RSS
Religion Under the Lens
- Philosophy of Religion (40)
- Criticism and Defense (38) : Criticism of Religion
- Afterlife (35) : Heaven, Hell, Immortality
- Pluralism (13) : One Way or Many
- Prayer (2) : Speaking with God?
Religion and Philosophy in Germany (1834), quoted in Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy (2010: Thomas Nelson), p. 115.
Christianity — and that is its greatest merit — has somewhat mitigated that brutal German love of war, but it could not destroy it. Should that subduing talisman, the cross, be shattered, the frenzied madness of the ancient warriors, that insane Berserk rage of which Nordic bards have spoken and sung so often, will once more burst into flame. This talisman is fragile, and the day will come when it will collapse miserably. Then the ancient stony gods will rise from the forgotten debris and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes, and finally Thor with his giant hammer will jump up and smash the Gothic cathedrals. ... Thought precedes action as lightning precedes thunder. German thunder ... comes rolling somewhat slowly, but .. its crash ... will be unlike anything before in the history of the world. [W]hen you hear a crashing such as never before has been heard in the world's history, then you know that the German thunderbolt has fallen at last. At that uproar the eagles of the air will drop dead, and lions in the remotest deserts of Africa will hide in their royal dens. A play will be performed in Germany which will make the French Revolution look like an innocent idyll.
Mark Coppenger (B&H Academic: Nov 1, 2011), 296 pages.
Have Christians grown accustomed to those who defame the Church? Whether it’s a best-selling author who claims “religion poisons everything” or an atheist comedian whose punch lines aren’t hassled by the burden of proof, foes of the faith continue to declare Christianity morally deficient without much resistance. In Moral Apologetics for Contemporary Christians, Mark Coppenger mixes compelling references — from classic philosophers to modern entertainers — to reasonably push back against both harsh critics and less intense cultural relativists, contending that Christianity is morally superior to its competitors as well as true. Coppenger doesn’t avoid uncomfortable realities like the misbehavior of many Christians and false teachers, but he sets the book’s course in defense of his faith with evidence that a Christian approach to life makes people and societies flourish, while those who turn their backs on genuine Christianity are more liable to behave wickedly. ~ Book Description
John Lennox (Lion UK: Oct 2011), 248 pages.
Tackling Hawking, Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, and a newcomer in the field—the French philosopher Michel Onfray—John Lennox points out some of the most glaring fallacies in the New Atheist approach in this insightful book. Since the twin towers crashed to the ground on September 11, there has been no end to attacks on religion. Claims abound that religion is dangerous, that it kills, and that it poisons everything. And if religion is the problem with the world, say the New Atheists, the answer is simple — get rid of it. Of course, things aren’t quite so straightforward. Arguing that the New Athiests' irrational and unscientific methodology leaves them guilty of the very obstinate foolishness they criticize in dogmatic religious folks, this erudite and wide-ranging guide to religion in the modern age packs some debilitating punches and scores big for religious rationalism. ~ Book Description
Thomas V. Morris (Wipf & Stock Publishers: Jul 2011), 222 pages.
In The Logic of God Incarnate, Thomas Morris seeks to defend Chalcedonian Christology from charges of incoherence as well as heterodox alternatives. Whereas Morris's Our Idea of God is addressed to general readers, The Logic of God Incarnate focuses on scholarly readers, those who wrestle with the more mysterious aspects of the Christian faith. In his Preface, after telling how his interest in the subject developed while doing graduate work at Yale, Morris says: "In the course of thinking about the Incarnation for some years now, I have come to see that a few simple metaphysical distinctions and a solid dose of logical care will suffice to explicate and defend the doctrine against all extant criticisms of a philosophical nature. That is what this book attempts to show". The Incarnation, of course, makes the extraordinary claim that Jesus was in fact fully God and man. Extraordinary, however, does not mean illogical or absurd. "The Christian claim is that because of the distinctiveness of divinity and humanity, it was possible for the Second Person of the Trinity, God the Son, to take on human nature while still retaining his deity. The two particular natures involved, despite appearances to the contrary, allowed this unusual duality". In becoming man, the Son did not lose or even temporarily surrender His divinity — Morris respects, but does not accept, what he regards as a fatal compromise implicit in kenotic Christology. In being assumed by God, the man Jesus did not lose his humanity — though we must understand that his humanity was "fully human," realizing God's design for man, not the "merely human" being we tend to think of, taking ourselves as models. Accordingly, "The God-man is, according to orthodoxy, both fully human and fully divine, but at the same time more deeply or fundamentally divine than human. The Person bearing the two natures is an essentially divine Person". ~ Gerard Reed at Amazon.com
Paul F. Crawford, The Intercollegiate Review 46:1, reprinted at First Principles Journal (April 21, 2011).
