Human Reasoning vs God Reasoning

This issue comes up a lot when you back a Christian into a corner (of course he’ll deny being backed into a corner). If shown the folly of the Bible, he will reply that you’re simply using human reasoning to rationalize away the message of the Almighty, and with this he simply appeals to authority, and his zealotry inflates in response to such… uninformed criticism.

This of course assumes (quite wrongly) that humans are actually capable of understanding God’s reasoning. A species that doesn’t even amount to a speck of dust in the universe is capable of understanding the mind of a being who’s presumably older than time itself and created all there is in the universe. Yeah… no, that isn’t happening any time soon. The reason is fairly simple; we weren’t meant to, at least for the time being. Any reasoning that God makes must, for humans to comprehend it in our current state of perception and consciousness, MUST be transmuted into human reasoning.

This, and for no other reason (assuming Christianity is completely true), is the reason that Christianity, contrary to the opinions of the Christians themselves, is the reason that Christianity, as well as the other religions of Judaism and Islam,  is Human Reasoning.  Humans, in their current state, are utterly incapable of understanding the nature of a being that is both omnipotent and omnipresent, is all wise and all knowing, etc., etc.. The reasoning of this Deity is thus utterly meaningless to us, all that matters is that a being far more powerful than us is telling us to do X, Y, and Z. This is of course assuming that the Bible, as the Christians would have us believe, is the pure, infallible word of God.

It can be assumed, safely, that a being such as this is not going to make mistakes, but unfortunately for God, if it is assumed that the Bible is the pure word of God, the Bible is loaded to the hilt with mistakes.  Nevermind the purely scientific errors the Bible makes, of which others within the respective fields have pointed out, the errors I’m going to lay waste to are economic and philosophical.

The Bible tells us, in Romans 13 1-7:

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.

 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.

7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

And just like that, the claim of infallibility goes up in smoke.  An unbiased look at history shows us, undeniably, that government authority figures are anything but bastions of the public good. Barbaric tribes throughout history who rape, pillage, and murder the surrounding territories for their personal enjoyment and gain have not, and could not have caused 1/6th of the horror that government authorities have implemented on people, especially their own, and it is not this way without reason.

The taxes it collects, which is justified supposedly by the Social Contract, are a guaranteed source of revenue. The money that the government collects through taxation is used to hire soldiers, who are then used to extract more money. The Social Contract, which he will insist is the justification for taxation, is illegitimate by its very nature. No court of law would ever accept as evidence for a claim of suit a contract that has not been signed by anyone. On the contrary, the Social Contract is nothing more than a decree of superiority of one group over another:

“We WILL provide you with whatever service we so desire to provide, whether you want it or not, you WILL pay us taxes for these services, whether you want to you or not, or you WILL be arrested, your property forcibly seized, or if it has to be done, we WILL kill you and those who resist with you.”

This is the Social Contract, and if you’re sane enough to reject such an arrangement, then you’re told to move to an island and away from society. Society is nothing more than a code-word for that network of interrelations by which people exchange their services voluntarily with one another. Since no one has ever signed an open, formal contract saying that they will pay taxes for services X, Y, and Z, taxation is theft. To forcibly confiscate a person’s money and then to infer or assume his content because he then proceeds to use those goods and services is an insufficient proof of consent. On the contrary, it is no proof of consent at all.

Is God so evil as to impose a system like this upon us? I don’t think so.  No, the above verses were written by some court historian who sought favor with the prevailing government of the time, or it was written by some poor fool who’s foundation in logic and reason has been all but washed away by systematic indoctrination.


Posted on October 12, 2013, in Economics, Political Philosophy, Religion and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.

  1. You misconstrue my arguments. Scripture interprets Scripture, and I find it interesting that you pick issues that we haven’t talked about when you respond to me. Romans 13 is to be interpreted in the light of other passages and based on the cross of Christ. The REASON Christ died is people are sinners. So when Romans 13 says: “They are a minister of God” it is by no means implying that the people involved in governing are always perfect, or even good. They are SINNERS. The point of Romans is that government has a responsibility to repress sin through physical consequences. You make the claim that government has committed more atrocities than the people they are supposed to be stopping from committing atrocities. This is only true because people have been stopped BY GOVERMENT from committing more atrocities than they have!!!! What do we see whenever government breaks down, whenever there is no light, power, police force, or anything to stop people from doing what they want?? MASS CHAOS!!! It’s simple.

    You never mentioned this verse before, so it is not a response to me in any way. However, the base of your article IS a response to what I’ve said, so I’ll clarify my case so others can see what it is to which you are responding:

    The Bible is reasoning from God. It is the Word of God, and therefore could NOT by definition be the reasoning of humans. I understand and agree with your point that humans CANNOT understand the things of God on their own. But you limit God when you say that therefore the Bible cannot be His reasoning. It is a very simple thing when you believe in a God who is all-powerful that He can do ALL things. Why is that difficult to understand. You seem to think the Bible is JUST a book of reasoning, and that reason alone can bring you to God. Why would you believe that a system that teaches that people are desperate sinners who do not seek God and want to do everything their own way, doing what is right in their own sight would also teach that people can get to God by their own reasoning?? Of course they won’t understand.

    BUT GOD, in His power, who created the world, can act in people to give them new life despite their blindness and spiritual death. It may be that you don’t BELIEVE these things, but that does nothing to their veracity in their own context. The problem you have is you approach Scripture and call it wrong because it disagrees with YOUR system of belief. The only thing you can do is say that Scripture is inconsistent within ITSELF. And it is not. Of course we’ve already talked about supposed contradictions on which you apparently backed me into a corner, however I don’t think that’s the case.

    You cannot come to a book that claims to be the Word of God, then say that God cannot do and say what He wants because it doesn’t fit into YOUR paradigm of what types of reason that humans can and can’t understand. If God wants you to understand, do you not think He can make you understand?? And if it says that you are blind, that does nothing to discredit it because the FACT that you can’t understand it PROVES it’s the Word of God. However, in your failure to understand, instead of being humble, you say that God must not be working here because if He were…. what?? You would understand it?? But we’ve already seen that you say you couldn’t understand it IF IT WERE GOD. Then you say that it must be human reasoning, all the while blind to the truth.

    None of this proves that the Bible is the Word of God. In a similar vein, none of your reasoning refutes the Bible. But the Bible teaches that you will never understand the Bible without the Spirit of God acting within you to help you understand, and the fact that people who claim to understand Scripture so consistently come up with different interpretations and understandings of what is actually a VERY CLEAR text is more evidence to the fact that it IS the Word of God.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: