Circular arguments in Christian theology
November 3, 2011 at 7:57 pm
(This post was last modified: November 3, 2011 at 8:13 pm by Ziploc Surprise.)
They say that truth is stranger than fiction and here's a case in point. The following was taken directly from a Christian Fundamentalist Theology book called "systematic Theology" by Wayne Grundem. The passage is an argument that (they think) supports the authority of scripture (the Bible). Grab your shovels folks, it's gonna get deep.
"We believe that Scripture is God's Word because it claims to be that. And we believe its claims because Scripture is God's word. And we believe that it is God's Word because it claims to be that, and so forth. (this sentence was the beginning of the defense for a circular argument they used earlier about how you can use Scripture to prove itself)
It should be admitted that this is a kind of circular argument. However, that does not make its use invalid, for all arguments for an absolute authority must ultimately appeal to that authority for proof: otherwise the authority would not be an absolute or highest authority. This problem is not unique to the Christian who is arguing for the authority of the Bible. Everyone either implicitly or explicitly uses some kind of circular argument when defending his or her ultimate authority for belief.
Although these circular arguments are not always made explicit and are sometimes hidden beneath lengthy discussions or are simply assumed without proof, arguments for an ultimate authority in their most basic form take on a similar circular appeal to that authority itself, as some of the following examples show:
"My reason is my ultimate authority because it seems reasonable to me to make it so."
"Logical consistency is my ultimate authority because it is logical to make it so."
"The findings of human sensory experiences are the ultimate authority for discovering what is real and what is not, because our human senses have never discovered anything else: thus, human sense experience tells me that my principle is true."
"I know there can be no ultimate authority because I do not know of any such ultimate authority."
In all of these arguments for an ultimate standard of truth, an absolute authority for what to believe, there is an element of circularity involved.
How then does a Christian, or anyone else, choose among the various claims for absolute authorities? Ultimately the truthfulness of the Bible will commend itself as being far more persuasive than other religious books ( such a the book of Mormon or the Qu'ran), or than any other intellectual constructions of the human mind (such as logic, human reason, sense experience, scientific methodology, etc.) It will be more persuasive because in the actual experience of life, all of these other candidates for ultimate authority are seen to be inconsistent or to have shortcomings that disqualify them, while the Bible will be seen to be fully in accord with all that we know about the world around us, about ourselves, and about God.
The Bible will commend itself as being persuasive in this way, that is, if we are thinking rightly about the nature of reality, our perception of it and of ourselves, and our perception of God. The trouble is that because of sin our perception and analysis of God and creation is faulty. Sin is ultimately irrational, and sin makes us think incorrectly about God and about creation. Thus, in a world free from sin, the Bible would commend itself convincingly to all people as God's Word. But because sin distorts People's perception of reality, they do not recognize Scripture for what it really is. therefore it requires the work of the Holy Spirit, overcoming the effects of sin, to enable us to be persuaded that the Bible is indeed the Word of God and that the claims it makes for itself are true.
Thus, in another sense, the argument for the Bible as God's Word and our ultimate authority is not a typical circular argument. The process of persuasion is perhaps better likened to a spiral in which increasing knowledge of Scripture and increasingly correct understanding of God and creation tend to supplement one another in a harmonious way, each tending to confirm the accuracy of the other. This is not to say that our knowledge of the world around us serves as a higher authority than Scripture, but rather that such knowledge, if it is correct knowledge, continues to give greater and greater assurance and deeper conviction that the Bible is the only truly ultimate authority and that other competing claims for ultimate authority are false."
Someone please pass the brain floss!!
"We believe that Scripture is God's Word because it claims to be that. And we believe its claims because Scripture is God's word. And we believe that it is God's Word because it claims to be that, and so forth. (this sentence was the beginning of the defense for a circular argument they used earlier about how you can use Scripture to prove itself)
It should be admitted that this is a kind of circular argument. However, that does not make its use invalid, for all arguments for an absolute authority must ultimately appeal to that authority for proof: otherwise the authority would not be an absolute or highest authority. This problem is not unique to the Christian who is arguing for the authority of the Bible. Everyone either implicitly or explicitly uses some kind of circular argument when defending his or her ultimate authority for belief.
Although these circular arguments are not always made explicit and are sometimes hidden beneath lengthy discussions or are simply assumed without proof, arguments for an ultimate authority in their most basic form take on a similar circular appeal to that authority itself, as some of the following examples show:
"My reason is my ultimate authority because it seems reasonable to me to make it so."
"Logical consistency is my ultimate authority because it is logical to make it so."
"The findings of human sensory experiences are the ultimate authority for discovering what is real and what is not, because our human senses have never discovered anything else: thus, human sense experience tells me that my principle is true."
"I know there can be no ultimate authority because I do not know of any such ultimate authority."
In all of these arguments for an ultimate standard of truth, an absolute authority for what to believe, there is an element of circularity involved.
How then does a Christian, or anyone else, choose among the various claims for absolute authorities? Ultimately the truthfulness of the Bible will commend itself as being far more persuasive than other religious books ( such a the book of Mormon or the Qu'ran), or than any other intellectual constructions of the human mind (such as logic, human reason, sense experience, scientific methodology, etc.) It will be more persuasive because in the actual experience of life, all of these other candidates for ultimate authority are seen to be inconsistent or to have shortcomings that disqualify them, while the Bible will be seen to be fully in accord with all that we know about the world around us, about ourselves, and about God.
The Bible will commend itself as being persuasive in this way, that is, if we are thinking rightly about the nature of reality, our perception of it and of ourselves, and our perception of God. The trouble is that because of sin our perception and analysis of God and creation is faulty. Sin is ultimately irrational, and sin makes us think incorrectly about God and about creation. Thus, in a world free from sin, the Bible would commend itself convincingly to all people as God's Word. But because sin distorts People's perception of reality, they do not recognize Scripture for what it really is. therefore it requires the work of the Holy Spirit, overcoming the effects of sin, to enable us to be persuaded that the Bible is indeed the Word of God and that the claims it makes for itself are true.
Thus, in another sense, the argument for the Bible as God's Word and our ultimate authority is not a typical circular argument. The process of persuasion is perhaps better likened to a spiral in which increasing knowledge of Scripture and increasingly correct understanding of God and creation tend to supplement one another in a harmonious way, each tending to confirm the accuracy of the other. This is not to say that our knowledge of the world around us serves as a higher authority than Scripture, but rather that such knowledge, if it is correct knowledge, continues to give greater and greater assurance and deeper conviction that the Bible is the only truly ultimate authority and that other competing claims for ultimate authority are false."
Someone please pass the brain floss!!
I have studied the Bible and the theology behind Christianity for many years. I have been to many churches. I have walked the depth and the breadth of the religion and, as a result of this, I have a lot of bullshit to scrape off the bottom of my shoes. ~Ziploc Surprise
