Does an inconsistance of Holy Writ imply that it is not of a divine origin? A famoust Russian scientist and theologian P.Florensky discussed the question in the paper of 1914 (see: Из истории отечественной философской Mbicjiu. П.А. Флоренский. Соч., Т.1 (1) (с. 1 -490) и Т.1 (2) (с. 491 - 840), М., 1990). Не used the symbolyc logic of his time and suggested some ideas, which are explicated now by systems of nonmonotonous and paraconsistent logic. Florensky considered that to find the clue to a solution one should solve correctly one of L. CarrolTs problems: what is followed from premises $p\supset r$ and $q\supset_. q\supset\neg r$? Florensky tracted the variables as statements about inconsistance of Holy Writ $(q)$, about a non-divine origin of Holy Writ $(r)$ and about a lucid state of a person's soul $(p)$. He bellieved that the only correct solution was $p\supset\neg q$ and that this one gave the negative answer to the first question.
How to Cite
Sidorenko E. Идеи немонотонной и паранепротиворечивой логики у П. Флоренского. // Logicheskie Issledovaniya / Logical Investigations. 1997. VOL. 4. C. 290-303.