Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 25, 2006 22:13:00 GMT -5
I've been reading some Cornelius Van Til on Christian apologetics and it has sparked a few different thoughts and questions.
Van Til, a reformed calvinist, gets into explaining the Christian metaphysical, epistomological, and ethical beliefs.
Regarding epistomology, theory of knowledge, he explains how all truth comes from God - the fear of the Lord is the BEGINNING of knowledge/wisdom. Truth is not an abstract entity apart from God but rather comes only from God, is found in God, and is God Himself, "I am...the truth". God is not subjected to the truth but rather truth is subjected to God. So truth comes from God and is known only through divine revelation, the revealing of truth by God. No truth can be known apart from God because God is truth. As Augustine said, we believe in order to know rather then know in order to believe.
My question however is not so much partaining to epistomology as much as it is to ethics.
The question that has been asked for many years, "Is it wrong because God says it or does God say it because it's wrong?" Basicly, is morality an abstract entity that exists apart from God? Is God subjected to morality or is morality subjected to God?
I suppose I'd say the answer to the age old question is "both". It's wrong because God says it is wrong as well as God says it's wrong because sin is already contrary to His character.
I heard Greg Bahnsen, a sort of disciple of Van Til, describe ethics as God's character. That all morality comes from God's never changing character and cannot exists apart from God's never changing character. We know that sin is transgression of God's commands. However are all of God's commands a direct reflection of God's character, therefore His character being the foundation of all ethics? So a man is sinful when he deviates from God's character and a man is holy when he conforms to God's character.
But if morality is subjected to God's never changing character rather then God's character being subjected to morality, then God cannot sin. Even if God changed His character (though His character is never changing) then all that means is that morality would change but still would not mean that God could sin.
If morality comes from God's character it would be that God dictates morality rather then morality dictating God. It would be that God cannot, not merely would not, sin because morality is based and comes from God's character which is never changing, for He is the same yesturday, today, and forever. So God could not and would not break any of His previous commandments because His character is never changing from which all of His commands come from.
Is morality a seperate entity apart from God or is morality based on the character of God? Is God subjected to morality or is morality subjected to God? Is God the dictator of morality or is morality the dictator of God?
Van Til, a reformed calvinist, gets into explaining the Christian metaphysical, epistomological, and ethical beliefs.
Regarding epistomology, theory of knowledge, he explains how all truth comes from God - the fear of the Lord is the BEGINNING of knowledge/wisdom. Truth is not an abstract entity apart from God but rather comes only from God, is found in God, and is God Himself, "I am...the truth". God is not subjected to the truth but rather truth is subjected to God. So truth comes from God and is known only through divine revelation, the revealing of truth by God. No truth can be known apart from God because God is truth. As Augustine said, we believe in order to know rather then know in order to believe.
My question however is not so much partaining to epistomology as much as it is to ethics.
The question that has been asked for many years, "Is it wrong because God says it or does God say it because it's wrong?" Basicly, is morality an abstract entity that exists apart from God? Is God subjected to morality or is morality subjected to God?
I suppose I'd say the answer to the age old question is "both". It's wrong because God says it is wrong as well as God says it's wrong because sin is already contrary to His character.
I heard Greg Bahnsen, a sort of disciple of Van Til, describe ethics as God's character. That all morality comes from God's never changing character and cannot exists apart from God's never changing character. We know that sin is transgression of God's commands. However are all of God's commands a direct reflection of God's character, therefore His character being the foundation of all ethics? So a man is sinful when he deviates from God's character and a man is holy when he conforms to God's character.
But if morality is subjected to God's never changing character rather then God's character being subjected to morality, then God cannot sin. Even if God changed His character (though His character is never changing) then all that means is that morality would change but still would not mean that God could sin.
If morality comes from God's character it would be that God dictates morality rather then morality dictating God. It would be that God cannot, not merely would not, sin because morality is based and comes from God's character which is never changing, for He is the same yesturday, today, and forever. So God could not and would not break any of His previous commandments because His character is never changing from which all of His commands come from.
Is morality a seperate entity apart from God or is morality based on the character of God? Is God subjected to morality or is morality subjected to God? Is God the dictator of morality or is morality the dictator of God?