RSS
Religious Views and Discussions or Paradigms & Metanarrative
Nathan Jacobson
»
November 06, 2008
On a recent broadcast of the Infidel Guy (Sep. 16, 2008), a caller challenged Gary Habermas, the evening's guest, to reconcile the omniscience of God with human free will. Habermas did his best to argue that there is no necessary conflict, that God knows because we freely choose, we do not so choose because God knows. For my part, I think it's a legitimate and difficult objection. I'm not yet persuaded by either Molinist or Openness attempts to reconcile the two, much less compatabilism or the notion that it is solved by God's being outside of time. But what followed is what struck me. Habermas took the opportunity to ask Reggie Finley, the host, whether he, as a naturalist, believed in free will. Reggie paused, then conceded that he was still trying to figure that one out. Good luck, Reggie, because while free will may be problematic for the theist, it is probably a lost cause for the naturalist. For example, in his excellent and lucid work, The Significance of Free Will, Robert Kane manages to find a place for indeterminacy in matter (in quantum theory), but not for agency, the sine qua non of free will in my judgment. My point is not to wade into the deep waters of human freedom. Rather, I'm taking exception to the widespread impression that it is only the theist who must accept mysteries, antinomies, and quandaries. The truth is, all worldviews are beset by unique difficulties and internal conceptual problems. And, we remain perplexed by many mysteries that we share in common. That is to say, we're in this together. With our amazing, but limited human faculties, the world remains puzzling to us all. In the ongoing debate about what is and is not real, it would serve us well to be mindful of the problems with which each worldview must deal. To that end, here are some that occur to me for both Christian theism and for naturalism.
"The Challenges of Postmodernism", chap.14 in Passionate Conviction, eds. Paul Copan and William Lane Craig (B&H Academic, Nashville : 2007), p.206.
An important and, sadly, often neglected component of Christian apologetics is the task of showing how Christian ideas enhance and do explanatory work across the academic disciplines and how rival worldviews harm and fail to do commensurate work in those same fields. And given that the various aspects of the image of God are recalcitrant facts for rival worldviews such as naturalism and postmodernism, one would expect that in those fields that examine that image, Christianity would enhance and its rivals would harm work and practice in these fields in particular. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the field of psychology.
Charles Taylor (Belknap Press: Sep 20, 2007), 896 pages.
In his characteristically erudite yet engaging fashion, Taylor, winner of the 2007 Templeton Prize, takes up where he left off in his magnificent Sources of the Self (1989) as he brilliantly traces the emergence of secularity and the processes of secularization in the modern age. Challenging the idea that the secular takes hold in a world where religion is experienced as a loss or where religions are subtracted from the culture, Taylor discovers the secular emerging in the midst of the religious. The Protestant Reformation, with its emphasis on breaking down the invidious political structures of the Catholic Church, provides the starting point down the road to the secular age. Taylor sweeps grandly and magisterially through the 18th and 19th centuries as he recreates the history of secularism and its parallel challenges to religion. He concludes that a focus on the religious has never been lost in Western culture, but that it is one among many stories striving for acceptance. Taylor's examination of the rise of unbelief in the 19th century is alone worth the price of the book and offers an essential reminder that the Victorian age, more than the Enlightenment, dominates our present view of the meanings of secularity. Taylor's inspired combination of philosophy and history sparkles in this must-read virtuoso performance.
Site Description: The place for resources and discussion on the cornucopia of religious varieties. Belief.net is itself non-partisan, but provides a space for pluralists and proponents of every faith to speak their peace on all manner of religious issues. Rate / Comment
Site Description: Irreverent reflections on the life of faith from those who've been there and back. Killing the Buddah features a remarkably eclectic, occasionally offensive, and always provocative collection of writers. Rate / Comment
Nancy R. Pearcey (Crossway Books: Jun 29, 2004), 512 pages.
As a religiously adrift young adult in the 1960s, Pearcey found her way to the Swiss retreat, and the intellectually rigorous faith, of the Calvinist maverick Francis Schaeffer. This book continues the Schaeffer-inspired project that Pearcey and Chuck Colson began in How Now Shall We Live? — awakening evangelical Christians to the need for a Christian "worldview," which Pearcey defines as "a biblically informed perspective on all reality." Pearcey gives credibly argued perspectives on everything from Rousseau's rebellion against the Enlightenment, to the roots of feminism, to the spiritual poverty of celebrity-driven Christianity. She also provides a layperson's guide to the history of America's anti-intellectual strain of evangelicalism. ~ Publishers Weekly
James W. Sire (InterVarsity: June, 2004), 172 pages.
