Paradox Part 1

I’m not sure about you, but I’ve heard the term used in Christian circles a lot lately. Those who use the word paradox are usually referring to a type of mystery or tension between two biblical truths. Here’s how J.I. Packer defines antinomy (another word for paradox) in his book Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God. Notice he also makes a clear judgment about how we should handle such things:

“An antinomy – in theology, at any rate – is…not a real contradiction, though it looks like one. It is an apparent incompatibility between two apparent truths. An antinomy exists when a pair of principlies stand side by side, seemingly irreconcilable, yet both undeniable…[An antinomy] is insoluble…What should one do, then, with an antinomy? Accept it for what it is, and learn to live with it. Refuse to regard the apparent contradiction as real.”

Robert Reymond, former professor of Systematics at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis, agrees with Packer’s definition, but not with his conclusion. Here’s part of what Reymond had to say about paradox in his work A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith:

“…many of our finest modern evangelical scholars are insisting that even after the human interpreter has understood the Bible correctly, it will often represent its truths to the human existent – even the believing human existent – in paradoxical terms, that is, in terms “taught unmistakably in the infallible Word of God,” which, while not actually contradictory, nevertheless “cannot possibly be reconciled before the bar of human reason.”

However… “bible students should be solicitous to interpret the Scriptures in a noncontradictory way; they should strive to harmonize Scripture with Scripture because the Scriptures reflect the thought of a single divine mind.”

I’ll be attempting to explore the implications of both views in a short series of upcoming posts. I hope you’ll be challenged to think critically about these things, even if you’ve never heard of them before now.