Faith vs. Logic
Why Do People Think Interpretation Can Override the Only Logical Conclusion?
Introduction: When Faith Becomes Evasion
In religious debates—especially those involving Islam—you’ll often hear a familiar line of defense:
“That’s just your interpretation.”
“You need to understand it spiritually.”
“You're not approaching this with faith.”
Translation: "We don't have a logical answer, so we'll shield the contradiction with mysticism."
But here's the question:
Why do people think faith or interpretive gymnastics can change the only logical conclusion available?
This post is a direct challenge to that mindset. It exposes the deep confusion between subjective belief and objective reasoning, and argues that faith must not become a smokescreen for evading contradiction, incoherence, or historical falsehoods.
1. The Law of Identity: A = A, Even in Theology
At the heart of all rational thought is the Law of Identity:
A thing is what it is.
If the Qur’an says:
“Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed in it” (Q 5:47)
Then either:
-
The Gospel they had in the 7th century was divine and trustworthy,
or -
The Qur’an is commanding judgment by a corrupted or false book, which is irrational and incoherent.
You cannot logically affirm both:
-
“The Gospel is corrupted,” and
-
“Judge by the Gospel God revealed.”
Yet Muslims routinely assert both—claiming interpretation or faith solves the contradiction.
But interpretation is not a license to violate logic.
Faith is not an escape hatch from A = A.
2. Interpretation Cannot Reverse Evidence
Suppose a verse says:
“The moon was cleft asunder.”
Interpretation might suggest:
-
Literal miracle
-
Poetic metaphor
-
Prophetic vision
-
Future event
But all those readings must fit within textual, historical, and logical boundaries. If:
-
No historical record supports a moon-splitting event
-
No astronomical anomaly exists
-
No eyewitness accounts outside Islamic tradition exist
Then the most logical conclusion is:
This is not a literal historical event.
If someone replies, “You just lack faith,” they’re abandoning reason to protect belief.
That’s not interpretation.
That’s intellectual surrender.
3. Faith Is Not a Trump Card—It Must Be Tested
True faith should be able to withstand scrutiny, not retreat from it.
Yet when faith becomes a get-out-of-logic-free card, it loses credibility. You can't say:
-
“The Qur’an confirms the Gospel” (Q 3:3, 5:47, 7:157),
and also, -
“The Gospel is lost and corrupted,”
…unless you redefine “Gospel,” “corruption,” and “confirmation” beyond recognition. That’s not faith—that’s semantic abuse.
Here’s the truth:
If your faith requires abandoning the most basic laws of logic, it's not truth you're defending—it's dogma.
4. “That’s Just Your Interpretation” Is a Deflection, Not a Defense
This phrase gets thrown around constantly in debate. It suggests:
-
No conclusion is final
-
All views are equally valid
-
Scripture is endlessly elastic
But here’s the problem:
If every text can mean anything, then it means nothing.
The Qur’an claims to be:
-
Clear (mubin)
-
Easy to understand (yassarna)
-
A guidance for all time
If the only way to escape its contradictions is by saying “Well, you’re just interpreting it wrong,” then the book fails its own claims of clarity and universality.
5. The Psychological Need to Escape Logic
So why do people resist the only logical conclusion?
Because:
-
They fear the consequences of letting go of inherited beliefs.
-
They equate disagreement with doctrine as an attack on identity or morality.
-
They don’t want to confront the discomfort of doubt.
So they hide in:
-
Mysticism ("Only God knows.")
-
Redefinition ("That’s not what it really means.")
-
Accusation ("You’re biased / faithless / arrogant.")
But in the end, reality doesn’t care how deeply you believe something.
Contradictions do not dissolve with devotion.
Conclusion: Faith Must Face Logic or Fade
Faith and logic are not necessarily enemies—but when faith refuses to face evidence, language, and law, it becomes a form of intellectual tyranny.
You cannot rewrite definitions, cherry-pick meanings, or reinterpret your way out of contradiction.
If A = A, then no amount of faith makes A = Not-A.
If the Qur’an says it confirms the Gospel, and history shows the Gospel was known and circulated in the 7th century, then the Qur’an is affirming that Gospel—not a lost, theoretical one.
If it later condemns what Christians believe as wrong, then the Qur’an is logically incoherent—not spiritually deep.
Interpretation is not a shield from logic.
Faith is not a cloak for contradiction.
The only honest path is to follow the evidence—wherever it leads.
No comments:
Post a Comment