Francis Schaeffer's Apologetics: A Critique

by Thomas V. Morris

Book Overview

Francis Schaeffer's apologetics: A critique This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0802428738
• ISBN13: 9780802428738
• Release Date: January 1976
• Publisher: Moody Publishers
• Length: 128 Pages
• Weight: 0.35 lbs.

Customer Reviews

Metaphysics and Logic

Morris' work is an excellent detail of weaknesses in Schaeffer's reasoning. This will help anyone get a grasp of the basic philosophical problems with some simple proofs for the existence of God. Morris' scholarly journey has not ventured into the realm of proofs for the existence of God. "Coherence" seems the place to be. I agree. Without a coherent conception of a personal God and humans, there's no reason to believe. Those who bury their heads in the Westminster catechism and fail to understand the basic problems of philosophy will continue to make over-reaching, and sometimes ridiculous, claims. The demands of a sound metaphysics require one to follow where reason leads. Yes, presuppositions are the starting point belief about reality, but without adequacy, consistency, coherence, and applicability, irrationality or silence is the only option. Schaeffer was too confident in his own argumentation and didn't take enough time to examine sophisticated criticism. He also did not have the pleasure to enjoy the last twenty years of the wonderful work in the Philosophy of Religion.Civilization needs evidence and logical argumentation. When people have no understanding of the demands of a rational metaphysical system, people like Depak Chopra and John Calvin, we are left with crazy world views. Morris shows clearly how Schaeffer claimed too much in his apologetics. And this is what makes Morris so good-he sticks with the rational criteria. His argument in another text about reason and God's knowledge of the future is superb. Determinism aside, a good starting point in metaphysics is the great recent work by Frederick Ferré, "Being and Value: Toward Constructive Postmodern Metaphysics."

Very Incisive Critiique by an able philosopher

Morris here presents an incisive critique of Schaeffer's apologetic -- both its method and its content. He begins with an examination of Schaeffer's presuppositional approach, which manifested itself in three major arguments for Christian theism: the Metaphysical, Epistemological, and Moral Arguments. The metaphysical argument proceeds along the lines of the classical cosmological and teleological arguments. In order to explain the reality of human personality - the mannishness of man, as Schaeffer put it - we must posit the existence of an ultimate personality. Likewise, to preserve the existence of cause and effect relationships, we must presuppose the existence of an ultimate rationality. Christian theism provides for both of these basic needs with its claim for the existence of an ultimate infinite-personal-rational God.The epistemological argument attempts to show the usefulness of Christianity in explaining both the knowing subject and the known object, as well as ascribing meaning to human existence. Antitheistic thought is unable to provide a way to distinguish between reality and fantasy, a failing due to its lack of a basis for truth. If all thought is the result of the random movements of atoms or basic particles, then one thought can be no truer than another. Naturalism also cannot provide any guarantee for the reality of extramental existence. All these problems, asserts Schaeffer, spring from the starting point of rationalistic autonomy, a presupposition that excludes divine revelation. From the autonomous starting point, one can speak only of phenomena and never of noumena. Man cannot know the thing in itself. Naturalism is the result and man is plunged below the line of despair, unable to explain the meaning that he feels compelled to ascribe to his life. Starting from the Reformation axiom of divine revelation - He is there and He is not silent - man is justified in attributing an ultimate purpose to his life, he has a basis for distinguishing truth from falsehood, and he is able to tell the difference between reality and fantasy.The moral argument undertakes to explain the reality of and justification for human moral judgments. Moral judgments are foundational to human society and inescapable - even atheists think it is wrong not to believe atheism. The impersonal starting point of naturalism, however, cannot provide a basis for making moral judgments. If man is but a collocation of atoms, then the rearrangement of these atoms - sometimes call murder - cannot be considered wrong. Cruelty becomes a meaningless term. Man cannot live devoid of morality or a moral sense, so he creates one. But all humanly manufactured systems of morality fall short of satisfying human longing for absolute, transcendent moral standards. Christianity, on the other hand, does provide such a foundation in the infinite-personal God and his commands. Only the Christian presupposition can explain man's awareness of mo