Where does the Law of Noncontradiction come from?
The Law of Noncontradiction (LNC) states that two contradicting statements can't both be true. Whereas it is quite self-evident that this law is universally correct, I've been wondering from where it originates.
Does it exist independently of God, i.e. God would be subject to the LNC (implying God would not be able to create a stone that he cannot lift, as this would be logically impossible - meaning God's omnipotence would cover everything that's logically possible to do, but nothing beyond that)?
Or did God _create _the LNC, i.e. God would be master of the LNC (implying God would be able to create a stone that he cannot lift; and he would also be able to lift this stone; as the LNC would not apply to God)?
Both Scripture and science are silent about this question… Despite a large apologetics library, I've found nothing.
My current working hypothesis is that God created the LNC, and is not subject to it. However, his whole creation is made in a way that it is subject to the LNC and requires the LNC. Therefore, even if God could in his omnipotence violate the LNC, he doesn't do it.
Comments
-
@Jan said:
Does it exist independently of God, i.e. God would be subject to the LNC (implying God would not be able to create a stone that he cannot lift, as this would be logically impossible - meaning God's omnipotence would cover everything that's logically possible to do, but nothing beyond that)?Is "lying" such "a stone God cannot lift", seeing that Scripture declares "God cannot lie"? Ever considered that "omnipotence" should be understood in light of and correspondence with other characteristics/attributes ascribed to God in Scripture?
Or did God _create _the LNC, i.e. God would be master of the LNC (implying God would be able to create a stone that he cannot lift; and he would also be able to lift this stone; as the LNC would not apply to God)?
The question seems beside the real issue ... Eh, perhaps God is able to create such a stone, which He could not lift ... BUT He is not so stupid to do so ???
-
@Jan said:
The Law of Noncontradiction (LNC) states that two contradicting statements can't both be true. Whereas it is quite self-evident that this law is universally correct, I've been wondering from where it originates.Does it exist independently of God, i.e. God would be subject to the LNC (implying God would not be able to create a stone that he cannot lift, as this would be logically impossible - meaning God's omnipotence would cover everything that's logically possible to do, but nothing beyond that)?
Or did God _create _the LNC, i.e. God would be master of the LNC (implying God would be able to create a stone that he cannot lift; and he would also be able to lift this stone; as the LNC would not apply to God)?
Both Scripture and science are silent about this question… Despite a large apologetics library, I've found nothing.
My current working hypothesis is that God created the LNC, and is not subject to it. However, his whole creation is made in a way that it is subject to the LNC and requires the LNC. Therefore, even if God could in his omnipotence violate the LNC, he doesn't do it.
I see a way in which God overcame the LNC. God is infinite or eternal. Everything created is finite. But God in his wisdom made the finite infinite, or eternal in life and righteousness through Imputation.
"imputation. A transfer of benefit or harm from one individual to another. In theology imputation may be used negatively to refer to the transfer of the sin and guilt of Adam to the rest of humankind. Positively, imputation refers to the righteousness of Christ being transferred to those who believe on him for salvation."
Grenz, S., Guretzki, D., & Nordling, C. F. (1999). In Pocket dictionary of theological terms (p. 65). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Had Adam not sinned, we would have only his finite righteousness and life. But since God himself became the second Adam (Jesus) and imputed his righteousness and life to those who believe in him, we have the eternal righteousness of God and the eternal life of God.
-
@Wolfgang said:
Is "lying" such "a stone God cannot lift", seeing that Scripture declares "God cannot lie"? Ever considered that "omnipotence" should be understood in light of and correspondence with other characteristics/attributes ascribed to God in Scripture?I'm aware people say that God can't lie because it's against his nature. So omnipotence is reduced to everything that is logically possible, and not against God's own nature. That's quite a restriction. I do have a different theory about God not able to lie.
Imagine I had a gun in my hand, and would point the gun to one of my children's head. I know with absolute certainty, that I could not pull the trigger, not because of physical inability, but because of my nature.
In the same way, God couldn't lie, not because he would be incapable of doing so, but in a sense that he **doesn't **lie because it's against his nature.
When we say that we can't do something, that can either mean that we're physically incapable of doing it, or it can be a moral statement meaning that it is something we don't do. I believe that Hebrews 6:18 falls just in that category.
Or did God _create _the LNC, i.e. God would be master of the LNC (implying God would be able to create a stone that he cannot lift; and he would also be able to lift this stone; as the LNC would not apply to God)?
The question seems beside the real issue ... Eh, perhaps God is able to create such a stone, which He could not lift ... BUT He is not so stupid to do so ???
Of course God would not be so stupid to create a stone he can't lift. But there are numerous other possible violations of the LNC, such as creating a square circle, creating a married bachelor, making 2+2 equal to 3 etc.
