You are on page 1of 7

LOGICAL THOELOGY: A NEW DIRECTION FOR THEOLOGY

In this chapter, I am going to ta! to "o# a$o#t something that co#% $e


consi%ere% as ne&' I sa" it is ne& $eca#se it presents a ne& (ie& o) something
o%' O) co#rse, the o% thing that I*m re)erring to is +Theoog"+' Theoog", in m"
#n%erstan%ing, has a&a"s $een aro#n%' E(er since man starte% &on%ering at
the mar(e o) the ,ni(erse, Go% &as the ans&er' I) not Go%, then the go%s' From
that &e %eri(e +Theoog"+'
Et"moogica", Theoog" comes )rom t&o Gree! &or%s: +Theos+ an% +Logos+'
The &or% +Theos+ means +Deit"+ or +Go%+ or +Di(init"+, +Logos+ means +-t#%"+,
+-cience+ or +.er$+' From that, &e %e%#ce that Theoog" is the -t#%"/-cience o)
Go%' Ergo, the 0#estion that I*m a$o#t to as!: Is it )air to approach Theoog"
$ase% on )aith aone1 2" ans&er to that is an o$(io#s +No+' I sa" no $eca#se
one cannot approach an" science &ith on" )ait as a $asis' The CT2,, &hich I
thin! presents a (er" -e)3containe% (ie& o) the ,ni(erse, states $asica" the
same thing' Not in these &or%s, o) co#rse, $#t the same I%ea' It goes &itho#t
mention that the CT2, )its per)ect" &ithin the parameters o) the -4L' In terms
o) e5poration, I ha% to &or! some o) the parameters m"se) 6especia" $eca#se
e(en $e)ore I &as a&are o) the CT2, these pro$ems &ere area%" $een p#t to
the attention o) the -4L7' I aso ho% that, i) in an"&a" some concept o) the -4L
&o#% appear to %i))er )rom that &hich that can $e )o#n% in the CT2,, it is
$eca#se o) a Ling#istic pro$em an% not a concept#a one'
As I ha(e arg#e% o(er an% o(er again thro#gho#t this $oo!, Reait" is Logica"
Consistent' What that sa"s is that e(er"thing &ithin Reait", in or%er to $e rea
has to $e Logica' I) not Logica, then Not e5ist' -impe as that' No&, &hen &e
oo! at )aith, &e )in% that it is not a&a"s consistent &ith Logic' This impies that
most o) &hat &e $eie(e might, in )act, not $e tr#e or rea' This, o) co#rse, is
something that most reigio#s peope &on*t accept' Again, this is $eca#se reigion
reies on )aith' Theoog" &ithin reigio#s circe starts &ith one $ig ass#mption:
There is a Go%' From that e(er" Theoogica %octrines come' No&, ho& can an"
%octrine $e right i) the (er" )irst ass#mption #pon &hich the %octrine is $ase%
might not $e1 I mean, sometimes e(i%ence can ea% to the &rong %irection' -o,
&hat %oes that sa" a$o#t )aith aone1
In this chapter, I am going to ta! a$o#t Logica Theoog"333that is a Theoog"
$ase% on Logic333an% the concepts that this Theoog" ho%s to $e tr#e'
First, et me sa" that the terms &as )irst #se% in the CT2, paper333a %eri(ation o)
the CT2,, I might sa"' What I mean $" that is not that Logica Theoog" is a
%esign o) the CT2,8 not at a' In )act, the -4L has $een )irting &ith that I%ea )or
0#ite some time no&' It 9#st %i%n*t ha(e a term )or it "et' The CT2,, on the other
han%, %i% not pa" artist' It &ent straight to the point $" re)erring to the concept as
&hat it is: +Logica+' In %oing so, it has aso gi(en the -4L something to hang on
to &hen re)erring to Theoog" in its #n#s#a )ashion' Logica Theoog" is that
&hich the -4L &o#% re)er to as the +Tr#e Theoog"+' Witho#t it, there*s no
Theoog"' For, &hat goo% is it to st#%" something, i) the e5istence o) that
something aone is $ase% on Faith 6an% on" )aith71 It &o#% appear that that
something might not e(en e5ist, an% then one is st#%"ing it1:1 What %oes that
sa" a$o#t Faith aone1
-ome o) the concepts ta! a$o#t here in this chapter, I ha(e area%" ta!e% a$o#t
in the chapters that prece%e% this one, $#t in s#ch a %etaie% &a"' In this one, I
&i tr" to $e a itte more tho#ro#h' Nee%ess to sa" that in Logica Theoog" there
is no ass#mption o) Go%*s e5istence' One has to start )rom scratch8 ta!ing )or
acco#nt the on" thing that can $e !no& )or s#re 6that is the )act that there is a
Reait"7 an% st#%"ing it as a &hoe' I) there is a Go%, s#ch a Go% &o#% re(ea
himse) consistent &ith Reait"' Logica Consistenc" is an aspect o) Reait" an% i)
Go% is rea333that is i) Go% is part o) Reait"333Go% has to $e Logica" Consistent'
;#t, ne(ertheess, $e)ore &e get into the Logica si%e o) Go%, &h" %on*t &e to#ch
the iogica )irst1
I %on*t &ant an"$o%" to thin! that I*m $eing against reigion or an"thing here' I
!eep on sa"ing that $eca#se I #n%erstan% that m" &a" o) pro(i%ing these
in)ormation might ea(e someone thin!ing, +We, this g#" has a $ig pro$em &ith
reigion+333&hich, I might sa", &o#%n*t $e so )ar )rom the tr#th &hen "o# thin!
a$o#t it' I %o ha(e a pro$em &ith reigion' I 9#st can*t get m" hea% aro#n% the )act
that in an" reigio#s circe "o#*% go, it &o#% seem i!e Logic is not a part o)
Reait"8 no one rea" ao&s "o# to thin! )ree"' The pro$em, as I !eep on
mentioning, is the )act that a &ithin reigion is )aith3$ase%' -o, o) co#rse, one
sho#% not e5pect to )in% Logic in a )aith3$ase% s"stem' In )act, one sho#% ne(er
e5pect to )in% Logic333tr#e Logic333in an" s"stem that is )aith3$ase%' -#ch
e5pectation on" ea% to %isappointment'
No&, et*s get to the iogica aspect o) Go% no&'
In ass#ming the e5istence o) Go%, the t"pe o) Theoog" that &e*re #se to aso
ass#me a co#pe o) characteristics that the" attri$#te to Go%' As an e5ampe,
The" sa" that Go% is Omnipresent, Omniscient, an% Omnipotent' These are the
three characteristics that the" !eep on attri$#ting to Go% name" !no&n as:
Omnipresence, Omniscience, an% Omnipotence' ;#t, the thing is, I %on*t thin!
