Just a few more thoughts about logic and faith. The comments yesterday were very helpful; if you haven’t read them, I encourage you to go back and read them.
Bryant said that logic is an expression of wisdom, and spiritual wisdom should produce spiritual logic. Guy separated logic itself from an overdependence on the outcomes of logic. I see some validity in what both of you are saying, but I also think that we need to step back a moment and look at the Bible.
The Hebrew approach to truth is not to come from logic to truth, but to let the truth govern and inform our logic. Because of this, some of the “logic” in the Bible doesn’t seem very logical. Let’s take an example from Paul, who was actually one who often reasoned in non-Hebraic ways. Look at Galatians 3:16
“The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ.”
By Western standards of logic, that makes no sense. We chuckle and say, “Well, Paul slipped one in there.” Actually, from a Hebrew way of thinking, this made perfect sense. The rabbis make all sorts of arguments based on the shapes of letters in Hebrew words, on etymology, and on minor elements that seem unimportant to us. I’m not sure how the Galatians took it, but a Hebrew would have been impressed with Paul’s insight.
Read the book of James. Drives me nuts. Outlining the book of James is a nightmare. That’s because James writes with Hebrew reasoning, not Greek reasoning. Ideas don’t have to be connected. Thoughts don’t flow one from another; they jump and skip and turn back on themselves.
Greeks sought to prove religious truths. Hebrews accepted the truths and reasoned based on those truths. The Saducees, embracing Hellenism, felt free to reject the parts of faith that “didn’t make sense.” That’s what I see many wanting to do today. Hellenistic thought has dominated the West for so long that Westerners tend to think it’s God-ordained, that it’s the only way of approaching truth.
Again, I’m not anti-intellectual, and it doesn’t take much reading on this blog to see that I use logic frequently. But I still think there’s a strong need for us to recognize and respect the limits of our logic.
Faith, as seen in the lives of Bible characters…as well as our own lives… often is not logical. This is the gift of God. In fact, it is my human reasoning that often works against what God is wanting to do in my life. Yet, if I submit my will to His, then the result can be spiritual insight and understanding…and this may or may not be logical, at least at the time. God may make sense of it…and it may happen today, next week, or next year, perhaps… I am sure that the insights that came to Peter at his times of stumbling may not have made logical sense at the time, yet he is able to say, “You are the Christ the Son of the Living God” (Matthew 16:16)…and these matters became much more clear (logical) at Pentecost (Acts 1-2).
Tim,
i still think “logic” here is just being used in a vague, undefined way.
Do you mean “logic” just in the sense of correct reasoning?
The formalization of arguments started by Aristotle?
“Logic” as in something akin to the scientific method?
“Logic” as in the kinds of conclusions a modern Westerner takes as credible?
i don’t think the point has much force if your target isn’t more specific.
–guy
Guy, I guess I’m wrestling with the whole concept a bit myself. We obviously can’t throw out all reasoning. Maybe I’m just needing to see more suspicion toward Aristotelian reasoning and the Baconian method.
You were probably right yesterday in your comment. I’m probably needing to focus on the overdependence on logic. What I see is that there are religious truths that logic can’t take us to, but what is at fault is not the truth but logic as the vehicle for arriving at that truth.
Still hard to pin down. Is this what they call fuzzy logic? :-)
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
It is interesting you mention the Baconian method; as Campbell, for one, was handcuffed by it. It ruled his theology and hermeneutics. Would say the same for Walter Scott as well. This was the dominant rule into the 20th century, which lent itself to the legalistic history of our tradition, giving others like RC Bell, RH Boll, GC Brewer, RL Kirkpatrick, and others such a hard time when they defended theological positions opposed to it (like justification by faith, imputed righteousness, and the Spirit’s role in conversion outside the “5-steps”).
Tim wrote, “what I see is that there are religious truths that logic can’t take us to” – and I think that is they key point here. Paul speaks to this in 1 Cor 1:18ff through ch 2. Specifically speaking 2:14, “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” While logic is a God-sent tool for us in some ways, I also believe it is a limited function of the flesh when dealing with transcendent things.
Grace be with you –
Jr
No conocía este blog, y hoy me encontré con él accidentalmente. Me parece muy interesante y quizá fuera bueno que hicieras algo similar en español. DTB.
Tim,
You:
What I see is that there are religious truths that logic can’t take us to, but what is at fault is not the truth but logic as the vehicle for arriving at that truth.
Me:
So in other words, there are religious truths which we can only learn via special revelation? Is that what you mean by this? i think that’s got to be true for sure. And maybe there’s somethings we just have to take on authority–for which we just don’t have sufficient knowledge to reason out why X is so? i think that’s got to be true as well.
–guy
Guy,
Following along with that thought, what surprises me is not that non-believers have problems with that concept, but that many believers seem to as well. They (we) don’t want to have to accept that God has revealed some things that can’t make sense to humans. We want God’s revelations to fit within our schemas.
Grace and peace,
Tim
Tim,
You wrote:
“They (we) don’t want to have to accept that God has revealed some things that can’t make sense to humans.”
Absolutely! For starters, let’s take the Sermon on the Mount.
–guy