In my last post I pointed out that
Christian belief comes from the instigation of the Holy Spirit, rather than
from unaided human reason. In this post, I am going to focus a little more
attention on what I mean by the terms justification, rationality, and warrant
as they are used in Christian apologetics. If you are new to this sort of
study, all I can do is encourage you to stay with it. You will run across
several terms and concepts that will seem confusing at first but I promise you
that if you will stay with, refuse to give up, eventually, the lights bulbs
will start becoming brighter and brighter.
I said in my last post that
Christians will generally encounter two types of objections to Christian
belief. The first kind is called de jure
objections. This kind of objection argues that Christian belief is not
warranted because there is something defective in it. Christian belief is
irrational, or those who hold Christian beliefs are operating with deficient
cognitive faculties. The second kind of objection is called de facto objections. This kind of
objection argues that Christian belief is false. There is something factually wrong
about the claims of Christian belief. A Christian should become familiar with
both types of objections, and with the most common characteristics in both
kinds of objections. In this post, I am dealing specifically with de jure objections; the claim that
something is irrational, or unjustified in Christian belief. This raises the
question around the meaning of the terms justified, rationality, and warrant.
Moreover, how does a belief qualify for such a status? I will offer some basic
definitions for these terms and then proceed to talk about the differences
between how pagan philosophers thinks about these concepts and how Christians
ought to think about them.
Some may argue that I ought not
call pagan philosophers, pagan philosophers because it is insulting to
philosophers everywhere. For the record, I am not interested in flattering men
who hate God and do all they can to destroy belief in Him. I will call them
what Scripture calls them and not apologize for it. I am interested in the
truth, not in making sure as few a people as possible are not offended by it. I
do not mean to be disrespectful for the sake of being disrespectful. If a pagan
philosopher does not want to be called a pagan philosopher, then they should
submit to Christ and become a Christian philosopher.
Now, let’s begin with the term
justification. For starters, I am not going to get into the technical details
around this term and bore you with issues like the Gettier problem (trust me,
you don’t want to know). I am only going to deal with the basics. In
philosophy, we would say that a person is justified in holding a belief if the
belief is true, and that they have done their due diligence in what is
intellectually obligatory to hold the belief in question. For instance, they
have done their duty in examining the belief and have concluded it is true. Note
that justification only applies to beliefs that are not basic in nature. A
basic belief is a belief that does not require justification because it is
self-evidently true. For instance, 2 + 2 = 4 is immediately self-evident. It
requires no justification. The belief that a proposition cannot be both true
and false at the same time and in the same sense is a belief that is
self-justifying: we call it the law of non-contradiction. But any belief that
is held on the basis of other propositions or beliefs, is not a basic belief,
and requires justification. We then ask the question, does the Christian need
to justify his belief in God, in Christ, in Scripture? In order to answer that
question, we ask if the belief in God, in Christ, and in Scripture is
occasioned by other propositions or beliefs? And I have already argued that Christian
belief arises from the instigation of the Holy Spirit in the human heart/mind.
Since Christian belief arises from the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit, it
is not based on another belief, and it is also not held on the basis of other
propositions. From this one must conclude therefore, that a right understanding
of Christian belief is that it is basic.
Another word often used to describe
a belief is rational. Is Christian
belief rational? Rationality goes to the question of whether or not Christian
belief involves either, inconsistency or outright contradictions. For example,
it is argued that Christian belief holds that God and evil both exist in the
same world and at the same time, and such a belief is logically contradictory.
Therefore, as far as they are concerned, Christian belief should be rejected on
the ground that it violates the laws of logic. This is just one example of many
used to claim that Christian belief is irrational.
Finally, we come to the word that
Alvin Plantinga uses to define whether or not someone is in possession of true
knowledge: warrant. A belief is warranted, according to Plantinga, if it is
produced by our faculties functioning as they are designed to function (aiming
for truth), within the right sort of cognitive environment, and we have good
reason for holding a belief. Now, this definition of warrant only gets one to a
high probability that the belief in question is actually true. Plantinga thinks
this is sufficient for knowledge. Under this definition of knowledge, we ask
the Christian, “Is Christian belief warranted?” and the answer is, yes it is!
However, I should point out that it is my contention that the degree of warrant
enjoyed by Christian belief comes in the highest possible degree.
Either Christian belief is basic or
it is not basic. Either Christian belief is grounded in other beliefs that are eventually
basic or it is not. Of course I am ruling out any coherentist view of truth in
the philosophical sense. For purposes of this post, I will resist to urge to
chase this rabbit. The question at hand concerns how Christian belief
translates into genuinely true knowledge. How does Christian belief attain
warrant?
Christian belief arises from faith.
Christian belief does not arise from empirical evidence, or from rational
arguments. Christian belief does is not produced by a series of logical syllogisms.
Christian belief is the product of faith, this faith itself being the gift of
the Holy Spirit, imparted to every Christian upon their new birth, their
regeneration which effectively results in their conversion to Christianity.
Genuine Christian belief then is occasioned by a supernatural work of God in
the human person. The cognitive faculties of human beings, in the spiritual
environment, do not and cannot function properly. Even though men’s knowledge
of God via the sensus divinitatis is
present and efficacious for its purpose, that knowledge is subjected to a
perversion because of the curse. We call this the noetic effects of sin. For
the unbeliever then, if they were to embrace some of these similar beliefs that
we are calling Christian belief, they would be unable to ground those beliefs
in such a way as to attain warrant for them. In other words, Christian belief
so-called, is unwarranted and unwarrantable, unless it arises within the proper
environment. And the only environment capable of producing genuine Christian
belief is the miraculous environment of regeneration. Faith is a cognitive
activity. Calvin wrote, True faith is not
only a certain knowledge, whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to
us in his word, but also an assured confidence, which the Holy
Ghost works by the gospel in my heart; that not only to others, but to me also,
remission of sin, everlasting righteousness and salvation, are freely given by
God, merely of grace, only for the sake of Christ’s merits.
In summary, I would say, with
Plantinga,
- When
beliefs are accepted by faith and result from the internal instigation of
the Holy Spirit, they are produced by cognitive processes working
properly.
- The
environment in which we find ourselves is precisely the cognitive
environment for which this process is designed.
- The
process is designed to produce true beliefs.
- The
beliefs it produces, belief in the great things of the gospel, are in fact
true.
Faith, then, is a reliable belief-producing process.
No comments:
Post a Comment