I started this blog over two decades ago, most of those articles are still in the archives though several have been lost over time for various technical reasons. I hope I have improved at least a little in my knowledge and ability to write since then. However, the catalyst that gave birth to it still drives it. Though I didn't understand it at the time, the root of that catalyst was set in logic.
What I had learned in history from my high school education and media forms left me with the worldview that this nation was founded by brilliant but secular men who drew from many sources of history to devise our governmental system. I understood little of their religious faith other than most were diest. Many years ago I came across a list of quotes from the founding era that contradicted that understanding. Logic told me that if those quotes were true, then my understanding was wrong. Logic is the art of using our intellectual powers and ability to think. That ability is the gift of God to all men above all other creatures. Naturally, we are gifted in varying degrees with my light burning somewhat dimly, yet we can all learn to focus that light more sharply.
I don't like puzzles, they are too hard with too little reward, but they offer a good illustration. If the piece doesn't fit, it's the wrong piece. I understood our founders were deists, yet when I began to study their writings, what they stated as their beliefs were not the beliefs of a deist. If it doesn't walk like a deist, or talk like a deist, it probably is not a deist. Logic has brought me from falsehood to truth, so every improvement we can make in its use brings us an increase in every area of life where it is applied. That is Logic in its simplest form.
"Our wisdom, prudence, and piety, our present conduct, and our future hope are all influenced by the use of our rational powers in the search after truth." ~ Isaac Watts
Question: There are two ducks in front of a duck, two ducks behind a duck, and a duck in the middle. How many ducks are there?
Answer: Three. Two ducks are in front of the last duck; the first duck has two ducks behind; one duck is between the other two.
The depth and difficulty of many truths weighing upon the weakness of our minds to penetrate to the full understanding at first glance give the art of Logic its value. The ancients had a saying, "Veritas in puteo" (Truth lies in a well) and it is Logic that enables us to reach the water.
Before we continue on in a discussion of Logic, I must address a present issue that has been set before me. I will present it as a question,
"Why do I believe the Bible is true?" Books could be written answering this question, and many have. However, in brief statements hopefully short enough to fit in a blog post I want to answer how logic formed my thinking and undergirds my faith.
The definition of faith as presented by a friend of mine is something close to, "a belief based without evidence" that definition itself defies the law of logic and defines delusional thinking. He believes the Bible to be a collection of myths and lies formed by the minds of deceitful men for the purpose of control and deception. To quote my friend,
"The Bible is just a book filled with mythical stories by mostly unverified authors writing poetic verses and fantastic stories of ancient mankind's struggles and victories." -
https://godlessamericanpatriot.org/
He will reference historical evidence showing how the books of the bible were chosen by men hundreds of years after the so-called accounts. He will suggest we don't even know who these men were and that afterward, it continued to undergo change and rewriting time and time again. He will suggest there is no verifiable historical evidence that Jesus even existed. What does logic tell me to do when faced with such statements of fact? It tells me to go after the water that is deep in the well.
After investigating the history of these things my faith was strengthened, that is the great benefit of confrontation and the application of logic.
For a blog post, I will not try to give a comprehensive explanation of all that is available, but I will speak briefly concerning the question of the Bible text.
1. (Books of the Bible were chosen by men hundreds of years after the so-called accounts.)
This is used by many as an attempt to bring into question the books of the Bible, that they can't be trusted because men picked out the books they wanted and then called them the Word of God to make them authoritative.
There is an element of truth in that statement, there were a collection of books gathered by 170 AD. It was called the Muratorian Canon and included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, and 3 John. We have copies of the Pauline letters still in existence that date to 180-200 AD which is referred to as P46. We also have in existence New Testament texts that date to the first century. By 397 AD we have a complete collection of books as we have them now in our Bibles. I assume this is the basis for the accusation that men chose which books were in the Bible.
This collection of books as a canon became necessary after a few hundred years. Copies of the originals were still in circulation and being read among the churches. It is helpful to understand how difficult it was to get these writings in those days, everything had to be hand-copied and they were expensive. Every Christian didn't have a copy of Apostolic writing, but the letters began to be circulated within the churches. However, writings without Apostolic authority began to surface by various authors, to get those writings in circulation many times the name of one of the Apostolic fathers or someone in relation to them was falsely assigned to them. Several pseudo Gospels surfaced among other pseudo writings. Information traveled slowly then, but as these writings began to find their way into churches and mixed in with original copies they began to introduce false teachings into the church. Thus, it became necessary for the Church to gather together the original copies and separate them as authoritative writings. This took some time as you can imagine, for some of the Apostolic writings were not as well known as others and it took time for certain groups to recognize and accept them as Apostolic.
What does logic tell me about these things, here are just a few facts:
(1) We have existing copies that date within 100 years of the original and in some cases fragments within 2 or 3 decades.
(2) We have existing copies of the complete New Testament that date to the middle of the 4th Century.
(3) We have the writing of the Church fathers from the 2nd Century, their many quotes from the Apostolic writings are invaluable as it shows us the books the early church received and recognized as authoritative. These books were already accepted as scripture by the following generation long before they were collected into a single book.
(4) We have over 5000 copies in the original language in existence to compare text as well as other languages.
The amount of sustaining evidence to support and determine the accurate transmission of the first-century texts is truly overwhelming. To allow the critics to convince me the text I am reading is not the same text that was being read by the church in the second century in light of all that is available would be illogical and unreasonable. Reason and logic demand the acceptance of this reality.
Now that we understand the scriptures are true to the original, the next question is, are they what they claim to be, God's revelation to man. It is there we move into a different sphere of reason and logic concerning spiritual things. The spiritual mind sees its claim of divine revelation as the only logical and reasonable answer, the natural mind stumbles at that question. 1 Corinthians 2:14 ESV (14) The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. That's another post for another day.
May the grace of God be upon each of you,
David
