Enlightenment or Endarkenment? Two Philosophies That Impact Issues Today
(Ed’s note: The following article is amazing for its comprehensiveness, yet brief overview of two divergent philosphies that war against each other today. A MUST read.)
An electoral shift to the right, or “right-wing” influence in media, education, entertainment, business, law enforcement, the military, or medicine might be deplored as a return to the Dark Ages of superstition and repression, and a rejection of the Enlightenment, which brought science, prosperity, and freedom.
It is popularly believed that, during this dark era and the “Middle Ages,” obscurantist Christians deliberately rounded up classical texts to destroy them, everyone thought the earth was flat, and scientific and technological advancement was virtually nonexistent (tinyurl.com/yf6azpsj).
The phrase “Dark Ages” was first used to describe the Middle Ages by the Italian scholar Francesco Petrarch (1304–1374 AD). He thought that classical antiquity was the Golden Age, and that he lived in an age of decline. Some historians use the term to refer more specifically to the Early Middle Ages (c. 475–c. 800 AD), from the collapse of the western Roman Empire until the rise of the Carolingian Empire, sometimes considered the first phase of the Holy Roman Empire, in the late eighth century A.D.
Our Own Disaster from Helene in the South
Readers may have noticed the gap in the last two posts. Well, hurricane Helene devasted my area (East Central Georgia), and I have been pre-occupied with personal damage and repair form that event. Just now getting back into the sadde.
If interested, you may want to check out this video.
Quo Vadis Christian Philosopher? Some Concerns and Directions among the Successes
No Christian in philosophy today would argue that there has not been a virtual explosion of the number of Christians working in philosophy. William Lane Craig and Paul Copan declare, “Nothing short of a veritable revolution in Anglo-American philosophy has begun! … God is making a comeback.”[1] Someone has estimated that 30 percent of all faculty at the college and graduate levels, including those secular, who are working in philosophy, are Christians. Alvin Plantinga played a considerable role in this development with his leadership in several ways and in particular his landmark address in 1984, “Advice to Christian Philosophers.” Then, there are a plethora of others who deserve mention, but cannot be for reasons of time.[2] This growth of Christians in philosophy is a cause for celebration—an exciting advancement for the Kingdom of God.
However, rapid growth in any area is never entirely positive. While I make no claim to the status of Plantinga, I would like to explore some ways that we might be more “Christian” in our work. Of course, these are MY concerns, but perhaps you might agree on one or more, or I may give you some ideas on which to work.
(Ed’s note: while published several years ago, this article is worth highlighting at this time.)
A Review of John Frame’s A History of Western Philosophy and Theology:
(Dis)Engaging Our Reformed Fathers (?): A Review of John Frame’s A History of Western Philosophy and Theology: A Review Article
John Frame has been a popular fixture in Reformed and Evangelical theological discussions for the last forty years. He has concluded his formal academic career and has published a number of works. Among Frame’s books is his recent A History of Western Philosophy and Theology, which he wrote over decades of teaching. Frame’s work is a massive survey that spans from the peripatetic philosophers to the present day and thus covers roughly two thousand years of the interaction between philosophy and theology. He explores philosophy and theology from his own peculiar triperspectivalism. While some may find this as a constraining feature, readers can still profit from his analysis even if they do not agree with his approach. Frame has thirteen chapters on the Greek philosophers, patristic, medieval, early modern, enlightenment, and modern periods. Frame writes for a seminary-level audience given that the book originated as his lectures for a course titled “History of Philosophy and Christian Thought” (xxv). I believe, however, that laymen who are willing to invest the time can profit from the book, as Frame’s style is easy to follow, and he breaks most of his chapters into smaller sub-sections. This division of his subject matter facilitates briefly exploring the thought of an individual theologian or philosopher without being overwhelmed.
Strengths
Frame’s book has a number of positive qualities. First, one of the biggest holes in a seminarian’s education is his lack of philosophical knowledge. Many are unaware of the connections between philosophy and theology and thus come ill-prepared for the serious study of theology. Frame’s book, therefore, helpfully identifies key figures, ideas, and texts that equip students with an overview so they can get their bearings when first introduced to various theological ideas. How important is Aristotle to Aquinas or Kierkegaard to Barth, for example? Frame’s work addresses such questions in a useful manner…..
