From: Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Jun 07 1997 - 16:02:53 EDT
On Sat, 7 Jun 1997, Will Wagers wrote:
> Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church wrote:
> > Just one example. Did you follow the discussion in 1 Jn 2:19? If we
> > understand the rules of logic regarding the conditional and its
> > contrapositive, then that passage can really come alive. The logic there
> > says a conditional implies the contrapositive. This cannot be rejected.
> > It is always true, not a variable. The conditional "If A, then B" will
> > always imply its contrapositive, "if not B, then not A."
> It seems to be that this could be a helpful or dangerous technique.
> Since in most writing people are not formally employing "logic" and,
> certainly, are not thinking simultaneously in terms of contrapositives,
> the author's meaning could quite easily be distorted into a form
> unrecognizable or unacceptable to him.
It seems that John was indeed very much aware of this type of thinking in
1 Jn 2:19. If he was not, then certainly the Holy Spirit superintended
the writing so that it came out that way, and we can learn from it,
regardless. John's sequential thought process is this: not B, if
A then B; therefore not A.
Secondly, there is nothing mystical about logic. It is simply a
description of how proper inferential thought occurs. It is like the
rules of physical science, or mathematics. If such laws were not fixed
and could not be counted upon, then we would never have sent man to the
moon. The same is true regarding logic and exegesis. If the rules of
logic are not constant and reliable, then how could we ever hope to come
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:18 EDT