It is almost scandalous to question the status of
"the Crusades" as the paradigmatic exemplar — along with the Inquisition — of the Christian religion gone bad. Nevertheless, recent
years have seen a steady stream of publications offering just such a
reappraisal. Paul F. Crawford summarizes some of this literature in
"Four Myths about the Crusades". The myths? 1) "The crusades
represented an unprovoked attack by Western Christians on the Muslim
world." 2) "Western Christians went on crusade because their greed led
them to plunder Muslims in order to get rich." 3) "Crusaders were a
cynical lot who did not really believe their own religious propaganda;
rather, they had ulterior, materialistic motives." 4) "The crusades
taught Muslims to hate and attack Christians." Events dimly remembered in the fog of history are prone to being recast and appropriated to one narrative or another. Crawford's summary and citations provide a starting point for considering whether the Crusades have suffered such a fate.
Reflections on the Revolution in France (J. Dodsley: 1790) pp. 15-6.
It is somewhat remarkable that this reverend divine should be so earnest for setting up new churches, and so perfectly indifferent concerning the doctrine which may be taught in them. His zeal is of a curious character. It is not for the propagation of his own opinions, but of any opinions. It is not for the diffusion of truth, but for the spreading of contradiction. Let the noble teachers but dissent, it is no matter from whom or from what.
John Milton, from the "Areopagitica", in The Best of the World's Classics (Funk and Wagnalls Co.: 1909), pp. 135-41.
Lords and Commons of England, consider what nation it is whereof ye
are, and whereof ye are the governors: a nation not slow and dull, but
of a quick, ingenious and piercing spirit, acute to invent, subtle and
sinewy to discourse, not beneath the reach of any point, the highest
that human capacity can soar to. Therefore the studies of Learning in
her deepest sciences have been so ancient and so eminent among us, that
writers of good antiquity and ablest judgment have been persuaded that
even the school of Pythagoras and the Persian wisdom took beginning
from the old philosophy of this island. And that wise and civil Roman,
Julius Agricola, who governed once here for Csesar, preferred the
natural wits of Britain before the labored studies of the French. Nor
is it for nothing that the grave and frugal Transylvanian sends out
yearly from as far as the mountainous borders of Russia, and beyond the
Hercynian wilderness, not their youth, but their staid men, to learn
our language and our theologic arts.
In The Early Life, Correspondence, and Writings of Edmund Burke, ed. Arthur Purefoy Irwin Samuels (Cambridge University Press), p. 176. Originally in the Reformer (April 7th, 1748).
The two greatest enemies of religion are infidelity and blind zeal, the former attacks it like an open enemy, and the latter like an indiscreet friend, does it more harm than good. The first gives rise to the free thinkers, the latter to our sectaries. A truly religious life has the same efficacy to the prevention of both.
The Case for Civility: And Why Our Future Depends On It (HarperCollins: 2008), p. 31, 32.
The salience of religion in our times is a massive stumbling block to much educated opinion in Europe, the United States, and the Western world at large — to what was once called the republic of letters, and which Peter Berger calls "the international faculty club." For one of the cardinal assumptions of intellectual orthodoxy since the Enlightenment, expressed canonically in the secularization theory, is that modernization means secularization, which in turn means that, like Lewis Carroll's Cheshire cat, religion will slowly disappear from sight as the world modernizes, leaving behind only a vacant grin. ¶ This presumption translates practically into three attitudes that are widely prevalent in educated circles in the West: that religion in the modern world is irrational, archaic, retrograde, and on the way out; that what remains of religion is the leading source of evil and conflict today; and that a central task of politics is to curb the illiberal power of religion, above all in the public square. In short, the idea that religion is a wild card in human affairs is admissible, but the idea that it could play a central and constructive role is absurd. ¶ For any thoughtful student of world affairs who understands the role of religion in American and Western history, or in international affairs today, this view is preposterous.
