A Very Brief Survey of the Laws of Logic in Scripture (Pt. 2)

Papyrus[Some time ago, I posted pt. 1 of my brief survey of the laws of logic in Scripture. This post is my last entry on that subject. I’ve chosen to write about the law of identity, the law of non-contradiction, and the law of the excluded middle. I am currently working on an article which shows the Genus/Species relationship in Scripture. I hope to eventually collate these articles and publish them as a book. Until then, stay posted :)]

[A Very Brief Survey of the Laws of Logic in Scripture (Pt.1)]

The Law of the Excluded Middle: The third Law of Logic is expressed as A ∨ ~A, i.e. Either A or ~A. This third law is inferrable from the first two: If Ais A, and A is not ~A, then either A is A or ~[A:A]. This law is also taught in Scripture.

[i.]Genesis 18:21: “I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.”

Here, God tells Abraham that Sodom and Gomorrah are either (a.)guilty or (b.)not guilty. There is no middle ground here between guilt (A) and innocence (~A). Either the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah are guilty, or they are not.

[ii.]Genesis 24:21: “[Abraham’s servant] gazed at [Rebekah] in silence to learn whether the Lord had prospered his journey or not.”

Abraham’s servant understood that either (a.)God prospers an individual or (b.)God does not prosper that individual. In particular, he understood that either (a.)God had prospered his journey to find a suitable wife for Isaac, or (b.)God had not prospered his journey to find a suitable wife for Isaac. There is no middle between A and ~A.

[iii.]Genesis 27:21: “Then Isaac said to Jacob, ‘Please come near, that I may feel you my son, to know whether you are really my son Esau or not.'”

Either the person who brought Isaac stew and asked for his blessing was Esau, or he was not. This person could not be both Jacob and Esau. Note that this is true for all propositions as well. All lies are a contradiction of the truth; hence, there is no gray area between truth and falsehood. Either Jacob was telling the truth, or Jacob was lying.

[iii.]Genesis 37:32: “And they sent the robe of many colors and brought it to their father and said, ‘This we have found; please identify whether it is your son’s robe or not.'”

Again, either (a.)the robe is Joseph’s or (b.)it is not. Logically, this is expressed as A ∨ ~A. The robe cannot be both Joseph’s (A) and not Joseph’s (~A).

[iv.]Exodus 16:4: “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Behold, I am about to rain bread from heaven for you, and the people shall go out and gather a day’s portion every day, that I may test them, whether they will walk in my law or not.'”

The people of Israel will either (a.)walk in God’s law or (b.)not walk in God’s law. This is true, incidentally, as regards the question of whether a man is obedient to God or not. What can be inferred from this is that there can only be two types of people in the world (a.)covenant keepers or (b.)covenant breakers. There is no third group. Again, A ∨ ~A.

[v.]Many Other Passages: There are too many passages in which this law is shown in operation in the reasoning of God and man to reproduce in this small space. What follows is a listing of additional relevant passages that reiterate the law.

Exo 22:8 & 10-11; Lev 13:59; Num 11:2, 13:17-20; Deut 8:2, 13:1-2; Jud 2:21-22; John 7:17; 2nd Cor 12:2-4*

[*Note here that the law of the excluded middle shows that a man is either (a.) in the body or (b.)not in the body. This underscores the fact that man is a spirit inhabiting a body. This, furthermore, refutes so-called ‘Christian’ physicalism.]

-h.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “A Very Brief Survey of the Laws of Logic in Scripture (Pt. 2)

  1. Robert says:

    H, I was musing about this subject this very weekend! I like what you have written/gleaned from scripture. I was thinking of posting the thought on FB. But, now I can just share what you have written. :)

    I was thinking about the foundation of the law of excluded middle. If Truth reflects the Mind of God and If the Law of Logic reflects the very character of God, Ie. Identity ~ I Am that I Am, and Non-Contradiction ~ God is not a lair, Then perhaps Excluded middle is a reflection of God’s Holiness.

    God is Absolute, so must His character and attributes. One is ether Holy or not. The standard of Holiness is absolute, Sin is defined as missing the mark, or anything less than Holiness. A v ~A.

    Thoughts?

    Robert

    Like

    • hiram says:

      Thanks, Rob! I think you’re on to a good start. I’ve been spending time in Scripture and noticing the fact that morality is bound up with Logic. For instance, God will judge all “liars.” This implies that (i.)truth is eternal, (ii.)a contradiction of the truth is not neutral or acceptable before God but constitutes sin, and (iii.)there are no true contradictions (i.e. literal logical paradoxes).

      Your thoughts are very helpful, brother :)

      -h.

      Like

  2. calvinist4life says:

    As I started going through the list and reading, I came to “[iii.]Genesis 27:21: “Then Isaac said to Jacob, ‘Please come near, that I may feel you my son, to know whether you are really my son Esau or not.’” and thought, this could be used against evidentialism.

    Like

involve yourself

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s