that an"one has rea" ta!en the time to thin! a$o#t &hat that impies' An o$(io#s
e5ampe that I !eep on ta!ing is the )act that in this ine o) thin!ing, one ass#me
that Go% is in Hea(en' Yet, e(en a)ter ass#ming s#ch a thing 6in a ittera &a", I
might a%%7, one sti insist on accepting Omnipresence as one o) the
Characteristics o) Go%' I, there)ore, &on%er i) peope act#a" ta!e the time to
thin! a$o#t their #se o) &or%s' In )act, i) I am to #n%erstan%, the" %on*t' Who
&o#% &ith a sincerit" o) heart 6i) not o#t o) )anatism7 sa" that Go% is in Hea(en,
an% "et, sti promoting the e5istence o) the same Go% as $eing Omnipresent'
Omnipresence, i) I might sa", means $eing e(er"&here at the same time' No&
pease, entertain me &ith an ans&er to that 0#estion: Ho& can someone $e
e(er"&here an% "et $e in one partic#ar point in space' ;eing e(er"&here impies
not $eing in a partic#ar point in space' That is $eca#se one is $eing in a point in
space at the same time' -o, &ith a respect to ogic, that &o#% aso imp" that
one 6re)erring to the one &ho is Omnipresent7 cannot $e in a partic#ar point in
space'
Let me entertain "o# &ith a simpe I%ea no&' ;eing in a partic#ar point in space
impies that one is not in the an" other points in space333that is to sa" that &hen
one is stan%ing +here+, one is on" +here+ an% not +there+' ;#t apparent", peope
%on*t act#a" thin! a$o#t that in reigio#s circes' The"*% pre)er to go &ith
&hate(er the reigion caims to $eie(e in regar%ess o) &hat Logic &o#%
s#ggest' This is &here Logica Theoog" %emar!s itse) )rom an" other )orm o)
Theoog"' This is in this respect that &e %eem it +The tr#e Theoog"+'
Another thing that &e nee% to oo! at an% consi%er is the )act that Go% is !no&n
to $e Omnipotent' This impies that Go% is capa$e o) %oing e(er"thing' ;#t, this
aso impies that Go% is %oing something' Doing something, I might sa", as to %o
&ith $eing in time' In or%er )or someone to %o something, that someone has to $e
in time' What %oes that mean rea"1
I am tr"ing to present this in the most simpe term possi$e'
What I mean is that %oing has to %o &ith action, an% action re0#ires time' There
can*t $e an" action in the a$sence o) Time' Yet, the same peope &ho caim that
Go% is Omnipotent aso ho% that Go% is $e"on% Time' The" caim that Go% is
a$o(e time an% "et !eep on insisting that this same Go% is Omnipotent' Another
thing that apparent" their Theoog" %oes not consi%er' An% in )ace o) that, one
has to &on%er &hether it is $" ignorance or some nat#ra e(i1 I &o#% pre)er to
go &ith the (ersion that sa"s ignorance, persona", $#t I ha(e $een &rong
$e)ore'':
It &o#% appear that the on" aspect o) Di(init" that seems to ma!e sense is the
Omniscience o) Go%' Then again, this might $e &rong too' O) co#rse Go% !n&os
e(er"thing there is to !no&8 there is nothing $#t Go%'
No&, ho& %o &e get to the i%ea o) Go%1 The i%ea is simpe rea"' A itte
o$ser(ation o) ho& Reait" &or!s sho&s that there is a certain La& &ithin it that
&e ha(e come to ca +Ca#sait"+' This is the a& o) +Ca#se+ an% +E))ect+' It states
that &hene(er there is an e))ect, there is aso a ca#se8 &hene(er there is a
ca#se, there is aso an e))ect' From e))ect to ca#se an% e))ect to ca#se &e
%e%#ce a )irst ca#se, +Go%+' -#ch a )irst ca#se, in or%er to $e the ca#se o)
Reait" has to $e o#tsi%e o) it' Yet, this is an imposs$iit"' For ho& can an"thing
