Friday, August 15, 2008

Qualifying Contradition

Although [the Essenes] reject oaths, they swear an oath upon entering the community! Moreover, they are allowed to take an oath in a judicial court... what to us may be a contradiction might not have been so for first-century Jews...
(Tan Kim Huat, The Zion Traditions and the Aims of Jesus, p.85, n.21)

Interesting? Though it is common sense that the logical law of non-contradiction applies very explicitly in many matters to everyone, yet this law has qualification nonetheless.

Many accuse the canonical gospels for having 'contradictions'. But this might not be so to their first readers.

1 comment:

Steven Sim said...

This sort of contradiction is not uncommon in legal matters and functions more as a caveat than an outright contradiction. An infamous one is our Article 11 which guarantees the freedom of religion where the free practice of religion is restricted by a caveat in propagation:

(1) Every person has the right to profess and practise his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.

Steven Sim