Responding to:
"You're just using western logic"
To understand this challenge we need some background in logic. Some people draw a distinction between what they call Western logic and Eastern logic. Western logic is based on a few laws of logic. Just as there are physical laws that control the physical universe, there are laws of logic that control the way all people think, communicate and relate to one another. All mentally normal humans use these because that is one of the characteristics that distinguish us from all the other animals.
One law of logic is called the Law of Non-contradiction. In a formal way, it states that "A can not be both A and not A at the same time, in the same place and in the same way." For example, "It can not be both raining and not raining at the same time, in the same place and in the same way."
Another example could be stated, "You can not be both wearing clothes and not wearing clothes at the same time, in the same place and in the same way." A well-known gullible emperor once learned this law of logic the hard way. Notice the emphasis in both of these examples on the use of the words "both" and "and". Something can not be "both" this "and"that. We'll come back to this in a moment.
Another law of logic is similar and is called the Law of Excluded Middle. In an informal way it states that either something is either A or not A. For example, "It is either raining or not raining;" or, "You are either wearing clothes or not wearing clothes." Some refer to this as "either/or" logic.
When either one of these laws of logic is broken we call it a contradiction. Someone would be contradicting himself if he said it was both raining and not raining at the same time, in the same place and in the same way.
In contrast, it is often said that Eastern religions and philosophies sometimes teach that reality itself contains contradictions. As a result, there can be great contradictions in what the teacher himself teaches, and there can be great contradictions between what different teachers teach. Their teachers say that the only way you can find the Ultimate reality is by putting aside the constraints of thinking in terms of either/or. Instead, we must embrace the contradiction break the laws of logic and believe that something can be both this and that at the same time, place and way.
Here is the problem: one must use "Western logic" to reject Christianity and accept "Eastern logic."
I was touring an ancient Native American sacred site in Arizona a few years ago. The tour guide (who was not Native American) began to extol the irrational mysticism of the Native American, as well as Eastern religions. He maintained that in order to experience the divine we have to not use Western logic but rather empty our minds and experience it without thinking about it. True knowledge of the Ultimate reality can only be obtained through nonrational means because Ultimate Reality is itself nonrational. I asked him, "When it is over, how do you know that you really experienced the divine?" He insisted, "You just know." With that he began whipping up support from the other people in the tour group, all of which were sympathetic. This effectively excluded me from further conversation since they had already made up their minds. I talked a little further with one of the people in the group at a different time. Finally, it came down to him angrily saying, "I just can't accept a religion like Christianity because it is intolerant of other religions! It can't be right!"
You see, what it boiled down to was that he knew Christianity is a distinctively different worldview that can not be reconciled with Native American and Eastern religions. But notice, he had to use Western logic to reject Christianity! He believed that the either/or kind of logic was not sufficient to obtain knowledge of the Ultimate Reality, but he had to use either/or logic to choose between the two worldviews. He subconsciously thought, "Either Christianity is true or the Eastern religions are true. They can't both be true.">/p>
When it comes down to actually thinking about religious truth, everyone, everywhere believes that truth can be known and uses universal either/or logic to attempt to know it and persuade others he or she is right. This is because universal logic corresponds to reality and reality is the same everywhere.
Let's join a hypothetical dialog in progress which can bring out the issues more clearly:
Challenger: "You're just using Western logic."
Responder: "What is your point?"
Challenger: "My point is that we can't use Western logic to understand the Ultimate Reality because it restricts our thinking. Eastern religions accept contradictions in trying to explain what the Ultimate Reality is like."
Responder: "Can you define and describe what you mean by 'Western logic'?"
Challenger: "In Western logic something is either true or not true. In Eastern logic two things can both be true even if they contradict each other."
Responder: "Are you saying we can only use the Eastern way of thinking when it comes to the Ultimate Questions of Life because the answers one gets when using Western logic contradict the answers from Eastern thought?"
Challenger: "Yes."
Responder: "So it turns out that you too are using Western logic. In fact, you are using Western logic to attempt to rule out using Western logic. So you can't escape having to use Western logic to think and talk about Ultimate Reality and Ultimate Truth. You see, logic is neither Western nor Eastern but universal. Everyone everywhere uses the same universal logic when trying to determine the truth, even religious truth. This is the only logic that corresponds to reality."
