# When paradox allowed / disallowed in a worldview?



## sotzo (Aug 29, 2007)

We recognize and live with paradox in our Christian worldview. Other worldviews have paradox that we often discount because they are non-Christian. 

When is paradox legit and when is it really an unacceptable contradiction?


----------



## Iconoclast (Aug 30, 2007)

Can you give an example of what you mean,specifically in reference to the christian worldview? I am not quite sure what you have in mind here


----------



## sotzo (Aug 30, 2007)

Iconoclast said:


> Can you give an example of what you mean,specifically in reference to the christian worldview? I am not quite sure what you have in mind here



Sure..one example would be that we hold to God being the creator of all things, but not guilty for the existence of evil.


----------



## javajedi (Aug 31, 2007)

sotzo said:


> We recognize and live with paradox in our Christian worldview. Other worldviews have paradox that we often discount because they are non-Christian.
> 
> When is paradox legit and when is it really an unacceptable contradiction?



Well, first, I think we need to agree on the defeinition of 'paradox'.

From Wiktionary the first 2 definitions read:


> 1. An apparently true statement that appears to lead to a contradiction or to circumstances that defy intuition.
> 
> Not having a fashion is a fashion; that's a paradox.
> 
> ...



The conflict comes from (2.), which I believe is wrong. A contradiction and a paradox are not the same. We need to use definition (1.) - an *apparent* contradiction. 

I think many assume def. (2.) and therefor, rightly, reject 'paradox'. Contradictions hold no place in a Christian worldview or belief. 

So, I believe true paradoxes [def. (1.)] are acceptable.

The issue is that we should only go as far as scripture allows. Like God creating all but not being the author of sin/evil. Or God being completely sovereign but Man also being responsible for our sin/actions.

Contradictions masquerading as paradox should be rejected.

Also, any one who says we should not bother trying to understand/define a paradox is also wrong, as that can lead to actually holding a contradiction since it is never examined closely.


----------



## javajedi (Aug 31, 2007)

Well, on further thought, the term 'mystery' should be part of this discussion. 

Paradoxes as 'apparent' contradictions often can be explained. Like, "he who loses his life will find it".

The examples I used of God's sovereignty might better be defined as mystery. I believe R. C. Sproul gets into these 3 words in the early part of "Chosen By God".

What I said about using 'paradox' carefully also applies to using 'mystery'.

I guess my main points are:
1) In order to discuss a topic like this we all need to be using the same definitions and have the same understanding of the terms/ideas being discussed.

2) We need to be very careful what we call a paradox or a mystery because we can easily be actually advocating a contradiction.


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Aug 31, 2007)

Sotzo, you may want to read [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Paradox-Christian-Theology-Paternoster-Theological/dp/1556352719/ref=sr_1_1/104-4750936-2567938?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1177934279&sr=1-1"]'Paradox in Christian Theology: An Analysis of Its Presence, Character, and Epistemic Status'[/ame] by James Anderson. It is next on my reading list.


----------



## BrianLanier (Aug 31, 2007)

caleb_woodrow said:


> Sotzo, you may want to read 'Paradox in Christian Theology: An Analysis of Its Presence, Character, and Epistemic Status' by James Anderson. It is next on my reading list.



Yes, definately read this. I've read most of it (reading too many things at once is my problem!) and it is very good. He also has some good discussion/interaction with Plantinga as well. This is especially helpful since James is coming from a Van Tillian (broadly) perspective--helps bring the two schools of thought together somewhat. Anyway, an enjoyable read.


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Aug 31, 2007)

BrianLanier said:


> (reading too many things at once is my problem!)


----------



## caddy (Aug 31, 2007)

Not sure, but I do know that Chesterton was deemed a masterful user of Paradox to explain certain aspects of the Christian faith.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/augustweb-only/8-27-52.0.html

http://www.subverbis.com/essays/chestertonnietzsche.rtf

http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/an...iles/antithesis/v1n6/ant_v1n6_Chesterton.html

http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/april_2003/is_common.htm

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2002ii/townsend.pdf

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/september4/5.78.html



C. S. Lewis was once labeled a “paradox-monger.”
12 But GKC
(before Lewis) was the acknowledged prince of paradox. Even the later
famed mystery writer Dick Francis commented obliquely: “Horses
appear to be as full of paradoxes as G. K. Chesterton.”13 An example of
GKC’s paradox-making is: “Its faith was doubtful, but its doubt was
faithful.”14 Elsewhere he noted that skepticism “implies a dogma of​hopelessness and definite belief in unbelief.”15


The Paradoxical Nature of Hatred
It is a great mistake to suppose that love unites and unifies men. Love diversifies them, because love is directed towards individuality. The thing that really unites men and makes them like to each other is hatred.

The more alike the enemy becomes, the more different he will appear.

G. K. Chesterton​


----------



## sotzo (Sep 1, 2007)

caleb_woodrow said:


> Sotzo, you may want to read 'Paradox in Christian Theology: An Analysis of Its Presence, Character, and Epistemic Status' by James Anderson. It is next on my reading list.



Caleb...many, many thanks for this reference!


----------

