Do theists believe in logic?

[Procrustes Stretched]

Since it was Satan who introduced us to the pursuit of knowledge, shouldn't devout theists of all stripes denounce critical reasoning and logic as the work of the Devil?

The very question is a breach of the laws of Logic. Who created the tree of knowledge and good and evil? Who created Satan? Yet, it is SATAN that is credited with being the foundation of knowledge? Just what is logical in declaring the created as superior to the creator? Can the sum/total of anything be greater than that from which it was subtracted?

Dude, Gestalt is so rad.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What is absolute truth?

Whatever dribbles out of my mouth.

Then tell us oh wise one, is there an inherent contradiction with being both a theist and a believer in logic?

I can answer this one in so many ways my mind spins.

Do you confuse logic with reason?

.
note: Personally I cannot square theism with reality.

 

[Ralph]

There is no contrast between logic and faith. One must complement the other. For either is void without the other. The exact same evidence is available to both the theist and the secular humanist. That evidence merely points to the OBJECT of ones faith. As such it is reason and logic that forms a solid basis for any devout Christian as that faith is not founded blindly on some dogmatic unprovable or untestable source, but to the contrary, that faith is founded on the word of God, as "...faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God". -- Romans 10:17. And indeed, the word of God, or the Holy Bible is very testable and contains a great deal of OBJECTIVE evidence to prove that what is being propagated within the pages thereof is not founded upon SUBJECTIVE individual evidences but evidences that are available for anyone to put to the test. In fact, the Christian faith admonishes everyone to "....PROVE ALL THINGS". -- 1 Thess. 5:21. We are told to "TRY" or test any message that is presented to us, to make sure that it is the truth as revealed by God. -- 1 John 4:1.

 

[manifold]

Do you confuse logic with reason?

Do you split hairs often?

 

[JBeukema]

If you want to back up, and say, "well, God has perfect knowledge of all particular items of knowledge," we are back into the problem of how God knows how he knows. To have perfect knowledge of something, is to know all the causes that made something what it is. To have perfect knowledge of something, is in effect to know how to create something. But God cannot know the nature and origin of his powers, because he did not create himself (even God can't do that).
.

So you agree with me on this?

I am absolutely certain that JB doesn't have a job.

1)Why do you say that?
2)What makes you think you matter?

I said we cannot know whether it is possible and cannot make a gnostic claim...

But that doesn't make sense. It is manifestly evident, that either it is possible that there exists an omniscient being, or that it is impossible. How could we not know of the existence of these alternatives? We're talking about them right now.

We don't know that it is not possible- we simply conclude that it appears impossible based on all we know.

Look, this is the same reasoning in a circle that I pointed out to you in my last post. But anyway, as it happens, it presents us with exactly the route taken by a reductio ad absurdum argument. We stipulate that there in fact exists a being that possesses absolutely complete knowledge. Then we draw the implications of the existence of such a being, and if we run into contradictions (such as the being not having complete knowledge even of itself, or, not possessing 'knowledge,' properly so called, at all), then we can dispense with the stipulation.

Without omniscient, how do we know that there is not a way the being could possess even knowinger regarding how it has knowledge about how it knows that it knows how it came to be? Perhaps the way things are within the physical universe need not apply 'outside' of it.

Again, you don't need to know everything that can possibly be known, to rule out the being of that which is not possible. There is no logical way around a logical contradiction, omniscience or no.

Without omniscience, you still cannot know that omniscience is impossible- unlike things demonstrably within the physical universe. We can only say that it appears impossible based on all our knowledge- but we must remain some degree of agnosticism, since we are not gnostic and omniscient. In case you haven't put it together, I come from an agnostic and positivist position.

It's like a gnostic atheist proudly declaring with absolute certainty that there is no deity.

I am inclined to think that by a variety of arguments we can be certain, that all forms of monotheism are false.[/QUOTE]

All that I am familiar with

 

[We Are They]

I am absolutely certain that JB doesn't have a job.

1)Why do you say that?
2)What makes you think you matter?


1) Your 1300+ long winded posts since april
2) Never said I did. Proof please.

 

[JW Frogen]

I am absolutely certain that JB doesn't have a job.

Lucky bastard.

 

[amrchaos]

Talking about Satan----

Let us say I introduced you to the Devil, am I injust?

What if, by bringing you to his attention, he causes great harm to you and your family although You prayed mightily for salvation. Am I evil.

I say that I am not. Thus the act of Satanic Evangelicalism could not be construed as an evil act. Even if worshipping Satan is an evil act.

What do you think? Please use Theistic logic.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Do you confuse logic with reason?

Do you split hairs often?

So now you're confused?

2: something that forces a decision apart from or in opposition to reason <the logic of war>

 

[manifold]

No, but apparently you are.

Let's see if I can help. Depending on the context, reason and logic are often synonymous. This would be the case here.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

No, but apparently you are.

Let's see if I can help. Depending on the context, reason and logic are often synonymous. This would be the case here.

what would I do without you?

 

[manifold]

My guess is you'd do what you do.