Tuesday, March 10, 2020

FAITH & REASON

The following is a short excerpt from my eBook The Nexus: The True Nature of Nature at: https://tinyurl.com/tclhh2s

Here is a link to my lengthier lecture on FAITH & REASON given in Canberra 2006?
Listen at the following: https://tinyurl.com/red4k6a

FAITH & REASON - The Relationship Between Theology & Philosophy

As you consider the sun, the moon, the stars, the earth, the sea, what have you concluded? As you consider your own existence, what assumptions have you made? Do you believe that ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’? Did God put you, and everything else there is, there? Or, did it all come into being by some other means? Is reality perhaps all just a projection of your own mind, or a projection of someone else’s mind for that matter?

To ponder these kinds of subjects is to enter into the sciences of Theology and Philosophy. Therefore every thinking rational being is a theologian and a philosopher – at least after a fashion. The crucial question we need to answer is this: Are Faith and Reason mutually exclusive? Are Theology and Philosophy autonomous exercises? Or is there a unifying factor – something that unites Theology, Philosophy, Faith, and Reason?

We shall seek to demonstrate that whilst it is healthy to make distinctions between the disciplines of Theology and Philosophy, in order to give an accurate knowledge and a logical sense of reality, both are dependent upon revelation of and from the Triune God.

The Christian Theologian, Philosopher, and Apologist Cornelius Van Til says:

Philosophy, as usually defined, deals with a theory of reality, with a theory of knowledge, and with a theory of ethics. That is to say philosophies usually undertake to present a life and world view. They deal not only with that which man can directly experience by means of his senses but also, and ofttimes especially, with the presuppositions of experience. In short, they deal with that which Christian theology speaks of as God. On the other hand Christian theology deals not only with God; it deals also with the world.[44]

If we have understood Van Til correctly, Philosophy seeks to present a philosophy of life, i.e., a ‘life and world view.’ And to do this Philosophy needs to deal with at least three main issues: a) Reality or the Metaphysical, (i.e., the ‘What is?’) b) Knowledge or the Epistemological, (i.e., the ‘How do we know what is?’) and c) The Ethical, (i.e., How should we then live in light of a and b?’)

Philosophy, then, as Van Til has alerted us, in a nutshell deals with how we should live our lives according to what we know about reality. Thus we acknowledge that there is a practical aspect to Philosophy. Philosophy is not all thinking and knowing. It is also doing. Thus men tend to behave according to their philosophies, i.e., according to their life and worldview.

Again, thinking of what Van Til has already said, that which man experiences through his senses necessarily includes what he presupposes about these experiences. Thus Philosophy builds its life and worldview upon knowledge gained from information received by and through the senses. But the subtlety is that man has prior assumptions about the information he is receiving. Says Ronald Kirk,

Godless education, or rather indoctrination, is a shipwreck. Godless science rarely admits that its starting place is not the objective, factual universe it claims. Humanistic science systematically avoids discussion of its foundational philosophical presuppositions regarding origins, necessarily religious at root. Instead, the godless merely assert their materialistic faith as objective science. In fact, it is nothing more than the sinful, rebellious counterpart to Christianity’s faith in God. If the materialists forthrightly declared themselves, the rest of us would soon realize that much of modern science is actually conclusion drawn from mere humanistic preference.[i]Humanistic science systematically avoids discussion of its foundational philosophical presuppositions regarding origins, necessarily religious at root. Humanistic science systematically avoids discussion of its foundational philosophical presuppositions regarding origins, necessarily religious at root. Instead, the godless merely assert their materialistic faith as objective science. In fact, it is nothing more than the sinful, rebellious counterpart to Christianity's faith in God. If the materialists forthrightly declared themselves, the rest of us would soon realize that much of modern science is actually conclusion drawn from mere humanistic preferenceHumanistic science systematically avoids discussion of its foundational philosophical presuppositions regarding origins, necessarily religious at root. Instead, the godless merely assert their materialistic faith as objective science. In fact, it is nothing more than the sinful, rebellious counterpart to Christianity's faith in God. If the materialists forthrightly declared themselves, the rest of us would soon realize that much of modern science is actually conclusion drawn from mere humanistic preferenceaims. Humanistic science systematically avoids discussion of its foundational philosophical presuppositions regarding origins, necessarily religious at root. Instead, the godless merely assert their materialistic faith as objective science. In fact, it is nothing more than the sinful, rebellious counterpart to Christianity's faith in God. If the materialists forthrightly declared themselves, the rest of us would soon realize that much of modern science is actually conclusion drawn from mere humanistic preference."aims. Humanistic science systematically avoids discussion of its foundational philosophical presuppositions regarding origins, necessarily religious at root. Instead, the godless merely assert their materialistic faith as objective science. In fact, it is nothing more than the sinful, rebellious counterpart to Christianity's faith in God. If the materialists forthrightly declared themselves, the rest of us would soon realize that much of modern science is actually conclusion drawn from mere humanistic preference."
-
Ronald Kirk
(Thy Will Be Done: When All Nations Call God Blessed)

Christian Theology & Christian Philosophy

Theology, i.e., Christian theology, holds that that which the Philosopher is directly experiencing through his senses is revelation of God. Therefore, as far as Christian Theology is concerned, man experiencing the five senses – seeing, hearing, touching, smelling and tasting – is man experiencing God. Thus, if there is a difference between Theology and Philosophy it is that Christian Theology is the science that works to produce Christian concepts, whilst Christian Philosophy is the science that reflects upon these Christian foundations and applies them.