How We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God (Macmillan: 2003), pp. 71-2.
From the Crusades' numerous attempts to cleanse the Holy Land of infidels (anyone who was not a proper Christian), to the Inquisition's efforts to purge society of heretics (anyone who dissented from Christian dogma), to the Counter Reformation's push to extirpate reforming Protestants from Catholic lands, to the Holy Wars of the late twentieth century that continue to produce death rolls in the millions, all have been done in the name of God and One True Religion. However, for every one of these grand tragedies there are ten thousand acts of personal kindness and social good that go largely unreported in the history books or on the evening news. Religion, like all social institutions of such historical depth and cultural impact, cannot be reduced to an unambiguous good or evil; shades of gray complexity abound in all such societal structures, and religion should not be treated any differently than, say, political organizations. One could easily build a case that state-sponsored terrorism, revolutions, and wars make even these horrific religion sponsored catastrophes appear mild by comparison. If God is a meme, so is King and President; and if religion is a virus, politics is a full-blown epidemic replete with copy-me memes such as nationalism, jingoism, and outright racism. Yet no memeticist would propose that we do away with the state. Why? Because the state is a complex social entity with countless nuanced beneficent effects that go along with the pernicious.
"Is Religion Evil?" in God Is Great, God Is Good, eds. William Lane Craig and Chad Meister (IVP Books: 2009), pp. 128-9.
When a society rejects the idea of God, it tends to transcendentalize alternatives — such as the ideals of liberty or equality. These now become quasi-divine authorities, which none are permitted to challenge. ¶ Perhaps the most familiar example of this dates from the French Revolution, at a time when traditional notions of God were discarded as obsolete and replaced by transcendentalized human values. In 1792 Madame Rolande was brought to the guillotine to face execution on trumped-up charges. As she prepared to die, she bowed mockingly toward the statue of liberty in the Place de la Révolution and uttered the words for which she is now remembered: "Liberty, what crimes are committed in your name." Her point is simple, and I believe it to be irrefutable. All ideals — divine, transcendent, human or invented — are capable of being abused. That's just the way human nature is. And knowing this, rather than lashing out uncritically at religion, we need to work out what to do about it. The problem lies in human nature.
The True Intellectual System of the Universe (Gould & Newman: 1837, orig. 1678), pp. 266-7.
Wherefore, we shall in the next place declare, what this idea of God is, or what is that thing, whose existence they that affirm, are called Theists, and they who deny, Atheists. In order whereunto, we must first lay down this lemma, or preparatory proposition — that as it is generally acknowledged, that all things did not exist from eternity, such as they are, unmade, but that some things were made and generated or produced; so it is not possible that all things should be made neither, but there must of necessity be something self-existent from eternity, and unmade; because if there had been once nothing, there could never have been any thing. The reason of which is so evident and irresistible, that even the Atheists confess themselves conquered by it, and readily acknowledge it for an indubitable truth, that there must be something αγεννηιον, something which was never made or produced — and which therefore is the cause of those other things that are made, something ... that was self-originated and self-existing ... Wherefore all the question now is, what is this ... which is the cause of all other things that are made. ¶ Now there are two grand opinions opposite to one another concerning it; for, first, some contend, that the only self-existent, unmade and
incorruptible thing, and first principle of all things, is senseless
matter; that is, matter either perfectly dead and stupid, or at least
devoid of all animalish and conscious life. But because this is really
the lowest and most imperfect of all beings, others on the contrary
judge it reasonable ... that the only unmade
thing, which was the principle, cause, and original of all other
things, was not senseless matter, but a perfect conscious understanding
nature, or mind. And these are they, who are strictly and properly
called Theists, who affirm, that a perfectly conscious understanding
being, or mind, existing of itself from eternity, was the cause of all
other things; and they, on the contrary, who derive all things from
senseless matter, as the first original, and deny that there is any
conscious understanding being self-existent or unmade, are those that
are properly called Atheists.
The Case for Civility: And Why Our Future Depends On It (HarperCollins: 2008), pp. 1-2.
