Course 19 · Apologetics
Modern Challenges
Study the major modern challenges to Christianity, state each in its strongest form, and learn how Christian thinkers have responded and where the questions remain open.
Overview
This course examines the main intellectual challenges to Christianity since the Enlightenment. They include secular humanism and philosophical naturalism, the theory of evolution, historical criticism of the Bible, postmodernism and moral relativism, and the critiques of religion by Marx, Nietzsche and Freud. It also takes up the charge that religion serves political power, the record of institutional corruption, objections to Christian morality, the relation of science and religion, and questions about consciousness, meaning and nihilism.
Each challenge is taught in the same order. First, it is stated in a form its own defenders would accept. Second, the course shows what is true or important in it. Third, it presents the main Christian responses from the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions, noting where Christians disagree with each other. Finally, it marks what is settled, what is debated and what is personal judgment.
The course does not assume that the critics were fools or that Christian responses always succeed. Some critics identified real failures in the church. Some arguments are answered well, some only partly, and some remain open. The aim is to train the student to argue without caricature and to tell a strong objection from a weak one.
By the end you will be able to write a structured response to a modern challenge to Christianity that is fair to the challenge, clear in its own position and honest about its limits.
Objectives
- Explain what secular humanism and philosophical naturalism claim and distinguish them from one another and from science itself.
- Describe the relationship between the theory of evolution and Christian doctrines of creation, and compare the main Christian positions.
- Describe the aims and methods of biblical criticism and the Christian responses to it.
- Explain postmodernism and moral relativism and state what is valuable and what is mistaken in each, according to Christian critics.
- Summarize the critiques of religion in Marx, Nietzsche and Freud, and state the strongest response to each.
- Evaluate the objections that religion supports political power, that the church is corrupt and that Christian morality is harmful.
- Compare the main models for relating science and religion.
- Explain the arguments about consciousness and materialism and the questions of meaning, purpose and nihilism.
- Write a structured response to a modern challenge that states the challenge fairly and defends a clear position.
Course outline
Module 1 The Secular Age: Humanism and Naturalism
Define secularism, secular humanism and philosophical naturalism, and examine the claims each makes about knowledge, morality and meaning.
Topics
- Secular humanism
- Philosophical naturalism
Lessons
Module 2 Science, Evolution and Faith
Study the major models relating science and religion and the Christian positions on evolution and creation.
Topics
- Evolution and creation
- Science and religion
Lessons
Module 3 Criticism of the Bible
Learn the aims of modern biblical criticism and how Christians in the different traditions have responded to it.
Topics
- Biblical criticism
Lessons
Module 4 Truth, Relativism and Postmodernism
Examine postmodern skepticism about truth and the claim that morality is relative, and weigh both critiques and responses.
Topics
- Postmodernism
- Moral relativism
Lessons
Module 5 The Masters of Suspicion
Read Marx, Nietzsche and Freud on religion, state their arguments fairly and consider the strongest replies.
Topics
- Marxist critiques of religion
- Nietzsche
- Freud
Lessons
Module 6 Power, Corruption and Morality
Face the historical charges that religion serves political power, that the church has been corrupt, and that Christian morality is harmful.
Topics
- Religion and political power
- Religious institutional corruption
- Modern critiques of Christian morality
Lessons
Module 7 Mind, Meaning and Nihilism
Take up the questions that remain after the arguments: consciousness, purpose and the possibility that life has no meaning.
Topics
- Consciousness and materialism
- Meaning, purpose and nihilism
Lessons
Module 8 Writing a Response
Practice stating a challenge fairly, building a reply and admitting where the question remains open.
Topics
- Secular humanism
- Postmodernism
- Meaning, purpose and nihilism
Lessons
Suggested schedule
| When | Work |
|---|---|
| Week 1 | Module 1: The Secular Age: Humanism and Naturalism |
| Week 2 | Module 2: Science, Evolution and Faith |
| Week 3 | Module 3: Criticism of the Bible |
| Week 4 | Module 4: Truth, Relativism and Postmodernism |
| Week 5 | Module 5: The Masters of Suspicion |
| Week 6 | Module 6: Power, Corruption and Morality |
| Week 7 | Module 7: Mind, Meaning and Nihilism |
| Week 8 | Module 8: Writing a Response |
| Week 9 | Independent assignment and self-assessment |
Readings
Required
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Religion and Science
A careful survey of how science and religion have been related.
