Quote:
Originally posted by Civbert
Now if I can not determine which premise is the false one, I still know that one of them must be false - because (as Van Til and Clark seem to agree) Scripture is not outside the realm of the law of non-contradiction. We can not get past that fact. Something is wrong, and no new information can make those premises all true. If X and Y contradict - all the information in the world will not make them non-contradictory. The only question is which one is false and which is true. And if and when we determine which is false - to embrace both X and Y is irrational - and God's Word if fully rational. We don't embrace non-scriptural proposition.
|
I don't have a problem, per se, with this.
The question is, are you willing to accept cognitive rest and,
knowing that there is not a contradiction, but
accepting that God may be witholding the information you need to fully form the premises are you willing to accept certain Truths as far as they go without resolving them?
Even Chalcedon is formed in a somewhat paradoxical way. You can keep pushing on the premises of full humanity as liberal theology has or the premises of full divinity as rationalism has and wreck the Truth of the hypostatic union. We don't have enough information to "solve" the Paradox by simply forming the logical premises correctly.
I just don't see some of you guys having any respect for some of these profound Truths that the Church, for centuries, have merely bounded what we know and warned us to "...press no further or you're likely to fall into heresy...."