The point being made is that there is a sense in which both sciences (Christian Theology and Christian Philosophy) are dealing with the same thing. Both are working with revelation of God. Christian Theology seeks to categorize and systematize that revelation. Christian Philosophy seeks to ponder and apply it.

Thus we see that Christian Theology and Christian Philosophy are two distinct but related disciplines. They are distinct in that Theology produces and categorizes concepts, and Philosophy thinks these concepts through, and builds a life and worldview upon them. Theology and Philosophy are related because each is dealing with revelation of God. Yet, importantly, neither one is subordinate to the other because both are equally valid ways of dealing with revelation. Indeed, they compliment each other, and of necessity, must borrow from each other. Whereas Theology deals with man’s scientific knowledge of the Creator, Philosophy deals with man’s scientific knowledge of creation.

Thus, though Theology and Philosophy have their own distinct spheres, they interpenetrate and overlap each other. Van Til notes the distinction and the relationship where he says:

Philosophy and science deal more especially with man in his relation to the cosmos and theology deals more especially with man in his relation to God. But this is only a matter of degree.[45]

The theologian is simply a specialist in the field of biblical interpretation taken in the more restricted sense. The philosopher is directly subject to the Bible and must in the last analysis rest upon his own interpretation of the Word. But he may accept the help of those who are more constantly and more exclusively engaged in biblical study than he himself can be.[46]

C. Stephen Evans also notes the intimate relationship between the sciences of Theology and Philosophy thus:

Although some would make a sharp distinction between philosophy and theology, there is substantial overlap in the questions each treats. One way to distinguish between the two is in terms of their audiences: A thinker who is speaking to a religious community and can presuppose the authorities recognized by that community is doing theology. The same thinker addressing a broader community may be doing philosophy.[47]

Though we believe in a ‘practical theology’ we believe John M Frame has gone a tad too far in the following statement:

The best way to define theology, in my view, is as the application of the whole Bible to the whole of human life. Theology is not an attempt to articulate our feelings about God (Schleiermacher), but neither is it merely an attempt to state the objective truth, or to put the truth in ‘proper order’ (Hodge), for Scripture already does those things perfectly well. Theology is, rather, teaching the Bible for the purpose of meeting human needs. It answers human questions, tries to relieve doubts, applies texts to life-situations.[48]

In this view the hippopotamus of Theology has swallowed the camel of Philosophy. For we hold that the application of the whole Bible to the whole of human life belongs to the sphere of Philosophy and not Theology, for Philosophy, as our definition has already noted, deals with life and worldviews. Therefore, Christian Philosophy is the thought-through application of Christian Theology. However, we wholeheartedly agree with Dr Frame that the whole Bible needs to be applied to the whole of human life.

As already alluded to, there is also an added and real danger that if we adopt the view of Theology as stated by Dr Frame we will have subordinated and subsumed Philosophy to Theology. Thus Philosophy simply becomes Jonah reflecting in the belly of the great fish of Theology. The flaw in this view is that it implies that we are to build our life and worldview solely upon God’s written revelation.

Though at first blush this sounds noble and pious, the subtlety is that it would seem to ignore and discard the revelation God supplies to all men through the things He has made. Man experiences this revelation of God through his senses. This is what Calvin calls man’s ‘sense of deity.’ To be sure, God’s Word is the spectacles through which man needs to look in order to clearly see God in nature (to use another of Calvin’s terms). Yet men do know and do learn about God through the things God has made (Psalm 19; Romans 1:20&21).

The Bible, for example, mentions the rainbow, but does not explain what colours to mix to make green. The Bible mentions bronze, but not what metals to mix to make bronze. To talk of mixing colours to paint and mixing metals to sculpt is to talk about art and metallurgy. Aesthetics and engineering are just two areas cultural man needs to continue to explore. And as he explores these and other areas, he will be confronted with revelation of God at every turn. 

Thus empirical knowledge is still revelation of God needing to be philosophically pondered. Theology does the cataloguing, putting it, as (Frame above says that) Hodge says, in its ‘proper order,’ and Philosophy does the pondering and applying. They must work together. The reason being is that if you separate them or subordinate or subsume one to the other, Christian man runs the risk of granting non-Christian man autonomy from God. For fallen men readily uncouple the railway carriage of Philosophy from the railway carriage of Theology and sideline and the latter – intending Theology for the scrapheap.

We see this in our own age in the way that Faith has been separated from and even divorced by Reason.


[i] Ronald W. Kirk, Thy Will Be Done: When All Nations Call God Blessed, Nordskog Publishing Inc, Ventura, California, 2013.

No comments:

Post a Comment