Christianity And The Role of Philosophy (K. Scott Oliphint)

 TITLE: Christianity And The Role Of Philosophy

AUTHOR: K. Scott Oliphint

PUBLISHER: Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Seminary Press, 2013.

Oliphint begins Christianity and the Role of Philosophy (CRP) by defining terms. He writes, "Generally speaking, it (philosophy) is a theoretical activity that seeks to make sense out of the world in order to make sense of our place in it" (5). In broad strokes, this seems to make sense. Throughout the history of philosophy, people have attempted to make sense of reality (metaphysics), knowledge (epistemology), and ethics. Oliphint explains that a natural place to start is from the Socratic dictum to "know thyself"(8). In so doing, you begin to gain insight into these three philosophical subjects.

Returning to the central question of CPR, Oliphint offers four answers that have been given. The first is that philosophy governs theology. This would be the position of Herman Dooyeweerd (1894–1977). It's the idea that "philosophy assigns to theology its place and its task" (15). This follows from the notion that "philosophy deals with reality; therefore, it is better equipped to lay out the metaphysical boundaries not only for theology but for every other discipline. 

The second position is that philosophy is to be integrated with theology. This is something like the view held by Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). Aquinas believed "that the knowledge of God could be acquired by reason alone" (15). Oliphint explains how this view requires a theory of the relationship between natural theology and special revelation. Natural theology functions as a form of immediate understanding obtained by any person observing the natural world. Thus, special revelation functions as supplamental understanding to proper conclusions arrived at through natural theology. 

Third is the view that philsophy is theology, the view held by John Scotus (1265/66–1308) as well as various forms of Deism and modernist theologians like Paul Tillich. In this view, there is no place for revelation. Knowledge of God comes through reason alone. Thus much of the discussion is about abstract ideas or systems of thought to the exclusion of anything revelatory. 

Oliphint prefers the Reformed view, which is that theology governs philosophy. In order to explain this, he reverts back and begins with the first principles, or what has been historically known in Latin as the principium. This term is preferred by Oliphint because it communicates the notion of a theological or philosophical source or ground. There are two categories of principium the first being the principium essendi which has more to do with existence or being, and the second is the principium cognoscendi which deals with the foundations of knowledge. The answer to the relationship between the disciplines of philosophy and theology will depend on their principium.

For Oliphint and the Reformed view, using philosophy as ones principium is a nonstarter. Philosophy treats bare reason as its principium. It might be further added that reason is governed by certain laws of thought, like logical laws. I can see the usefulness in this way of looking at it, but as Oliphint explains, we are left with nagging questions about: What kind of laws are these? What are their origins? What is their nature? Are they material or immaterial? Are they invariant? Are these the kind of laws that we can rely on to produce truth? At the outset, we are left with the possibility that reason might not be the best place for us to ground our principium.    

Theology (and I might add trinitarian Theology) provides a principium essendi in God. God is the basis or ground for all predictions. The laws of thought that I discussed above are the way in which God thinks and expects us to think. As created beings, we are created in His image, so we have the ability to execute on these laws of thought but are not able to execute on them absolutely as God does. This is what we call the principium cognoscendi, which for theology is revelation.

The point of this is to show that in theology we find the required principium for predicating on philosophy. Using theology as a predication for philosophy means that philosophy is subservient to theology. That is because reason is not self-verifying but contingent on the principium of theology. From this perspective, Oliphint uses Francis Turretin's (1623-1687) four uses of philosophy in theology. The first is apologetics; the second is a testimony of consent in things known by nature, to properly distinguish and clarify the truth as found in Scripute; and lastly, to point us to the reception and management of higher science.

Timothy George on the Trinity

I have been reading A Theology for the Church, edited by Daniel Akin, and came across something worth sharing from Timothy George. He writes:

“Though followed by many orthodox theologians, there is a subtle danger in the former pattern (de uno deo). The danger is that it can lead to a low-grade unitarianism that reduces the doctrine of the Trinity to an afterthought. If we begin by treating the essence and attributes of God in the abstract and then come along and say, “Oh yes, this God is also a triune reality,” the latter affirmation can easily become a secondary or even dispensable element in one’s theological system…

We should introduce one further distinction before turning to some key biblical texts. The economic Trinity refers to God’s works ad extra, that is, what God has done outside himself in creation and redemption, while the immanent Trinity denotes God’s relations ad intra, that is, his eternal intratrinitarian communion as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The immanent Trinity is also called the “ontological” Trinity…

The doctrine of the Trinity is the necessary theological framework for understanding the biblical account of Jesus as the true story of God-and if what the Bible says about Jesus is anything other than that, we have no gospel.”

Here, George discusses the tendency to discuss the one God over and above the Trinity. On the surface, this seems harmless, but it tends to cause one to think theologically about God as a single modality instead of the triune God that He is. For God to be a solitary modality would mean something like a "low-grade unitarian." This is why the church, early on, spoke about God as one, in essence, three in person.

George also introduces the distinction between economic and immanent or ontological Trinity. The economic Trinity explains how the Father creates, the Son saves, and the Holy Spirit sustains us. It's what he means when he says that the doctrine of the Trinity is the necessary theological framework for understanding the Gospel. Foundational to everything is the ontological Trinity. The idea is that a personal God existed from all eternity, who loved, had volition, and created all things, including us, in His image.

I appreciated how George handled the doctrine of the Trinity in this section. As I read through A Theology For The Church, I found many sections to be brief, to the point, and without the complexities common in other theology texts. From the publisher:

A Theology for the Church, an immense 992-page work edited by Daniel Akin, with contributions from leading Baptist thinkers Albert Mohler, Jr., Paige Patterson, Timothy George, and many others, addresses four major issues in regard to eight Christian doctrines.

What does the Bible say? Each Christian doctrine is rooted in the Bible’s own teaching in both the Old and New Testaments.

What has the Church believed? Christians have interpreted these doctrines in somewhat different ways through the centuries.

How do the doctrines fit together? Each Christian doctrine must cohere with the other doctrines.

How does each doctrine impact the church today? Each Christian doctrine must be meaningful for today’s church. It’s sure to become a widely-used resource in systematic theology study.

Quotes

"Scripture does not give us data to interpret; it is itself the interpretation of reality, the shaper of a distinct worldview." 

-Herman Bavinck I.354