Christian Worldview vs. Postmodernism Book Summary

Title: Christian Worldview vs. Postmodernism
Author: Dave Armstrong

TLDR: This book tackles common atheist and agnostic arguments against Christianity, defending the rationality of Christian belief. Armstrong uses philosophy, logic, and history to argue that Christianity offers a more coherent and meaningful worldview than atheistic materialism.

Chapter 1: The Rationality of the Christian Worldview

This chapter establishes the foundation for Armstrong’s arguments by asserting the inherent rationality of the Christian worldview, challenging the prevailing secular narrative that often portrays Christianity as irrational and incompatible with intellectual pursuits. Armstrong addresses the prevalent skepticism towards Christianity within academia and intellectual circles, highlighting the prejudice and double standards often employed against Christian thinkers. He argues that possessing a Christian faith does not preclude one from engaging in rigorous philosophical inquiry or scientific exploration.

Armstrong uses the example of Dr. William Lane Craig, a prominent theistic philosopher, who is often criticized for his association with Campus Crusade for Christ and his apologetic writings. He dismantles the argument that a Christian philosopher’s work becomes automatically suspect due to their faith or their efforts to defend it. He argues that atheists, like Christians, operate from unproven axioms and faith-based propositions, and that their alleged intellectual superiority is often rooted in prejudice and an unfounded sense of epistemological certainty.

Armstrong traces the historical roots of modern secularism and skepticism, attributing the breakdown of the medieval theological synthesis to the nominalist philosophers and the subsequent impact of the Renaissance and the religious divisions of the 16th century. He argues that the Enlightenment’s “hyper-rationalism” further separated reason from faith, culminating in a dominant secular worldview that relegates Christianity to the fringes of society and the realm of private, subjective belief.

However, Armstrong also highlights the inherent failures and disillusionment of post-Enlightenment philosophy, observing the breakdown of various secular ideologies and the descent into relativism, nihilism, and meaninglessness. He argues that, while postmodern thought may have abandoned the “certainty” of prior systems, it offers no viable alternative for understanding reality or providing a coherent worldview. In contrast, he suggests that consistent, thoughtful Christianity remains unaffected by this intellectual and cultural malaise, as it never embraced the Enlightenment worldview in the first place.

Armstrong concludes that Christianity, grounded in faith but consistent with reason and science, offers a sense of intellectual and religious confidence that provides meaning and purpose to life and intellectual discourse, in contrast to the often-cynical and disillusioned outlook of postmodern thought.

Chapter 2: Reflections on Agnosticism, Atheism, and Skepticism

This chapter delves deeper into Armstrong’s defense of the Christian worldview by dissecting the arguments commonly employed by agnostics, atheists, and skeptics. He refutes the notion that truth can only be attained through empirical observation, arguing that this position itself rests on unproven axioms and philosophical assumptions. He challenges the common charge that Christians merely accept the propaganda of their upbringing, highlighting his own journey to faith as a critical and deliberate process.

Armstrong systematically addresses various skeptical arguments, including:

• Parallels with other mythologies: He argues that the mere existence of parallels between biblical narratives and other ancient myths does not invalidate the Bible’s claims.
• Wishful thinking: He contends that Christianity, with its often-difficult moral demands, is hardly a system designed to cater to wishful thinking.
• Suppression of Greek philosophy: He counters the claim that Christianity suppressed classical learning, highlighting the significant role of Greek philosophy in the development of Christian thought.
• Empiricism as the sole source of truth: He dismantles the flawed logic that rejects revelation solely because it is not empirically verifiable.

Armstrong argues that atheists, like Christians, begin with unproven axioms and faith-based propositions. He suggests that atheists often adopt materialistic axioms as unquestionable truths, failing to recognize the implicit assumptions and potential flaws inherent in their own belief system. He explores the various assumptions underpinning scientific inquiry, such as the reliability of our senses, the existence of matter, and the uniformity of natural laws, arguing that these assumptions are not self-evident and require a level of faith similar to that required by theism.

Armstrong explores the psychological aspects of religious belief, presenting a counter-argument to Freud’s “father complex” theory of theism by suggesting that atheism might arise from negative experiences with fathers in childhood. He highlights the work of psychologist Paul C. Vitz, who found a correlation between atheism and absent or defective fathers in the lives of prominent atheists. He acknowledges that psychological factors can influence both religious belief and disbelief, but argues that ultimately, both worldviews require faith-based propositions.

Armstrong emphasizes the importance of Christian apologetics in addressing the stereotypes, misinformation, and caricatures often used to criticize Christianity. He argues that apologetics can help skeptics understand the true nature of Christian beliefs, but ultimately, conversion requires not just intellectual assent but also a change of heart and the reception of divine grace.

Chapter 3: Replies to Atheists’ and Agnostics’ Questions About Christianity

This chapter takes the form of a Q&A, addressing various common questions and objections posed by atheists and agnostics concerning specific aspects of Christian belief. Armstrong provides concise, clear answers, clarifying and defending Christian doctrines while acknowledging the limits of human understanding and the mysteries inherent in faith.

Some key questions addressed in this chapter include:

• The nature of God the Father and God the Son
• The reasons for Jesus’ death on the cross
• The concept of salvation and how it is attained
• The nature of the soul and its existence outside of space and time
• The purpose of evangelism, especially considering the fate of the unevangelized

Armstrong defends the rationality and coherence of Christian doctrines, addressing potential logical inconsistencies and demonstrating how faith can coexist with reason and intellectual inquiry. He clarifies misunderstandings surrounding concepts like heaven and hell, emphasizing the Christian emphasis on love, grace, and the transformation of individuals through a relationship with God.

Armstrong also tackles the challenging question of why God allows suffering, arguing that the Christian understanding of free will and God’s ultimate plan for redemption provide a plausible explanation, even if we cannot fully comprehend the mysteries of divine providence. He underscores the importance of grace in overcoming sin and evil, and the ultimate hope of eternal life with God as a source of meaning and purpose in the face of suffering.

Chapter 4: Christian Replies to the Argument From Evil (Free Will Defense): Is God Malevolent, Weak, or Non-Existent Because of the Existence of Evil and Suffering?

This chapter directly confronts the Argument from Evil, a central objection to the existence of a benevolent and omnipotent God. Armstrong lays out the core tenets of the Free Will Defense (FWD), arguing that the existence of evil is a consequence of human free will, a gift bestowed by God that allows for genuine love and relationship but also opens the possibility for rebellion and sin.

Armstrong distinguishes between:

• Free Will Theodicy (FWT): attempts to definitively explain God’s reasons for permitting evil.
• Free Will Defense (FWD): argues that it is logically possible that God has good reasons for allowing evil, even if we cannot fully grasp them.

Armstrong favors the more modest FWD, demonstrating that it is logically possible for God to create a world with free will without necessarily causing or willing evil. He acknowledges that this does not provide a complete explanation for the suffering in the world, but argues that it effectively removes the logical contradiction between God’s goodness and the existence of evil.

Armstrong addresses the problem of natural evil, arguing that such events are a necessary consequence of the laws of nature that God has established. He critiques the inconsistency of atheists who demand a world without suffering while simultaneously rejecting the possibility of miracles. He contends that natural laws, with their inherent potential for causing harm, are essential for an orderly and predictable universe.

Armstrong further explores the relationship between God’s omniscience and human free will, arguing that God’s foreknowledge does not negate our freedom of choice. He acknowledges that we cannot fully comprehend the mysteries of divine providence, but suggests that faith, grounded in reason and revelation, allows us to trust in God’s goodness and ultimate plan, even when we face suffering.

Chapter 5: The “Problem of Good” and the Nature of Meaningfulness in Atheism (The Flip Side of the Problem of Evil Argument Against Christianity)

This chapter flips the script on the Argument from Evil, posing the “Problem of Good” as a challenge to the atheist worldview. Armstrong argues that atheism, taken to its logical conclusions, struggles to provide a coherent basis for morality, justice, and meaning in a universe devoid of God. He contends that without a transcendent source of good, morality becomes arbitrary, relativistic, and ultimately meaningless.

Armstrong presents five key challenges to atheist morality:

1. Defining evil: Without a transcendent standard, the definition of evil becomes subjective and arbitrary.
2. Eschatological justice: Atheism offers no hope for ultimate justice or punishment for evil deeds.
3. Objective basis for condemning evil: Without God, there is no objective ground for condemning acts like those of Hitler or Stalin.
4. Absence of heaven: Atheism lacks the concept of an eternal reward for virtue or a life lived in union with God.
5. Ultimate meaninglessness: A godless universe, in its finality, becomes fundamentally hopeless and meaningless.

Armstrong argues that while atheists may live moral lives, their actions often contradict their philosophical presuppositions. He points to the historical consequences of atheistic ideologies like Communism and Nazism, arguing that these systems, in their attempts to create a godless utopia, resulted in immense suffering and injustice.

Armstrong suggests that atheists often rely on unexamined assumptions and faith-based propositions in their attempts to define and justify morality. He contends that their moral compasses are often informed by the “capital” of the image of God within them, even if they reject the source of that inherent moral sense.

Armstrong contrasts the Christian worldview, which grounds morality in the nature of God and His love for humanity, with the relativistic and ultimately unsatisfying ethical systems often proposed by atheists. He argues that Christianity offers a coherent and compelling basis for both individual and societal morality, grounded in the absolute standard of God’s love and justice.

Chapter 6: Miracles, Natural Scientific Laws, and the Relationship of Christianity and Metaphysics to the Scientific Method

This chapter explores the complex relationship between miracles, natural laws, science, and the Christian worldview. Armstrong challenges the common atheist argument that the existence of natural laws automatically precludes the possibility of miracles. He argues that miracles, as supernatural interventions, operate outside the realm of scientific inquiry, but their effects can be observed and verified through the same empirical methods used in science.

Armstrong addresses the common objections to miracles, including:

• Violation of natural laws: He clarifies that miracles are not necessarily violations, but rather exceptions to, natural laws, caused by divine intervention.
• Rarity of occurrence: He contends that the rarity of miracles is consistent with their nature as extraordinary events, and does not disprove their possibility.
• Lack of explanatory value: He argues that metaphysical explanations, such as those offered by theology, operate on a different level than scientific explanations, and can provide valuable insights into the meaning and purpose of events, even if they cannot fully explain the mechanisms involved.

Armstrong argues that science, while a valuable tool for understanding the natural world, cannot answer every question or explain every phenomenon. He contends that materialistic scientists often fall into the trap of “scientism,” treating science as the only valid source of knowledge and dismissing anything that cannot be scientifically verified.

Armstrong highlights the historical fact that modern science arose in a Christian milieu, with many of the founding figures of science being devout Christians who saw no inherent conflict between their faith and their scientific pursuits. He argues that the Christian worldview provides a foundation for scientific inquiry by asserting the orderliness and intelligibility of the universe, created and sustained by a rational God.

Armstrong concludes that science and religion are distinct but complementary realms of knowledge, each with its own methods and limitations. He contends that the Christian worldview can accommodate both the natural laws discovered by science and the possibility of miracles, providing a comprehensive and coherent understanding of reality.

Chapter 7: The Atheist’s Boundless Faith in Deo-Atomism (“The Atom-as-God”)

This chapter dives into the concept of “Deo-Atomism,” a term coined by Armstrong to describe the uncritical faith that many atheists place in the power of matter to explain the universe and all its complexities. He argues that atheists, in their rejection of God, often elevate matter to the status of a deity, attributing to it the creative and organizing powers traditionally ascribed to God.

Armstrong examines various claims made by atheist scientists and thinkers, such as the idea of “bubble universes” and the insistence on applying uniformitarianism to the Big Bang. He argues that these claims, lacking empirical support and often based on speculation beyond the reach of scientific verification, demonstrate the inherent faith-based nature of atheism.

Armstrong humorously compares Deo-Atomism to ancient polytheism, suggesting that atheists essentially worship a pantheon of gods, including the “Atom-gods,” the “Cell-gods,” and the “Time-Goddess.” He contends that Deo-Atomism requires an immense leap of faith, even greater than the faith required by theism, as it demands belief in the inherent power of matter to create and organize itself without any guiding intelligence or design.

