tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2704719460864356051.post3642736924394187725..comments2024-01-04T19:48:08.059-05:00Comments on Mathaytes: Gordon Clark's Scripturalsim: A Few ConsiderationsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2704719460864356051.post-10385495243874354332011-06-12T10:12:23.013-04:002011-06-12T10:12:23.013-04:00I am not talking about "other men" I am ...I am not talking about "other men" I am talking about self existence. I have heard people try and deduce this from scripture but not convincingly. As far as Jeremiah. Clark would perhaps say that this refers to a vision and not a sensory perception.KGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14562049216439963042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2704719460864356051.post-70291110819091434322011-06-12T10:06:26.469-04:002011-06-12T10:06:26.469-04:00For all (that is,man) have sinned. Can I not deduc...For all (that is,man) have sinned. Can I not deduced from Scripture that outside my own conscience other men exist? There are many universals that attribute certain attributes to man that empirically could not be known or proved. I agree that Clark has a problem when the Scripture speaks of using the senses to affirm or deny something. "And the word of the Lord came to me saying, "What do you see, Jeremiah?" And I said, "I see a rod of an Almond tree." Then the Lord said to me, "You have seen well." If Clark were alive today I would have loved ask him about this verse.NFIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06837450887335960603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2704719460864356051.post-2091894906068882202011-06-12T09:52:39.820-04:002011-06-12T09:52:39.820-04:00also... I think Clark would not agree that his sta...also... I think Clark would not agree that his statement about olives means that there is a sensation that communicates the flavor of anything. He would probably say that those sensations are merely a stimulus to intellection and that either it is impossible for someone to know the flavor of an olive or that God occassions such knowledge at the time of the stimulus. He admitted that there were a great many things that are often opined but cannot be known.KGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14562049216439963042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2704719460864356051.post-52838271244318431332011-06-12T09:47:09.890-04:002011-06-12T09:47:09.890-04:00Your'e right but there are still a couple thin...Your'e right but there are still a couple things to consider. First, obviously Clark can define his terms the way he likes but most philosophers do not require certainty as a necessary condition of knowledge. So, as usual the way terms are defined is crucial. Secondly, even if you do Clark has a problem because I have 100% certainty that my mind exists and yet such knowledge is not able to be deduced from scripture.KGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14562049216439963042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2704719460864356051.post-31578122936954360512011-06-12T00:38:03.090-04:002011-06-12T00:38:03.090-04:00In one of Clark's lectures he mentions that li...In one of Clark's lectures he mentions that likes olives. For a guy who argues against sense perception it seems a little out of place. He's got know when he makes a statement like that he is referring to a sensation which communicates the flavor of the olive. Which leads me to believe that his system as whole is one of distinguishing knowledge of certitude that can only be found in Scripture, and empirical data that is always contingent. All crows are black could be false because we can not know all crows past, present, and future etc.NFIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06837450887335960603noreply@blogger.com