In this chapter, Dr. Sproul begins to talk about the law of noncontradiction, one of the logical rules that must be in place before we can know something. The most important idea is probably the idea of absolute vs. relative truth.
The primary argument for the law of noncontradiction in this chapter is that, without it, we have no way of knowing what is true or false, right or wrong (the moral relativists will love that). In Christianity in particular, without the law of noncontradiction, the entire Bible would be useless to us. If God commands us to do something, we can't disregard it. In the same way, if God commands us not to do something, we can't just go out and do it. That's a Biblical given. But, if the law of noncontradiction didn't exist, who's to say these are absolute commands? How do we know what God's commands are? How do we even know what He is like? Can Jesus have died and not died at the same time? When the Bible says He rose from the grave, could He have not risen from the grave? So we see the law of noncontradiction's necessity to our faith.
Now, the law of contradiction doesn't prove Christianity. All it does is give us a concept of how to think, how to view the world. It gives us a framework for understanding the universe. It's the law that states that I can't be both Sarrah's husband and not be her husband at the same time. To be both would be a clear contradiction. But without the law of noncontradiction, who's to say I can't do that? Or God can't not be God, or not fulfill His attributes. He is an absolute God and a God of absolutes.
This chapter also talks about the problems with relativism (believing something to be true or right for some people and not for others). Sproul also points out that one cannot be a consistent relativist, believing that all truth is relative. For one thing, the idea that all truth is relative (meaning there are no absolutes) is itself an absolute, and the whole idea behind relativism is that it denies absolutes. For it to not be an absolute, one would have to say that only some things are relative, which would mean that some other things are absolute. You see the dilemma? I suppose one could say that there are some relatives and some absolutes. But the fact remains that there are absolutes in our world.
This is also the law that allows us to make certain observations. Sproul gives the example of the phrase "All men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore Socrates is mortal." Logic allows us to add this up and see this to be true. This kind of idea could be applied to a lot of things, like "Heights scare me; the Space Needle is very tall; therefore going on the Space Needle would scare me."
Sproul points out that logic in general wasn't invented by man. When he talks about Aristotle's ideas about logic, he is careful to point out that "Aristotle didn't invent logic; rather he defined it. He argued that logic is a necessary tool for human thinking and communication, as well as a means for us to comprehend the rational structure of the universe." Aristotle did, in fact, affirm the law of noncontradiction in his writing Metaphysics, saying that it is "impossible that contrary attributes should belong at the same time to the same subject" (IV.3.8). The reason it is important to note that Aristotle didn't invent logic is because, back in those times (and still today even), there are those that argued that Greek philosophy and what they called "Aristotelian logic" should never be used in conjunction with Christianity. At the time the use of such things was commonly intended to try to prove heresy, and of course it should never be used for that. But why can't logic be used to prove Christianity? Is our faith irrational? Is it based on a blind leap of faith? Some Christians would actually say so. But doesn't the Bible tell us that the one who says there is no God is a fool? (Psalm 14:1, 53:1) Wouldn't the fool be more apt to follow the "irrational" idea that there is a God? By saying Christianity is inherently irrational, we are calling all of the church a bunch of fools! But, Biblically, it is the non-Christians who are foolish, not the Christians.
All in all, this chapter had a lot to absorb. I had to think and re-think about it to grasp it, and that fact means I may not be able to simply write about each chapter every day. There are still three more laws to cover, and this I understand, this one I've always agreed with. So I may be a bit slower in continuing to write about this book, but I'll get it done.
No comments:
Post a Comment