David -- in the past, I have not done well in comparing notes on logic:with you and I know it. So I have decided to limit my comments to my forte -- what the book says and how it has practical or meaningful application in our world and in our lives. I have much to learn, in this regard, but I do know my way around the subject.
With that admission in mind, I am going to confirm that circular reasoning is one of several forms of "illogic." To me, circular logic is seen in the process of assuming that which is in question. I once rejected arguments made from circular reasoning, not understanding the importance of faith and its relationship to considered "realities." Torrance puts it this wise and says it better than I : "..... we should seek to understand Christ within the actual matrix of interrelations from which he sprang as Son of David and Son of Mary ...." AND "..... in the light of what he is in himself in his internal relations with God.........that is in terms of his intrinsic significance disclosed through his self-witness and self-communication to us in word and deed ........................&nbs
p; When we adopt this kind of approach .. we find that progress in understanding is necessarily circular........."
To me, it is "irrational" because the analytical cannot present us with a full understanding of all that is involved. It is "irrational" because we cannot know of the reality apart from faith. I speak of "irrational" from a secular -- none faith - point of view.
The incarnation and the incarnate Christ, for example, cannot be understood analytically IMO. The Being that changed form while remaining God, He who accepted our form and our limitations remains fully God and fully man. I accept this to be a fact. I "understand" it via faith. I have no alternative way of knowing, in this case. The Incarnate Christ, for me, is as much the subject of faith as is the unseen God of the Ages. Christ did not move God from the abstract to the "real" in disregard of faith. It is all understood through faith. We accept the self-revelation of God and really should ask for nothing more.
What is wrong with this ---------- if I need correction (G, Lance, Bill, David et al) I am open, as always.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:33:40 -0500
Subject: (no subject)
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Infallibility
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:33:10 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Precedence: bulk
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [email protected]
David Miller wrote:
>> If I declare, "Jesus Christ is the Messiah!"
>> is this an infallible statement or not?
>> Is the statement without error? Is not this
>> statement an infallible declaration of truth?
JD wrote:
> Only to those who believe.
Why would you say such a thing? Is the earth a sphere only to those who
believe it is a sphere?
The truth is that Jesus Christ is the Messiah whether or not anybody
believes it. Every person will one day lower themselves to their knees and
acknowledge that Jesus is Lord, even those who today do not believe him to
be Lord.
When I preach that Jesus is Lord, I am speaking infallibly for the Lord.
Why is that concept so taboo and anathema to you?
Lance, Bill, Gary, what do you all say about that? Am I speaking infallibly
when I declare Jesus to be Lord or not?
JD wrote:
> I do think our belief system regarding all
> that is of Christian claim is circular in
> nature and, hence, irrational.
There are several problems with understanding your statement here. First,
"circular reasoning" is not irrational. Look up the word "tautology" in a
logic textbook. We have discussed this before, but you have failed to
understand the nature of circular reasoning if you now call it "irrational."
Secondly, how can you possibly say that the Christian claim is circular?
Bill and Lance, why do you guys give JD a pass on stuff like this? Bill,
why be quiet when JD wrongly represents the humanity of Jesus in other
posts? I know that you do not believe like he does on these issues.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how
you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend
who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
he will be subscribed.
