Thursday, November 29, 2012
reason vs revelation
Today in class I was very interested when we discussed reason and revelation. More precisely we discussed Athens and Jerusalem and wnat each of them symbolised. How is reason accurate without revelation. They are coexisting beings that support each other and are flawed when viewed separately. Without revelation, reason is chaotic and destructive toward all who posses it. An example of this is morals, without the revelation of what is right or wrong there is not a standard to which we must be held to. That quickly escalates into chaos, destruction, and pain. Also, revelation without reason is pointless. Reason helps us to interpret scripture and determine truths. Without reason, revelation is only words without a clear and consise meaning. Therefore they are misread and mis interpreted, leading to secular cults and wrong ideas about the scripture. Now while Philo has some things that i do not agree with, I believe he is right when he used reason and revelation as partners instead of enemies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I enjoyed this part of the discussion as well. I like what you're saying about reason and revelation supporting each other. Reason can't explain everything on its own, because some things don't follow our own reasoning. They must be explained through God's revelation. You also made a good point about reason helping us understand revelation. That may be the reason Philo used allegorical interpretation and reason in his explanations of the Scriptures.
ReplyDeleteWell, I agree partially with what you are saying. I think that they can exist dependently. At least, I think that athiests believe reason can exist without revelation. They would propose that
ReplyDeleteif it were absolutely true that without revelation, reason would cause society to be chaotic and destructive, then athiests would promote anarchy. There would be no order in athiestic society if were not for revelation. They would say that they do not follow biblical law, but instead they follow the law set up by society. However, the law set up by society is essentially based upon the law of the Scripture whether they are willing to agree upon it or not.
I think I would tend to say that the two go hand in hand in intended function, but can exist seperately. In the allegorical interpretation when Philo is speaking about prudence, he says "For what would have been the use of it, if there had been no reasoning powers in existence to recieve it, and to give impressions of its form?" I thought this was a very interesting statement when considering reason and revelation. Without the reasoning power with which to make recieve those things that God gives us, they can have no form or significance in our lives.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the grammar. Had to do this on my phone. the hotel wifi stopped working.
ReplyDeleteI believe that reason and revelation go together as well because reason without revelation from God usually leads to these primal feelings of only looking out for those that look out for you and basically live a selfish life and revelation without reason would be as you say the inability to interpret the scripture leading to chaos for some of the questionable decisions that God has made but ultimately were for good.
ReplyDeleteI believe that reason and revelation go together as well because reason without revelation from God usually leads to these primal feelings of only looking out for those that look out for you and basically live a selfish life and revelation without reason would be as you say the inability to interpret the scripture leading to chaos for some of the questionable decisions that God has made but ultimately were for good.
ReplyDelete