Maybe it would still be stupid to make any of these happen.
@Dave_L said:
I see a way in which God overcame the LNC. God is infinite or eternal. Everything created is finite. But God in his wisdom made the finite infinite, or eternal in life and righteousness through Imputation.I'm not so sure that this couldn't be reconciled without actual contradiction, such as Jesus being God and man, or us being elect as well as free creatures, or communion being bread and wine as well as body and blood of Christ.
An actual violation of the LNC would cause truth to be false, wrong to be right, and truth no longer to be knowable.
-
@Jan said:
@Wolfgang said:
Is "lying" such "a stone God cannot lift", seeing that Scripture declares "God cannot lie"? Ever considered that "omnipotence" should be understood in light of and correspondence with other characteristics/attributes ascribed to God in Scripture?I'm aware people say that God can't lie because it's against his nature. So omnipotence is reduced to everything that is logically possible, and not against God's own nature. That's quite a restriction. I do have a different theory about God not able to lie.
Imagine I had a gun in my hand, and would point the gun to one of my children's head. I know with absolute certainty, that I could not pull the trigger, not because of physical inability, but because of my nature.
In the same way, God couldn't lie, not because he would be incapable of doing so, but in a sense that he **doesn't **lie because it's against his nature.
When we say that we can't do something, that can either mean that we're physically incapable of doing it, or it can be a moral statement meaning that it is something we don't do. I believe that Hebrews 6:18 falls just in that category.
Or did God _create _the LNC, i.e. God would be master of the LNC (implying God would be able to create a stone that he cannot lift; and he would also be able to lift this stone; as the LNC would not apply to God)?
The question seems beside the real issue ... Eh, perhaps God is able to create such a stone, which He could not lift ... BUT He is not so stupid to do so ???
Of course God would not be so stupid to create a stone he can't lift. But there are numerous other possible violations of the LNC, such as creating a square circle, creating a married bachelor, making 2+2 equal to 3 etc.
Maybe it would still be stupid to make any of these happen.
@Dave_L said:
I see a way in which God overcame the LNC. God is infinite or eternal. Everything created is finite. But God in his wisdom made the finite infinite, or eternal in life and righteousness through Imputation.I'm not so sure that this couldn't be reconciled without actual contradiction, such as Jesus being God and man, or us being elect as well as free creatures, or communion being bread and wine as well as body and blood of Christ.
An actual violation of the LNC would cause truth to be false, wrong to be right, and truth no longer to be knowable.
Interesting. Where I see the contradiction being overcome is the temporal (created) becoming eternal (uncreated). This through imputation per Romans 5.
-
According to the law of non-contradiction, a thing can’t be both created and not created, so the categories are mutually exclusive. Any particular thing has to be one or the other. It’s very simple.
Geisler states that foundationalism is the theory of knowledge (Epistemology) that affirms the need for certain foundational principles as the basis of all thought.
- For example, The law of noncontradiction that says a proposition cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the same sense.
- Also, either something is true or false but not both – exclusion of the middle.
- Finally, the principle of identity – what is true is true and what is false is false. These are foundational principles.
The resultant effect is that many do not want to go to church because it is filled with “hypocrites”. The perceived truth is that the Bride of Christ is no better than the harlot Bride of God in the Old Testament. Christians are seen as a community of whores, drunkards, and thieves but we are not to remain that way; though at times, that view is merited. Even a secular world that embraces an illogical attitude of tolerance sees the error. The problem is, as Aristotle's Metaphysics stated regarding The Law of Noncontradiction explains, two opposing statements, (or thoughts) couldn’t be true at the same time. "The most certain of all basic principles is that contradictory propositions are not true simultaneously”. It states that something cannot be both true, and not true at the same time when dealing with the same context. The majority, if not all of the philosophers, even the pagan ones embrace this logic.
For example, a person cannot be considered dead by one person and proclaimed alive by another and both statements true. One is false. Yet, the problem is that Christians are willing to allow contrary beliefs to be “true”, as long as they are assured of not being hassled. Again, people do not want to hear anything contrary to their position.
Sometimes this delusion is asserted in regards to obeying God. People assert that they are obeying God, or living a godly lifestyle when they clearly are not. When people live in a delusion of sin, they are acting contrary to God’s will. The problem with living intolerance of sin is that the end result is chaos, guilt, or death, most notably a decisive death in the relationship with God. A life cannot be lived according to, and contrary to the Law of God simultaneously; both positions cannot be right. CM
SOURCE:
-- Geisler, Norman. The New Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999:259.
