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#: