Th 503 Chapter 5

1. Chapter Five:Chapter Five:
““The Rational Precondition”The Rational Precondition”
PowerPoint prepared by Dr. Mark E. HardgrovePowerPoint prepared by Dr. Mark E. Hardgrove

2. To help you understand the layout of Geisler’sTo help you understand the layout of Geisler’s
book, we need an overview of what he’s talkingbook, we need an overview of what he’s talking
about concerning “preconditions” of Evangelicalabout concerning “preconditions” of Evangelical
Theology.Theology.
He says “Evangelical theologians believe the BibleHe says “Evangelical theologians believe the Bible
is an infallible, absolutely true communication inis an infallible, absolutely true communication in
human language that came from the infinite,human language that came from the infinite,
personal, and morally perfect God. This beliefpersonal, and morally perfect God. This belief
presupposes several things are true—most ofpresupposes several things are true—most of
which are challenged by our current culture.”which are challenged by our current culture.”

3. 1.1. God:The Metaphysical PreconditionGod:The Metaphysical Precondition
2.2. Miracles:The Supernatural PreconditionMiracles:The Supernatural Precondition
3.3. Revelation:The Revelational PreconditionRevelation:The Revelational Precondition
4.4. Logic:The Rational PreconditionLogic:The Rational Precondition
5.5. Meaning:The Semantical PreconditionMeaning:The Semantical Precondition
6.6. Truth:The Epistemological PreconditionTruth:The Epistemological Precondition
7.7. Exclusivism:The Oppositional PreconditionExclusivism:The Oppositional Precondition
8.8. Language:The Linguistic PreconditionLanguage:The Linguistic Precondition
9.9. Interpretation:The Hermeneutical PreconditionInterpretation:The Hermeneutical Precondition
10.10. Historiography:The Historical PreconditionHistoriography:The Historical Precondition
11.11. Method:The Methodological PreconditionMethod:The Methodological Precondition

4. As Geisler notes:As Geisler notes:
There are a lot of philosophical things that
are presupposed. We believe that the
Bible is the perfect, infallible, and
absolutely true communication in human
language that came from a morally
perfect God.

5. It presupposes the belief that there is a
theistic God (which we covered in chapter
one). It presupposes the metaphysical
precondition of God (chapter two),Who
created the world and can miraculously
intervene in it (chapter three).

6. A God who has revealed Himself in both
special and general revelation (chapter four).
This revelation is subject to the laws of logic
(chapter five), which contains objective
meaningful statements (the semantical
precondition, chapter six), that are true
objectively, the epistemological precondition
(chapter seven), and true exclusivity (the
oppositional precondition, chapter eight),
which statements can be practically
understood in analogous language (the
linguistic precondition, chapter nine).

7. The meaning and truth of which can be
understood objectively, by hermeneutical
method that get the objective meaning
from the text (chapter ten), including those
elements related to historical events, we
can know history objectively (chapter
eleven), which revelation can be
systematized into a comprehensive
theological method (chapter twelve).

8. There are three elemental laws of allThere are three elemental laws of all
rational thinkingrational thinking:
1. The law of noncontradiction (A is not
non-A);
2. The law of identity (A is A);
3. The law of the excluded middle (either A
or non-A)

9. 1.1. What is the “law of noncontradiction”What is the “law of noncontradiction”
and why is it important for theand why is it important for the
Evangelical theologian?Evangelical theologian?
2.2. What is the “law of identity” and why isWhat is the “law of identity” and why is
it important for the Evangelicalit important for the Evangelical
theologian?theologian?
3.3. What is the “law of the excludedWhat is the “law of the excluded
middle” and why is it important for themiddle” and why is it important for the
Evangelical theologian?Evangelical theologian?

10. Deductive Logic: There is one proposition
that is correctly deduced or drawn from
others. For example:
1.1. If all of A is inside B, andIf all of A is inside B, and
2.2. All of B is inside of C, then it follows thatAll of B is inside of C, then it follows that
3.3. All of A is also inside of C.All of A is also inside of C.

