But I suspect many of our disagreements about scripture have more to do with blik than objective exegesis. I know that no exegesis could convince me that God is a monster. If I thought it possible that God is a monster there would be no point in doing exegesis because a monster cannot be trusted.
I agree. At least once in my life I “heard” God speak to me so distinctly and clearly that I could not question it...It passed all five of my criteria.
So how does Olson know that the God who unquestionably spoke to him wasn’t the deceitful Cartesian demon of Calvinism? After all, not only could a Cartesian demon speak clearly and distinctly to Olson, but it could easily delude Olson into imagining that it passed all five of his criteria–just like those sci-fi stories involving telepathic aliens who make their human captives imagine they escaped, when–in fact–they are still imprisoned in their 6 x 8 ft. cell.
Olson can’t very well dismiss this as an implausible thought-experiment, for he’s the one who introduced that thought-experiment as a hypothetical defeater for Calvinism.
No comments:
Post a Comment