Any thoughts? does this follow your line of thinking at all?
IS LOGIC HIGHER THAN GOD?
Dear Professor Theophilus:
I am a Christian, a junior at Brown, and I've been debating with an atheist friend. I'd written to him that God can't do the logically impossible, like make something true and false in the same sense at the same time. He wrote back, "What does it mean that there are logical rules in our universe that not even God can violate? Did He create them? If He did, why would a perfect being cripple Himself by limiting His power like that? If He didn't create them, who did, and why are they the way they are?" As a former atheist yourself, do you have any insight into his questions?
Reply:
Your friend's questions are variations on the famous Euthyphro Dilemma (so called because it originated in a question that Socrates once posed to his friend Euthyphro).
In its original form, the dilemma is about morality, and runs something like this: Does God command the moral law because it is good, or is it good because He commands it? If He commands the moral law because it is good, then it seems that there is something — call it Good or Goodness — which is higher than God. On the other hand, if it is good because He commands it, then it seems that morality is arbitrary. For example, God could have commanded us to hate Him, and then that would be good.
Your friend is posing a version of the same dilemma, but in terms of logical rather than moral laws. Does God ordain the laws of logic because they accord with reason, or are they reasonable because He ordains them? If He ordains the laws of logic because they accord with reason, then it seems that there is something — call it Reason or Reasonableness — which is higher than God. On the other hand, if the laws of logic are reasonable because God ordains them, then it seems that logic is arbitrary. For example, He could have ordained that a statement could be true and false in the same sense at the same time, and then that would be reasonable.
The classical Christian answer to the moral form of the Euthyphro problem is that both of the alternatives are wrong. Have you noticed that the problem is posed incorrectly? The flaw in the way it is posed is that it takes God and Goodness to be different things, so that either God is greater than Goodness, or Goodness is greater than God. But God and Goodness are not different things. The solution is a third alternative: God Himself is the supreme Good. The reason He commands the moral law — which is rooted in His Goodness — is neither because Goodness is higher than He is nor because He is higher than Goodness is, but because He does not contradict His own nature.
A similar solution takes care of your friend's logical variation on the Euthyphro problem. God and Reason are not different things any more than God and Goodness are. Just as He is the supreme Good, so He is the supreme Truth or Reason — as the Gospel of John puts it, the Logos, "the Word." His creation makes logical sense neither because Reason is higher than He is nor because He is higher than Reason is, but — as before — because He does not contradict His own nature.
Remember, though, that philosophical apologetics has limits. Often, atheists like your friend ask questions not because they really want to know the truth, but because they want to hide from it. You see, if an atheist can keep you busy solving logical problems, which can be multiplied endlessly, then, he thinks, He can keep God on the blackboard; he never has to deal with Him in all his personal reality. For this reason you must always try to penetrate your friend's evasions, to go beyond the questions he asks to the real questions he is trying to avoid. For example, I sometimes ask fellows like your friend a question of my own, which runs like this. "You pose a lot of riddles. Suppose we had all the time in the world, and after many weeks of nonstop conversation, I solved every one of them to your complete intellectual satisfaction. Then would you give yourself to Jesus Christ?" You'd be surprised how many people who hear this question get a strange look on their faces, pause for a moment, then answer "No." That allows me to say, "In that case, the riddles aren't your real reason for rejecting Him. Since the real reason is something else, why are we wasting time going down all these rabbit holes? What do you think your real reason is? Do you know?"
2007-10-20
08:16:42
·
11 answers
·
asked by
sisterzeal
5
in
Religion & Spirituality