Beyond the Syllogism: Proper Contextual Interpretation–5
Syllogisms assume a Deductive writing of the Bible. There are certainly elements of argumentation in the Biblical text. One cannot deny that logic is throughout the Bible, but the problem with a syllogism is the assumption that God wrote in a deductive form. The Bible is told more by stories than through argument. To force the Bible into a syllogistic form is to rearrange to divine text. One should not force the text into an alien model of reasoning unless the text was previously in that form. To lift the text from the natural flow is to be unfaithful with the meta-narrative. A story was never intended to be pushed into a syllogism as a syllogism was never intended to tell a story. When the text is lifted for the original context, there is a natural change in the scripture. The words are the same, but the meanings change because of the lack of context to interpret them. Creating a syllogism from the wrong text is not being honest with the Bible. It is like a picture in changed lighting. With one shade of lighting certain colors will standout but with another lighting scheme, other colors will become prominent. The Bible verses function in the same matter.
A syllogism is not inherently evil, but can cause scripture to be abused. In some cases the syllogism maybe an aid to proper interpretation, but in other causes the logical form can cause unfaithful understandings of the text. The syllogism can be a tool, but must be used correctly.
Related posts:
- Beyond the Syllogism: Proper Contextual Interpretation
- Beyond the Syllogism: Proper Contextual Interpretation–3
- Beyond the Syllogism: Proper Contextual Interpretation–2
- Beyond the Syllogism: Proper Contextual Interpretation–4
- You Find What You Want
About The Author
Now that the series is completed, I would love some interaction concerning the points or the position. Does anyone have any thoughts? What did I miss?
reading with interest bro ….
Matthew,
There is so much in this small article that needs to be heard loud and clear by many Christians, both in and out of the CoC.
“To force the Bible into a syllogistic form is to rearrange to divine text.”
“To lift the text from the natural flow is to be unfaithful with the meta-narrative. A story was never intended to be pushed into a syllogism as a syllogism was never intended to tell a story. When the text is lifted for the original context, there is a natural change in the scripture. The words are the same, but the meanings change because of the lack of context to interpret them.”
Those are both very well written statements. They properly state the problem with the typical approach to biblical interpretation found so prevelant at least in North American Christianity.
Grace and peace,
Rex
Thank you Rex. I was waiting for your thoughts on this too. You are in my prayers as well these days. Hope all is well.
i think you’re basically right, although i’m not sure about something. take your comments about love and compassion, etc. being beyond the category of logic. Suppose a person gave an interpretation syllogistic in nature which you found to be incompatible with things like love, compassion, etc.
1. How would you critique that interpretation without having some rational (or dare i say, *logical*) understanding of what love and compassion imply?
2. What if love and compassion don’t imply what you think they do, but instead this passage and interpretation offers something that challenges your view of love and compassion? In other words, what if this interpretation is *not* incompatible with love and compassion, it’s merely incompatible with *your view* of love and compassion? [This is basically the problem of the criterion--how do i know which is to be treated as the standard which decides the case?]
Love is logical. Good point about allowing human standards of love to judge a situation.