Uh oh. My philosopher friend (and he's working on his Ph.D in philosophy, so he has real stripes...not coffeshop stripes like the rest of us) Dustin has chimed in with questions about my Francis Schaeffer blog a few days back. Philosophy and Francis Schaeffer...we may be a while today, folks.
His first question was: 1) do you think he's correct to place theology at the very end of the chain, even behind popular culture. The answer is yes. Theology is usually the last of the academic disciplines, for a myriad of reasons, and highly reactionary. The (historically, but I agree that Schaeffer's "slow creep" theory is being affected by the Internet) continental philosophers throw the lobs over the net and academic theologues wait for the high bounce before they knock them back.
The second question was: 2) what, if any, aspects of contemporary Christianity, do you think made their way down through the system? The answer is that whatever aspects of contemporary Christianity that have made it through the system have had minimal impact (historic Christianity used to be the basis for all formal academic philosophy so I assume you used "contemporary" measuredly). Dispensationalism, for example. Maybe the neo-orthodoxy movement. The writings of Neuwen and Wright come to mind as well. The pendulum swings back, but it has been so marginalized in academic circles that contemporary Christianity by and large (out of necessity, mind you) publishes to itself and debates internally.
Finally, the question was asked "ARE the truths of Christianity discernable through reason alone? If not, what else must we have? Experience? Innate ideas? Faith?" There's no question that the basic truths about God are discernable by reason alone (re: Romans 1). I would eliminate experience and "innate ideas" from the mix. Faith certainly plays a part (as it does in atheism and/or pragmatism as well)...but the question will arise "Faith in WHAT?" At that point, I'd say the truth of the Scripture, which simply rounds out the discussion and kicks it back above Schaeffer's "line of despair."
Nice way to start the day with coffee and deep thought. Thanks, Dustin! I'm truly glad you're checking in occasionally and hope you start blogging yourself.
His first question was: 1) do you think he's correct to place theology at the very end of the chain, even behind popular culture. The answer is yes. Theology is usually the last of the academic disciplines, for a myriad of reasons, and highly reactionary. The (historically, but I agree that Schaeffer's "slow creep" theory is being affected by the Internet) continental philosophers throw the lobs over the net and academic theologues wait for the high bounce before they knock them back.
The second question was: 2) what, if any, aspects of contemporary Christianity, do you think made their way down through the system? The answer is that whatever aspects of contemporary Christianity that have made it through the system have had minimal impact (historic Christianity used to be the basis for all formal academic philosophy so I assume you used "contemporary" measuredly). Dispensationalism, for example. Maybe the neo-orthodoxy movement. The writings of Neuwen and Wright come to mind as well. The pendulum swings back, but it has been so marginalized in academic circles that contemporary Christianity by and large (out of necessity, mind you) publishes to itself and debates internally.
Finally, the question was asked "ARE the truths of Christianity discernable through reason alone? If not, what else must we have? Experience? Innate ideas? Faith?" There's no question that the basic truths about God are discernable by reason alone (re: Romans 1). I would eliminate experience and "innate ideas" from the mix. Faith certainly plays a part (as it does in atheism and/or pragmatism as well)...but the question will arise "Faith in WHAT?" At that point, I'd say the truth of the Scripture, which simply rounds out the discussion and kicks it back above Schaeffer's "line of despair."
Nice way to start the day with coffee and deep thought. Thanks, Dustin! I'm truly glad you're checking in occasionally and hope you start blogging yourself.
.jpg){kind=avatar}
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home