PROLEGOMENA

[Saint Paul] asserts that Christ is the wisdom of God and that only Christians can attain true wisdom (1 Cor. 1–2). 

—E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism1

Jesus Christ is Lord of philosophy. To be sure, no one can say Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3). Certainly no one can say Jesus is Lord of philosophy, and mean it, except by the same Holy Spirit. A substantial change in inner being and outlook fostered by Pentecostal power is surely necessary to affirm Christ’s lordship in general and his lordship over philosophy in particular. To affirm Christ’s lordship over life and philosophy, in other words, is a function of regeneration. You must be born again (John 3).

Affirming that Jesus is Lord of philosophy is a radically countercultural position. It is sure to appear ludicrous to many. C. S. Lewis (1898–1963) once bemoaned but later applauded Jesus Christ as the “transcendental Interferer” in life.2 Jesus is the “transcendental interferer” in philosophy as well, a proverbial “game-changer.” More theologically, Jesus Christ as incarnate Savior and Lord interferes with philosophy by redeeming, converting, and transforming it. He decisively shifts the philosophic paradigm.3

If we have a christological disposition, we should ply our philosophic trade coram Deo—before the face of God. Augustine (354–430) is an example. By God’s grace, he and those who have followed after him have recognized the supremacy of Jesus as the creator and redeemer of all things and knew he was the one “in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:3).

Abraham Kuyper (1837–1920) certainly wanted to honor Jesus and his lordship over all creation, including education and the academic disciplines, philosophy among them. The noted Dutch polymath offered his signature proposition on the matter in these often quoted words from his inaugural address at the founding of the Free University of Amsterdam in 1880: “There is not a square inch,” Kuyper thundered, “in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: ‘Mine!’”4 

Kuyper’s Spirit-inspired affirmation of Christ’s lordship over everything is certainly a biblical notion. It is derived from God’s native supremacy and sovereignty (see Ex. 9:29; Deut. 10:14; Job 41:11; Pss. 24:1; 50:12; 103:19; Dan. 4:17; cf. 1 Cor. 10:26). God’s rule is especially manifest in the redemptive triumph of Jesus over sin, death, and Satan and other wicked forces that had deformed humanity and creation. In Christ, the kingdom of God was at hand (Mark 1:15). Jesus is Christus Victor (Col. 2:15).5 In light of his conquest, God exalted Jesus by granting him authority and lordship over all things as the Great Commission and Paul’s words make clear (Matt. 28:18; Phil. 2:9–11).

God’s existence and sovereignty and Christ’s lordship couldn’t be more influential for the study of philosophy. Or complicating! In light of these realities, we have to ask different questions and participate in new conversations, if we are to reclaim a Christian intellectual tradition in philosophy (actually, the questions and conversations are rehabilitations of older ones). In short, we want to know how to philosophize in light of God and the gospel. We want to grasp the philosophic implications of the Scriptures as divine revelation. Perhaps the recent turn or return to religion in philosophy and cultural affairs will facilitate discussion of these questions. That is, unless ABC prevails.6

Regardless, we must ask: What are Christian implications on metaphysics, anthropology, epistemology, ethics, and aesthetics? These matters constitute a veritable Gordian knot that is difficult to untie, almost as challenging as apprehending the mystery of the Trinity. Hence, we need a prolegomena to help us sort this out.

PROLEGOMENA AND ITS IMPORTANCE

Prolegomena is derived from the neuter present passive participial form of the Greek verb prolegein, which means “to speak beforehand or predict.” A prolegomena, or a word spoken beforehand, is a preliminary exercise to any subject matter or discussion. Its purpose is to spell out the fundamental assumptions, methods, principles, and relationships that guide any specific inquiry, especially academic ones.

Normally, theologians offer a prolegomena at the outset of their theologies to inform people of the basic concepts that are driving their reflections. From time to time, theologians’ prolegomenas are quite biblical. Other times, they deploy extrabiblical ideas as the bases on which they theologize. Regardless, a theological prolegomena is quite influential. “Show me your prolegomena,” says one theologian, “and I will predict the rest of your theology.”7

A prolegomena is also philosophically prophetic. Very often, however, and this is a very important point, philosophers philosophize unprolegomenously.8 That is, philosophy’s main practitioners, Christian philosophers included, pursue the subject without giving much, if any, attention to prefatory concerns. With a tip of the hat to a presumed objectivity, many jump right into the philosophic process and churn out theories willy-nilly. We think our thoughts and theories can explain reality unmediated. We think that reality is automatically present to mind and directly expressible.

This approach, however, is naive. Philosophies have antecedents (as well as consequences), and philosophers ought to state their assumptions up front so that people will know from where they are coming. As C. S. Lewis reminds us, “For what you see and hear depends a good deal on where you are standing: it also depends on what sort of person you are.”9 Show me your prolegomena, and I can predict the rest of your philosophy.

PROBLEMATIZING CHRISTIAN PROLEGOMENA

Before I build, however, I must do a little blasting. My concern is that a fair number of Christian philosophers have often relied on non-Christian sources to guide them in their thinking. Plato and the neo-Platonists, Aristotle and the Aristotelians, Descartes and the Cartesians, Kant and the Kantians, Hegel and the Hegelians, Reid and Common Sense Realists, Heidegger and the Heideggerians, and so on, have supplied various and sundry Christian philosophers with their basic principles by which they have offered an alleged Christian philosophy. 

However, we must ask whether such appropriations help or hinder a Christian philosophical apprehension of God, life, and the world. For example, did aspects of neo-Platonic philosophy assumed by the early church fathers help them produce a more biblically faithful understanding of things? What influenced Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35–c. 107) to write this comment in his epistle to the Romans: “I have no delight in corruptible food nor in the pleasures of this life”?10 Is this a Christian sentiment? Just how orthodox were these early Christian theologians and philosophers? Note Friedrich Nietzsche’s charge that Christianity overall was basically “Platonism for the people.”11 Where does such thinking come from? It seems that various Greek conceptions damaged Christian philosophy and theology early on and in a residual way. Aren’t we still struggling with the fallout of Christianized versions of stoicism, asceticism, Gnosticism, and so on?

We might also ask how more recent appropriations of aspects of rationalism, empiricism, scientism, idealism, evolutionism, processism, logical positivism, linguisticism, pragmatism, existentialism, Marxism, feminism, and so on, have affected Christian thought. Have these “isms” helped or hindered our understanding of God and his ways? What about modernism? Or postmodernism? These are huge issues. Has Christian philosophy been in thralldom to a kind of philosophic captivity over the centuries? No doubt the very idea of a “Hellenization,” used here to stand for interpreting Christian truth by means of foreign outlooks (“Christ of culture”) has continued unabated.

Though there will always be imperfections and impurities, we conclude, nevertheless, that a Christian philosophy requires a biblically sound prolegomena, not an interloper. A prolegomena should be indigenous to the material it directs, like a native guide pointing out the features of his or her homeland to visitors. Let’s call it a “prolegomena to the glory of God.”12

A PROLEGOMENA FOR CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY

I begin with the claim that faith is a universal component of human nature.13 Faith is the deepest thing within us, and, as a result, it guides our thinking and living. For all of us, then, and not just Christians, “faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1).

If we are creatures living naturally in a God-given, faith-based mode, this means at least...