What I would like to do now is define the main points that I have tried to demonstrate in my posts on the "failure of Unbelief".
There are two options, ultimate reality is meaningful and rational or irrational and impersonal.
If the universe as a whole is meaningful and rational then there is a rational mind behind it who has given his creation an interpretation (God). This mind has created everything for a purpose, and everything relates to each other in a unified plan. Because this mind has created everything with a purpose he has by his creation given finite reality an interpretation. A tree is a tree because God created to be one and said it was a tree.
The problem with most of the history of thought is that they have excluded the existence of God’s interpretation. For them man is the first rational being who looks out into the world to interpret it. But if there is no ultimate interpretation to reality as a whole what is man to find in the way of knowledge or facts. The world outside for them is here by chance, impersonal and irrational.
What can man say rationally about the irrational? And how can we say that man’s thinking is even rational if man is a part of the whole. Cause then the irrational has produce the rational. How could we distinguish one from the other? How could we even understand ourselves in an irrational environment?
If there is to be objective knowledge and objective facts then there must be an interpretation to the whole of reality. We would call it divine revelation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment