Who's Afraid of the Unmoved Mover?: the Failure of Postmodern

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Who's Afraid of the Unmoved Mover?: the Failure of Postmodern Who’s Afraid of the Unmoved Mover?: The Failure of Postmodern Evangelical Rejections of Natural Theology by Andrew Isaac Shepardson A Doctoral Thesis suBmitted to the Faculty of Trinity College and the Graduate Centre for Theological Studies of the Toronto School of Theology. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theological Studies awarded By Trinity College and the University of Toronto. © Copyright By Andrew Isaac Shepardson 2018 Who’s Afraid of the Unmoved Mover?: The Failure of Postmodern Evangelical Rejections of Natural Theology Andrew Isaac Shepardson Doctor of Philosophy in Theological Studies Trinity College and the University of Toronto 2018 Abstract In terms of Christian theology, natural theology is understood as that branch of human inquiry which seeks to discover knowledge about the existence and nature of God apart from sources of revealed theology (i.e. the Bible, the person and work of Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and various forms of prophecy). Knowledge of this kind is based on the validity or suggestive power of arguments made from observations of the natural world, human experience, and necessary truths. Various argument forms are employed including deduction, induction, and inferences to the best explanation. Closely related to natural theology is the practice of positive apologetics, where the arguments of natural theology and other aspects of Christian theology are defended rationally, with the claim, either explicit or implicit, that the doctrines and practices of Christianity correspond to reality, are internally consistent, and are existentially viable. The Evangelical philosophers James K. A. Smith, Myron B. Penner, and Carl A. Raschke claim that most forms of natural theology are dependent on modern conceptions of reason, truth, and language. Marshalling postmodernism’s critiques of foundationalist epistemology, the correspondence theory of truth, and referential semiotics, these authors argue that Evangelicals should reject natural theology. Appeals to common ground in nature to demonstrate or infer the ii existence of God will fail because these appeals are beholden to modernity’s outmoded grounds for knowledge. Moreover, because of their dependence on modernism, natural theology and apologetics are often hindrances to authentic Christian faith. According to these authors, notions like objectivity, neutrality, and rationality are various forms of idolatry, and any philosophical dependence on knowledge informed by these values will be a kind of idolatry. I ask this key question: Do these postmodern Evangelical philosophers provide sound objections to natural theology? I explicate the objections to natural theology made by Carl A. Raschke, James K. A. Smith, and Myron B. Penner and show that their objections fail by employing primarily analytic philosophical strategies and, on occasion, biblical and systematic theology regarding the issues of truth, rationality, general revelation, and evangelism. iii Acknowledgments I owe a substantial debt of thanks to the many teachers and professors who encouraged my academic pursuits over the years. I appreciate especially Jerry Rouse, Linda Iovino, John Kane, Fr. James Guyer, S. J., Thomas Leininger, Daniel Clayton, Rev. David Holman, Rev. Alan Eastland, Rev. Peter Henderson, and Elodie Emig. Donald Wiebe has been a constant champion for my work and has loyally challenged and encouraged me to be a better thinker and a clearer writer. Douglas Groothuis has provided excellent counsel and encouragement on my academic work, and his mentorship and friendship has graciously extended far beyond my studies, as well. Special gratitude is owed to my parents, who have instilled in me a love for God and for learning. Their faith in me has been unflinching, and their encouragement has been abundant. My precious wife, Kelsey Walsh Shepardson, has been the greatest supporter of my dreams, and in addition to editing my written work, has lovingly helped me to become a better man. iv Contents Chapter 1: Elucidation of the Problem and Definitions .......................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 Presuppositions ........................................................................................................ 3 Method..................................................................................................................... 3 Definitions. .............................................................................................................. 5 Chapter 2: ‘Evangelical’ Natural Theologies and Postmodern Philosophy and Theology .. 13 ‘Evangelical’ Natural Theologies ........................................................................... 13 Postmodern Philosophy .......................................................................................... 56 Postmodern Theology. ........................................................................................... 69 Chapter 3: Postmodern Evangelical Rejections of Natural Theology (Part 1) ..................... 83 The Rejection of Universal Reason ........................................................................ 83 Truth, Propositionalism, and Foundationalism ........................................................ 95 Chapter 4: Postmodern Evangelical Rejections of Natural Theology (Part 2) ................... 111 The God (or god) of Natural Theology ................................................................. 111 The Nature of Faith .............................................................................................. 128 Revelation. ........................................................................................................... 143 The Ethics of Apologetics. ................................................................................... 152 Chapter 5: Natural Theology After the Postmodern Critique: A Proposal....................... 162 Apologists for Truth ............................................................................................. 162 Humility, Confidence, and Natural Theology ....................................................... 169 Advocates for Science. ......................................................................................... 173 A Proposal for Evangelical Colleges and Seminaries. ........................................... 177 Conclusion. .......................................................................................................... 180 v Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 181 vi Chapter 1 Elucidation of the ProBlem and Definitions 1 Introduction In terms of Christian theology, natural theology is understood as that branch of human inquiry which seeks to discover knowledge about the existence and nature of God apart from sources of revealed theology (i.e. the Bible, the person and work of Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and various forms of prophecy). Knowledge of this kind is based on the validity or suggestive power of arguments made from observations of the natural world, human experience, and necessary truths. Various argument forms are employed including deduction, induction, and inferences to the best explanation. Closely related to natural theology is the practice of positive apologetics, where the arguments of natural theology and other aspects of Christian theology are defended rationally, with the claim, either explicit or implicit, that the doctrines and practices of Christianity correspond to reality, are internally consistent, and are existentially viable.1 The Evangelical philosophers James K. A. Smith, Myron B. Penner, and Carl A. Raschke claim that most forms of natural theology are dependent on modern conceptions of reason, truth, and language. Marshalling postmodernism’s critiques of foundationalist epistemology, the correspondence theory of truth, and referential semiotics, these authors argue that Evangelicals should reject natural theology. Appeals to common ground in nature to demonstrate or infer the existence of God will fail because these appeals are beholden to modernity’s outmoded grounds for knowledge. Moreover, because of their dependence on modernism, natural theology and apologetics are often hindrances to authentic Christian faith. According to these authors, notions like objectivity, neutrality, and rationality are various forms of idolatry, and any philosophical dependence on knowledge informed by these values will be a kind of idolatry. 1 Many Christians employ apologetics as an internal discipleship strategy to increase confidence and to assuage doubts of those in the Christian community; however, positive apologetics also forms a part of some evangelistic strategies aimed toward those not in the community of faith. The latter, and not the former, is within the scope of this work. 1 2 I ask this key question: Do these postmodern Evangelical philosophers provide sound objections to natural theology? I will explicate the objections to natural theology made by Carl A. Raschke, James K. A. Smith, and Myron B. Penner and show that their objections fail by employing primarily analytic philosophical strategies and on occasion, biblical and systematic theology regarding the issues of truth, rationality, general revelation, and evangelism. Postmodern Evangelical voices have been ascendant in theology and
Recommended publications
  • St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Williams Honors College, Honors Research The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors Projects College Spring 2020 St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death Christopher Choma [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects Part of the Christianity Commons, Epistemology Commons, European History Commons, History of Philosophy Commons, History of Religion Commons, Metaphysics Commons, Philosophy of Mind Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Recommended Citation Choma, Christopher, "St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death" (2020). Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects. 1048. https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects/1048 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors College at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The University of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 1 St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death By: Christopher Choma Sponsored by: Dr. Joseph Li Vecchi Readers: Dr. Howard Ducharme Dr. Nathan Blackerby 2 Table of Contents Introduction p. 4 Section One: Three General Views of Human Nature p.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Aquinas' Argument from Motion & the Kalām Cosmological
    University of Central Florida STARS Honors Undergraduate Theses UCF Theses and Dissertations 2020 Rethinking Causality: Thomas Aquinas' Argument From Motion & the Kalām Cosmological Argument Derwin Sánchez Jr. University of Central Florida Part of the Philosophy Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the UCF Theses and Dissertations at STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Undergraduate Theses by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Recommended Citation Sánchez, Derwin Jr., "Rethinking Causality: Thomas Aquinas' Argument From Motion & the Kalām Cosmological Argument" (2020). Honors Undergraduate Theses. 858. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses/858 RETHINKING CAUSALITY: THOMAS AQUINAS’ ARGUMENT FROM MOTION & THE KALĀM COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT by DERWIN SANCHEZ, JR. A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Honors in the Major Program in Philosophy in the College of Arts and Humanities and in the Burnett Honors College at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Fall Term 2020 Thesis Chair: Dr. Cyrus Zargar i ABSTRACT Ever since they were formulated in the Middle Ages, St. Thomas Aquinas’ famous Five Ways to demonstrate the existence of God have been frequently debated. During this process there have been several misconceptions of what Aquinas actually meant, especially when discussing his cosmological arguments. While previous researchers have managed to tease out why Aquinas accepts some infinite regresses and rejects others, I attempt to add on to this by demonstrating the centrality of his metaphysics in his argument from motion.
    [Show full text]
  • A Contextual Examination of Three Historical Stages of Atheism and the Legality of an American Freedom from Religion
    ABSTRACT Rejecting the Definitive: A Contextual Examination of Three Historical Stages of Atheism and the Legality of an American Freedom from Religion Ethan Gjerset Quillen, B.A., M.A., M.A. Mentor: T. Michael Parrish, Ph.D. The trouble with “definitions” is they leave no room for evolution. When a word is concretely defined, it is done so in a particular time and place. Contextual interpretations permit a better understanding of certain heavy words; Atheism as a prime example. In the post-modern world Atheism has become more accepted and popular, especially as a reaction to global terrorism. However, the current definition of Atheism is terribly inaccurate. It cannot be stated properly that pagan Atheism is the same as New Atheism. By interpreting the Atheisms from four stages in the term‟s history a clearer picture of its meaning will come out, hopefully alleviating the stereotypical biases weighed upon it. In the interpretation of the Atheisms from Pagan Antiquity, the Enlightenment, the New Atheist Movement, and the American Judicial and Civil Religious system, a defense of the theory of elastic contextual interpretations, rather than concrete definitions, shall be made. Rejecting the Definitive: A Contextual Examination of Three Historical Stages of Atheism and the Legality of an American Freedom from Religion by Ethan Gjerset Quillen, B.A., M.A. A Thesis Approved by the J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies ___________________________________ Robyn L. Driskell, Ph.D., Interim Chairperson Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Baylor University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Approved by the Thesis Committee ___________________________________ T.
    [Show full text]
  • DIVORCE and RETREAT!
    Advice for infallibilists: DIVORCE & RETREAT! Article (Published Version) Booth, Anthony Robert (2018) Advice for infallibilists: DIVORCE & RETREAT! Synthese, 195 (9). pp. 3773-3789. ISSN 0039-7857 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/68117/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse: Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University. Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Synthese DOI 10.1007/s11229-017-1421-0 S.I. : EPISTEMIC JUSTIFICATION Advice for Infallibilists: DIVORCE and RETREAT! Anthony Robert Booth1 Received: 1 April 2016 / Accepted: 28 April 2017 © The Author(s) 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Infallibilism and Easy Counter-Examples
    grazer philosophische studien 95 (2018) 475-499 brill.com/gps Infallibilism and Easy Counter-Examples Alex Davies University of Tartu [email protected] Abstract Infallibilism is commonly rejected because it is apparently subject to easy counter- examples. The author describes a strategy that infallibilists can use to resist this ob- jection. Because the sentences used in the counter-examples to express evidence and belief are context-sensitive, the infallibilist can insist that such counter-examples trade on a vacillation between different readings of these sentences. The author describes what difficulties await those who try to produce counter-examples against which the proposed strategy is ineffective. Keywords context-sensitivity – counter-examples – entailment – infallibilism 1 The Example Based Objection Infallibilism about evidence-based belief is the following thesis: Infallibilism A knows that P on the basis of evidence E only if E entails P.1 1 I restrict attention to evidence-based belief because I don’t want infallibilism to turn out false simply because there’s such a thing as knowledge that is not based on evidence. Defenders of infallibilism (more or less so understood) include Bonjour (2010), Dodd (2011), Ledding- ton (forthcoming), McDowell (1982), and Travis (2005). Unlike the others, Bonjour and Dodd both defend infallibilism and either argue (in the case of (Dodd, 2007)) or grant (in the case of (Bonjour, ibid)) that infallibilism implies scepticism. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi 10.1163/18756735-000054Downloaded from Brill.com09/27/2021 09:56:17AM via free access <UN> 476 Alex Davies Infallibilism is the kind of philosophical thesis that undergraduates have to be taught out of believing—in the first instance, untutored intuition tends to be in its favour.
    [Show full text]
  • The Crisis of Representation Jg. 04 Heft 02
    Interdisciplinary Journal for Religion and Transformation (2018), Heft 7, doi.org/10.14220/jrat.2018.4.issue-2 The Kingdom, the Power, the Glory,and the Tawdry: Neoliberal Hegemony and the “Undoing” of the Demos Carl Raschke This article explores Giorgio Agambenscelebrated “double paradigmofsovereignty”, which introduces the Christian idea of oikonomia (“economy”)asafoundational polit- ical concept in Western thinking. It argues that Agambensfar-ranging discussion im- proves our understanding of how Foucaultsnotion of biopoweractually develops his- torically from the matrix of earlyChristian theology and how it becomes its own kind of “political theology” to undergird the contemporarydynamics,structure,and rhetoricof neoliberalism. FollowingAgamben, the argument also builds on his thesis that “eco- nomic sovereignty” today is cemented through the power of modern forms of media in much the same way that the critical theorists of the interwar period identified the “culture industry” as the genuine hegemon of capitalism. Finally, it devotes extensive attention to the work of the French social philosopher and media theorist Bernard Stiegler and his notion of “cognitive capitalism.” GiorgioAgamben;MichelFoucault;Carl Schmitt;Oikonomia;Trinity; Biopolitics; Pastorate;Karl Marx;Wendy Brown;Jean-Jacques Rousseau;Jürgen Habermas;Ber- nard Stiegler;Cognitive Capitalism;Neoliberalism;Social Media Carl Raschke is Professor of Religious Studiesatthe University of Denver and senior editor for TheJournalfor Cultural and Religious Theory.His most recent
    [Show full text]
  • Ten PROBLEMS with AQUINAS' THIRD
    Ten PROBLEMS WITH AQUINAS' THIRD WAY Edward Moad 1. Introduction Of Thomas Aquinas’ five proofs of the existence of God, the Third Way is a cosmological argument of a specific type sometimes referred to as an argument from contingency. The Aristotelian argument for the existence of the First Unmoved Mover was based on the observation that there is change (or motion), coupled with the principle that nothing changes unless its specific potential to change is actualized by an actual change undergone by some other thing. It then arrives at the conclusion that there exists something in a constant state of pure activity, which is not itself moved but sets everything else in motion. The operative sense of contingency this argument turns on, then, is that of motion. That is, things have the potential to change in certain ways (depending on the kind of things they are), but may or may not do so; whether they actually do being contingent on whether they are acted on in the right way by something else. For this reason, Aristotle’s argument delivers a first mover, which brings about the motion in all that exists, but not a being that brings about the very existence of everything else. The argument referred to specifically as the argument from contingency, by contrast, turns on the idea of the contingency of the very existence of anything at all. That is, if something exists which may not have existed, and the fact that it does exist rather than not is contingent on the action of other existing things which are themselves contingent, then the existence of the whole lot of contingent things, taken together, is also contingent.
    [Show full text]
  • A Round Generation in the Timaeus
    AROUND GENERATION IN THE TIMAEUS By JONATHAN WRIGHT, M.D. PLEASANTVILLE, NEW YORK N turning to a former issue of pupil derived from his master. Aristotle Annals of Medical History I repeatedly calls himself a Platonist. A find that I began an essay on the modern commentator2 on Aristotle has “Timaeus” of Plato with a refer­ recorded references to a number of passages ence to Aristotle.1 In the present article, in his works where the younger man pays a Owhich will find its mainspring also in the tribute of respect to Plato and acknowledges “Timaeus,” but which deals largely with himself as his follower. the subject of some of the modern ideas on In reading Galen the medical historian the birth of man, we shall again have to take perceives how much more he was inspired by up some of the ideas of Aristotle, as well as Plato than by Aristotle. He places Plato and those of Plato, on the birth of matter. It is not Aristotle side by side with Hippocrates this which leads us into the “Timaeus” in his treatise on their dogmas.3 Robin4 points again. I presume without the criticism of out that Plato gave birth scarcely less to Aristotle on the “Timaeus,” especially of Aristotle than to Plotinus. In the former all his master’s books, subsequent commen­ paper I referred to the very dark corner in tators would less frequently, certainly less the “Timaeus” which deals with generation intelligently, have made a study of it. For and which Plato calls the Receptacle. This many of the formative years of his life Robin regards5 as “the nurse of generation.” Aristotle was a pupil of Plato, for seventeen It is the place where not only the birth of years of his youth, it is said.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    1 Atheism, Agnosticism, and Theism Non - Religious Ethics is at a very early stage. We cannot yet predict whether, as in Mathematics, we will all reach agreement. Since we cannot know how Ethics will develop, it is not irrational to have high hopes. (Derek Parfi t, 1984) 1 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:8) Let us start with what people most often associate with “ the secular outlook. ” If with anything at all, they associate it with atheism. But what is atheism? Sometimes atheism is presented as a coherent worldview, encompassing all the other traditions supposedly associated with the secular outlook. On this basis the Christian theologian and physicist Alister McGrath (1953 – ) writes: “ Atheism is the religion of the autonomous and rational human being, who believes that reason is able to uncover and express the deepest truths of the universe, from the mechanics of the rising sun to the nature and fi nal destiny of humanity. ” 2 The fi rst thing that strikes us is that atheism is presented here as a “ religion. ” A second point that is remarkable is that McGrath depicts as “ atheism ” beliefs that most people would associate with “ rationalism. ” In clarifying his defi nition the author even introduces other elements, such as optimism. Atheism, so McGrath writes, “ wasCOPYRIGHTED a powerful, self - confi dent, and aggressiveMATERIAL worldview. Possessed of a boundless confi dence, it proclaimed that the world could be fully 1 Parfi t , Derek , Reasons and Persons , Clarendon Press , Oxford 1984 , p.
