusses it. Wintery Knight recommended it in one of his blogs.
To say that there are three mental states begs the question as to whether doubt is different than unbelief.
Well, it's apparently clear (at least to me and some philosophers) that 1. one can believe something to be true; 2. believe something to be false; and 3. believe something might be true or false and assign a probability to its truth or falsity.
You can know your own mental states.
Yes you can. But sometimes one doesn't always know with clarity one's mental states. Human psychology is more complicated than that. Sometimes people need to search their hearts to discover to what they really believe or how they feel. There are five basics states of consciousness: 1. sensations, 2 thoughts, 3. beliefs, 4. desires, 5. acts of the will. The combination of those things plus the depth and complexity of the psyche results in people being deep pools. There's more to a person's personality than what's on the surface of their consciousness. Even the Bible teaches this. That's why it describes God having to "search" the hearts of men. Not that God doesn't already fully know it and must discursively and inductively find out what makes a person tick. Scripture is just acknowledging that we human beings realize that the human psyche is deep and mysterious, but that God can nevertheless get to the bottom of what a person is really like.
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST:
DeleteThe spirit of man is the lamp of the LORD, searching all his innermost parts.- Prov. 20:27
"I the LORD search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds."- Jer. 17:10
Search me, O God, and know my heart! Try me and know my thoughts!- Ps. 139:23
The crucible is for silver, and the furnace is for gold, and the LORD tests hearts.- Pro. 17:3
these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God.
For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. - 1 Cor. 2:10-11
And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.- Rom. 8:27
There are many other verses I could quote.
You can know your own mental states.
People don't always fully know why they do the things they do. Sometimes it takes examining one's own heart and thoughts. For example, Joe may be hostile to Mary, a fellow Christian, whenever he meets her at church. He notices that he's been reacting to her in that way for a long time for no apparent reason. He may decide to examine his own heart and ask God to reveal to him why he's like that. Then he may come to the conclusion that the reason was because subconciously Mary reminds him of his abusive mother and female boss at work who got a promotion rather than himself because she's sleeping with the higher up manager. It's at that time Joe realizes that Mary looks like his mother physically and has some of her mannerisms while his boss' actions and treatment is like the treatment he received from his mother. The combination of his treatment at work 5 days a week plus his exposure to Mary's face, body type and mannerisms on Sunday lead to his hostility toward Mary who has done nothing wrong. That's an example of how people can not fully know their mental states. Even some atheists don't realise that their hostility toward God is based on their hostility toward their abusive or absentee father.
BTW kbl, would you happen to be a Clarkian? I ask because some of what you're saying sounds like something a Clarkian would say. I have great respect for Gordon Clark, but I think some of what Clarkians believe are problematic. If you are a Clarkian, I recommend one of my blogs for your perusal:
Critiques of Clarkianism and Scripturalism
In one's worldview and web of beliefs, some beliefs are more central than others. The more central beliefs are those that people normally will hold with greater tenacity than those that are farther from the center by comparison. One will will be willing to let go of or change one's mind about those beliefs that are less central. For example, for a Christian, the belief that the Christian God exists is more central than one's belief regarding whether Barak Obama was born in American and whether he is legitimately the President of the United States.
DeleteIf your position is true that one can only believe or disbelieve a proposition with nothing in between, then that can set Christians up for apostasy. For example, if an ignorant Christian believed that the King James Version is the inerrant Word of God on the same epistemic level as the existence of God, then if he were convinced that the KJV had errors, then he could lose his faith in God entirely. When, in fact, the integrity of the KJV has little or no bearing as to the truth of the Christian God's existence. The same can be said regarding issues of origins. If a Christian held to the modern Young Earth Creationist interpretation of Genesis with equal certainty and on par with the belief in God's existence, then that person could lose his faith in God if he were convinced (or even MERELY HAD DOUBTS) regarding the truthfulness of Young Earth Creationism.
The Young Earther can reason this way. "Since I have doubts regarding the truthfulness of Young Earth Creationism, therefore I must not believe that Young Earth Creationism is true [since one can only believe or disbelieve a proposition]. Since Christian truth and the Christian worldview is coherent, integrated and consistent, error in one part means error in other parts and in the whole. Since, I disbelieve the truth of Young Earth Creationism [by having doubts about it], it must also be the case that I also disbelieve the truth of Christianity altogether. Therefore, I'm not a Christian."
DeleteAlso, if the person doesn't merely doubt Young Earth Creationism, but positively believes it is false, then that person may conclude that Christianity as a whole is false if he also believes the integrated nature of the Christian worldview. Since, for him, he may confuse 1. the concept that all propositions and concepts are either believed or disbelieved equally, with 2. all Christian propositions are equally true or false and therefore equally to be believed or disbelieved (which is erroneous).
