 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Can God be beyond logic? | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 8/1/2003 11:57 AM (GMT -6) |   | | But, Fleetwood, I would ask if you are using the term "beyond logic," to put forth a view that is illogical, or contraditory? In other words, saying that God can make a square circle is not beyond logic, but illogical. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Fleetwood
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 110
| Posted 8/1/2003 7:14 PM (GMT -6) | | Honorman, I am using the term "logic" to talk about human reasoning. I gave you examples. God asking Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Logic to man?
Laika, I am aware that beyond does not mean contradictory. ?? You got me there buddy. Beyond: "more distant than"; "outside the limits" If it would help, change the word to God "surpasses" logic. Don't let the word "beyond" get you hung up. That was perhaps a poor choice of word. I agree with you completely that 2=2=4 but that God's math knowledge is beyond mine. If you consider that one of the defs of "logic" is reasonable, then it is not logical to ask a man to kill his son since murder is one of the 10 commandments, since the son was given to the man by God. True, not understood, but also illogical if reasoned using human reasoning. There are many defs. of logic, and it seems we are coming at this with different defs. and that is the prob. RD gave a def. of Logic as she thinks of logic used in this discussion. What is your def. of logic? Mine is logic in terms of human reasoning. Beyond in terms of surpass- to go beyond the limits of something. God is logic, God surpasses MAN'S logic. A teenage girl gets pregnant. Is it logical to keep the child? | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 8/1/2003 7:39 PM (GMT -6) | | Heb 11:17 ¶ By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten {son;}
18 {it was he} to whom it was said, "In Isaac your descendants shall be called."
19 He considered that God is able to raise {people} even from the dead, from which he also received him back as a type.
Abraham had at this point had enough experience with God to know that he could trust Him when he spoke. (Abraham also apparently knew that how to hear from God). Therefore he considered that God was able to raise Isaac from the dead, if need be. It was not illogical or irrational for Abraham to obey God's voice here, as God had proved himself time and again already in Abraham's life.
quote:
A teenage girl gets pregnant. Is it logical to keep the child?
It was logical, based on the revelation God had given to both Mary and Joseph that this child was the Son of God. (If in fact you are referring to Mary and Joseph).
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/2/2003 5:20 PM (GMT -6) | | --> Please don't look for continuity in this post <--
Worshiping during tonight's liturgy this struck me.
The Cross!
Is the Cross "logical?"
Is God's loving us, showing mercy towards those who sin "logical?"
I know that is a very different sense of talking about Logic, different from most of this thread. But I think it needs saying.
Thank God that we are not left to logic.
We are rescued by Love!!! | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 8/2/2003 5:31 PM (GMT -6) | | Yes it is logical for God to love us, just as those of us who are parents logically love our children. Because of sin, the Cross was necessary, and therefore logical, if God were to freely forgive sinners. There is nothing in the gospel that contradicts logic (involves a logical contradiction).
Yes, love is more than just logic, but it is not irrational or unreasonable--it makes sense to love.
God is still saying to us today, "Come now, and let us REASON together," Says the LORD, "Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool. Is 1:18
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 8/2/2003 6:07 PM (GMT -6) | | Laika,
Since opposites attract, electron flow in electrical/electronic circuits, magnetic poles, ionic chemical reactions and etc. is it logical for an atom to have multiple positive charged protons in its nucleus without having them repel each other (Physics. To present an opposing force to; push back or away by a force: Electric charges of the same sign repel one another)? RD, is it contradictory? Yes, but it is a fact, in the real world.
Is there such a thing as perpetual motion? Have you ever seen, or heard, of a 16O2 molecule with tired electrons that fall off and the 16O2 molecule becomes a 15N2 molecule? Have you ever swept up a pile of dead electrons? Is it logical to have perpetual motion, something that continues to move for thousands of years (unless you get to 0 degrees Kelvin (-273 degrees C), which hasn't been done) without a recharge? | | Back to Top | | |
|
Fleetwood
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 110
| Posted 8/2/2003 8:25 PM (GMT -6) | | | John, I don't see the "logic" in love. You know of Todd Agnew and his "thunder song"? He's a contemp. artist. He loved a woman dying of cancer. He married her anyways. She died couple months later. That seems illogical to me. Love is not "logical" when you consider the risks involved such as betrayal, death, and could go on and on. Parents don't "logically" love their children. They love them naturally. It doesn't make sense to love when love involves such risk and pain. Love surpasses logic. Speaking again of logic being human reasoning. | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 8/2/2003 8:55 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Fleetwood
John, I don't see the "logic" in love. You know of Todd Agnew and his "thunder song"? He's a contemp. artist. He loved a woman dying of cancer. He married her anyways. She died couple months later. That seems illogical to me.
He had to have some REASON why he married her. Love can be a very good reason to marry someone. When we use the term, "logic," we are merely saying something accords with reason.
quote:
Love is not "logical" when you consider the risks involved such as betrayal, death, and could go on and on.
