Apologetics.
Christian apologetics, broadly conceived, is argumentation on behalf of the Christian faith. Its substance is derived from revelation, while its packaging reflects the culture it addresses. Presumably, apologetics is directed toward those outside the Christian community, but in reality the audience is usually those within the Christian community.
Apologetics was imported to America ready-made from Great Britain. At the close of the eighteenth century, English and French deism* penetrated most facets of American life. College presidents such as Timothy Dwight* at Yale* and Mark Hopkins* at Williams spoke out against deism, and courses in Christian evidences soon appeared at Transylvania (1789), Harvard* (1807), Princeton* (1821), Amherst (1822), Dartmouth* (1822), Williams (1822) and Yale (1822). Christian evidences were required in the newly founded state universities of Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, South Carolina, Wisconsin and Mississippi. Evidences were taught at Mississippi in the regular curriculum from 1850 to 1930. The British anti-deistic apologetic became the standard, particularly that of Joseph Butler (1692-1752) and William Paley (1743-1805). Many schools required both Butler and Paley as texts, but almost always, Paley.
A consensus on apologetics was possible among Protestants because of a commonly accepted epistemology, agreed upon by deists and traditionalists alike. This was the epistemology of the British philosopher John Locke (1632-1704), which was mediated through Scottish Common Sense Realism* and later flew under the flag of Baconianism. Locke held that all ideas are derived from experience, either sensation or reflection. The mind can synthesize these raw data and engage in rational demonstration with profit, especially in matters pertaining to God. Scientific knowledge came from empirical data, and religious knowledge from Scripture* and experience. Despite differing nuances, all eighteenth- and nineteenth-century American apologists agreed epistemologically. At stake was the deist rejection of miracles, as well as the necessity of revelation. The burden of apologetics, therefore, consisted in marshaling historical evidence for the miracles, and the necessity and authenticity of the Scriptures.
Butler argued in Analogy of Religion (1736) that neither miracles nor Scripture can be proven with final certainty, but then neither can scientific propositions. Conclusions in either case are probable. For Paley (View of the Evidences of Christianity, 1794), the miracles, fulfilled prophecies and the triumph of Christianity establish the veracity of the Christian faith. The miracles are attested by at least twelve credible witnesses. Americans who drew upon these British predecessors were Alexander Campbell* in his debate with Robert Owen* on Evidences of Christianity (1829) and Mark Hopkins's Lectures on the Evidences of Christianity (1858).
The influence of deism had waned by the 1850s, but new challenges appeared on the horizon—first evolution* and then the new form of biblical interpretation,* higher criticism. Discussions of evolution only became incorporated into apologetics proper after the turn of the century. Higher criticism, however, was another matter. The traditionalists defended the veracity of the Scripture and set out to prove that the documents were written by Moses, the prophets and the apostles, and therefore were a credible witness to the revelation from God. Such was the thrust of books by George P. Fisher* (1889), Harvey W. Everest (1884) and J. W. McGarvey* (1886).
After 1900 apologetics became more and more problematic. The American epistemological consensus gradually eroded. The first challenge was Hegelianism in its various forms. But it was the rigorous empiricism of neo-Kantianism, with its severe reservations about the possibility of divine action, which destroyed the possibility of a pan-apologetic. Liberals* and fundamentalists* could no longer talk with each other because the fundamentalists retained the older Lockian epistemology while the liberals followed first Hegel and then Kant or the pragmatists.
A revival followed World War 2* with the apologetic theology of Paul Tillich* and the conservative apologetics of Gordon H. Clark,* Edward J. Carnell* and Bernard Ramm. Tillich argued that culture provided the questions, specifically the alienation of modern man, and biblical faith the answers. His views drew considerable attention in a decade intrigued with depth psychology. Clark championed fundamentalistic Calvinism* by showing that all other positions violated the law of noncontradiction. His defense was therefore philosophical rather than historical. Carnell and Ramm hoped to command the attention of the wider Christian community—Carnell through the law of noncontradiction and history, and Ramm by characterizing the varieties of apologetics—but they primarily captivated fellow conservatives. They did, however, enter the international arena by discussing the classical apologists as well as neoorthodox* theologians.*
By the late 1960s the neoorthodox theologians were passing from the scene, and American intellectuals were increasingly fractured epistemologically, affirming logical positivism, language analysis, phenomenology, existentialism,* neo-Kantianism, process,* personalism, pragmatism and neo-Thomism* (with its attendant Roman Catholic* and Anglican* apologetics). The conservatives, in contrast, embraced either Cartesian rationalism, Lockian empiricism or both, and turned their attention to experiential and relational* theology, which retained an empirical foundation but without the prosaic Lockian confines.
Bibliography. B. Willey, Christianity Past and Present (1952); E. Flower and M. G. Murphey, A History of Philosophy in America (1977); R. C. Sproul, J. Gerstner, A Lindsley, Classical Apologetics (1984); J. O. Filbeck, The Christian Evidence Movement (1946).
T. H. Olbricht
Dictionary of Christianity in America.[1]
Apologetics.
The rational defense of Christian faith. Historically, apologetic arguments of various types have been given: philosophical arguments for the existence of God; arguments that the existence of God is compatible with suffering and evil; historical arguments, such as arguments from miracles and fulfilled prophecies; and arguments from religious experience, including mystical experience. (See argument from prophecy; evil, problem of; mysticism; theistic arguments.) Some distinguish positive apologetics, which attempts to argue for the truth of Christianity, from negative apologetics, which merely attempts to remove barriers to faith by responding to critical attacks.
Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion.[2]
Occasionally called eristics, apologetics is the formal defense of the
Christian faith. Historically, Christian theologians have differed as to whether
apologetics is appropriate to the presentation of the gospel, and if so, how it
should be accomplished. Depending on how they have answered these questions,
apologists have appealed to rational argumentation, empirical 14evidence, fulfilled prophecy, authorities of the
church or mystical experience in defending such beliefs as the existence of God,
the authority of Scripture, the deity of Christ and the historicity of Jesus'
resurrection. See also polemics.--
The Hodder Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms
by Mr. Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzi, Cherith Fee Nordling [3]
Appendix / Bibliography
[1] Reid, Daniel G., ed. Dictionary of Christianity in America. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990. WORDsearch CROSS e-book
|
Posts
.jpg?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/quality,q_70/resize,m_mfit,w_350,h_350/format,webp)
No comments:
Post a Comment