11. The device by which one proposition is
correctly drawn from others is called a
syllogism. Deductive logic comes in three
forms:
1.1.Categorical syllogismsCategorical syllogisms
2.2.Hypothetical syllogismsHypothetical syllogisms
3.3.Disjunctive syllogismsDisjunctive syllogisms

12. Categorical Syllogisms:Categorical Syllogisms: A categorical
(unconditional) syllogism is one where a
categorical (unconditional) proposition is
deduced from two other categorical
propositions. [A proposition is a declarative
sentence that affirms or denies something.]
Example:
1.1. All human beings are sinful.All human beings are sinful.
2.2. John is a human being.John is a human being.
3.3. Therefore, John is sinful.Therefore, John is sinful.

14. Fallacies of Categorical SyllogismsFallacies of Categorical Syllogisms
1. Illicit Major:1. Illicit Major: The major term isThe major term is
undistributed in the major premise but isundistributed in the major premise but is
distributed in the conclusion.distributed in the conclusion.
 All dogs are mammals.
 No cats are dogs.
 Therefore, no cats are mammals.

15. Fallacies of Categorical SyllogismsFallacies of Categorical Syllogisms
2. Illicit minor:2. Illicit minor: The minor term is
undistributed in the minor premise but
distributed in the conclusion.
 All cats are felines.
 All cats are mammals.
 Therefore, all mammals are felines.

16. Fallacies of Categorical SyllogismsFallacies of Categorical Syllogisms
3. Undistributed middle3. Undistributed middle is the fallacy where
the middle term is not distributed at least
once.
A child concluded that there are money-trees
because "money is green [in the United
States] and so are trees, so money must
grow on trees."

17. Venn diagram of the undistributed middle
fallacy:

18. Fallacies of Categorical SyllogismsFallacies of Categorical Syllogisms
4. Four-term fallacy:4. Four-term fallacy: the fallacy where
there are not three and only three terms
in the syllogism.
 All Communists believe in heavy taxes.
 Senator X believes in heavy taxes.
 Therefore, Senator X is a Communist

19. Venn diagram of the fVenn diagram of the four-term fallacy:our-term fallacy:

20. Hypothetical Syllogism:Hypothetical Syllogism: These are statedThese are stated
in an “If . . .Then. . .” fashion. If “A” thenin an “If . . .Then. . .” fashion. If “A” then
“B” follows.“B” follows.
 If God is all-just, then He must punish sin
 God is all-just
 Therefore, He must punish all sin
This is an example of a modus pollens
because it affirms the antecedent.

21. Hypothetical Syllogism:Hypothetical Syllogism: These are stated inThese are stated in
an “If . . .Then. . .” fashion. If “A” then “B”an “If . . .Then. . .” fashion. If “A” then “B”
follows.follows.
 If the Qur’an is God’s Word, then it cannot
err.
 The Qur’an has errors
 Therefore, the Qur’an is not God’s Word.
This is an example of a modus tollens because
it denies the antecedent.

22. Disjunctive Syllogism:Disjunctive Syllogism: If phrased in an
“either/or” statement.
 Either God is existent or He is nonexistent.
 God is not nonexistent
 Therefore, God is existent.

23. INDUCTIVE LOGICINDUCTIVE LOGIC
Broadly speaking:Broadly speaking:
. . . deductive reasoning is from the general
to the particular
. . . inductive reasoning is from the
particular to the general

24. Rules of Inductive Logic:Rules of Inductive Logic: The following
questions give us the guidelines for
inductive reasoning:
 How many cases were examined?
 How representative was the evidence?
 How carefully was the evidence
examined?
 How does the information gained,
correlate with other knowledge?

25. A priori probabilityA priori probability is probability before
the fact and is mathematical in nature. It
deals with the likelihood or odds of an
event occurring. For example, the
likelihood of a penny landing on heads if
50% because we know that every penny
only has two sides.

26. A posteriori probabilityA posteriori probability is probability after
the fact. In science, it is empirical
probability, also called scientific probability.
For example, if we have a sufficiently large
sample, then we can test the theory that we
will have a 50/50 ratio of a penny landing on
head or tails. A small sample would be
insufficient to prove this. A posteriori
probability offers varying degrees of
certainty that something is true based on an
examination of the available evidence

27. Degrees of ProbabilityDegrees of Probability
According to the inductive method, there
are various degrees of probability,
depending on the kind and extent of the
evidence available. These range from
virtually impossible, to virtually certain.

28. God does not merely choose toGod does not merely choose to
be rational and consistent;be rational and consistent;
He is rational by His veryHe is rational by His very
nature.nature.