Do not mix truth and beauty
We humans are tempted to equate beauty with truth. If something is beautiful, we reason, then it’s more than likely true, right? Wrong.
Dr. Sollereder makes a solid argument that beauty is not a reliable indicator for truth. She writes,
💬
Historically, many beautiful, simple, and elegant ideas in science were wrong. Johannes Kepler thought the orbital distance of the six (known) planets were related to the Platonic solids. It is a lovely, attractive idea, but wrong. Up until Tycho Brahe’s extremely precise measurements of Mars’s orbit, everyone thought that planets moved in perfect circles. Again: a beautiful but ultimately erroneous notion.
In my opinion, this happens frequently in theological systems and is an example both of the fallacy of false cause and, sometimes, the fallacy of an appeal to emotion. Dr. Sollereder describes:
💬
[T]heological models that weave scripture verses and philosophy into complex, gorgeous, ethereal systems of beauty. But, like the fragile beauty of a snowflake, under the heat of scrutiny, these systems simply melt away. I still remember the thrill of an early foray into Dispensational theology, for example, but later discarded it wholesale.
The love shown humanity by the Father through Jesus' surrender unto death has beauty and also horror. But neither beauty nor horror are causes of its truth (false cause). Whether the act fills you with disgust or gratitude (appeal to emotion) does not determine the veracity of the claim.