$e o#tsi%e o) Reait" &hen Reait" is s#ppose% to $e a that is Rea1 This &o#%
impp" that this )irst ca#se 6in or%er to $e the ca#se o) Reait"7 has to $e rea'
;#t, i) it is rea eno#gh to in)#ece Reait" 6or in this case, Ca#se it7, $" %e)inition,
it has to $e part o) it' This is a contra%iction'
-o, ho& %o &e reso(e this1
-cience, as it seems presents something that %i))ers )rom Logic in so man"
e(es' It presents Reait" as $eing aca#sa' As an e5ampe, -cience s#ggest that
Reait" e5ist $" acci%ent33meaning &itho#t a %e)initi(e ca#se' This, as I 9#st sai%,
is a )orm !no&n as Aca#sait"' ;#t, &hat*s the point o) a Reait" r#n $"
+Ca#sait"+ $eing +Aca#sa+1 2" ans&er is none &hatsoe(er' -o, Reait" cannot
$e Aca#sa' It has to $e Ca#sa' ;#t ca#sa is not necessari" an option %#e to
the contra%iction it pro(i%es' In )act, $oth options seem to $e contra%icti(e'
Ca#sait" seems to $e contra%icti(e' Aca#sait" seems to $e contra%icti(e' This
is a para%o5, o$(io#s"8 a itte $it i!e: +This statement is )ase+ is tr#e' The on"
ans&er to s#ch a para%o5 is -e)3re)erence' In )act, the para%o5 itse) is a -e)3
re)erence'
I mention that $eca#se o) a paper &ritten $" Christopher 2ichae Langan 6the
creator o) the CT2,7 &ith the tite +-e)3re)erence'''+
In this paper, Christopher Langan re)ers to this !in% o) para%o5es as e5isting in
t&o e(es' Remem$er that in terms o) the CT2, 6an% sha I aso mention the
-4L7 e(er"thing can $e re%#ce as Lang#age' From that, 2r' Langan sa"s that
&e can aso %e%#ce the t&o e(es o) s#ch para%o5: Lang#age an% a
2etaang#age' Nee%ess to no& sa" that a 2etaang#age is a Lang#age a$o#t a
Lang#age' In reation to this para%o5 +This statement is )ase+ is the ang#age,
an% +is tr#e+ is the 2etaang#age' Ergo, &e ha(e a statement, an% a statement
a$o#t a statement'
;#t, ho& can this a $e appie% to Reait" an% the pro$em o) Ca#sait"1
It &o#% appear that i) Reait" is -e)3re)erentia, its ca#sation has to $e -e)3
Ca#sation' We sa" that Reait" is -e)3re)erentia $eca#se there is nothing
o#tsi%e o) Reait" to &hich it can $e re)ere%' An" re)erence o) Reait", there)ore,
has to $e -e)3re)erence' This is 0#ite o$(io#s act#a"' ;#t sa%", peope act#a"
miss that !in% o) o$(io#s' That is either $" ignorance 6as I i!e to sa"7 or $"
nat#ra e(i'
Ass#ming it is $" ignorance o) co#rse, "o#*% e5pect them to act#a" &ant to
!n&o an% ,n%erstan%' Then again, ho& co#% them &hen the (er" orgina<ation
the" tr#st %oesn*t ao& them to as! too m#ch 0#estions333especia" the !in% o)
0#estions that can $e h#rt)# to s#ch orgina<ation' ;#t, et*s not ose the 0#estion
o) Reait" o) sight'
It &o#% appear that Reait" &o#% $e its o&n ca#se' In )act, &e !no& o) another
)orm o) e5istence that is -e)3ca#se%: Go%'
Act#a", one %oesn*t e(en nee% to %o a that menta g"mnastic in or%er to
%e%#ce that Go% is simiar to Reait"' In )act, I i!e to ca that !in% o) menta
g"mnastic +2enta 2ast#r$ation+'The simpest &a" to %o that is $" %etermining
that Reait" is -e)3ca#se%' Once that is !no&n, the rest sho#% $e rea" eas" to
%e%#ce' I) Reait" is -e)3ca#se%, that impies that Reait" is its o&n )irst ca#se'
An% ha(en*t &e area%" %etermine% that Go% is the )irst ca#se1 Isn*t it &hat Go%
is $" %e)inition1 That ma!es sense, since Reait" e5ist e(er"&here'
Connecting the %ots has ne(er $een so m#ch )#n'
F#nn" eno#gh, in the =#%eo3Christianit" reigio#s s"stem, Go% himse) re(eas
himse) as Reait": +I am that I am+' Ho&e(er, it &o#% seem that the" compete"
