tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post1077095619924901664..comments2024-03-27T20:28:38.015-04:00Comments on Reasonable Christian: Incarnation Part 6Charlie J. Rayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-54971570503310988852020-11-28T06:52:20.498-05:002020-11-28T06:52:20.498-05:00John, I should point out that Clark says that unde...John, I should point out that Clark says that undefined words mean nothing. Worse, even dictionary definitions can give 3 or 5 or more different definitions of words. A seemingly rational argument can become ambiguous and fallacious if definitions are not nailed down clearly. Hope this helps.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-74884153929973770452017-03-14T21:04:11.528-04:002017-03-14T21:04:11.528-04:00Clark's view is much more complicated than thi...Clark's view is much more complicated than this. He doesn't reject everyday experience obviously. He often distinguished between common ways of talking and a more formal philosophical examination of things. The word religion is meaningless because it cannot be consistently defined because of all the world religions. But we use the word in every day speech to refer to different Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-74598085786031773312017-03-09T23:22:45.084-05:002017-03-09T23:22:45.084-05:00Thx Charlie, that was quite a helpful summary.
Wh...Thx Charlie, that was quite a helpful summary. <br />Whilst I can see that the two persons theory is where Dr Clark's definition of a person would lead him, one must wonder if the definition is correct. Not that I can give you a better one!John Bradshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02831471278699375702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-1730434449618529252017-03-09T23:02:08.950-05:002017-03-09T23:02:08.950-05:00From the propositions in the Bible other propositi...From the propositions in the Bible other propositions can be inferred and deduced. One example is that man is God's image and the reason we think logically is because that is how God thinks. God is Logic. John 1:1.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-49626593180203987722017-03-09T22:37:27.551-05:002017-03-09T22:37:27.551-05:00John, it is a bit complicated to bring all of Clar...John, it is a bit complicated to bring all of Clark's thinking together. I've read all of his books and I have to constantly re-read them to remind myself what his views are. If you mean that the Bible contains all knowledge, no. That is not what Clark says. He starts with the axiom of Scripture which he says is propositional and logical information. From the Bible propositions are Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-92162885109787875352017-03-09T22:26:37.438-05:002017-03-09T22:26:37.438-05:00Incarnation Part 7<a href="http://reasonablechristian.blogspot.com/2017/03/incarnation-part-7.html" rel="nofollow">Incarnation Part 7</a>Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-49228304232229848792017-03-05T17:46:27.498-05:002017-03-05T17:46:27.498-05:00Thx Charlie. It would be very interesting if you c...Thx Charlie. It would be very interesting if you could dissect how his system leads to his definitions, particularly in this case of a person. It seems to me that getting the definition of a person (or a substance), from Scripture is not that easy. Yet perhaps it is upon this point that Dr Clark differs with Chalcedon and the writers of the WCF.John Bradshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02831471278699375702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-66728791390453312732017-03-05T04:43:41.191-05:002017-03-05T04:43:41.191-05:00Thanks for your comment, John. Unfortunately I...Thanks for your comment, John. Unfortunately I've been working longer hours lately so I haven't been able to post. Dr. Clark's epistemology is important in understanding his view of the Incarnation. In fact, all of his writings fit together in harmony. Dr. Clark's view of knowledge as propositional and as a system of propositional truths also determines his view of the TrinityCharlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-72288551861160269962017-03-04T23:43:25.705-05:002017-03-04T23:43:25.705-05:00A great series. Thx Charlie. Perhaps in a future e...A great series. Thx Charlie. Perhaps in a future essay you could comment how Dr Clark understood the specific Scriptures that speak of Christ as man, God, God-man, as Charles Hodge outlines in the section Consequences of the Hypostatical Union, vol. 2,p.374, Systematic Theology. <br />Thx John Bradshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02831471278699375702noreply@blogger.com