    [Show full text]
  • CARL RASCHKE University of Denver a PREFACE to THE
    CARL RASCHKE University of Denver A PREFACE TO THE GENEALOGY OF NEOLIBERALISM I. In my book Force of God: Political Theology and the Crisis of Liberal Democracy, published last year by Columbia University Pressi, I argue that the current global crisis of liberal democracy is a “crisis of representation.” In some ways, this statement is both tautological and gratuitous. The question of liberal democracy as we understand it historically is all about the problem of “representation.” Contrary to Rousseau’s effort to radicalize social contract theory with his postulate of the volonté générale, or “general will,” — which, as many critics have rightly noted, can easily be misconstrued as an argument for totalitarian control of all features of society (the Nazi Gleichschaltung) — we have lived through almost three centuries now when political theory, epistemology, and theology have been aligned around the late Medieval trope of a reflexive relationship between words and things. The trope of an intimate correlation between words and things — verba and res, les motes et les chose, Wörter und Dinge — as the framework for what in the history of philosophy has come to be known as “correspondence theory” harks back to ancient Athens, where democracy was born. The ancient crisis of democracy ultimately derived from the struggle between Socrates and the Sophists, between Platonism and the cheap kind of conceptual relativism associated with a crude nominalism, which the latter hawked in the agora. These epistemological debates, persisting in some guise for millennia, have never been esoteric preoccupations for cloistered thinkers removed from the “practical” affairs of Western political theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Atheism in the Ancient World
    Also by Tim Whitmarsh Beyond the Second Sophistic: Adventures in Greek Postclassicism Narrative and Identity in the Ancient Greek Novel: Returning Romance The Second Sophistic Ancient Greek Literature Greek Literature and the Roman Empire: The Politics of Imitation THIS IS A BORZOI BOOK PUBLISHED BY ALFRED A. KNOPF Copyright © 2015 by Timothy Whitmarsh All rights reserved. Published in the United States by Alfred A. Knopf, a division of Penguin Random House LLC, New York, and in Canada by Random House of Canada, a division of Penguin Random House Ltd., Toronto. www.aaknopf.com Knopf, Borzoi Books, and the colophon are registered trademarks of Penguin Random House LLC. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Whitmarsh, Tim. Battling the gods : the struggle against religion in ancient Greece / Tim Whitmarsh.—First Edition. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-307-95832-7 (hardcover)—ISBN 978-0-307-95833-4 (eBook) 1. Atheism—Greece—History. 2. Greece—Religion. 3. Christianity and atheism. I. Title. BL2747.3.W45 2015 200.938—dc23 2015005799 eBook ISBN 9780307958334 Cover image: Marble bust of Apollo. Regent Antiques, London, UK Cover design by Oliver Munday v4.1 ep Contents Cover Also by Tim Whitmarsh Title Page Copyright Dedication Preface A Dialogue Part One: Archaic Greece Chapter 1: Polytheistic Greece Chapter 2: Good Books Chapter 3: Battling the Gods Chapter 4: The Material Cosmos Part Two: Classical Athens Chapter 5: Cause and Effect Chapter 6: “Concerning the Gods, I Cannot Know” Chapter 7:
    [Show full text]
  • PRESS PUBLICITY TEAM: Visit Ivpress.Com/Media Alisse Wissman, Print Publicity, at 800.843.4587 Ext
    A Future for Theology in an Age of Crisis Drawing from the academic genre of critical theory, internationally renowned writer and academic Carl Raschke introduces an agenda for theological thinking in this age of global crisis. In the interview below, IVP Academic editor David Congdon talks with Raschke about the origins and timeliness of this new “critical theology.” Many of our readers will be unfamiliar with the literature and debates that you engage in this work, ranging from Bultmann and Horkheimer to Badiou and Žižek. Could you set the stage for this work? What are the origins of what you call “critical theology”? Raschke: Critical theology is in many ways the ongoing twenty-first-century legacy of pomo theology. Postmodern theology, which started off in the 1980s as an effort to develop an Carl Raschke, author of immediate theological application for the tremendously influential philosophy (at the time) of Jacques Derrida, gradually became an extension of what Hent DeVries termed in the late Critical Theology: Introducing an 1990s the “religious turn” in continental philosophy as a whole. Right after the turn of the Agenda for an Age of Global millennium the more youthful cadres within evangelical Christianity became quite Crisis interested in these philosophical thinkers, and they became a significant readership for not only two of my earlier books (The Next Reformation, 2004, and GloboChrist, 2008) but also for a variety of other works by leading philosophical theologians, such as John D. Caputo and James K. A. Smith. Figures like Alain Badiou and Slavoj Žižek (the latter especially) are Find more from Raschke at leading stars in this galaxy of contemporary philosophical figures who have drawn a carlraschke.com considerable following and have become their own household names among academic religious thinkers.
    [Show full text]