Loving God with Your Mind: Essays in Honor of J. P. Moreland by

Language: eng
Format: mobi
Publisher: Moody Publishers
Published: 2013-12-18T05:00:00+00:00

Here Paul did the truly impossible. Think about it: on Wilkinson’s view, you really can’t demolish any argument designed to undercut the knowledge of God. To do that you would need to contradict something about the argument—either one of its premises or its logical form. Even worse, if LNC doesn’t hold—and hold necessarily—then there isn’t any real difference between a pretension and a non-pretension, an idea that precludes knowledge of God and one that doesn’t, a thought that obeys Christ and another that does not.

Wilkinson says that Paul “agreed with skeptics that faith is irrational,”26 and in Corinth showed us a better way: “I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2 NRSV). But you see, on Wilkinson’s view, there can be no difference between knowing Christ and failing to know Christ (!)—hence no difference between being saved or not, between heaven or hell—because there is no real difference between p and not-p. Ironically, then, it doesn’t matter whether we tell reason’s story, as he calls it, or faith’s story. He prefers the latter. But there can be nothing wrong with telling reason’s story instead. Without LNC, it’s all the same.

(As an aside: Please don’t ask us what “faith’s story” is. We cannot tell you. What we do know is that while postmodern Christians do their best to avoid putting the definite article “the” in front of “faith,” Jude exhorts us to contend—not for faith—but rather “the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” [Jude 3 NRSV]. That we can tell you about.)

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.