What the hell is wrong with people? Unfortunately this has been an argument that I have heard on occasion in some of the fellowships of which I have been a part.
I don’t think there’s an implied “you” in the subject of that sentence. An implied “you” is like, “Go to the store.” There, the command is for whoever the sentence is directed toward, the implied “you.” One could rephrase it as “You, go to the store,” without losing or changing meaning.
The sentence on the sign should be either, “Reason is the greatest enemy of faith” or “Faith’s greatest enemy is reason.”
I meant your sentence: “You can’t end a sentence with ‘has’.”
You have ‘to end’ as the verb. However, noow I’m wondering if ’sentence’ is the direct object since it’s being ended by ‘You.’
I’ve been learning greek lately so I’m looking at it through that lens. If the sentence were translated into greek, ‘You’ would be in the nominative (the subject case), ’sentence’ would be in the accusative (the direct object case) and ‘has’ would be in the dative since, as you pointed out, it’s being used as a noun and not as a verb.
But I’m not sure if those categories transfer into English.
i think this conversation about grammar is dividing you two, which is a sin, so we should just all go back to latin (the best of all languages) and forget everything else…including reason…
I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt…perhaps they had the resurrection of Christ in mind when they devised the marque message, as that is quite an unreasonable event…
I read the other article you suggest. I have long been aware of the faults of Luther; however, making grave errors in judgment does not render one’s truths ineffectual or false. Were this the case we should all be permanently silenced.
In regards to the statement (having not read the context in which Luther used it) I see the point. I do feel that reason is an enemy of faith.
Too often we equate reason with intelligence, academics, and learning, as it well can intend–particular in a Kantian sense of things. However, reason can also be referring to one’s mental perception of the physical realm. In that sense, reason can be contra faith.
Faith demands some degree of suspension of reason. As stated above, the mere belief in God is quite unreasonable. I have yet to meet a person who has seen God. I haven’t. Despite observing the elements of creation as a revelation of His existence, I still must suspend my reason. Belief in the Real Presence necessitates a faith that temporarily abandons reason. Yes, reason may have been involved in arriving to a belief in the real presence through study of scripture and church tradition, but when actually approaching the Eucharist, were one to rely on rational empirical thought, they could only come to the conclusion that they are eating bread, and bread alone.
All that to say, as Hebrews 11:1 suggests, faith is belief in things unseen…to some extent, belief in the unbelievable. I do see how mere reason can be an adversary.
four pentecostals turned episcopalian discussing the church, theology, unorthodoxy, the arts, pipe smoking and craft beer. [about us] or [email us] or a [brief history]
RT: internetmonk
reed
adhunt
jstambaugh
Shawn Wamsley
June 1, 2009 at 16:37
Love to see stupidity on display in my fellowship…
June 1, 2009 at 16:40
I’m sure there’s a mainline one somewhere that says “Who needs miracles when you’ve got Reason?”
June 1, 2009 at 17:09
I hope this is from one of those Church Sign Creator things. Otherwise…. *shudder*
June 1, 2009 at 19:37
What the hell is wrong with people? Unfortunately this has been an argument that I have heard on occasion in some of the fellowships of which I have been a part.
June 2, 2009 at 22:51
Plus, that’s just awful grammar.
You can’t end a sentence with “has.” Well, except when “has” is the subject, rather than the verb, as displayed in my previous sentence.
Jeeze, were going to be diagramming sentences next, won’t we?
June 3, 2009 at 4:30
… so where’s the joke?
June 3, 2009 at 6:27
Isn’t “has” the direct object and “You” the subject? (Sorry, ADJ. Now, I couldn’t resist.)
June 3, 2009 at 8:13
I don’t think there’s an implied “you” in the subject of that sentence. An implied “you” is like, “Go to the store.” There, the command is for whoever the sentence is directed toward, the implied “you.” One could rephrase it as “You, go to the store,” without losing or changing meaning.
The sentence on the sign should be either, “Reason is the greatest enemy of faith” or “Faith’s greatest enemy is reason.”
Wow..are we nerds or what?
June 3, 2009 at 8:28
I meant your sentence: “You can’t end a sentence with ‘has’.”
You have ‘to end’ as the verb. However, noow I’m wondering if ’sentence’ is the direct object since it’s being ended by ‘You.’
I’ve been learning greek lately so I’m looking at it through that lens. If the sentence were translated into greek, ‘You’ would be in the nominative (the subject case), ’sentence’ would be in the accusative (the direct object case) and ‘has’ would be in the dative since, as you pointed out, it’s being used as a noun and not as a verb.
But I’m not sure if those categories transfer into English.
(Nerds? Yes.)
Either way, anti-intellectualism is lame.
June 3, 2009 at 8:47
Before I think about any more parts of speech this morning, I think I’m gonna need some Wheaties.
June 3, 2009 at 11:56
i think this conversation about grammar is dividing you two, which is a sin, so we should just all go back to latin (the best of all languages) and forget everything else…including reason…
June 3, 2009 at 12:32
Latin has got nothing on Greek
July 30, 2009 at 21:34
I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt…perhaps they had the resurrection of Christ in mind when they devised the marque message, as that is quite an unreasonable event…
July 30, 2009 at 21:40
See also: http://theophiliacs.com/2009/06/13/i-couldnt-pass-it-up-either/
July 31, 2009 at 7:33
I read the other article you suggest. I have long been aware of the faults of Luther; however, making grave errors in judgment does not render one’s truths ineffectual or false. Were this the case we should all be permanently silenced.
In regards to the statement (having not read the context in which Luther used it) I see the point. I do feel that reason is an enemy of faith.
Too often we equate reason with intelligence, academics, and learning, as it well can intend–particular in a Kantian sense of things. However, reason can also be referring to one’s mental perception of the physical realm. In that sense, reason can be contra faith.
Faith demands some degree of suspension of reason. As stated above, the mere belief in God is quite unreasonable. I have yet to meet a person who has seen God. I haven’t. Despite observing the elements of creation as a revelation of His existence, I still must suspend my reason. Belief in the Real Presence necessitates a faith that temporarily abandons reason. Yes, reason may have been involved in arriving to a belief in the real presence through study of scripture and church tradition, but when actually approaching the Eucharist, were one to rely on rational empirical thought, they could only come to the conclusion that they are eating bread, and bread alone.
All that to say, as Hebrews 11:1 suggests, faith is belief in things unseen…to some extent, belief in the unbelievable. I do see how mere reason can be an adversary.