How to use it: Read for the main models of the relation between science and religion. Use it as the framework for the module on evolution.
Read online (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) In the library - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Problem of Evil
A full and fair survey of logical and evidential arguments and the main theistic responses.
How to use it: Read for the argument that suffering counts against belief in God, which several modern critics rely on.
Read online (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) In the library - Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief
A leading philosopher argues that Christian belief can be rational without being proved by arguments. Advanced.
How to use it: Read selectively for the argument that Christian belief can be rational without proof, and for the replies to Freud and Marx.
Find in a library or bookstore catalog (Open Library) In the library - C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
A clear, accessible case for central Christian belief, based on wartime radio talks. A good first book for apologetics.
How to use it: Read the opening chapters on moral law as one popular reply to relativism and naturalism.
Find in a library or bookstore catalog (Open Library) In the library - Blaise Pascal, Pensées
Notes toward a defense of Christianity by a great mathematician. Memorable on faith, reason and the human condition.
How to use it: Read selectively for Pascal’s description of human greatness and misery, which bears on meaning and nihilism.
Read online (Christian Classics Ethereal Library) In the library - David Bentley Hart, The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss
An argument for the classical understanding of God across religious traditions, written by an Orthodox author.
How to use it: Read selectively for an argument that materialism struggles to explain consciousness, being and meaning.
Find in a library or bookstore catalog (Open Library) In the library
Recommended
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Hume on Religion
Introduces Hume’s critique of natural theology and miracles.
How to use it: Read for Hume’s critique of religion, a source for many later critics.
Read online (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) In the library - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fallacies
A scholarly guide to logical fallacies. Use it to sharpen argument checking.
How to use it: Use as a checklist for reviewing arguments on both sides.
Read online (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) In the library - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moral Arguments for the Existence of God
Lays out the main moral arguments and the replies to them.
How to use it: Read for the argument that moral facts point toward God, and for objections to it.
Read online (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) In the library - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Natural Law Tradition in Ethics
A scholarly overview of natural law from Aquinas to the present.
How to use it: Read for a classical alternative to relativism.
Read online (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) In the library - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Virtue Ethics
What virtue ethics is, from Aristotle forward, and how it differs from other theories.
How to use it: Read for an account of morality that Christian and non Christian thinkers both draw on.
Read online (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) In the library - Alvin Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil
The short book that set out the free-will defense against the logical problem of evil.
How to use it: Read for the free will defense, one of the best known replies to the logical problem of evil.
Find in a library or bookstore catalog (Open Library) In the library - Richard Swinburne, The Existence of God
A rigorous cumulative-case argument for God’s existence. Advanced.
How to use it: Read selectively for a cumulative probability argument for God that engages naturalism.
Find in a library or bookstore catalog (Open Library) In the library - Augustine of Hippo, Confessions
Augustine’s account of his restless search for God. Read Book I and then Book VIII, the story of his conversion.
How to use it: Read selectively for a classic account of restlessness and the search for meaning.
Read online (New Advent (Church Fathers)) In the library - Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morals
Nietzsche’s attack on the origins of Christian morality. Read it in order to answer it fairly.
How to use it: Read the first essay.
Read online (Project Gutenberg) In the library - Friedrich Nietzsche, The Joyful Wisdom (The Gay Science)
The book that contains the famous ‘death of God’ passage. Read it to see what Nietzsche meant by it.
How to use it: Find the passage on the death of God and read it in its context.
Read online (Project Gutenberg) In the library - Sigmund Freud, The Future of an Illusion
Freud’s argument that religious belief is a wish-fulfilling illusion. A classic text to read and answer.
How to use it: Read it as the classic psychological critique of religion.
Find in a library or bookstore catalog (Open Library) In the library - Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right: Introduction
The essay with Marx’s phrase about religion as the ‘opium of the people’. Read the whole passage in context, not just the phrase.
How to use it: Read the introduction and the passage on religion in full.
Read online (Marxists Internet Archive) In the library
Passages in the Scripture Study
- Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God. Used in discussions of nature and creation.
- Genesis 1:27 Humans are made in the image of God, the basis of Christian claims about human dignity.
- Job 38:4 God asks Job where he was when the earth was founded, a text on the limits of human understanding.
- Ecclesiastes 1:2 Vanity of vanities. The Bible itself voices the experience of meaninglessness.
- Ecclesiastes 12:13 The conclusion of Ecclesiastes about fearing God and keeping his commandments.
- Psalm 14:1 The fool says in his heart there is no God. Read it in context and with care about how it is applied.
- Acts 17:28 Paul quotes pagan poets, a model for engaging the thought of non Christians.
- Colossians 2:8 A warning about philosophy that depends on human tradition. Read it with its context.
- 1 Corinthians 1:22 Paul on Jews who seek signs and Greeks who seek wisdom.
- 1 Peter 3:15 Always be ready to give a reason for the hope you have, with gentleness and respect.
- Matthew 7:16 By their fruits you will know them, relevant to the charge that Christians do not live as they teach.
- Luke 18:11 The Pharisee’s prayer, a warning against self righteousness that critics of religion often cite.
- Romans 13:1 Paul on governing authorities. Compare it with Acts 5:29 on obeying God rather than men.
- Acts 5:29 Peter says that one must obey God rather than men.
- John 10:10 Jesus says he came that they may have life and have it abundantly.
Independent assignment
A Structured Response to a Modern Challenge
- Purpose
- To choose one modern philosophical or cultural challenge to Christianity, state it fairly and in its strongest form, and write a structured response that concedes what is true in it and defends a clear position.
- Instructions
- Choose one challenge, such as naturalism, evolution, the critique of Marx, Nietzsche or Freud, postmodernism, the charge of institutional corruption, or nihilism.
- State the challenge in the strongest form its own defenders would accept. Cite at least one primary or leading source for it.
- Identify what is true or important in the challenge. Name any historical failures or sound arguments the Christian should concede.
- Define the key terms that the challenge uses and make clear which ones are in dispute.
- Present at least two Christian responses, and if relevant, show where Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant thinkers differ.
- Evaluate the responses and defend the one you find strongest, giving reasons from philosophy, history, Scripture or experience.
- Present the strongest remaining objection to your response and reply to it, or admit that you cannot fully answer it.
- State what is settled, what is debated and what is personal judgment in your conclusion.
- Required sources
- At least four of the required readings.
- At least one primary or leading source for the challenge itself.
- At least three of the Scripture passages listed for this course, or others relevant to the topic.
- Length and scope
- About 3,000 to 4,000 words, or ten to thirteen pages. Keep it in your own notebook or document. Do not send it anywhere.
- Questions to address
- What is the best version of this challenge?
- What in it should a Christian accept?
- What do the various Christian traditions say in reply?
- Which response is the strongest, and what are its weaknesses?
- What remains open in my conclusion?
- Expected output
- A written structured response with a statement of the challenge, concessions, definitions, at least two Christian responses, an evaluation, a reply to the strongest remaining objection and a statement of what is settled and what is not.
- How it will be evaluated
- It states the challenge fairly and in its strongest form.
- It concedes what is true in the challenge.
- It defines terms precisely and uses them consistently.
- It presents more than one Christian response and represents the traditions accurately.
- It reasons carefully and avoids logical fallacies.
- It distinguishes what is settled from what is debated and from personal judgment.
- Common mistakes to avoid
- Answering a weaker version of the challenge instead of the strongest.
- Dismissing a critic by describing his motives or his life instead of answering his argument.
- Quoting Nietzsche, Marx or Freud from memory or from secondary slogans.
- Treating a failure of Christians as a proof that Christianity is false, or treating a good argument as proof that every critic is wrong.
- Presenting one Christian response as the only Christian response.
Knowledge check and self-assessment
What is the difference between science and philosophical naturalism?
Science is a method of studying the natural world by observation, measurement and testing. Philosophical naturalism is a broader claim that nature is all there is and that nothing supernatural exists. The first is a method that Christians and non Christians use. The second is a worldview that goes beyond what the method can test. Confusing the two leads to the false idea that accepting science requires rejecting God.
Name three Christian positions on the relation of Genesis to evolution.
Young earth creationists read Genesis as a historical account of creation in six ordinary days a few thousand years ago and reject common descent. Old earth creationists accept an ancient earth but resist the claim that humans descend from earlier species. Evolutionary creationists, sometimes called theistic evolutionists, accept evolution as the way God created and read Genesis in a more theological or literary way. Catholic and Orthodox Christians have a range of views, with many accepting evolution while affirming God as creator.
What is the genetic fallacy, and does it dispose of the critiques of Marx and Freud?
The genetic fallacy is the mistake of judging a belief false because of its origin. If Freud is right that belief in God arises from wishful thinking, it does not follow that God does not exist, since a belief may arise for poor reasons and still be true. However, an explanation of how a belief arose can make us examine its support more carefully. A fair reply grants this and then asks for independent reasons on both sides.
What was Nietzsche’s critique of Christianity?
Nietzsche argued that Christian morality grew from resentment, valuing weakness, humility and pity over strength and creativity. He announced that God is dead, meaning that belief in God had lost its hold on European culture and that the moral order built on it would be shaken. He thought the result would be either nihilism or a new creation of values. Christian thinkers respond that he correctly saw the link between morality and belief, while disputing his account of Christian ethics.
What did Marx mean when he called religion the opium of the people?
In the passage, Marx described religion as the sigh of the oppressed and the heart of a heartless world, as well as an opium. He meant that it comforted people in unjust conditions and so could dull the desire to change them. He thought that religion would fade when injustice was removed. Christians respond that the faith has also inspired movements for justice, such as the abolition of the slave trade, while granting that religion has often served the powerful.
How does moral relativism differ from the claim that cultures hold different moral views?
The claim that cultures disagree is a fact about what people believe, and anthropologists observe it. Moral relativism is a philosophical claim that no moral view is better or worse than another beyond what a culture or person holds. The first does not lead to the second, since people disagree about facts too. Critics of relativism point out that it makes moral criticism and reform difficult, while defenders reply that it encourages tolerance.
How should a Christian respond to the charge of institutional corruption?
By acknowledging the facts without defensiveness. The church has included abuse, greed and cooperation with injustice. Christians can note that the Christian faith itself condemns these failures, that critics and reformers appeared within the church, and that the failures of members do not by themselves decide the truth of the teaching. A good response also asks what changes and repentance are needed. It does not use the good done by the church to excuse the harm.
What is nihilism, and how do Christians and secular thinkers respond to it?
Nihilism is the view that life has no inherent meaning, purpose or value. Some secular thinkers accept that the universe supplies no meaning but hold that people can create meaning through relationships, projects and moral commitment. Christians hold that meaning comes from being created and loved by God and called to a purpose. The disagreement is partly about whether meaning that is only created by humans is enough, and both sides give reasons.
Judge your own progress
- When you finish the modules, answer the knowledge questions from memory, without notes. Aim for 70 percent or better; if you score lower, reread the relevant module and try again.
- Write your structured response (the independent assignment). Wait three days, reread it, and mark every place where you weakened the challenge or avoided a hard point.
- Check your work against the evaluation criteria in the assignment. Rate each criterion as strong, adequate or weak and write one sentence on how you would improve each weak one.
- Return to the key ideas of the course after 1 day, 7 days, 30 days and 90 days. At each point, state one challenge in its strongest form and give the best Christian reply and the best objection to that reply.
- You can state each major challenge so that its defenders would accept your account.
- You can concede what is true in a challenge without giving up your own position.
- Your response is fair, reasoned and honest about what remains unsettled.