DeleteHere's another example. Years ago I re-watched Rambo II with someone. A day or two after watching the movie she wore a green jade necklace similar to the one the woman in the movie wore. I asked her why she was wearing it. She said she just wanted to. Then I asked her if it's possible that she subconsciously wanted to because of the woman in the movie. When I asked her that, she looked at me and her eyes lighted up. She then agreed that the movie almost certainly affected her subconsciously in the way I suggested.
DeleteA final example.
DeleteIf a Christian really believed 1. that God exists, 2. is always watching him (or her), 3. that obedience always leads to blessing (if not also in this life, then at the very least in the next life), 4. sin always leads to injury or lose or damage (either to oneself, other people, or offense/injury to glory of God), 5. the Christian afterlife is real, 6. God rightfully ,Demands/commands, Deserves, and Delights in our obedience, then a Christian should and would never sin on earth because he fully believes all those propositions at all times given your binary view of belief where one either believes or disbelieves without any wavering or degrees.
Your view seems to not only deny 1. strengths of beliefs, but also the possibility of 2. occurrent and non-occurrent knowledge, 3. occurrent beliefs and non-occurrent beliefs, 4. dispositional beliefs (some of which may have never been an occurrent belief).
See this wiki article on occurrent and non-occurrent beliefs and dispositional beliefs. HERE
Deletekbl, you asked, "Define strong belief and weak belief?" Does this mean you don't believe in different degrees or strengths of belief? If so, how would you understand the statement of the father in Mark 9:24? Or the passages I quoted in Steve's blog HERE?
DeleteHere's a re-post of the relevant passage:
Yet, Scripture clearly teaches that there are "proportions of faith" (Rom. 12:6) and "measures of faith" (Rom. 12:3) that God assigns to individuals. It also distinguishes regular faith from "the gift of faith" as well as "the prayer of faith", which may be two different things or the same thing described in two different ways (1 Cor. 12:9; Jas. 5:15). Scripture also constantly encourages us to have faith, grow in faith, move from faith to faith knowing that Christ is the perfector of our faith (Rom. 1:17; Jas. 1:5-8; 2 Thess. 1:13; Heb. 12:2; Matt. 17:19-21; 21:21-22; Mark 11:22-24; Luke 17:5-6; John 14:12-14; Acts 3:16; 14:9; 1 Cor. 13:2; 1 John 3:21-22; 5:14-15). If there were only one kind of faith with only one kind of degree/strength, then the disciples weren't saved since they asked the Lord to increase their faith (Luke 17:5).
AP,
DeleteI don’t have the time or energy to respond to all your replies. Here’s a few responses:
{{But you can also have doubts about its truth even though you believe it to be true.}}
You can’t believe something to be true and doubt it at the same time. Doubting 2 + 2 = 4 is not the same as believing 2 + 2 = 4.
{{For example, a really rich husband can, for the most part, believe that his wife loves him for who he is and not for his money. But there can also be some small doubt in his heart.}}
He is vacillating between believing his life loves him and not believing his wife loves him.
{{If it's true that one can ONLY believe a proposition or not believe it, then when Christians doubt or have doubts about the truth of Christianity, they cease being believers (i.e. Christians).}}
Only if you define a Christian as one who never doubts.
{{Some, like J.P. Moreland, define belief as something you take to be true somewhere between 50% and 100% certainty.}}
What does 51% certain even mean? What does 73% faith believe? How do you measure those percentages? How do you know 77% certain isn’t actually 23% certain.
{{HERE'S AN MP3 LINK where I believe (rightly or wrongly) he discusses it.}}
Listened to it. While it was enjoyable, he did not talk about percentages of believing.
{{Well, it's apparently clear (at least to me and some philosophers) that 1. one can believe something to be true; 2. believe something to be false; and 3. believe something might be true or false and assign a probability to its truth or falsity.}}
If you believe a proposition may or may not be true, then you don’t believe that it is true.
{{Does this mean you don't believe in different degrees or strengths of belief?}}
You’re either persuaded a proposition is true, or you’re not.
{{If so, how would you understand the statement of the father in Mark 9:24? Or the passages I quoted…}}
I don’t see how the percentages/degrees of belief view is the best understanding of the verses you cited.
typo correction: I wrote, "...belief as something you take to be true somewhere between 50% and 100% certainty." I meant to say "between 51% and 100% certainty"
DeleteIn Mark 9:24, I take the word "unbelief" there to mean "doubt" in context. But, maybe you're right about belief and unbelief. Maybe it's because people vacillate from belief to unbelief so fast (at the speed of thought) that it appears that one can believe and disbelieve at the same time. Maybe I'm also using the word "doubt" in an idiosyncratic sense.