It would be a safe but sad bet that someone, somewhere in the world, is killing someone else at this very moment in the name of religion or ideology. ¶ Currently, the world's newspapers give us each day our daily read of the Sunni Muslims ferociously slaughtering Shia Muslims in Baghdad, and of Shia Muslims ferociously slaughtering Sunni Muslims in revenge. Elsewhere it might be Muslims and Hindus killing each other in Kashmir, or Buddhists and Hindus in Sri Lanka, or Muslims and animists in Sudan. Earlier it would have been Protestants and Catholics in Ulster, and Muslims, Orthodox, and Catholics in the Balkans. ... But before anyone drifts off into the well-rehearsed litany of blaming it all on religion, we should remember that modern "terror" began in France in 1789 in the name of secular Reason, killing several million in its wars and committing a near genocide in the Vendée on its first outing. Nearer our own time, close to a hundred million people were slaughtered in the twentieth century by secularist ideologies — far more than the deaths from all the religious persecutions and repression in Western history combined.
David Brog (Encounter Books: July 2010), 376 pages.
Religious faith is under assault. In books and movies and on television, militant secular critics attack religion with a renewed vigor. These “new atheists” repeat a two-part mantra: that religious faith is hopelessly irrational and that those possessed of such faith are responsible for the hatred and bloodshed that has plagued humanity. Abandon religion, they urge us, and the world will at last live in peace. In Defense of Faith examines this proposition in the context of Western civilization and the Judeo-Christian tradition and asserts that, far from encouraging hatred and violence, the Judeo-Christian tradition has easily been the most effective curb upon the dark defects of human nature and our best tool in the struggle for humanity. From the Christian activists who fought to stop the genocide of Indians in South America and their ethnic cleansing in North America, to the abolition of African slavery on both sides of the Atlantic, and on to modern human rights activists from Martin Luther King Jr. to the rock star Bono — In Defense of Faith rebuts the fashionable arguments against religion and presents the strong and lasting record of the Judeo-Christian idea. History has not been as kind to the atheist model: every time it is put to the test, we have reverted to the most base, violent instincts of our selfish genes. ~ Production Description
In its own words: Over the past several years, I have observed to my dismay the forces
of militant religious fundamentalism gaining in strength, both in my
home country, the United States of America, and worldwide. This ominous
development, driven by those who are dedicated enemies of all the
progress and enlightenment that has been achieved over the past several
centuries, threatens the liberty and happiness of all people
everywhere. As a result, I have been compelled to grow more involved in
political causes to help oppose it, and to defend the human rights that
once more need defending. This process of awakening led to my writing
the essay "Unapologetic",
but did not stop there. We need as many voices as possible calling
attention to the evil of the religious right and shining the light of
scrutiny on their true goals. Only by doing so can we hope to stop
them, and I hope to play some small part in that.
The final motivating factor is the fact that there are not nearly as
many good atheist weblogs as there should be. There are many blogs
written by atheists, but relatively few that are about atheism, relatively few that are well-written and address the subject frequently and knowledgeably.
Tagline: Sex, atheism, politics, dreams, and whatever. Thinking out loud since 2005.
The True Intellectual System of the Universe, Vol II (Gould & Newman, 1838), pp. 554-7.
Christ came not into the world to fill our heads with mere
speculations, to kindle a fire of wrangling and contentious dispute
amongst us, and to warm our spirits against one another with nothing
but angry and peevish debates; whilst in the mean time our hearts
remain all ice within towards God, and have not the least spark of true
heavenly fire to melt and thaw them. Christ came not to possess our
brains only with some cold opinions, that send down nothing but a
freezing and benumbing influence upon our hearts. Christ was vitae
magister, not scholae: and he is the best Christian, whose heart beats
with the purest pulse towards heaven; not he, whose head spinneth out
the finest cobwebs. ¶
He that endeavors really to mortify his lusts, and to comply with that
truth in his life, which his conscience is convinced of, is nearer a
Christian, though he never heard of Christ, than he, that believes all
the vulgar articles of the Christian faith, and plainly denieth Christ
in his life.
"Prosblogion was established in June of 2004 following the
suggestion by Jeremy Pierce (Syracuse) that the blogoshpere needed a
group philosophy of religion blog. Our contributors range from
advanced graduate students to senior figures in the field of philosophy
of religion, and include theists, atheists, and agnostics. Because so
many of us work in places where we may be the only one in our field
interested in issues in philosophy of religion, Prosblogion
often serves as a platform for those hallway conversations one might
have if they had more likeminded colleagues. Much to the credit of
our contributors and readers, a number of those conversations have made
the journey from blog posts to published articles."
