The Trinity and the Vindication of Christian Paradox: An Interpretation and Refinement of the Theological Apologetic of Cornelius Van Til by B. A. Bosserman

Author:B. A. Bosserman [Bosserman, B. A.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781630874964
Publisher: Pickwick Publications, an Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers
Published: 2014-10-08T05:00:00+00:00

Even with formal descriptions of a proper method of implication, and of self-defeating contradictions, we must stress the fact that the one can only be distinguished from the other with reference to a concrete system. Earlier we observed that Adam’s conclusion that none of the animals could serve him as a suitable companion reflects a complex understanding of the continuities and discontinuities between men and animals. But what if he had decided that he was like the animals in the sense that any one of them could function as his companion, but unlike the animals in the sense that “man” is not divisible into male and female? Adam would still be asserting a sort of “unity in difference” between himself and the animals. However, it would have represented a self-destructive contradiction. Adam would find himself emotionally, intellectually, sexually, and spiritually frustrated in his attempt to regard an animal as his fit companion. Still more, as he labored to live and to act in harmony with some animal, he would have to abandon the very sort of intellectual and even regal existence that enabled him to study and evaluate the animals in the first place. Hence, although Adam’s actual conclusion would have left him with many mysterious questions concerning the likeness and difference between man and beast, it is clearly distinguishable from a self-defeating contradiction when considered within the context of the biblical story. The difference, then, between paradox and contradiction can be formally defined, but whether a specific concept enhances or fatally disrupts the Christian worldview can only be determined with reference to special revelation.

6.3.4 Apparent Contradiction

Van Til argues that, due to human finitude, apparent contradictions must arise at the perimeter of man’s knowledge.512 What distinguishes an apparent from a genuine contradiction is the fact that both of the apparently opposing truths are based upon a faithful receptivity to revelation (see fig. 19). Stated another way, both contraries are implied by the Christian system, because they are based on the sorts of evidence that it sanctions as authoritative. Apparent contradictions would include apparent discrepancies within the biblical narrative (e.g., the different genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke); apparent conflicts between Scriptural revelation and natural revelation (e.g., the age of the universe); and apparent divergences within natural revelation (e.g., the apparent dual nature of light as a particle and a wave, etc.).513 When it comes to evaluating apparent contradictions, the believer has every right to expect that these can be resolved in some fashion, if all of the relevant information were available to him, since God’s revelation cannot contradict itself (Deut 13:1–5; 1 Cor 14:29–33).514 Furthermore, he may determine that the resolution must be centered on one side of the apparent conflict as opposed to the other. For example, Van Til is quite convinced that the biblical system would be destroyed if Adam were taken as anything less than a historical personage. Therefore, the conflict between the biblical doctrine of the origins of the human race and certain scientific theories with respect to the same must be resolved by a refinement of the latter, and not of the former.

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.