-
@C_M_ said:
For example, a person cannot be considered dead by one person and proclaimed alive by another and both statements true. One is false. Yet, the problem is that Christians are willing to allow contrary beliefs to be “true”, as long as they are assured of not being hassled. Again, people do not want to hear anything contrary to their position.And yet, how many consider Jesus to be God and also to be a human being ... they are very willing to allow this contradictory belief as true, because they do not date to believe the truth for fear of being hassled to no end ...
Just have a look at these forums and how those few who believe that God cannot be a man and neither can a man be God are hassled on these forums ... and how the many rather do away with truth in order to hold on to their erroneous position that God can be a man and a man can be God, and that two / three who are each God are still not three Gods etc
-
"Aristotle's Metaphysics...The Law of Noncontradiction." Is Aristotle wiser than God? Nothing that Aristotle or any man puts forth is the standard or the foundation to work from or to be reached.
The finite can never fully grasp the infinite. We see through a glass darkly. Because man can't wrap himself around God's nature, character and manifestations, it doesn't mean that what's revealed is not. The wisest human theory (regardless of how it appears to baffles), is no match for God's revelation and illumination. CM
-
@Wolfgang said:
For example, a person cannot be considered dead by one person and proclaimed alive by another and both statements true. One is false. Yet, the problem is that Christians are willing to allow contrary beliefs to be “true”, as long as they are assured of not being hassled. Again, people do not want to hear anything contrary to their position.
And yet, how many consider Jesus to be God and also to be a human being ... they are very willing to allow this contradictory belief as true, because they do not date to believe the truth for fear of being hassled to no end ...
This is not a contradictory belief. "Jesus is God and Jesus is not God" would be a contradictory belief.
Judging from nothing but God's omnipotence, can God become a man?
If you say yes, then there's no contradiction in Jesus being God an man at the same time.
If you say no, then you have to reconcile this inability with God's omnipotence.
-
@Jan said:
This is not a contradictory belief. "Jesus is God and Jesus is not God" would be a contradictory belief.Judging from nothing but God's omnipotence, can God become a man?
If you say yes, then there's no contradiction in Jesus being God an man at the same time.
If you say no, then you have to reconcile this inability with God's omnipotence.
I propose that there IS a potential contradiction in the God-Jesus relationship, Jan, but it's not "Jesus is God; Jesus is not God." The contradiction, most clearly embedded in the statement "Jesus is God and Jesus is human," exists if one assumes God is wholly other than human (Isaiah 55.8-9) and therefore cannot possibly be human. The resulting conclusion is then that Jesus can't at the same time be human AND one who can't possibly be human (unless Schrödinger and his cat have theological implications!
) -
Bill, you've evaded the question.
Can the omnipotent God, if he chooses so, become human without ceasing to be God? -
@Jan said:
Bill, you've evaded the question.
Can the omnipotent God, if he chooses so, become human without ceasing to be God?Actually, the omnipotent God can NOT become human.
A human can NOT be God, God can NOT be human.The omnipotent God can NOT chose to become human.
The rest of your question follows on a false premise ... as "without ceasing to be God" is as irrelevant and loony tunes as would be "with ceasing to be God".
Your question is non-sensical.IF you violate these truths, and claim that Jesus can both be God and human, you are in the company of Babylonian, Eyptian, Greek, Roman and other mythologies who insist on such being a possibility when speaking about their Gods and their kings, pharaohs, ceasars, etc
-
@Wolfgang said:
Actually, the omnipotent God can NOT become human.
A human can NOT be God, God can NOT be human.Then your God is not omnipotent.
The omnipotent God can NOT chose to become human.
The rest of your question follows on a false premise ... as "without ceasing to be God" is as irrelevant and loony tunes as would be "with ceasing to be God".I'm not so sure he couldn't cease to be God. I'm absolutely sure though that he wouldn't cease to be God, as he is a necessary being.
Your question is non-sensical.
Since it is what billions of trinitarian Christians believe he did, is is a valid question, which makes a lot of sense.
IF you violate these truths, and claim that Jesus can both be God and human, you are in the company of Babylonian, Eyptian, Greek, Roman and other mythologies who insist on such being a possibility when speaking about their Gods and their kings, pharaohs, ceasars, etc
Do you have any evidence that these peoples believed that their "gods" remained "gods" while they were in their "human form"?
-
@Jan said:
Bill, you've evaded the question.
Can the omnipotent God, if he chooses so, become human without ceasing to be God?There is no question to be evaded, Jan, if, as my post made clear, the assumption is that God is wholly other than human, an assumption which produces the result I cited: Jesus can't be human AND someone wholly other than human.
If the assumption is changed to permit God's taking on human form - a circumstance not under review in my previous post - then in my view the result is that God can be human without ceasing to be God... but not necessarily so.
A scenario which, of course, directs us to Scripture's message on the issue of Jesus' deity. Our respective posts on the matter suggest that we disagree strongly as to the content of that message. So be it.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
