Showing posts with label Logic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Logic. Show all posts

Monday, March 23, 2026

Anonymous Asks (398)

“Is Mary the mother of God?”

There is a kind of childish logical syllogism drawn by some in which the budding theologian goes from the true statements “Mary was the mother of Jesus” and “Jesus is God” to “Mary is the mother of God”. The final claim is simply untrue, not to mention blasphemous, depending on what those who say it or write it intend by it. The error is a decent example of the informal fallacy we call false equivalence, which involves consciously or unconsciously substituting one term for another in a syllogism where the terms are not precisely identical. Asparagus is a vegetable. That does not make it the only type of vegetable in existence.

Think of it this way: if Jesus is God, does that mean God is Jesus?

Monday, November 13, 2017

The Reset Button

Get behind me, Satan,” said the Lord Jesus to an entirely earnest Peter.

It sounds a little unkind, but Peter was in need of serious correction. In that moment he was thinking naturally rather than spiritually: all his standard defaults had kicked in. In the realm of ordinary human logic, death and suffering are things to be avoided under virtually every circumstance.

Peter could not conceive of any higher good such things might make possible.

Saturday, September 17, 2016

Quote of the Day (25)

Last Monday, Prime Minister Trudeau addressed Muslims in an Ottawa mosque. I almost managed to refrain from commenting, but here goes.

Never mind that the particular imam connected with that mosque happens to be a member of a group considered a terrorist organization. Never mind that the women in Trudeau’s entourage had their heads covered in deference to Islam in their own country; that’s all fine and to be expected from a Liberal government.

No, the real kicker was Trudeau’s subject: Canadian values.

Wednesday, June 04, 2014

Atheism and Logic

I’ve read numerous books on the subject of whether the Christian faith is “reasonable”.  Most of these were consumed as a young adult, when the question seemed more urgent and I was considerably less equipped to argue it.

While some books were better than others and all made some valid points (most if not all of which are now lost in the sands of time), I do not recall many staking out the intellectual Christian position as aggressively as John C. Wright does in his latest “Wright Perspective” column.

By aggressive, I don’t mean nasty or mean-spirited. But, Lewis and Chesterton aside, the more modern books seemed primarily concerned with mounting a satisfactory intellectual defence of Christianity from accusations of unreasonability, illogic and incoherence. They were, if not on the ropes sucking air, perhaps a little over-occupied with avoiding the knockout punch.

Wright, on the other hand, comes out swinging and keeps moving forward.