All I'm saying is that godly love has reasons for existing, and that it is not simply a biological urge (erotic love) or an irrational emotion (sentiment).
quote:
Parents don't "logically" love their children. They love them naturally.
To my mind, "natural" does not exclude reason, but in fact admits to reason. For example, with my six-month-old daughter, yes, there are natural feelings of love that come up inside me when I see her smile at me when I sing to her, but even those natural feelings are subject to cause (she's so cute!) and effect (I can't help responding to her in love).
quote:
It doesn't make sense to love when love involves such risk and pain. Love surpasses logic. Speaking again of logic being human reasoning.
I think it is important to note that the basic premise we are operating from is that a thing is either A or non-A, and that there is a reasonable explanation to things (even miracles). In other words, we are not talking about a cold, Spock-like sort of dispassionate "logic" when we use the term. We are simply saying that the nature of reality conforms to reason. Every one of us, whether we admit it or not, operate using and depending on Reason. Knowing the basic laws of operation of our automobile, we can act upon these laws and are able to get where we need to go.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 8/3/2003 5:56 PM (GMT -6) | | | I'm assuming that everyone is still thinking about electrons and protons, so I'll give you a little longer to think. | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/3/2003 6:12 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
Yes it is logical for God to love us, just as those of us who are parents logically love our children. Because of sin, the Cross was necessary, and therefore logical, if God were to freely forgive sinners. There is nothing in the gospel that contradicts logic (involves a logical contradiction).
Yes, love is more than just logic, but it is not irrational or unreasonable--it makes sense to love.
I won't disagree with you, John!
Yet, I think that what I posted STILL STANDS AS SOMETHING OBSERVED. Consider this quote:
quote:
"Only the intellect can seek to solve some problems, though it will never solve them; only the instinct can solve them, though it will never seek them." (Nikos Kazantzakis)
Forget for a moment that Kazantzakis wrote "Last Temptation of Christ." His observation is still sound. SOME THINGS YOU DON'T ARRIVE AT BY LOGIC (AS I POINTED OUT); YET WHEN KNOWN AND LOOKED AT AFTER THE FACT THEY DO FIT WITH LOGIC (AS YOU POINTED OUT).
Thanks for your response.
PoW | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 8/4/2003 2:13 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Paul5388
Laika,
Since opposites attract, electron flow in electrical/electronic circuits, magnetic poles, ionic chemical reactions and etc. is it logical for an atom to have multiple positive charged protons in its nucleus without having them repel each other (Physics. To present an opposing force to; push back or away by a force: Electric charges of the same sign repel one another)? RD, is it contradictory? Yes, but it is a fact, in the real world.
"Strong nuclear force" is holding repellant protons together in nuclei. How does this contradict logic?
In logic, contradictory means A AND NOT A. It doesn't mean, "wow, how does that happen?"
It's not illogical in physics for a more powerful force to overwhelm a weaker force.
from: theory.uwinnipeg.ca/mod_tech/node178.html
quote:
The Strong Nuclear Force and Binding Energy
It may seem strange that nuclei, being composed of positively charged protons and neutral neutrons packed very closely together, are able to exist. One might think that the large repulsive electrostatic forces between the protons should cause the nuclei of atoms to fly apart. Obviously, most nuclei are stable and thus there must exist some other force which binds them together. This force is known as the nuclear force and is an attractive force that acts between all nuclear particles at the short distances between them (about 2 x 10-15 m). Within the nucleus, where the protons and neutrons are very close together, the nuclear force dominates the repulsive Coulomb force and holds the nucleus together.
One important illustration of the equivalence of mass and energy of Equation (13.2) has to do with what is called the binding energy of the nucleus. It is observed that the mass of any nucleus is always less than the sum of the masses of the individual constituent nucleons which make it up. The ``loss'' of mass which results when nucleons form a nucleus is attributed to a ``binding energy'', and is a measure of the strength of the strong nuclear force holding the nucleons together. In order to separate the nucleons, energy must be supplied to the nucleus. This is usually accomplished by bombarding the nucleus with high energy particles (atom smashing).
Now maybe that force holding atoms together is God Himself, but in no way does this contradict anything. In physics, a stronger force can override a weaker force. Maybe the stronger force hasn't been discovered yet, but it's not contradictory.
You say that it's illogical for a man to want to kill his son as God asked Abraham to. Yet it is possible for a man to kill his son. The great soul singer Marvin Gaye was killed by his dad. So we see you're not using the kind of logic we're talking about.
We say it's illogical for a square to be a circle. This is not possible. Can you show an example?
