The Clarity of God's Existence: The Ethics of Belief After the Enlightenment

221 Pages·2008·85.53 MB·English

by  Owen Anderson

The Clarity of God's Existence
The Ethics of Belief after the Enlightenment
OWEN ANDERSON
WIPF & STOCK • Eugene, Oregon
THE CLARITY OF GOD'S EXISTENCE
The Ethics of Belief after the Enlightenment
Copyright © 2008 Owen Anderson. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations
in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any
manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions,
Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene,OR 97401.
www.wipfandstock.coni
ISBN 13:978-1-55635-695-7
Manufactured in the U.S.A.
Contents
Foreword xi
Preface xiii
Acknowledgments xvii
CHAPTER ONE Inexcusability, Redemption, and the Need
for Clarity • 1
1 Christian Scriptures and Clarity
2 Historic Christian Thinkers and Clarity
3 Overview of Enlightenment Challenges to God's Existence
4 Book Overview
CHAPTER TWO Attempts to Avoid the Need for Clarity • 21
1 Skepticism
2 Fideism
3 Probability and Plausibility
4 Mysticism and Religious Experience
5 Scripture Alone
6 No Free Will, or Free Will and Predestination are Incompatible
7 The Fall Provides an Excuse
8 Conclusion: Clarity as a Precondition to Redemptive Claims
CHAPTER THREE Attempts to Avoid the Need for Arguments • 45
1 Thomas Aquinas
2 Tertullian
3 John Calvin and the Sensus Divinitatis
4 Reformed Epistemology
5 Graham Oppy
6 Conclusion: Clarity Requires Strong Justification
CHAPTER FOUR Theistic Arguments before Hume • 59
1 Types of Theistic Arguments
2 Augustine
3 Anselm
4 Thomas Aquinas
5 John Locke
6 Conclusion: The Inexcusability Principle and Historic
Christian Claims
CHAPTER FIVE Enlightenment Challenges to Theistic Belief • 81
1 David Hume
2 Immanuel Kant
3 Conclusion: The Necessity to Establish the Ontological Argument
CHAPTER SIX Victory Over Theism? • 99
1 Friedrich Schleiermacher
2 G.W.F.Hegel
3 Ludwig Feuerbach
4 Albrecht Ritschl
5 Friedrich Nietzsche
6 Sigmund Freud
7 Conclusion: After Kant
CHAPTER SEVEN Theistic Responses
to the Challenge of Hume and Kant • 109
1 Fine-Tuning Theistic Arguments
2 Fideism
3 Non-Cognitivism
4 Classical Apologetics
5 Evidentialism
6 Cumulative Case Theory
7 Presuppositionalism
8 Reformed Epistemology
9 Conclusion: The Establishment of Clarity as a
Precondition to Exclusivist Claims
CHAPTER EIGHT The First Step toward the Clarity of Gods
Existence • 139
1 Showing the Clarity of Gods Existence
2 Steps for Showing the Clarity of Gods Existence
3 Clarity and the Inexcusability of Hume and Kant
4 Hume's Challenge to Reason
5 Critiquing Hume from Within: The Idea of the Eternal
6 Something Must Be Eternal: No Uncaused Events,
No Being from Non-Being
7 The Impossibility of Uncaused Events
8 Kant's Response to Hume
9 The Transcendental Method
10 The Transcendental Illusion
11 Responding to Kant
12 The Ontological Role of Reason
13 Presuppositional Thinking
14 The Error of Kant's Solution and the Response
15 Conclusion: Thinking about Being or Silence
CHAPTER NINE Historical Overview of Being from Non-Being. 167
1 Sextus Empiricus
2 Leibniz and Occasionalism
3 David Hume
4 Immanuel Kant
5 William James
6 John Stuart Mill
7 Bertrand Russell and Analytic Philosophy
8 Alan Guth, Quentin Smith, and Quantum Physics
9 Existentialism and Postmodernism
10 Philosophical Buddhism, Lao-Tzu,Wang Pi, and Chuang-Tzu
11 Conclusion: Empiricism and Uncaused Events
CHAPTER TEN Conclusion: Where Do We Go from Here? . 195
1 Responsibility at the Basic Level
2 Implications for Something Existing from Eternity
3 From the Eternal to God
4 Conclusion: The Principle of Clarity and the Possibility
of Knowledge through the Critical Use of Reason
Bibliography 203
Foreword
TMUST ADMIT THAT I was a bit skeptical when Owen sent me this manu-
X script. I have known Owen for several years, and have followed his writ
ing that has appeared as reviews and longer pieces in Reviews in Religion
and Theology. He has become a regular contributor to that journal (of
which I am the associate editor), and he covers a remarkable range of
material and subjects, always with an impeccable writing style and crisp
clear prose. But I tend not to be a big fan of works on apologetics, because
I tend to think that the truth of Christianity is proven in the trenches, so
to speak, in arguments over specific issues, rather than in general debates
about what apologetics should be.
I was wrong. This is an exciting book that advances the status of
apologetics by analyzing and probing some fundamental issues in contem
porary philosophy and theology. The emphasis on clarity is, to me, new and
fresh and provocative. First of all, it provides an alternative to the idea that
arguments for God must be primarily analyzed as true or false, right or
wrong, and instead provides a method for testing their meaning. Second,
it connects in fundamental and creative ways with our notions of moral
responsibility. I am currently teaching a course on philosophy and religion
to undergraduates at Wabash College, and when we do the proofs, a re
curring concern of the students is the problem of responsibility. At what
point do we hold people responsible for things they should or could know?
Conversely, how clear must God be in order to expect general revelation to
have any authority in our lives? And what is clarity anyway?
In sum, the issue of clarity links epistemology and moral philosophy
in a creative and constructive fashion. But that is only part of this book's
strengths. It is also a nice combination of historical criticism and contem
porary analysis. I think Owen is able to pull this off due to the elegance
and simplicity of his focus. The question of excusability lies at the heart of
several theological doctrines and plays a role in any discussion of God's
judgment or the afterlife. Owen focuses on the connection of inexcus-
Foreword
ability and redemption, which I found intriguing. I'm really surprised :hat
the constellation of clarity, responsibility, and inexcusability has not been
examined in detail before.
I truly believe that Owen's introduction of a new principle into
philosophy of religion—the principle of clarity—will gain attention and
analysis from many other philosophers and theologians and could very
well become a standard trope in the field of philosophy of religion.
A final trait that I like about this book is its ability to economi
cally and effectively delve into and characterize traditional or historic
Christianity for the purposes of adjudicating among competing philo
sophical attempts to obscure the importance of clarity. Owen defends his
thesis with the clearest exposition.
Stephen H.Webb
Wabash College
Oct 2007
xii