By Prof. Vladimir Shpilrain
He walks out of class faster than we can say "Do we have syllabus?"
Text: Kenneth Rosen's Discrete Mathematics and Applications
Operations on sets:
Symmetric difference of A and B: 
Non-deterministic infinite sequence: e.g. coin tosses.
Th, 9/10 - no class (M schedule)
Tu, 9/15 - no class (holiday)
Th, 9/17 - no class (Prof. out)
Tu, 9/22 - no class (holiday)
----------------------------
Th, 9/24 - yes
F, 9/25 - yes (TÂ schedule)
Prof. Nick Pappas
Assistant: Kathryn Wojtkiewicz
Ancient Philosophy Period:
May 28, 585 BCE - Sept. 4, 476 CE (Thales to the fall of the Roman Empire)
Scope of class: From Thales to Aristotle, as per text book: Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle, 4th Ed. by Reeve.
Pre-Socratic
Socrates: works: Apology, Phaedo
Plato: works: Republic, Symposium. School Academy.
Aristotle: Studies everything, e.g. biology. Logic, ethics, politics, physics, metaphysics, etc.
Lots of learning from this course coincide with Ligonier's Philosophy I.
I believe that using a commentary site for works like that of Plato's is rather convenient.
For Aristotle's works/etc..
Prof. Benjamin Vilhauer
With lots of talk about God. Perhaps this is the most interesting class for this term.
I find that http://www.informationphilosopher.com is very helpful in this course, and possibly all other philosophy courses.
Some of the entries will contain Ligioner's "Understanding Free Will" by Sproul.
It seems that the talk of having better fellowship, ecclesiastical living, etc. in America and hence the whole world today ultimately comes down to social aptitude, which is actually rather secular.
But judging from the scandals involving Dr. Tong, Alex, the ex-HK STEMI, Driscoll, etc., those could only band together because they are of the same friendship, not quite have to do with a good fellowship.
If I have not mistaken, I recall Dr. Stephen Tong once said he'll never understand this part. Since it was Dr. Tong, I try not to dismiss this verse likely.
Now, through Redeemer's West Side Men weekly devotional email, I've stumbled on the same issue. We are studying the book of Judges, and we use Tim Keller's book: Judges for You.
Keller, referenced Michael Wilcock:
The force of 14:4 is that the two communities are so interlocked that even the Lord can find nothing to get hold of to pry them apart. He uses Samson's weaknesses, therefore, to bring about the relationship with this irresistible girl from which so much ill-feeling will flow. ~ The Message of Judges, pg. 139
Keller: God not only fulfils His promise in spite of their sin, but even through their sin.
Thus far, this explains quite well. Today, this kind of society union is with the liberals, post-modernism. Worshipping peace, not God. But nothing is new, it happened before, in Samson's time, where Israel befriended the Philistines.
Verses of note:
James 4:4 "friendship with the world is hatred toward God".
Acts 2:23 "How God accomplish Christ's salvation for us through wicked choices of humans"I think Joseph's betrayal by his brothers could be included in this list as well (Genesis 50:20).
New Pharaoh forgetting the credit of Joseph.
Of course, this certainly answers whether God has done this elsewhere, but has the real question been answered? Why did God choose this way?
It would appear that Keller is taking this view:
The more "sleeping/rebelling" sinners God delivers, the more wickedness of the people (including those of His own people) God shall use to accomplish his promise/will.
This may be a good answer to Dr. Tong's question.
Sure, but that is only for attraction. They should not be the reason for someone to attend church. Many leaders/organizers/promoters/church members do not realise or care about this.
Worse still, they make it a cause for conversion.
When we use these "incentives", we must have integrity in our motives and characters.
It will be very telling in the testing of someone's faith, once these incentives are removed.
So that when mankind finally learned to be advanced enough to swap receding hair skin with the chin.
I don't know why or how this just pops into my head.
When dealing with practical parenting, I've always favored one of St. Monica's prayers & last talks to her son St. Augustine:
Son, for myself I have no longer any pleasure in anything in this life. Now that my hopes in this world are satisfied, I do not know what more I want here or why I am here. There was indeed one thing for which I wished to tarry a little in this life, and that was that I might see you a Catholic Christian before I died. My God hath answered this more than abundantly, so that I see you now made his servant and spurning all earthly happiness. What more am I to do here?
~ Augustine's Confessions: 9.10.26
Most mothers desire their children to be successful, settling stable, married, having grandchildren, etc. in the world. This is also one chief reason why some Christian parents today view being a preachers/pastors today as a sort of curse (unless they are like Joel Osteen, Benny Hinn, who have even their own private jets) even though they would shake hands and smile with a pastor or preacher. St. Monica only wish - That her child would TRULY be the child of God. Because from there, there will be no more worries, rich or poor, St. Augustine would have been in God's hands. There's no need to mix worldly treasures with that of heavenly, as the Charismatics influence, there's no need to mix good works with faith, as the liberals blaspheme. A true child of God, like King David, will never loose sight of his priorities in life, in spite of the attack of sins, from time to time.
Trying to prove MacArthur's cessationism wrong. Perhaps the after-effect of the Strange Fire Conference.
What I would comment from the video is that escorts must think very low of Dr. MacArthur. It would be great to leave it for MacArthur to respond to the man. As Jesus would. It seemed that Dr. MacArthur was beginning to enjoy responding to him, unfortunately, the hands of Uzzah got in the way. May God be merciful to them.
I would love for Dr. MacArthur to respond, even though I am not a cessationist.
In his book, Judges for You: Chapter 14:1-15:2,
...they [liberal churches] do not do church discipline...
He's definitely right on in criticizing the liberals and the conservatives in that passage.
