I just finished reading the book Metaphysics by William Hasker. I was reading it for my own personal growth and to supplement a Christian point of view for my Philosophy of Mind class. This book really changed my understanding of what it means to be a Christian philosopher. I used to think that in philosophy I can assume what God reveals to us in the Bible as groundwork and then move on from there. I no longer take that view point. To do that is to study theology. Theology and philosophy are supposed to be different and I would just be replacing philosophy with theology. I honestly never understood the difference between them, but now I do. This is not to say that I stop believing what God has said in the Bible to be true but that I try to come to those conclusions using philosophical reasoning.
I believe that the Christian faith is capable to stand up against all logical attacks. God is a logically consistent God and no logically true argument can ever knock Him down. This is where I come in as a Christian philosopher. I set out to prove the existence and nature of God through philosophical reasoning. The reason why this is so important is that theology is studied by people who already believe in the existence of God according to His revealed Word but philosophy is studied by people with all kinds of worldviews. Some of these worldviews include the idea of a God and others exclude it.
Metaphysics is all about answering the question: what is the ultimate nature of reality? There are many different metaphysical points of view about reality of the world, humans, and God. Can we develop a Christian metaphysic? This is what Hasker says in response.
"There is no one metaphysical system which is definitely Christian, but rather a number of systems, ll of them more or less inconsistent with each other and all of them more or less adaquate to the content of Christian faith. But the fact that Christianity is a religion of salvation also suggests that in a sense no philosophical system can be fully Christian, because no philosophical system can express the unique content of Christianity."
This idea was hard for me to grasp because I have such a strong bias towards objective Truth and here it seems that Christians can hold different metaphysical beliefs and both still staying true to Biblical revelation about reality. When I think about this further I think I understand and it is humbling. Basically the Bible tells us a lot but not everything about the ultimate nature of reality.
What would make these Christian metaphysical theories Christian? Hasker responds to this with 3 things that a Christian metaphysic must have.
1. It must speak of God
2. It must speak of Creation by God.
3. It must speak of man as the image of God.
Is there at least some broad categories that all Christian metaphysics should fall into? Hasker points out that a Christian metaphysic must be theistic by nature and cannot be naturalistic, pantheistic, or panentheistic. This is because theism is the only one that acknowledges God's true character as Creator of the world and existing independently of His creation. Also a Christian metaphysic must adopt philosophical realism concerning the physical world.
An important note to end on is that no philosophical reasoning or human reflection can bring us the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. This is the limit of this discipline. The Apostle Paul expands on this in 1 Corinthians 2:4-8.
"My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God's power. We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we declare God's wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."
Join the Relentless Fight Against Opression!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I will say remembering my days on the Clarion Campus, conversational evangelism was probably the most effective way you guys had to talk to people about Jesus. It wasn't something impersonal like a poster or downright annoying like having 4 older men give you the same dang book out of similar-looking boxes in the same day. That, and when done right it actually engages both parties to speak and listen to each other rather than barricade themselves behind stereotypes.
Personally, I think as much as you guys think you are helping others - speaking as an outsider I think it helps you guys build your own confidence in speaking about your faith and finding answers to questions that need to be researched to gain a better understanding of your faith by asking hard questions of it (e.g. how come Adam and Eve could mate, but incest is a bad thing which leads you to learn about how Humans gradually became more impure as they grew more distant from God through the generations).
That, and it helps you guys all "exit your comfort zones" as I remember you saying... and getting out of one's comfort zone is a very practical life skill, not just one with theological application.
Post a Comment