Alden Swan dot com

In my last post I briefly discussed the origins of modern epistemology (that area of philosophy concerned with what we know and how we know that we know what we know), for the purpose of providing some background to discuss modern Christian epistemology and post-modern epistemology.

Recently I received an e-mail which linked to recent articles appearing on Christianity Today online, with the subject line, “Apologetics makes a comeback…”  Apologetics historically is the systematic defense of Christianity. The Apostle Paul is considered the first Christian apologist, first using the word apologia as recorded in Acts 26:2. At its most basic, apologetics is providing the basis for your faith; however, under modernism, apologetics has often come to mean the systematic proof of Christianity. Modern apologetics includes philosophical arguments relying heavily on Aristotelian logic, as well as scientific and historical arguments. With modern apologetics, reason tends to reign supreme – even more so than with much of modern materialism.

As with its arch-rival, philosophical materialism, modern Christianity (especially evangelicalism) has been to some extent running scared from the West’s newest worldview, postmodernism. Postmodernism started as an architectural style, a move away from modernism’s boxy steel & glass that now dominates our cities’ skylines, and philosophers began using the term. Philosophically, it is very hard to define, other than that it is a purported deconstruction, critique and rejection of many of the failures of modernism. In some ways, it is not a philosophy so much as a non-philosophy. However, the major issue with regard to Christianity has been the tendency to reject the notion that anyone can claim any hold on truth. Truth claims are seen as methods of control (which often they are; no one has either the ability to know what is true or the right to enforce that view on others. We all choose our own paths, our own truths, blah, blah, blah.

So, when Christianity Today starts publishing “apologetics isn’t dead” articles, what’s behind it is this fear that postmodernsm will put modern apologetics out of business.  However, CT’s article A New Day for Apologetics quotes author Lee Strobel:

“It wasn’t too many years ago that scholars were writing off apologetics because we live in a postmodern world where young people are not supposed to be interested in things like the historical Jesus,” Strobel says. “The biggest shock is that among people who communicated to me that they had found faith in Christ through apologetics, the single biggest group was 16- to 24-year-olds.”

A 2nd CT article turned out to be an interview with an old friend of mine, Mark Mittelberg, who has recently published a book entitled Choosing Your Faith: In a World of Spiritual Options (Tyndale, 2008). This book – while I admit I haven’t even seen a copy yet – is a bit different than some of the older apologetic books, as it is focused on evaluating truth claims in a culture where truth seems to be up for grabs. Mark says,

I would urge my fellow believers to not let go of one of the most important things God has given us: logic, evidence, old-fashioned apologetics, which Jesus often appealed to when he was questioned. He would say, “Don’t just listen to my words, but look at my works, look at my miracles, look at the fact that I am fulfilling the roles of the Messiah in the prophecies. Look to the fact that I will rise from the dead.” And then to Thomas the doubter, he said, “Look at the holes in my hands and in my side. Look at me; it’s Jesus.” Over and over he pointed to the facts, the evidence, as did the apostles and other writers of Scripture. I’m not saying it’s the only approach; I’m just saying it’s an important approach that we need to use well…

If we can call this The New Apologetics, it seems that besides offering logical evidence for Christianity, it is also to an extent an apologetic for modernism; saying, “don’t give up on logic, reason and evidence.” Here, oddly enough, even The New Atheists would be in agreement, but disagree as to what constitutes evidence. However, even at modernism’s peak (the pre-Vietnam era), there were many for whom logic, reason and evidence simply weren’t enough.

So, in the early 21st Century, we are told on one hand that we are living without a doubt in a postmodern culture. On the other hand, interest in science, technology and apologetics seems as strong, if not stronger, than ever. What gives?

Stay tuned for the possible answer to this question, and more …

A few days ago I asked the very philosophical question, “how do we know what we know?,” just touching on a topic that I happen to find extremely interesting.  I’m not an expert, by any means – if I were, I could be making a lot of money doing what I am doing here for free – and neither am I an expert on the history of epistemology.

What I do understand is that the origins of Western thought with regard to these matters dates back to ancient Greece, to Plato and his student Aristotle. For the first thousand years of the Church’s existence, Plato was of no little influence in both the Eastern and Western churches; Augustine was heavily influenced by Plato. At that time very little of Aristotle’s writings were even available in the West. It was not until Abelard came along around the year 1100 that an Aristotle-based philosophy began to develop. Abelard’s mentor was a realist, as you would expect. Abelard began to dismantle his professor’s arguments using Aristotelian logic and soon gathered a considerable following. His most famous quote is perhaps, “For by doubting we come to inquire, and by inquiring we perceive the truth.” While challenging Augustine’s position on original sin, he remained essentially orthodox in his theology. His logic, however, was no match for his love for Heloise, which nearly lost him is private parts.

The real shift toward what would become the “Age of Reason” came 30-40 years later with the appearance of Thomas Aquinas, the first medieval Christian to have access to all of the translated works of Aristotle. While having somewhat limited influence while he was alive, his writings eventually impacted most of the Western Christian world. His primitive thoughts on the essential nature of things – asking the question, “what can we know?” – set the stage for what would become modern science.  Aquinas proposed that all human knowledge – even that of God – came through our five senses, essentially establishing the concept of modern natural theology (Plato as well as Augustine also referred to natural theology, but did not limit “experience” to the 5 senses).

Thomas Cahill writes about the impact of Aquinas’ teaching on the western church:

Not even God’s revelation, filtered through scripture and church, could replace reason’s role in tackling and settling questions – since even God’s revelation must be approached, absorbed, and digested by human reason. … Such a philosophy must necessarily reduce the role of revelation and of church in the lives of those who subscribe to it, for it is the human mind, and it alone, that ultimately sits in judgment on the meanings of the scriptures and the pronouncements of the church, as on all else. (Mysteries of the Middle Ages, p. 215)

Cahill goes on to explain that in spite of this rationalistic approach to knowledge, Aquinas remained an orthodox believer, writing, “Three things are necessary for a human being’s salvation: to know what he ought to believe; to know what he ought to desire; and to know what he ought to do.” He also wrote, “To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.” Obviously, Aquinas did not see any conflict between faith and reason.

Aquinas wasn’t universally accepted, however. While he was sainted about 50 years after his death, his teachings were still being debated. It wasn’t until 1879 that his teachings became the “official” teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, due to Pope Leo XIII. Cahill questions the basis for this decision, stating that Pope Leo “viewed Thomism principally as a weapon to be used against the rising political and social liberalism of nineteenth-century Europe.”

Regardless of the RCC’s official position, it would seem that the success of modernism is largely owing to Aquinas, whose influence is seen everywhere.  This is especially true within Western Christianity, as even most non-Catholics have succumbed to the prevailing worldview of modernism, as evidenced in the area of apologetics and the reliance upon reason in interpreting the Scriptures.  Most in the church would probably agree with Thomas when he says, “The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”

But, what if he was wrong?  (hint: I tend to think he was.)