ARTICLE: Faith & Philosophy

[STR Ambassador]

For some Christians, faith and philosophy are strange companions.
When used properly, though, philosophy is a friend, not a foe, an ally, not an antagonist.

Faith and Philosophy Greg Koukl

"Stay away from the philosophy department," is the advice frequently given by well-meaning pastors and parents to their college-bound charges. "It will ruin your faith." No doubt their caution is an attempt to pass on Paul's warning not to be taken captive by the empty and deceptive traditions of men (Colossians 2:8). This admonition to students, though, is based on a misunderstanding of Paul and the nature of philosophy.

Tools of Thought

Setting aside for the moment the question of whether a faith that's capable of being ruined through rigorous analysis is even worth having, I have this comment. Those who give such advice err by not distinguishing the tools of philosophy from the opinions of philosophers.

Paul's warning, of course, was against certain opinions of men that were not according to Christ. Ironically, the tools of philosophy have helped to safeguard the church from the empty and deceptive traditions Paul was referring to. Careful philosophical thought has been vital in protecting Christians since Nicea from the "elementary principles of the world" that concerned Paul.

When Christians abandon these fundamental tools of thought, what remains are ad hoc theologies justified by scattered proof texts rather than by rigorous and clear-headed thinking coupled with a focused look at the Scriptures. Believers try to add the roof before they build the walls.

This brings me to the issue of the integration of philosophy and theology. Sometimes difficult questions are answered by an appeal to theological slogans. Often the intentions are good, but the point is so misstated it creates more confusion than clarity.

Sloppy Slogans

There's nothing wrong with catchy ways of expressing a conclusion based on careful consideration. In fact, Jesus was a master at using short, pithy statements (known as aphorisms) to drive a point home. Sloganeering in the hands of the unskilled, though, tends to be a sloppy business. The kernel of truth is lost beneath a pile of misleading chaff.

Many slogans are not answers, but clever dismissals. No careful work has been done to justify the verdict. Let me explain.

One truism I've heard regarding the problem of God's sovereignty versus man's freedom goes something like this: "God is a gentleman. He won't tamper with your free will." The statement has a ring of truth to it, and as a slogan it has populist appeal. Yet, more often than not, the statement is like a roof hanging in mid-air; the more demanding foundational work needed to support it simply has not been done.

For example, this maxim is vulnerable to a couple of simple observations. First, the Scripture doesn't make this particular claim about human freedom. It doesn't even imply that God is a gentleman who won't interfere with our lives. To the contrary, there are a number of biblical examples that indicate just the opposite.

Take Paul on the road to Damascus, for instance. He was in total rebellion against God. He dragged Christian men, women, and children into prison and even presided over executions. Paul was, in his human will, an enemy to the cross of Christ. So God knocked him off his horse on the Damascus Road, blinded him, then spoke to him like thunder from the sky (Acts 9:3-7). Was God tampering? It looks like it.

Consider poor Nebuchadnezzar. God had him chewing grass with the cows in the fields of Babylon for three years until he finally looked heavenward, came to his senses, and gave God the glory (Daniel 4:28-37). Was there any divine pressure here? Seems like it to me.

Prayer and Free Will

Second, the notion that God doesn't tamper with our free will presents problems in the area of prayer. For example, what exactly are we asking for when we pray for someone's salvation? Aren't our very words, "God, change this person"? Aren't we asking God to intervene by influencing a person's will in order to elicit a response of faith? It seems difficult to argue that God doesn't tamper with free will and then pray this prayer.

The problem doesn't just present itself when praying for someone's salvation, though. It includes prayer for anything involving human agency.

God answers prayer in two ways. He can respond directly, like he did when Peter was in jail and an angel released him. Since there was no human involvement, no one's will was violated. The same is true when Jesus multiplied the loaves and fishes or raised Lazarus from the dead.

It seems, however, that most of our requests entail God's mediate action, in which the answer involves the agency of another person. Characteristically, we're not rescued by angels. Usually, God doesn't multiply food or raise the dead in direct, immediate response to our prayers. Instead, the garden variety of prayer sets the will of God against the will of man.

Our prayers for a new job involve a human decision to hire. Our requests for the protection of the unborn speak to intentions of legislators and judges. Our petitions for good grades relate, in part, to the benevolence of a professor. In fact, with many prayer requests, the contrary will of a person is the precise issue of concern. Most prayers appeal to God to prevail upon other human wills. In effect we're praying, "God, use Your will and Your power to overcome the power and will of others."

Did God Do It?

I have a friend who was on her way to India with Youth With a Mission when she was diverted to Thailand because of an air-traffic controller's strike. Upon her arrival, she discovered that the YWAM team there had been praying for more helpers. They hailed her rerouting as a wonderful answer to their prayers.

Consider this, though. Labor strikes happen when individuals with grievances agree together not to go to work. If a strike is the result of human choices, in what sense did God answer the missionaries' prayers? It seems that without the direct agency of God on the wills of men, apparent answers to prayer are mere accidents.

This illustration points to an even larger issue: Does God have a plan? Is His plan something He merely desires, or is it something He decides will happen? Does God guarantee the outcome of His desires, at least in some cases?

If God cannot determine people's actions in some way, how is it possible for Him to have a plan? Clearly, God does have a plan. Therefore, it follows that our understanding of human freedom is not accurately expressed by the slogan, "God won't tamper with free will."

However we resolve this issue, we must give fair consideration to the fact that God does seem to tamper with the wills of men. Sometimes He does so aggressively, even in ways (like causing air-traffic controller strikes) that seriously inconvenience a lot of other people. If He didn't, history would simply be the chaotic record of human impulse instead of the grand unfolding of God's design.

Beliefs Worth Having

In tackling difficult questions, I try to work from the known to the unknown, and this short discussion hopefully gives us some fixed points to aid our navigation. Where this ultimately leads regarding the question of human freedom depends on further considerations.

This reflection only raises the question and begins to define the landscape. There are many issues that need to be pondered: What are the necessary pre-conditions for a free act? What are the different ways of understanding free will? What role does character play? Does man have a nature that seriously restricts his options?

This is where the tools of philosophy come in, being carefully employed to serve theology. Ad hoc assessments and theological slogans aren't adequate. It's easy to state a belief. It's much more difficult to build an argument that will weather rigorous scrutiny.

That's the only way to have a belief worth holding, though. Such a faith can't avoid philosophy, nor should it.


Stand to Reason - Training Christian ambassadors in the areas of knowledge, wisdom, and character - www.str.org

[lee_merrill]

People do indeed say "God won't interfere with man's free will" a lot...

Take Paul on the road to Damascus, for instance. He was in total rebellion against God. ... So God knocked him off his horse on the Damascus Road, blinded him, then spoke to him like thunder from the sky (Acts 9:3-7). Was God tampering? It looks like it.

Consider poor Nebuchadnezzar. God had him chewing grass with the cows in the fields of Babylon for three years until he finally looked heavenward, came to his senses, and gave God the glory (Daniel 4:28-37). Was there any divine pressure here? Seems like it to me.

That's perty good...

People also say "Love must be free, with the possibility of refusal, in order to be really love." Well, what about people loving God in heaven? Time to check some more foundations...

Blessings,
Lee

[Calvinist4Him]

Those well-meaning pastors and parents need to take a moment to read commentary written by Christian scholars who disagree with them.

Col 2:8 - Beware lest any man spoil you,.... Or despoil you; rob you of the rich treasure of the Gospel, strip you of your spiritual armour, take away from you the truths and doctrines of Christ, and divest you of your spiritual privileges and blessings; suggesting, that the false teachers were thieves and robbers, and men of prey: or drive and carry you away as spoils, as the innocent harmless sheep are drove, and carried away by wolves, and by the thief that comes to steal, to kill, and destroy; intimating, that such as these were the heretics of those times; wherefore it became them to be upon their guard, to watch, look out, and beware, lest they should be surprised by these deceitful workers, who lay in wait to deceive; were wolves in sheep's clothing, who transformed themselves into the apostles of Christ; and therefore it became them to take heed, lest any man hurt them, be he ever so wise and learned, or be thought ever so good, religious, and sincere; since men of this cast put on such masks and false appearances, on purpose to beguile. The things by which they imposed upon weak minds are as follow, and therefore to be shunned, avoided, and rejected:

through philosophy: not right philosophy, or true wisdom, the knowledge of God, of the things of nature, of things natural, moral, and civil; which may be attained unto by the use of reason, and light of nature. The apostle does not mean to condemn all arts and sciences, as useless and hurtful, such as natural philosophy in its various branches, ethics, logic, rhetoric, &c. when kept within due bounds, and in their proper place and sphere; for with instances of these the Scriptures themselves abound; but he means that philosophy, or science, which is falsely so called, the false notions of philosophers; such as the eternity of matter, and of this world, the mortality of souls, the worshipping of demons and angels, &c. and also such principles in philosophy, which in themselves, and in the things of nature, are true, but, when applied to divine things, to things above nature, the mere effects of divine power and grace, and of pure revelation, are false; as that out of nothing, nothing can be made, which in the things of nature is true, but not to be applied to the God of nature, who has made the world out of nothing; as also that from a privation to an habit there is no return, which is naturally true, but not to be applied to supernatural things, and supernatural agency; witness the miracles of Christ, in restoring sight to the blind, life to the dead, &c. and therefore is not to be employed against the resurrection of the dead: philosophy may be useful as an handmaid; it is not to be a mistress in theological things; it may subserve, but not govern; it is not to be made use of as a judge, or rule in such matters; the natural man, on these principles, neither knows nor receives the things of the Spirit of God; judgment is not to be made and formed according to them; as of a trinity of persons in the Godhead; of the sonship of Christ, and his incarnation; of man's redemption by him, of reconciliation and satisfaction by his blood and sacrifice, of the pardon of sin, of a sinner's justification, of the resurrection of the dead, and such like articles of faith: that philosophy which is right, can only be a rule of judgment in things relating to it, and not in those which are out of its sphere: in a word, the apostle here condemns the philosophy of the Jews, and of the Gnostics; the former had introduced natural philosophy into the worship and service of God, and the things appertaining to their religion; and had made the tabernacle and temple, and the most holy place, and the things belonging thereunto, emblems and hieroglyphics of natural things; as of the sun, moon, and stars, and their influences, and of the four elements, and of moral virtue, &c. as appears from the writings of Josephus (r), and Philo (s); when they were types and representatives of spiritual things under the Gospel dispensation; and the latter had brought in the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, concerning abstinences, purgations, sacrifices, and ceremonies of worship, given to demons and angels: in short, the apostle's meaning is, that philosophy is not to be mixed with the pure Gospel of Christ; it has always been fatal to it; witness the school of Pantaenus in Alexandria, in the early times of Christianity, by which the simplicity of the Gospel was greatly corrupted; and the race of schoolmen a few centuries ago, who introduced the philosophy of Aristotle, Averrois, and others, into all the subjects of divinity: to observe no more, such kind of philosophy is here meant, which may be truly called

vain deceit: that is, that which is vain and empty, and has no solid foundation, even in nature and reason itself; and which being applied to divine things and religious observances, is deceitful and delusory:

after the tradition of men; either of the Gentiles, who had their traditions in religion; or of the Jews, called the traditions of the elders, and of the fathers, which the Pharisees were fond of, by which they transgressed the commandments of God; which the apostle was brought up in, and was zealous of formerly, but now was delivered from, and rightly condemned as idle, trifling, and pernicious:

after the rudiments of the world, or "the elements of the world"; not the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water; or the worship of the sun, moon, and stars, &c. among the idolatrous Gentiles, but the ceremonial laws of the Jews; see Gal_4:8; which were that to them in religion, as the A B C, or letters, are in grammar, the elements and rudiments of it; and though these were to them, when children, useful, but now under the Gospel dispensation are weak, beggarly, and useless, and not to be attended to:

and not after Christ; what he has taught and prescribed, the doctrines and commandments of Christ, the treasures of wisdom and knowledge which are in him; and therefore all such vain and deceitful philosophy, human traditions, and worldly rudiments, are to be rejected; Christ and his Gospel, the revelation he has made, are the standard of doctrine and worship; he only is to be heard and attended to, and whatever it contrary thereunto is to be guarded against,

(r) Antiqu. l. 3. c. 6. sect. 4. 7. (s) De Congressu quaerend. Erud. p. 440. 441. de Vita Mosis, l. 3. p. 665, &c. quod deterius pot. p. 184.

II. The fair warning given us of our danger: Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, Col 2:8. There is a philosophy which is a noble exercise of our reasonable faculties, and highly serviceable to religion, such a study of the works of God as leads us to the knowledge of God and confirms our faith in him. But there is a philosophy which is vain and deceitful, which is prejudicial to religion, and sets up the wisdom of man in competition with the wisdom of God, and while it pleases men's fancies ruins their faith; as nice and curious speculations about things above us, or of no use and concern to us; or a care of words and terms of art, which have only an empty and often a cheating appearance of knowledge. After the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world: this plainly reflects upon the Jewish pedagogy or economy, as well as the Pagan learning. The Jews governed themselves by the traditions of their elders and the rudiments or elements of the world, the rites and observances which were only preparatory and introductory to the gospel state; the Gentiles mixed their maxims of philosophy with their Christian principles; and both alienated their minds from Christ. Those who pin their faith on other men's sleeves, and walk in the way of the world, have turned away from following after Christ. The deceivers were especially the Jewish teachers, who endeavoured to keep up the law of Moses in conjunction with the gospel of Christ, but really in competition with it and contradiction to it.

"Col 2:8 - Translate, "Beware (literally, 'Look' well) lest there shall be (as I fear there is: the Greek indicative expresses this) any man (pointing to some known emissary of evil, Gal 1:7) leading you away as his spoil (not merely gaining spoil out of you, but making yourselves his spoil) through (by means of) his philosophy," &c. The apostle does not condemn all philosophy, but "the philosophy" (so Greek) of the Judaic-oriental heretics at Colosse, which afterwards was developed into Gnosticism. You, who may have "the riches of full assurance" and "the treasures of wisdom," should not suffer yourselves to be led away as a spoil by empty, deceitful philosophy: "riches" are contrasted with spoil; "full" with "vain," or empty (Col 2:2-3, Col 2:9).

after--"according to."

tradition of men--opposed to, "the fulness of the Godhead." Applied to Rabbinical traditions, Mar 7:8. When men could not make revelation even seem to tell about deep mysteries which they were curious to pry into, they brought in human philosophy and pretended traditions to help it, as if one should bring a lamp to the sundial to find the hour [Cauations for Times, p. 85]. The false teachers boasted of a higher wisdom in theory, transmitted by tradition among the initiated; in practice they enjoined asceticism, as though matter and the body were the sources of evil. Phrygia (in which was Colosse) had a propensity for the mystical and magical, which appeared in their worship of Cybele and subsequent Montanism [NEANDER].

rudiments of the world--(See on Gal 4:3). "The rudiments" or elementary lessons "of the (outward) world," such as legal ordinances; our Judaic childhood's lessons (Col 2:11, Col 2:16, Col 2:20; Gal 4:1-3). But NEANDER, "the elements of the world," in the sense, what is earthly, carnal and outward, not "the rudiments of religion," in Judaism and heathenism.

not after Christ--"Their" boasted higher "philosophy" is but human tradition, and a cleaving to the carnal and worldly, and not to Christ. Though acknowledging Christ nominally, in spirit they by their doctrine deny Him."

Col 2:8 - Beware (βλέπετε) Lit., see to it.

Lest any man spoil you (μὴ τὶς ἔσται ὑμᾶς ὁ συλαγωγῶν)
The Greek is more precise and personal: lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil. So Rev. Συλαγωγέω to carry off booty, only here in the New Testament. A very strong expression for the work of the false teachers; make you yourselves a booty. The A.V. is ambiguous, and might be taken to mean corrupt or damage you.

Philosophy and vain deceit (τῆς φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης)
Rev. gives the force of the article, his philosophy: καὶ and is explanatory, philosophy which is also vain deceit. Hence the warning is not against all philosophy. Φιλοσοφία, philosophy, only here in the New Testament. It had originally a good meaning, the love of wisdom, but is used by Paul in the sense of vain speculation and with special reference to its being the name by which the false teachers at Colossae designated not only their speculative system, but also their practical system, so that it covered their ascetic practices no less than their mysticism. Bishop Lightfoot remarks upon the fact that philosophy, by which the Greeks expressed the highest effort of the intellect, and virtue (ἀρετή), their expression for the highest moral excellence, are each used but once by Paul, showing “that the Gospel had deposed the terms as inadequate to the higher standard, whether of knowledge or practice, which it had introduced.”

After the tradition
Connect with the whole phrase philosophy and vain deceit, as descriptive of its source and subject matter. Others connect with make spoil. The term is especially appropriate to the Judaeo-Gnostic teachings in Colossae, which depended for their authority, not on ancient writings, but on tradition. The later mystical theology or metaphysic of the Jews was called Kabbala, literally meaning reception or received doctrines, tradition.

Rudiments (στοιχεῖα)
See on 2Pe_3:10. Rudimentary teachings, as in Heb_5:12; applicable alike to Jewish and to Gentile teaching. Ceremonialism - meats, drinks, washings, Essenic asceticism, pagan symbolic mysteries and initiatory rites - all belonged to a rudimentary moral stage. Compare Col_2:11, Col_2:21, and Gal_4:9.

Of the world
Material as contrasted with spiritual.