In the second chapter of the book, The Christian Mind, Harry Blamires distinguishes between two kinds of thinking – Christian and secular. To think secularly “is to think within a frame of reference bounded by the limits of our life on earth,” whereas to think Christianly, “is to accept all things with the mind as related, directly or indirectly, to man’s eternal destiny as the redeemed and chosen child of God.” It is possible, Blamires argues, that one might think secularly about Christian matters, such as the unity of the church, and Christianly about secular matters such as the cost of gas. Indeed, Blamires argues that there is nothing that cannot be thought about…
-
-
Evolution and the Soul
Historically, Christians have held to various forms of dualism, the idea that the human person is both material and immaterial This, it is said, is what makes it possible to exist beyond the grave even though one’s earthly body remains in it. To the materialist such an idea is archaic and unnecessary. Evolution explains our origins without human souls and if the cost is not living on after we die then so be it. Of course there are many who are both Christian and committed to an evolutionary explanation of human origins. If one is committed to evolution and to the idea of life after death one must explain a possible way that the soul emerges through…
-
I am a Heretic
Pastor, Kevin DeYoung writes: “at present, one of the worst heresies is to be in the same zip code with someone who takes a firm stance on homosexuality” (see here). Heresy, Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek claims, is no longer deviation from dogma or even reason, but deviation from the crowd. If holy text and universal truth go the way of the dodo, then the crowd is all that we have left. And, although no one is quite ready to burn the heretic (in this country, at least), there are many ready to silence him. But I am not yet faced with a death threat. And I am weak, fallible and prone to capitulation.…
-
Herodiasian Times
Herodias Jared Wilson likens our time to a transition from Herod to Herodias (see here). He quotes Mark: “For John had been saying to Herod, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” And Herodias had a grudge against him and wanted to put him to death. But she could not, for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and he kept him safe. When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed, and yet he heard him gladly.” John makes a public claim, rooted in his worldview, that is “heard gladly” by Herod even while not taken to heart. Herodias, on the other…
-
Reference: God
When two people, one Christian and one non-Christian, reference God are they referring to the same God? If a Muslim says “Allah be praised” and a Christian says, “praise God!” are they referring to the same God? If one thinks it is the same God, it appears that one would have to lower the differentiation between the two religions. If one says that the references are completely separate, then is it at all possible for an unbeliever to refer to the Christian’s God at all? In his speech to the Athenians, Paul refers to the Athenian temple to an unknown god. And what the Athenians deem to be unknown, Paul proposes to declare (or make known) to them. In this case…
-
Historical Adam?
There is an interesting (supposedly all the rage) theological position building up a head of steam. The movement attempts to find a solution to a problem raised if one is committed both to a high view of scripture and a high view of modern science. Evidence from modern science supposedly produces belief in an evolutionary account of earth’s history and the Biblical account produces some history, but mostly a theological account. The two must be squared in some way and, for some people, a form of theistic evolution emerges. However, a vital question also emerges: what are we to do with the historical Adam? And here is where the debate gets interesting. The line of thought,…
-
Riffing on Tripartite
The precondition of knowledge has traditionally been whether what is known is true, believed and justified: p is known iff p is true, S believes that p is true, and S is justified in believing that p is true. This definition of knowledge has been challenged by Paul Gettier and since then epistemology has revolved around what counts as justification for a belief (See the Warrant series by Alvin Plantinga for a good response to Gettier). I intend not to delve too far into the problem. Only make a few comments as the definition relates to Christian beliefs. First, the nature of truth. Christian Theism (CT) holds that God knows…
-
Language
What is the purpose of language? Where did it come from? For much of Western history we have vacillated between the theory that meaning is in the object and the theory that meaning is in the mind. Perhaps it was Wittgenstein who turned all this on its head. After making the argument for the former, Wittgenstein changed his mind and thought that the problem would be solved by resisting the temptation to define language ostensibly. Instead, language, and, more basically, meaning, is functional. Language is used in what Wittgenstein called, “language games,” a complete activity, a way of doing things not merely naming things. Language has since been top of the philosophical to-do list.…