Tags
Christ, Economic, eschatology, evangelism, Logic, Olivet Discourse, Omniscience, Ontological, Shawn, Synoptic Gospels, Theological Method, Trinity
Logic is the beautiful and artistic arrangement of propositions, statements, or examples to construct an argument. The more I study principles of logic, organization of logic, and flaws of logical fallacies, everyone everywhere constantly forms logical arguments. It is interesting, and I think an argument can be made, that some aspects of Scripture don’t follow logical rules. One such example will embody this post. However, instead of assuming the Bible contains logical fallacies that can be easily defeated, I’ve coined a term within my own communities to attempt to solve this illogical tension within some principles in Scripture. I call it “biblical logic”; that is, though it does not follow the set rules of logic per se, it presents its own argument while affirming the inability to be inconsistent. Therefore, a presupposition of scriptural coherence prohibits me from seeing competing discrepancies and therefore presents a different set of logical hurdles to formulate.
Take for example the deity of Christ. I’ve encountered this within my evangelistic encounters where the recipient refuses to believe in the complete deity of Christ because they see some deficiency in Christ. They, typically without any philosophical or logical training (and therefore, I believe, proves my idea that people formulate logic unknowingly) try to disprove the gospel using logical means of a syllogism. A syllogism is composed of three elements: Major Premise, Minor Premise, and Concluding Thought. They use Matthew 24:36 in order to diminish the deity of Christ, “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the son, but only the Father.” They draw out Christ’s inability to know all things and consequently reveals a bit of presuppositions on their end. Their syllogism typically follows:
