Hello Sean,
Quote:
|
You say Clark did not understand the individual propositions and commands of Scripture as axioms (or, more accurately part of the axiom of Scripture), but rather as theorems.
|
I did not say what was in your parenthesis. I did say that Clark construed the individual propositions for Scripture to be theorems. ‘Theorems’ is to be understood in the axiomatic sense of a proposition derived from other axioms or theorems. You have asked me to prove this. Here is what Clark says in
An Introduction to Christian Philosophy on page 88…
Quote:
The thousands of Biblical propositions need not be construed as an immense set of axioms…this theology can operate on a single axiom. The single axiom is: The Bible is the Word of God. But though single, it is fruitful because there is embedded in it the law of contradiction, plus the nature of God…plus thousands of propositions thus declared true.
On this latter point the form of deduction can be maintained. From the one axiom it follows syllogistically that such and such a sentence in Scripture is true because it is the Word of God.
In the next place, as would not be the case if each Biblical proposition were singly and strictly regarded itself as an axiom, the truths of Scripture can be arranged in patterns of logical subordination.
|
These last two paragraphs provide support for my position. Clark clearly thinks it is neither desirable nor necessary to make the “thousands of Biblical propositions” an aggregate set of axioms. It is not desirable because it does not allow one to arrange the truths of Scripture “in patterns of logical subordination.” It is not necessary because through deduction, syllogistically each of these thousands of propositions can be proved true. These propositions derived syllogistically from the axiom are properly called theorems.
Sincerely,
The Incorrigible, Dishonest and Nonsensical One.
(Note: You really should spend more time putting forth rational argumentation and less time making disparaging remarks about me.)