PHILOSOPHICAL WRITINGS
WITH ALL YOUR MIND
PART ONE: MAPPING THE LANDSCAPE
CHAPTER FOUR: CHRIST—THE CLUE TO REALITY (Part 1)
Page 83
The following 2 words are incredibly important if you are going to understand the meaning of the words "ontology" or "metaphysics." "Christian philosophy endeavors with a staggering audacity to penetrate being or reality in its __________________. This is the special concern of ontology, or metaphysics. It seeks to discover what reality is in its ________________ as compared or contrasted to a mere function, appearance, linguistic symbol, or partial manifestation."
According to Martin Heidegger, what question does ontology (metaphysics) try to answer?
In the next sentence Woodfin says that we are not just trying to understand reality, that is, everything that is real. Instead we are trying to probe what that reality would be if all ____________ and _____________ properties could be stripped away."
We are looking at that segment of reality which does what?
Page 84
According to Alfred North Whitehead what has the Christian faith been seeking?
Page 85
Christians do seek a metaphysic for their faith. In other words, we speak about forgiveness of sins. Is that just a mere feeling or is it based upon reality? Are we just feeling forgiven, or has God truly forgiven us? "What confidence may we have that the experience is _____________ and not only ______________, _______________ and not just exuberance of mood, an encounter with life that touches the ____________ of our concern and not merely one ______________ fragment." In other words, when we speak about forgiveness of sins, have we truly tapped into ultimate reality?
WHAT ABOUT NATURAL THEOLOGY?
According to the great Protestant theologian Karl Barth (pron. "Bart") natural theology is merely speaking of God "by speaking of ___________ in a loud voice." (That quote is famous!)
Barth's comments were very appropo for his day. Man set himself over God's Word acting as Its judge rather than letting God's Word judge him. Page 86 According to Barth there is only one judge, or one criterion for interpreting revelation [God's Word] and that is the ____________ of God itself."
When is Barth's No! (Nein!) to Natural Theology still appropriate?
T. F. Torrance, Barth's famous student and later professor of philosophy at the University of Edinburgh, claims that "if we are to take seriously . . . the relation between the ___________ and the ___________ in God's creative and redemptive interaction with the world, then a closer relation must be established between natural theology and revealed theology."
What 3 claims does Christianity maintain which still give credibility to natural theology?
How does Christian theology change natural theology?
How does positive (natural theology) change Christian theology?
Page 87
Theology itself can scare us because we fear we may get it wrong; however, if we distinguish between revelation and theology, we should be OK with theology. According to T. F. Torrance what is revelation?
According to Torrance what is theology?
In other words, we are to hold onto God's revelation tightly (Christ and the Scriptures) but hold theology lightly.
NO ESCAPE FROM ONTOLOGY
"Man as creature seems to have no possibility of escape from an ________________ frame of reference."
Willard Quine assumes: "Ontological statements follow immediately from all manner of casual statements of commonplace fact." In other words, you see a tree, just an ordinary tree, and then think, "Where did it come from?" You look in a mirror and then think "Why am I here?" Or you hear about savage wars and ask the question, "Why is there evil in the world?"
What does Paul Tillich concede?
Even the denial of the possibility of ontology is what?
What are we doing when we retreat into a rigid individualism?
This takes care of Nietsche.
Page 88
What does man refuse to be satisfied with?
According to Tillich the concept of true being is the result of what?
In other words, we don't want to know just that there is a universe, we want to know where it came from and why it exists. Everything around us is begging us to ask the bigger questions.
The harsh truth is that there may not really be anything "out there" which gives meaning to all of life. Life may just simply exist. HOWEVER, we are able to find an explanation for the totality of reality and "provide a plausible theory for the almost _____________ appearance of such an expectation." In other words, if there is NO explanation, no ontological explanation for all of life, then why is everyone seeking for this explanation? The fact we feel compelled to seek it surely shows that it exists. The fact that people hunger says that food exists; the fact that people thirst says that liquids exist; otherwise, such "feelings" are illogical. The fact that we feel compelled to seek the full explanation of reality/life says that such an explanation exists; otherwise, such a "feeling" is illogical.
In the paragraph at the end of the page, Woodfin speaks of the "logos-quality" of the world. By "logos-quality" Woodfin means that there is something rational to all of life. We relate to life rationally. Are we being irrational when we relate rationally to life, or is it legitimate to relate rationally to life? If it is legitimate to do so (and it works!), then life itself must be rational. There should then be a rational explanation to life. (Remember that reality is realistic and it takes into account other expressions of reality.)
Page 89
According to Torrance whenever man is questioning the rationality of the universe, what is he assuming to be true?
Is it possible to ask a meaningful question about life (one's environment) and then question if meaning actually exists?
When we do this, what do we surrender ourselves to?
What does the intelligibility of human discourse and the rational interest man has toward the understanding of his place and destiny implies what?
What do meaningful experiences make unavoidable?
Some rational reflections support what belief?