r#e o#t the intent $ehin% this sentence, simp" ass#ming that Go% is Eterna'
This is not compete" o#t o) s"nc &ith the e5act meaning o) Go%*s ans&er' I)
an"thing, it co#% $e consi%ere% as one aspect o) s#ch ans&er' Go% is a 2#ti3
e(e entit"' Atho#gh this seems to $e a (er" $ig ass#mption, et me ass#re "o#
that it isn*t' In )act, %#e to the position o) this $oo! 6an% especia" this chapter7, it
&o#% $e (er" h"pocritica to $ase% s#ch statement mere" on an ass#mption or
)aith' I &i $e e5paining that a itte $it ater' Right no&, Go%*s ans&er is the
interest'
The reason &h" Go% ha% to come #p &ith s#ch ans&er is the most interesting
aspect o) the con(ersation, i) "o# as! me' When 2oses as!e% Go% a$o#t his
name, Go%*s ans&er &as +I am that I am+' This impies that Go% cannot $e
compare% to an"thing ese' There is nothing &it &hich "o# can compare me' I
9#st am: Isn*t it &hat the Apha an% the Omega is s#ppose% to $e1 I mean, &hat
can e5ist o#tsi%e o) the ;eginning an% the En%1 These, o) co#rse, are 0#estions
that most reigio#s peope %on*t ta!e the time to as!' I &on%er &h":1: I) on"
reigion ao&e% its mem$ers to as! 0#estion333e(en &hen these 0#estions &o#%
seem to %ismem$er their %octrines 6especia" &hen these 0#estions seem to
%ismem$er their %octrines7'
Another thing that I nee% to mention 6an% perhaps, I sho#% ha(e mentione% that
since the opening o) this chapter7 is that %#e to the nat#re o) Logica Theoog"333
that is $eca#se Logica Theoog" is r#n $" Logic333man" %i))erent %iscipines
6&hich can $e consi%ere% as e5tension o) Logic7 can $e #se%' As an e5ampe, I
might ta! a$o#t Ling#istic 4ro)iing' This is in reation to the &riters &ithin the
man" %i))erent Theoogies that e5ist' Let me sho& "o# &hat I*m ta!ing a$o#t'
+In the ;eginning Go% create% the Hea(en an% the Earth+' This is the (er" )irst
sentence in the ;i$e &hich state that Go% create% e(er"thing' No&, in st#%"ing
the presentation o) the te5t, or sho#% I sa",in st#%"ing the te5t itse), one is aso
earning a$o#t the &riter333&hich in this case is 2oses'
One thing that &e earn a$o#t 2oses is that he &as con)i%ent that there is a Go%'
We can $e s#re that 2oses ha% no %o#$t a$o#t the e5istence o) Go%' Another
thing to notice is that 2oses &as aso con)i%ent that there &as a ;eginning' To
him it &asn*t a 0#estion o) &hether or not there &as a $eginning' To 2oses, it
&as a )act, an% Go% &as the ca#se o) that ;eginning' This can $e $ro!en %o&n
this &a":
-tep >: There &as a ;eginning
-tep ?: There is a Go%
-tep @: Go% &as the ca#se o) the ;eginning
No&, that ma!es per)ect sense since &e area%" !no& &hat 2oses tho#ght o)
that Go%8 +I am that I am+' From that &e can %e%#ce that Go% )or 2oses &as the
same as Reait"' In s#ch, Go% &as a )act' He ha% tangi$e proo) )or the e5istence
o) Go%'
No& "o# see ho& in part ho& Ling#istic 4ro)iing can sho& #s some aspect o)
someone*s personait", &hich in ret#rn sho&s #s ho& that person sa& Go%' Who
&o#% ha(e tho#ght that 2oses (ie& o) Go% &as simiar to that &hich presente%
in Logica Theoog"1
I &i $e ta!ing more a$o#t Ling#istic 4ro)iing in the coming chapters' In )act,
the" &i $e a chapter 9#st )or that s#$9ect' O) co#rse, I &i aso $e presenting
other %iscipine that can $e #se% as e5tension o) Logica Theoog" in st#%"ing the
%i))erent man" script#res o) the %i))erent man" reigions' For no&, 9#st sit $ac!
