Faith and Reason: Three Views

190 Pages·2014·1.559 MB·English

by  Alan G. Padgett , Craig A. Boyd , Carl Raschke , Steve Wilkens

SPECTRUM
MULTIVIEW BOOKS
Faith and Reason
T H R E E V I E W S
Steve Wilkens
EDITED BY
WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY Craig A. Boyd,
Alan G. Padgett and Carl A. Raschke
InterVarsity Press
P.O. Box 1400, Downers Grove, IL 60515-1426
World Wide Web: www.ivpress.com
Email: [email protected]
©2014 by Steve Wilkens
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission from
InterVarsity Press.
InterVarsity Press® is the book-publishing division of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship/USA®, a movement of
students and faculty active on campus at hundreds of universities, colleges and schools of nursing in the United
States of America, and a member movement of the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students. For
information about local and regional activities, write Public Relations Dept., InterVarsity Christian Fellowship/USA,
6400 Schroeder Rd., P.O. Box 7895, Madison, WI 53707-7895, or visit the IVCF website at www.intervarsity.org.
Scripture quotations marked nasb are taken from the New American Standard Bible®, copyright 1960, 1962, 1963,
1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.
Scripture quotations marked niv are taken from THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®,
NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
Scripture quotations marked nrsv are from the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright 1989 by the
Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA. Used by permission.
All rights reserved.
Design: Cindy Kiple
Interior design: Beth Hagenberg
Images: The Incredulity of St. Thomas by Michelangelo Merisi de Caravaggio/Schloss Sanssouci, Potsdam,
Brandenburg, Germany/The Bridgeman Art Library
ISBN 978-0-8308-8023-2 (digital)
ISBN 978-0-8308-4040-3 (print)
Contents
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Steve Wilkens
1 Faith and Philosophy in Tension. . . . . . . . . . . 35
Carl A. Raschke
Faith Seeking Understanding Response . . . . . . . . . 68
The Synthesis of Reason and Faith Response. . . . . 76
2 Faith Seeking Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Collegiality and Difference in Theology and Philosophy
Alan G. Padgett
Faith and Philosophy in Tension Response . . . . . . . 116
The Synthesis of Reason and Faith Response. . . . . 125
3 The Synthesis of Reason and Faith . . . . . . . . . . 131
Craig A. Boyd
Faith and Philosophy in Tension Response . . . . . . . 160
Faith Seeking Understanding Response . . . . . . . . . 169
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
A Brief Note on Disagreeing Christianly
Steve Wilkens
List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
Praise for Faith and Reason: Three Views . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
About the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Spectrum Multiview Book Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
More Titles from InterVarsity Press . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
Introduction
Steve Wilkens
L
ife confronts us with an endless stream of questions.
Where should I go for lunch? Is it time to buy a new coat? Should I head
for bed now or stay up and watch the show I recorded? Paper or plastic?
Questions of this variety are rather mundane, and our decisions about
them, at least taken separately, have little effect on the overall course of our
life. At times, though, we contemplate inquiries that take us to a deeper
dimension, a place where our decisions have profound implications. Is
there a God? If so, how can I know that, or know anything about who or
what God is? What sources and authorities can I trust in my pursuit of
truth, or is the quest for truth an elusive dream? How should I live and
what should I value? Do I really have any choice in what I value or how I
live? Is my life meaningful, or am I simply the accidental result of blind
material forces? What happens at the end of my biological existence?
These and similar questions draw us into the most important pon-
derings of human inquiry. Because they are fundamental, we all ask
these questions at some point. Sometimes they arise in crisis situations
when events force our attention in their direction; occasionally they
come in quiet, reflective moments while sipping coffee in front of a fire
or rocking a child to sleep. However, we sometimes work through these
deep questions in a more intentional and systematic manner, perhaps in
an educational setting or more informally by sustained reading and re-
flection. When this is the case, we generally refer to this activity as either
theology or philosophy.
Theology and philosophy have never been able to completely distance
8 Faith and Reason: Three Views
themselves from each other precisely because they have a shared interest
in matters of deep existential concern to us. Yet, although both address
the same questions, there are important differences. First, philosophical
inquiry is generally understood to be rooted in reason, seeking justifi-
cation for positions that any clear-thinking person could share. Theology,
in contrast, is grounded in revelation, knowledge communicated by God
to humanity via Scripture or in some other way. A second difference
concerns the proper stance of the individual engaged in these activities.
Traditionally, the philosophical ideal is to put aside biases and personal
commitments so the best argument can take us where it will. We start, if
you will, from a position of detachment and skepticism, evaluating argu-
ments and counterarguments until we arrive at a rational conclusion.
Detachment is not an option for faith and theology, however. Theology,
as opposed to religious studies,1 starts from an attitude of trust or faith.
In other words, the Christian theologian is committed to beliefs (perhaps
as a result of prior philosophical investigations) that are central to the
Christian faith.
Because people of faith start from a set of beliefs, certain potential
answers to life’s big questions will remain viable for a philosopher that
will not be options for the Christian. For example, fundamental to
Christian faith is a commitment to belief in God’s existence. However,
philosophers, as philosophers, may remain agnostic or come to a con-
clusion contrary to that of a Christian. While the philosopher may seri-