But for now, it seems to me that it's possible to believe and doubt a proposition at the same time because human consciousness seems to have different layers whereby it's possible to believe something at one layer/level and doubt or even disbelieve it at another layer. For example, many presuppositionalists (e.g. Van Tillians and Clarkians) believe that all men know God even though it's not the case that atheists are lying in a bald-faced manner when they say that don't believe in God's existence. Take this classic example by Greg Bahnsen:
The vocabulary of self-deception is recognizable (even by children), mastered by people, and taught to others. And so, when the son of Mrs. Jones has been caught red-handed stealing lunch money out of students' desks at school, and Mrs. Jones continues to protest her son's innocence - despite this being the third time such an incident has taken place, despite her discomfort and red face when the subject of dishonesty comes up in casual conversations, despite the fact that she does not trust her son around her purse any longer - and she continues to explain his innocence with strange explanations (like the school officials have a vendetta against little Johnny, they were framing him, etc.) nobody finds it awkward to say the poor lady "is deceiving herself." You see, self-deception is part of our common experience, and familiarity with it breeds acceptance of it as a genuine reality of life. [source]
Also, I do believe that people can vacillate from strong to weak belief.
You can’t believe something to be true and doubt it at the same time. Doubting 2 + 2 = 4 is not the same as believing 2 + 2 = 4.
But you could be doing your calculations while dreaming so you don't have absolute certainty that you're doing your math correctly. I've had dreams where reading the same sentence in a book repeatedly had different meanings. Or where a person I'm speaking to changes from person A to person B without my notice, and so there's a sense in which I believe the person I'm speaking to is both person A and person B (or A and Non-A). Or where one room in one house changes into another room in a different house, and so there's a sense in which I believed contradictory things (e.g. this is my living room and at the same time this is not my living room).
Only if you define a Christian as one who never doubts.
As a Calvinist, I don't believe that a Christian can never disbelieve (at least temporarily). However, I believe more commonly that Christians often both believe and doubt at the same time. For example:
Jesus immediately reached out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him, "O you of little faith, why did you doubt?"- Matt. 14:31 (and I've already mentioned Mark 9:24)
Notice Jesus talks about the 'size' (or strength) of one's faith and that Jesus seems to be saying that Peter both believed and doubted at the same time. But I can see how one can interpret it your way.
Continued in Next Post:
I asked, "Does this mean you don't believe in different degrees or strengths of belief?" You answered, "You’re either persuaded a proposition is true, or you’re not." But I think most people will admit that one can have stronger persuasion and weaker persuasion. I would guess that some people actually believe that O.J. Simpson didn't murder his wife. But that many of those same people don't have a high degree of confidence in the truth of that proposition.
DeleteWhat does 51% certain even mean? What does 73% faith believe? How do you measure those percentages? How do you know 77% certain isn’t actually 23% certain.
Did Shakespeare write the plays attributed to him or did Francis Bacon, or the 6th Earl of Derby, or Christopher Marlowe, or the 17th Earl of Oxford. From the little research I've done, I would guess that Shakespeare did write it. I believe it, but I don't have absolute certainty. Does that mean I don't really believe it? I don't know if you're a Clarkian or not, but Clarkians believe there are only three cognitive states regarding belief and knowledge; 1. knowledge, 2. opinion and 3. ignorance. You seem to believe that belief requires 100% assurance. Or functionally so since you view of belief is binary. Either you believe or disbelieve and there's no such thing as strength or weaknesses of belief. But it seems that would render the weighing of evidence as very problematic. I couldn't say I believe that Shakespeare wrote his plays. The preponderance of the evidence might favor his authorship, but since I can't have absolute proof, I can't have absolute assurance. Therefore, I can't say I believe it since I can still question it (given your view of belief). It seems that the only way I could believe it is by a "leap of faith" (whatever that means) or an act of the will. But doxastic voluntarism has it's own problems.
Listened to it. While it was enjoyable, he did not talk about percentages of believing.
Yeah, sorry about that. He does mention percentages briefly HERE (already cued up at 18 min 54 seconds). But he does only mention it briefly so it may not be worth you time listening to it.
I don’t see how the percentages/degrees of belief view is the best understanding of the verses you cited.
James talks about double-mindedness regarding faith and doubt in James 1:5-8.
If anyone is interested, here are some related audio/video:
ReplyDeleteDr. Paul Vitz on the Psychology of Atheism and the effect fathers have on belief and disbelief in God
Lecture ONE
Lecture TWO
The Psychology of Atheism by R.C. Sproul
If anyone is interested, this conversation came about because of comments posted at Triablogue HERE.
Delete