an% en9o" the ri%e that*s $eing o))ere% to "o# &ithin these pages' There are man"
man" more things to sa" a$o#t Logica Theoog"' Hope "o#*re rea%" )or the ri%e'
In or%er to rea" #n%erstan% Logica Theoog", one has to st#%" the str#ct#re o)
Logic, an% to reate that str#ct#re 6so to spea!7 &ith Theoog"' As I thin! I*(e sai%
$e)ore, the term Logica Theoog" &as pinne% $" Christopher 2ichae Langan in
his CT2, paper' An% since, &e a%(ocate the )act that Go% sho#% not $e a
matter o) $eie) aone, it*s on" )air to sa" that the CT2, %i% not ma!e that same
mista!e'
The 4#rpose o) the CT2, is to %escri$e the ,ni(erse' In %oing so, it appears
that there is a Go%: +GOD+ 6Go$a Or%er" De)inor7' -#ch Go% is a part o), an% is
$eing %istri$#te% o(er Reait" as &hoe'-ince the CT2, ea%s to Go%, &e
%e%#ce Theoog"' An% since the Go% o) the CT2, is not )aith3$ase% $#t Logica"
consistent, &e propose or %eri(e a ne& !in% o) Theoog"' -#ch Theoog" &e ca:
Logica Theoog"'
This, perhaps, is the $est &a" I co#% s#mme% Logica Theoog" &itho#t getting
into too m#ch technicait"' I co#%, o) co#rse, come #p &ith interesting stories33
aegories, perhaps333that &o#% e5pain it cear", $#t I &o#% ha(e $een %oing
e5act" &hat has gotten so man" into $eie(ing the aegor" instea% o) that &hich
the aegor" stan%s )or' I) that isn*t at "o#r i!ing, I am in)inite" sorr" )or
%isappointing:'''No'''No that*s not tr#e' I am, in )act, compete" a&are o) the
sacri)ice that &as to $e %one 6i) "o# can ca that a sacri)ice7 in or%er to !eep
e(er"$o%" on trac!' I) Logica Theoog" is to $e Logica, it has to remo(e itse)
)rom an"thing that might $e )aith3$ase% on"' ;" that, I mean an"thing that might
s#ggest a )aith3$ase% on" concept' That, o) co#rse, inc#%es stories333aegories I
mean333that might $e ta!en to $e ittera'
No&, et*s get a oo! at &hat Logic is s#ppose% to $e' In the most simpest terms
possi$e, Logic ta!es the )orm o): I) A then ;, there)ore C' An" Logica s"stem
has to $e presente% in s#ch a )orm8 Logica Theoog" is no e5ception' I) an"thing,
this )orm is at te core o) Logica Theoog"' As an e5ampe, &e sa" that Go% is the
same as Reait" $" %e)inition' That is $eca#se, i) A is the %e)inition o) Reait", an%
; the %e)inition o) Go%, &hene(er A an% ; are e0#a, there)ore C is the )act that
Go% an% Reait" are the same' Logic sho#%n*t $e an"thing ess' An" Theoog"
that %oes not ta!e the )orm o) +I) A then ;, there)ore C+ is not Logica"
Consistent'
Let me entertain "o# a itte $it $" re)erring "o# to a $oo! that sho&s "o# ho&
Logica" Iterate some peope are an% the pace o) ogic in o#r e(er"%a" Li)e' I
&ant to re)er "o# to a $oo! &ritten $" 2ari"n .os -a(ant' The $oo! has )or tite:
+The 4o&er o) Logica Thin!ing+' In this $oo! &riten in the most simpest )orm,
"o# &i )in% concepts that &i hep "o# impro(e "o#r Logica reasoning an%
$ecome a $etter Logician'
In terms o) Logica Theoog", I can ass#re "o# that once "o# $ecome a goo%
Logician, "o# &i $e tooe% &ith (a#a$e concepts )or an a%e0#ate Theoog"'
Ha(ing p#t "o# into this #ncom)orta$e position o) istening to me or, in this case,
rea%ing this $oo! e5paining Logica Theoog" in its most simpest terms, I hope
that, as I ha(e promise% in the $eginning o) this chapter, the ri%e &as not on"
&orth it, $#t &as pro%#cti(e an% en9o"a$e' I) s#ch a )it &as accompishe%, I ha(e
no one to than! $#t Yo# &ho ha(e ma%e it possi$e' In s#ch, I than! "o#: