INEVITABLE CIRCLES OF REASON…

“We believe the Bible to be the infallible word of God because the Bible itself tells us that this is the case. The immediate objection is that this is a circular argument — which of course it is! But is it really different from saying we know that God is God because he says he is? Can circularity be avoided and, if so how?

“If we refuse to start with the assumption that the Bible tells the truth in claiming to be God’s word, we must start with another assumption: that it does not or may not tell the truth and, therefore, it is not or may not be God’s word. If we seek to avoid the obvious circularity of this latter approach by saying that we must test the Bible by certain objective neutral facts, then who determines what is neutral and which facts are applicable?

“In the end, it becomes human reason that judges what is reasonable evidence about the nature of the Bible. As soon as we admit this, then we see that it is a choice of two opposing circular arguments: one assumes the ultimate authority is God and his word, and the other that assumes the ultimate authority of unaided human reason.

Goldsworthy

Advertisements

Comments are closed.