ously entertain the belief that human life is accidental or that Scripture
is a hindrance in our quest for truth, Christian theology starts from the
premise that life is purposeful and the Bible is an authoritative guide to
truth. This is not to say that Christians agree on every detail about life’s
purpose or how we are to understand scriptural authority. Nor, as we will
investigate at length in this book, does a believer’s commitment allow us
1The “insider” stance proper to theology is evident in Karl Rahner’s definition, which says that
“Theology is the conscious and methodical explanation and explication of the divine revelation
received and grasped in faith.” Quoted from Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduc-
tion (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2001), p. 139. By contrast, S. A. Nigosian’s view of religious studies
stresses the necessity of the “outsider” perspective: “The study of world religions requires an
appreciation of the values that each individual religion gives to its believers and an understand-
ing of how people in different times and under different circumstances thought, felt, and acted.”
S. A. Nigosian, World Faiths, 2nd ed. (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994), p. 15.
Introduction 9
to predict how one views faith in relation to philosophy. Instead, the
point is that Christianity assumes the truth of basic principles and ideas
that philosophers, as philosophers, may view as open questions.
The differences between philosophy and theology concerning au-
thority, stance and method set up the tension this book investigates.
Does a shared interest in a common set of questions indicate that phi-
losophy and theology are close kin and allies, or are they competitors
vying for our souls, each requiring a loyalty that excludes the other? Do
differences in method and orientation signal that these disciplines are
valuable and complementary partners, or do their dissimilarities indicate
that we should expect philosophy and theology to be incompatible or
even mutually hostile?
GETTING BEYOND THE BINARIES
The differences between faith and reason often lead to the assumption
that we are confronted by a binary choice—we must choose one or the
other. Indeed, individuals on both sides have come close to declaring war
on the other. Many who line up on the “reason” side of the line assert that
theology and faith are antithetical to clear thought and are inherently
hostile to science (which today is often cited as the paramount expression
of rational thought). They argue that reliance on faith and the revelation
upon which it rests tangles humanity in hopeless and outmoded super-
stitions that hinder progress. In this view, faith is not benign but dan-
gerous, and thus should be relegated to the dustbins of history.2 At the
other end of the reason-faith spectrum, Christians have often denigrated
reason as “merely human,” identifying it as the archenemy of faith. In
2Sigmund Freud declares, “It is not permissible to declare that science is one field of human
mental activity and that religion and philosophy are others, at least its equal in value, and that
science has no business to interfere with the other two. . . . It is simply a fact that truth cannot
be tolerant, that it admits not compromises or limitations, that research regards every sphere of
human activity as belonging to it and that it must be relentlessly critical if any other power tries
to take over any part of it.” Sigmund Freud, “New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis,” in
The Complete Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, ed. and trans. James Strachey (New York:
Norton, 1966), p. 624. More recently, Sam Harris says, “For anyone with eyes to see, there can
be no doubt that religious faith remains a perpetual source of human conflict. Religion persuades
otherwise intelligent men and women to not think, or to think badly, about matters of civiliza-
tional importance.” Sam Harris, The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (New
York: Norton, 2005), pp. 236-37.
10 Faith and Reason: Three Views
this view, our very salvation is at stake, so dependence on any finite
human capacity threatens or diminishes the faith upon which our eternal
destination depends.
While these binary opposites describe perennial and often-popular
impressions of the relationship (or lack thereof) between faith and
reason, they do not represent the best thinking of either group. Most
philosophers today are more circumspect about reason, moderating the
Enlightenment’s confidence that rationality can transcend the influence
of culture, personal bias or perspective, religion, social status and other
factors. Indeed, while Christopher Hitchens and others who represent
the view that science is the antithesis of faith say, “Our principles are not
a faith,”3 those more careful about the manner in which scientific thought
proceeds acknowledge that the scientific enterprise relies on principles
that themselves cannot be demonstrated by reason. In addition, science
itself relies on the regularities of nature, what we often refer to as the laws
of nature. However, the laws on which science is grounded are not them-
selves directly open to empirical confirmation, even if their utility pro-
vides good reasons to trust (i.e., have faith in) them. In short, faith of
some kind is fundamental to scientific investigation itself.
Similarly, Christians who claim to reject reason’s authority inevitably
smuggle it back into their considerations in a multitude of ways. They
are quite happy to employ the fruits of rational investigation embedded
in their cellphone’s technology or give thoughtful consideration to re-
tirement investment strategies. Indeed, they may even give reasons, ar-
guments they expect logical individuals to find convincing, for rejecting
the spiritual authority of reason. In reality, we all rely on reason in in-
numerable ways, from balancing the checkbook to reading a map—or
reading this page, for that matter. Thus, to make sense of the discussions
in this book, we will need to get beyond the stereotypical either/or bi-
naries mentioned above. Instead, the more specific question with which
we will struggle concerns the proper relationship of faith and reason,
theology and philosophy.
3Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Ruins Everything (New York: Twelve, 2009),
p. 5.