Most of the people you will hear claiming that you can't use Western logic to discover spiritual truths probably haven't actually read the sacred writings of Eastern religions. Many were written with the same kind of universal logic this challenger rejects as Western logic. Eastern religions are a blending of many different religious traditions around some central tenets. Many of the contradictions are simply different opinions by different teachers in those various traditions. It is interesting to note that many of the same people who think it is fine for Eastern religious teachers to teach things that are contradictory within their own teachings and between each other say, "I can't believe the Bible is God's revelation to man because of all the contradictions." Now that's a contradiction!
Since Eastern religions often state their teachings in contradictory and ambiguous ways we are told that you need a special guru or priest to interpret them. But that presupposes there is a correct interpretation that you need to get from the guru or priest. By stark contrast, when you read the words of Jesus they are so clear anyone can understand them.
Even more importantly, Jesus is the embodiment of the Ultimate source of logical reasoning. The apostle John begins his gospel with, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." The Greek word that is translated into "Word" is "Logos." All the words that end in "ology" use it. For example, biology is the logical reasoning or study of life. Theology is logical reasoning about God. This Logos was the "world-reason" which sustains and permeates the cosmos. The Jews John was addressing his Gospel to had been heavily influenced by Greek philosophy (Hellenists) and believed this Logos worked spiritually in the world but not physically. John was claiming that this very Logos which both the Greeks and the Hellenized Jews believed in actually became a man. This Logos turns out to be more than just pure logic but also personal. In other words, we can have a personal relationship with Logos. John declared that Jesus was the incarnation of both the personal God of the Jews and the impersonal Logos of the Greeks. He wrote, "The Word (Logos) became flesh and made his dwelling among us (John 1:14)." Jesus was God (the most rational being) in the flesh!
The traditional Chinese believe in an impersonal force called the "Tao." (Pronounced Dow) In one of the traditional schools in the fourth century BC, it came to be understood as "the way life operates." In other words, "This is the way reality works so get with the program." It was also understood "as a force operating within the phenomenal (natural) world, a natural guiding force that leads all things to their fulfillment." Another ancient school taught that the Tao is "an indescribable unity transcending all human knowledge and activity." It is the source of all spiritual power, with which the Taoist connects (and is ultimately united) by means of ritual or meditation.?
This is an impersonal force with which we can not have a personal relationship. Let's illustrate this with the force of gravity. Gravity is not personal. You can't have a personal conversation with it like, "Hey gravity, sup?" Then gravity says, "It would be better to ask, "Wuz goin' down, man! Hey, sorry about pulling you off that balcony last night, etc." In the same way, no Taoist would say you can have a personal conversation or relationship with the Tao.
When Chinese biblical scholars translated John's declaration, what word do you suppose they used to translate the word and concept of the Greek "Logos"? They chose "Tao". If John had written about Jesus Christ to the ancient Chinese he undoubtedly would have written, "The Tao was with God, and the Tao was God. And the Tao became flesh and made his dwelling among us."
Through Jesus Christ, the truth is revealed to us that there is a God over and beyond everything but also that is also ever present in our lives and world. We learn that this God is also personal and is the ultimate source of true love, moral purity, mercy, grace, justice and a million other needs we have. When you become a Christian you suddenly have a personal relationship with the God of the universe. We don't have to invent superstitions, rituals and mystical feelings and grope around for the truth through contradictory teachings. We finally have the truth. Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him. Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father." (John 14:6)
Do you have a personal relationship with the ultimate, only, one, true, personal God of the universe?
References
Brown, Colin. (ed.) The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Zondervan, 1971, Volume 3, p. 1117.
Copan, Paul. True for You, But Not For Me. p. 29 - 31
Smith, Jonathan Z. The Harper Collins Dictionary of Religion. Harper Collins, 1995, p. 1053.
Zacharias, Ravi. Can Man Live Without God? p. 126-131.
Copyright 2005. Gary C. Burger and New Media Ministries. This article may be reproduced and distributed freely as long as it is done so in its entirety. If quoted it must be properly cited as a reference.
