Archive for the ‘Contradiction’ Category:
Certainty and Knowledge
In our culture, the need for certainty is often held up as the norm, skepticism is even praised. The default position in the Scientific Method is doubt. We seem to believe that if something is true, it will be able to stand up to any test (without even questioning the validity of the test itself).
Until a few months ago, I also embraced this view.
I thought truth was something that could be put into nice neat propositional statements and always could be proved with absolute certainty. The first time I read Descartes’ Meditations, I soaked it up like a sponge. I thought that here was how I could know, with absolute certainty, that I exist, and subsequently that God exists. I could build a firm foundation and be certain of anything that comes from this foundation. After all, this foundation was built form the idea of radical doubt. But our need for certainty is misplaced and leads to epistemic nihilism (the inablitiy to know anything, and a sense of loss in this).
Dane Cook on Atheism
OK, so my wife and I were browsing youtube for some entertainment (we’re cheap and don’t have cable) when we decided to look for some Dane Cook. We came across this video (ironically) at the same time that I was having an interesting conversation on de-Conversion on a post called “Where was God on 9/11.” I won’t lie, the conversation had a me a little perturbed to have my Christian beliefs dismissed so quickly as illogical, silly, “twisted,” “pathetic,” etc. I don’t care if you disagree with my conclusions, that’s fine! But to be so quickly dismissed and labeled was more than a little frustrating. It was kind of ironic that it is Christians that are often (rightfully) seen as judgmental or lacking empathy and understanding for the beliefs of others.
Anyway, considering that conversation, this video made me laugh hysterically. Dane Cook is irreverent, but hilarious, and he uses humor to make a really really good freaking point about atheism (or at least some versions of it) and the kind of assumptions we carry with our beliefs. It kind of puts the shoe on the other foot, so to speak. Holy crap… so funny… Enjoy!
(Disclaimer: The following video is meant to be humorous. It is not intended to make sweeping generalizations or disrespect anyone’s personal beliefs.)
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wts-dntnyh4]
God in a Box
This last week I was talking with a friend, and several paradoxes about God came up. We hit on free will and God’s sovereignty. We conversed on how Christians are free from the law, but still told to be holy. These questions lead us to wonder if there are nice systematic answers at all. To this, I pointed to the doctrine of the trinity (the concept that God is three persons, each person is fully God, and that there is only one God). Although these statements may not be contradictory, we have to admit that our finite human minds cannot fully understand them. Another friend wondered if God exists in three persons just to make us realize we cannot fully know God. That reminded me- we cannot fully know God, otherwise he ceases to be God.
Check out what God says to Isaiah: Read more »
A Contradiction in Scripture
This week I was reading Romans 7 at a Bible study. As we read and discussed, I became frustrated. Paul seemed so clearly to contradict himself. Paul first argues that the law is dead to Christians, and that the Christian is now united with Christ instead of the law. Paul says that the law “aroused” sinful passions within him, and thus the law brings death. So it sounds like the law is bad, even evil, right?
But Paul says, “What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin” (v. 7). The law is not sin, it is through the law we become aware of sin. But then why does Paul say, “apart from the law, sin lies dead” (v.8)? It just doesn’t seem to make sense how something that produces sin can be good.
Posts