Since we're talking apples and oranges, try this:
www.wwnorton.com/college/phil/logic3/welcome.htm
And quit mis-quoting "my ways are not your ways", that's METHODS He's talking about. NO WHERE in scripture does it say or imply that God is illogical.
inside you the time moves and she don't fade
the ghost in you she don't fade | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 8/4/2003 5:05 AM (GMT -6) | | | This is the crux of the issue for me (after thinking about it for awhile). I think it is disingenious of someone to USE logic to make their point, to prove the validity of what they believe and THEN when something they believe APPEARS to be contradictionary to appeal to God's logic being beyond us. | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 8/4/2003 3:29 PM (GMT -6) | | The "my ways/thoughts are not your ways/thoughts" is often used to infer the incomprehensibility of God. However, the context reveals that this is definitely NOT what God is saying in this passage:
Is 55:6 ¶ Seek the LORD while He may be found; Call upon Him while He is near.
7 Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon.
8 "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," declares 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.
So it would appear that far from meaning, "You puny humans are simply unable to even begin to comprehend my thoughts or my ways," in this passage God is actually saying, "Your ways and thoughts OUGHT to be like mine, but they aren't--because you refuse to give them up!"
(or, in other words, "REPENT!")
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/4/2003 4:16 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
PoW,
As an Open Theist, I see no contradiction whatsoever in affirming both Reason and Revelation. I know of no Openness writer who has ever argued that one does not need the revelation of God to have an understanding of Him.
I have no beaf with you here, John.
My post was not a contest with that, but just a comment originating from the other end of the conversation. So to speak.
quote:
PotOnWheel Posted - 08/02/2003 : 10:20:14 PM
---------------------------------------------------
--> Please don't look for continuity in this post <--
Worshiping during tonight's liturgy this struck me.
The Cross!
Is the Cross "logical?"
Is God's loving us, showing mercy towards those who sin "logical?"
I know that is a very different sense of talking about Logic, different from most of this thread. But I think it needs saying.
Thank God that we are not left to logic.
We are rescued by Love!!!
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/4/2003 5:05 PM (GMT -6) | | Quibble with words all you want, Laika. But there is BOTH an 'illogic' and a 'logic' to this!
My post meant: "While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
There is a non-sequitor mentioned; and THAT makes the gospel so marvelous!
quote:
Romans 5:6 You see. . .when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
But the logic is also marvelous!!!
quote:
2 Corinthians 5:13 If we are out of our mind, it is for the sake of God; if we are in our right mind, it is for you. 14 For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. 15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.
I made the post when I was struck with AWE over the wonderous marvel of the Gospel.
If you relate, then I'm sure you can understand why I posted as I did.
Get it?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 8/4/2003 5:12 PM (GMT -6) | | Laika,
Hearing and believing doesn't necessarily mean understanding what you hear. I see no reason whatsoever to think a "little child" has the reasoning ability to use logic in arriving at the point of belief.
Luke 18:17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.
1 Corinthians 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
Ecclesiastes 8.17 Then I beheld all the work of God, that a man cannot find out the work that is done under the sun: because though a man labour to seek it out, yet he shall not find it; yea further; though a wise man think to know it, yet shall he not be able to find it. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/4/2003 8:13 PM (GMT -6) | | Is the Cross "logical?" I'll agree with John on this one and say yes. It is the Cross which is the ultimate rational act while Adam's sin was the ultimate irrational act. This doesn't mean we could have arrived at the inevitability of the Cross before that event. It just means that the event is consistent, comprehendable (not exhaustively), able to be related to meaningfully.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/5/2003 1:48 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by TGB
Is the Cross "logical?" I'll agree with John on this one and say yes. It is the Cross which is the ultimate rational act while Adam's sin was the ultimate irrational act. This doesn't mean we could have arrived at the inevitability of the Cross before that event. It just means that the event is consistent, comprehendable (not exhaustively), able to be related to meaningfully.
Tom
OF COURSE I AGREE WITH YOU, TOM; AND JOHN TOO.
But if you read the way that I used the word "logic" then you might understand what I was saying. Please discover what I was saying. (Or if you don't...o, well.) I was using the literary device of juxtaposition. I was not using dictionary definitions.
Re-read if you care to -- but don't use a dictionary.
quote:
I made the post when I was struck with AWE over the wonderous marvel of the Gospel.
If you relate, then I'm sure you can understand why I posted as I did.
Get it?
---------------------------------------------
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 08/04/2003 10:09:18 PM
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/5/2003 1:55 AM (GMT -6) | | My REASON for posting it was to bring balance to the thread. And that was not any reaction of accessment of anything wrong or lacking in the thread. I was just struck with AWE and saw its place with respect to this topic.
Thanks. | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/5/2003 3:30 AM (GMT -6) | | Here's a different "tack."
John and Tom, IS SIN LOGICAL?
Reflecting on what Tom wrote, I wondered just how much the "juridical" view of atonement bears on it. Is BECOMING SIN a logical act. Or is it outside logic?
What do you think; and why?
Backing up, I'd think that to answer that one also has to answer the first question: Is sin logical?
Where's Meph on this one?
(o)
| | Back to Top | | |
| 120 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 5:28 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|