For more than thirty years James W. Sire has grappled with this
issue. In this book he offers readers his most mature thought on the
concept of a worldview, addressing such questions as: What is the
history of the concept itself? What is the first question we should ask
in formulating a worldview: What is the really real? or How do we know
anything at all? How are worldviews formed existentially as well as
intellectually? Is a worldview primarily an intellectual system, a way
of life or a story? What are the public and private dimensions of a
worldview? What role can worldview thinking play in assessing our own
worldview and those of others, especially in light of the pluralism
within which we live? In his widely used textbook The Universe
Next Door, first published in 1976, Sire offered a succinct definition
of a worldview and cataloged in summary fashion seven basic worldview
alternatives. Students, critics, new literature and continued
reflection have led him to reexamine and refine his definition of a
worldview. This companion volume to The Universe Next Door is the fruit
of that effort. Here is an excellent resource for all who want to
explore more deeply how and why worldview thinking can aid us in
navigating our pluralistic universe.
James W. Sire (Intervarsity: May 1, 2004), 252 pages.
When The Universe Next Door was first introduced nearly thirty years
ago, it set the standard for a clear, readable introduction to
worldviews. In concise, easily understood prose, James W. Sire
explained the basics of theism, deism, naturalism, nihilism,
existentialism, Eastern monism and the new consciousness. The second
edition was updated and expanded to include sections on Marxism and
secular humanism, as well as a completely reworked chapter on what is
now widely known as New Age philosophy rather than new consciousness.
And the third edition offered further updating and revisions, including
a thoroughly revised chapter on New Age philosophy and, perhaps most
importantly, a new chapter on postmodernism. Now the fourth edition
refines the definition of worldview itself, incorporating Sire's
thinking and teaching during the past decade.
The Universe Next Door has been translated into several languages and
has been used as a text at over one hundred colleges and universities
in courses ranging from apologetics and world religions to history and
English literature. With the publication of the fourth edition, this
book will continue to aid students, teachers and anyone who wants to
understand the variety of worldviews that compete with Christianity for
the allegiance of our minds and hearts. ~ Product Description
J. P. Moreland, William Lane Craig (InterVarsity Press: April 1, 2003)
I find this book very helpful as a reference. It gives philosophical arguments for Christianity in a thorough and scholarly way. Moreland and Craig are libertarian free thinkers, but they are fair to other theological perspectives. Chapter 13 is worth the price of the book alone. The various views of man's freedom are discussed. Does God predestine everything in our lives, as Calvinism teaches? Or, does God allow men to have freewill? One view says God determines everything we do. The other view says in some ways man is a self determining creature. This has been a hotly debated topic for many centuries. Moreland and Craig handle it admirably. ~ Fred Currie
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (Oxford University Press: June 1998)
Represents Nietzsche's attempt to sum up his philosophy. Returning to a favorite theme, he offers a wealth of fresh insights into what he saw as the self-destructive urge of Christianity, the prevalence of "slave moralities" and the terrible dangers in the pursuit of philosophical or scientific truth.
Gilbert K. Chesterton (Ignatius Press: 1993)
As always with Chesterton, there is in this analysis something (as he said of Blake) "very plain and emphatic." He sees in Christianity a rare blending of philosophy and mythology, or reason and story, which satisfies both the mind and the heart. On both levels it rings true. As he puts it, "in answer to the historical query of why it was accepted, and is accepted, I answer for millions of others in my reply; because it fits the lock; because it is like life." Here, as so often in Chesterton, we sense a lived, awakened faith. All that he writes derives from a keen intellect guided by the heart's own knowledge. ~ Doug Thorpe
"Christianity and Culture", in Princeton Theological Review 11 (1913), p.6.
[It] is based simply upon a profound belief in the pervasiveness of ideas. What is today a matter of academic speculation begins tomorrow to move armies and pull down empires. In that second stage, it has gone too far to be combated; the time to stop it was when it was still a matter of impassionate debate. So as Christians we should try to mold the thought of the world in such a way as to make the acceptance of Christianity something more than a logical absurdity.