Armstrong argues that the scientific method, while valuable for understanding the natural world, cannot definitively answer the ultimate questions of origins and purpose. He contends that both theism and Deo-Atomism rely on metaphysical assumptions and faith-based propositions to explain the universe, and that the Christian view, grounded in a personal God who is both Creator and Sustainer, offers a more compelling and coherent explanation than the atheist’s reliance on the mysterious and unexplained powers of matter.

Chapter 8: First Cause: The Cosmological Argument for God’s Existence

This chapter focuses on the Cosmological Argument, a classic philosophical argument for the existence of God, which asserts that the universe must have a First Cause, an uncaused cause that brought everything into being. Armstrong contrasts the Christian view, which posits God as the First Cause, with the atheist materialist view, which typically claims that matter has always existed.

Armstrong analyzes the implications of both positions:

• Christian view: Consistent with the Big Bang theory, as it suggests a finite universe with a beginning.
• Atheist materialist view: Clashes with current scientific understanding, which suggests a finite universe with a beginning in time.

Armstrong argues that Deo-Atomism, in its attempt to reconcile atheism with a universe that has a beginning, relies on unscientific and ultimately faith-based propositions, such as the existence of hyper-universes or bubble universes. He contends that these hypothetical scenarios, lacking any empirical support, demonstrate the Deo-Atomist’s willingness to abandon scientific principles in order to maintain their faith in the power of matter.

Armstrong further explores the concept of causation, arguing that the very nature of scientific inquiry presupposes the principle of cause and effect. He contends that the Big Bang, as a definite beginning of the universe as we know it, necessarily implies a cause, and that God, as an eternal, uncaused Spirit, is a more plausible explanation for this ultimate cause than any hypothetical material process.

Armstrong clarifies that the Cosmological Argument, while a compelling argument for a First Cause, does not automatically lead to the full Christian understanding of God. He suggests that revelation, as found in Scripture and the Christian tradition, is necessary to fully grasp the nature and attributes of God.

Armstrong concludes that the Cosmological Argument, while not a “knockout proof,” provides a strong philosophical basis for belief in God as the First Cause of the universe. He contends that the Christian view, consistent with both scientific evidence and philosophical reasoning, offers a more satisfying and coherent explanation for the origin of the universe than the atheist’s reliance on unsubstantiated material processes.

Chapter 9: The Teleological Argument for God’s Existence: Irreducible Complexity, and Intelligent Design

This chapter examines the Teleological Argument, also known as the Argument from Design, which posits the existence of God based on the apparent design and purpose evident in the universe and in living organisms. Armstrong highlights the work of contemporary proponents of Intelligent Design (ID), such as Michael Behe and Phillip Johnson, who argue that the complexity and intricate functionality of biological systems point to an intelligent designer.

Armstrong explores the concept of “irreducible complexity,” introduced by Behe, which describes biological systems that cannot function without all their parts working together, suggesting that they could not have evolved through gradual, Darwinian processes. He cites examples like the bacterial flagellum and the human eye, arguing that their sophisticated structures and interconnected components defy explanation through purely materialistic mechanisms.

Armstrong critiques the responses of materialistic evolutionists to the challenge of irreducible complexity, arguing that they often resort to circular reasoning, unsubstantiated claims of “preadaptation,” and dogmatic insistence on the sufficiency of Darwinian mechanisms, even in the absence of empirical evidence. He contends that these responses demonstrate a faith-based commitment to materialistic evolution that ignores the scientific evidence pointing to design.

Armstrong addresses the common objection that ID is not science, arguing that ID proponents utilize the same scientific methods of observation, experimentation, and inference used by all scientists. He suggests that the resistance to ID within the scientific community stems from a philosophical commitment to methodological naturalism, which arbitrarily excludes the possibility of intelligent design, even when the evidence points in that direction.

Armstrong concludes that the Teleological Argument, coupled with the evidence for irreducible complexity, provides a strong case for the existence of an intelligent designer. He contends that the Christian worldview, which posits God as the Creator and Designer of the universe, offers a more compelling and coherent explanation for the origin and diversity of life than the atheist’s reliance on blind, unguided material processes.