Weaknesses
At the same time, a book’s greatest strength can also carry weaknesses. In a book that covers such a large swath of history, theology, and philosophy, there are bound to be gaps and limitations.
The full review is here…
The Grand Old Doc: Gordon H. Clark
In the numerous extant letters from Edward J. Carnell to Gordon H. Clark the address is always the same; when Carnell wrote to Clark his letters were simply addressed, “Dear Doc.” Carnell is a name that should be familiar to many American Evangelicals. He was a graduate of Wheaton College, class of 1939, and later President of Fuller Seminary. But even in reaching such heights he was always the student; Clark, his former Wheaton College philosophy professor, always the Doc. When Carnell published a book of his own and sent a copy to Clark he signed his name on the first page and wrote “To the grand old ‘Doc.’”
…
Carnell was by no means the only American Evangelical to put Clark in such a place of honor in his mind. While doing research for The Presbyterian Philosopher, The Authorized Biography of Gordon H. Clark I flipped through the pages of many of Dr. Clark’s books in his personal library, now housed at Sangre de Cristo Seminary outside of Westcliffe, Colorado. In one of these books, I found a letter to Clark from Kenneth Kantzer; another name that should be familiar to many American evangelicals. Kenneth Kanzter taught theology here at Wheaton College from 1946 until 1963 and had a long connection also with Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.[1] What is particularly notable in the letter I found—the only one in fact that I’ve found between the two men—is a comment in the postscript where Kantzer writes to Clark:
“As always I enjoyed greatly our short time together at E.T.S. [The Evangelical Theological Society] In a way you are the grand patriarch of us all, but I have never heard of such a young and spritely patriarch as you. On second thought “leader” is much the better word.”
Faith vs. Faith – Fighting on Level Ground
Possibly the most important article for the survival of Western civilization
In both secular and Christian publications, one often hears such phrases as “faith-based organizations,” “peoples of faith,” and “the religious and irreligious.” The implication of these designations for Christians, however, is to admit defeat before ever engaging in battle. Throughout history there has been an antithesis between faith and reason. If one group is “faith-based,” then by default the other is “reason-based.” When presented in this way, those who are “reasoning” have virtually already won the argument. “Everyone” knows that to reason is better than to have “faith.” At least that is how the argument goes in the public square. Thus, I will present that Christians must continually and broadly begin to demonstrate that every person acts by faith—secularists, Christians, and those of any other religion.
Of course, to most Christians today, they have already admitted defeat. They do not want to “polish brass on a sinking ship.” But at least they ought to recognize that they have not upheld the honor of Christ, by allowing his followers to be placed into a category of irrationality. Then, there are those Christians who seem intent to invite persecution. They conclude that secularists have won the political and cultural battles. The only thing left is to accept persecution, being brave martyrs. After all, Tertullian said that “the blood of the martyrs is the seed” (of the church). The more persecution, the more that the Church grows—by this brand of reasoning—more irrationality.
Redeeming Reason: A God-Centered Approach (recent book)
Humans use reasoning to understand and order the world around us. We apply this logic in a variety of contexts, from classifying simple objects to considering complex philosophies. But how should our identity as Christians–made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27) with minds renewed by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 12:1-2)—inform our reasoning?
Vern S. Poythress explains how all human reasoning reflects God’s nature. Providing a foundational understanding of God as the source of rationality, Poythress details the 3 fundamental laws of logic–identity, contradiction, and excluded middle–with a strong focus on analogical reasoning. This robust guide explains types of analogy, ethics applied to logic, the use of analogies in the doctrines of God, and more to give readers a renewed perspective on how to use reason as a follower of God.
- Thorough Study of Reasoning: Explores the 3 fundamental laws of logic along with various kinds of analogy, including syllogistic reasoning, formal deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, and scientific models
Redeem Reason: A God-Centered Approach … read more and/or purchase
Biblical Medical Ethics, Inc. and Biblical Worldview 21st Century
While my two other websites are listed on this Home Page, I would like to make special mention of them as a New Post, just so you recogize them.