[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Logic biblical?

On Thu, 7 Jan 1904, John M. Moe wrote:

> Carl W. Conrad wrote:
> > 
> > At 4:17 AM -0400 6/6/97, Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church wrote:
> > >
> > >The question then becomes, how do we know logic is trustworthy?  Simply
> > >because it is biblical.  It is used in scripture consistently and
> > >throughout.  It is assumed there and used there.  Thus, we can and should
> > >utilize it.
> > 
> > If Edgar fears the slings and arrows of outraged linguists, I may have
> > reason to fear those of outraged philosophers and theologians. Yet I was
> > struck by this assertion that logic "is biblical," and wondered whether I
> > have rightly understood what is being said thereby. Of course, the
> > follow-up sentence says clearly enough, "It is used in scripture
> > consistently and throughout." 
> <snip>
> 
> I'll take a chance on a few slings and arrows here myself:
> 
> 8 "For My thoughts [are] not your thoughts, Nor [are] your ways My
> ways," says the LORD.
> 9 "For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher
> than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.
> (Isaiah 55:8-9, NKJV+).
> 
> 20 Where [is] the wise? Where [is] the scribe? Where [is] the disputer
> of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
> 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not
> know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached
> to save those who believe.
> (1 Corinthians 1:20-21, NKJV+).
> 
> Food for thought?

John, I'm not sure what you're doing with this, but I suspect (was the
continuation of Carl's "slings and arrows" meant to suggest you were
slinging with him, not at him?) that you think these verses somehow argue
against the place of logic in the interpretation of scripture.  I will
assume this.

If so, then I object (shock).  The Isa 55 passage is not rejecting the
place of logic.  You cited verses 8-9.  These verses give the reason for
the exhortation in the immediately preceding verses, "let the wicked
forsake his way, and the unrighteous man is thoughts; and let him return
to the Lord."  It is simply a call for the unrighteous to reject their way
of thinking and behaving because it is in opposition to God's.  It does
not say anything about rejecting logic.

Likewise, in 1 Cor 1:20 which you cited the context is the wisdom of this
age, of those who are perishing (v. 18), that is being rejected and
destroyed by God by the preaching of the cross (18-19).  It certainly says
nothing about God rejecting or destroying logic.

I am not sure why there is this aversion to logic. I know some people have
an aversion to mathematics.  Maybe its the same fear.  Maybe it is just a
prejudice against something misunderstood.  Like mathematics, logic was
created by God.  It is a reflection of His creation and order.  Both are
beautiful and should be studied, mastered, and used by God's people for
His glory.

Just one example.  Did you follow the discussion in 1 Jn 2:19? If we
understand the rules of logic regarding the conditional and its
contrapositive, then that passage can really come alive.  The logic there
says a conditional implies the contrapositive.  This cannot be rejected.
It is always true, not a variable.  The conditional "If A, then B" will
always imply its contrapositive, "if not B, then not A."  Applied to the
passage we get this:

	If they had been of us, then they would have remained with us.
	They did not remain with us.
	Therefore, they were not of us.

As I commented earlier, the last part of the verse was not necessary in
order for us to infer the conclusion.  It's statement, however, is
significant then, because it shows emphasis.

Paul Dixon
Follow-Ups: References: