In Pursuit of an Orthodox Christian Epistemology

Jonathan Mutinda Waita holds a Ph.D. (Theological Studies) from Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas (USA), a Th.M. (Theological Studies) from Dallas Theological Seminary, and an MSc (Epistemology, Ethics, and Mind) from The University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom. He is currently Adjunct Professor of Apologetics, Liberty University School of Divinity and Adjunct Professor of Philosophy, Richland College, Dallas, Texas.

Acknowledgments – Introduction – Carl Henry and Anti-Metaphysical and Heterodox Metaphysics-Oriented Epistemologies – The Distinctiveness of Henry’s Epistemological Model – A Critical Evaluation of Henry’s Epistemology – Conclusion – Glossary – Bibliography – Index – Biblical Index.

“All philosophy is based on axioms of epistemic foundationalism as the foundation of a theocentric Christian mode of thought. Jonathan Mutinda Waita’s analysis of Carl F. H. Henry’s thought is thorough and his conclusions strongly support an evangelical approach to Scripture as divine revelation.
“Waita explains Henry’s critique of post-modern trends, and examines and critiques Henry’s writings by recognized scholars, such as Stephen Spenser and Kevin Hackoozer. Waita argues convincingly that Henry should be analyzed not so much as a modern rationalist but as a metaphysical realist.
“The reader will discover a keen analysis of the philosophy of Kant as one who altered the traditional approaches to metaphysics that have resulted in Neo-orthodoxy and other re-structuring of traditional modes of analysis that have largely supplanted traditional apologetic approaches.
“Waita’s analysis provides the reader with new ways of analyzing traditional problems of philosophy and theology. He shows how problematic these trends are for the reliability of the faith once delivered to the community of faith. Compromising the revelation found in the Scriptures cannot help but compromise the entirety of Christianity, resulting in epistemological nihilism.
“Waita provides a thorough and erudite analysis of themes relevant to Henry’s thought as it relates to manifold theories relevant to his thesis. Readers well-versed in theology and philosophy, who have minds adequate to follow Waita’s rigorous presentation will profit from Waita’s analysis."
—JAMES W. GUSTAFSON, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy

“In this well-structured, carefully researched, deeply reflective, and remarkably insightful defense of Christian Orthodoxy, Jonathan Mutinda Waita has chosen to use the insights of Carl F. H. Henry, perhaps the previous century’s most acute defender of Christian presuppositionalism, as a lens to applaud his efforts, though not without awareness of short-comings , while employing his criticisms as a defense against Henry’s adversaries. In short, the book proports to sustain the validity of foundationalism, what is also called presuppositionalism, to explain that the nature of how we know (ontology [what exists, being] presupposes the nature of what can be known [epistemology or how we come to know what can be known]). Simply put, an effect without a cause cannot exist (the collectivity of nature cannot explain the existence of all that is in nature, including the profundity of human reflection). No person makes decision without a set of assumptions from which they make deductions.
“Kantianism fails because it limits metaphysical realities to the sum of mere existence, Logical Positivism denies the existence of the metaphysical altogether, and Process Theism destroys the ontological supremacy of God for a human cooperative and evolutive fulfillment of the divine purposes. Barth is not the extreme theorist reflective of the other approaches, though he ultimately destroys the link between fideism and verifiability.
“Henry’s approach is a welcome panacea to the post-modernist, deconstructionism that seems to be gaining in Christian circles these days. Waita offers us serious ‘food for thought.’ I can only highly recommend this man’s endeavor to defend the presuppositional basis of our faith, arguing that a presuppositional approach to the construction of truth is no irrational, a-rational, nor anti-rational. It is a proper tool to the quest for truth.”
—JOHN D. HANNAH, ThM, MA THD, PhD, DD, Distinguished Professor of Historical Theology, Research Professor of Theological Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary