Stating a theological tension precisely

Program / Course 25: Theological Synthesis / Lesson 5.1

What you will learn

• Define a theological tension and distinguish it from a contradiction and from a mystery.
• Use a five-part template to state any tension fairly and precisely.
• Recognize common ways that tensions are hidden or falsely resolved.
• Apply the template to one tension of your choice.

The big idea

A theological tension is a pair of claims, each backed by Scripture or tradition, that appear hard to hold together. Examples are divine sovereignty and human freedom, or one God and three persons. Tensions are not signs of failure. They are places where careful thought is most needed. Stating one precisely means giving both claims in their strongest form, defining the terms, showing exactly where the difficulty lies and setting out the proposed resolutions. The result is a clear picture that can be examined.

Key terms

Tension

A pair of claims that each seem well supported but appear to pull in different directions.

Contradiction

A pair of claims that cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.

Paradox

A statement that seems to contradict itself or common sense but may express a truth when properly understood.

Mystery

In theology, a truth revealed by God that human reason cannot fully comprehend, though it can be affirmed and partly understood.

Antinomy

A pair of conclusions, each apparently supported by good reasons, that conflict with each other.

Strawman

A weak or distorted version of an opposing view that is easy to defeat.

Equivocation

Using one word in two different senses within one argument, so that it appears to prove something it does not.

Background

Every major religious tradition and philosophy has tensions, and Christianity is no exception. Early Christians faced the question of how Jesus can be both God and man. The Reformation brought sharp disputes about faith and works. Modern thinkers press questions about God and suffering. Often the disagreement among Christians is itself a disagreement about how to relate two things everyone affirms.

A common mistake is to treat one’s own side as obvious and the other as foolish. Another is to avoid the tension by quietly dropping one of the claims. This lesson offers a method for stating a tension that avoids both mistakes and that prepares for the case studies in the next lesson.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: State Claim A in its strongest form

Write the first claim as one of its best defenders would. Give the main Scripture and the strongest reasons. Define any technical term. For example, in the tension between sovereignty and freedom, the first claim might be that God governs all events, with texts such as Ephesians 1:11, which speaks of God working all things after the counsel of his own will.

Step 2: State Claim B in its strongest form

Do the same for the second claim, with its strongest texts and reasons. In the same example, the second claim is that human beings make real choices for which they are responsible, with texts such as Joshua 24:15, in which Joshua says choose you this day whom ye will serve. A fair statement will not make either claim look foolish.

Step 3: Show exactly where they seem to collide

Name the specific point of difficulty. Not every pair of claims conflicts. The collision must be stated: for instance, if God determines everything, then it seems that people could not choose otherwise, and if so it is hard to see how they are responsible. Write this as a short argument with numbered steps, so that others can see which step they would deny.

This is the point where much of the work is done. Many apparent tensions dissolve at this stage because the supposed collision depends on an unstated assumption, such as a particular definition of freedom.

Step 4: Set out the proposed resolutions

List the main ways in which Christians have responded, and state each as its holders would. Include at least one from each major tradition where relevant. A response might deny one claim, or redefine a term, or hold that the claims concern different levels, or hold that the matter is a mystery that reason cannot resolve.

For each response, note its cost: what it gives up, or what new difficulty it creates.

Step 5: Say what you hold and how firmly

Finally, state your own position, if you have one, and the confidence you attach to it. It is legitimate to say that you hold both claims firmly and have no resolution, or that you incline to one resolution, or that you suspend judgment. What matters is that the statement is honest. Distinguish clearly between what your tradition requires, what the evidence suggests and what you personally find persuasive.

1. Can I state each claim in a way its defenders would accept?
2. Where exactly is the supposed contradiction, and what assumption does it rest on?
3. Is the problem a real contradiction, or only an apparent one?
4. Which resolutions have I not considered?
5. What does each resolution cost?
6. How firmly do I hold my position, and on what grounds?

Examples

Different perspectives

Catholic

Catholic theology holds that revealed mysteries exceed reason without contradicting it, and Vatican I taught that faith and reason can never be truly opposed. It values precise definition, as in the councils, and recognizes that some truths, such as the Trinity, are known only by revelation and cannot be fully explained.

Orthodox

Orthodox theology often uses the language of antinomy: truths that must be held together, though reason cannot reconcile them, such as the unity of essence and the distinction of persons. It stresses that the right response to mystery is worship and silence as well as analysis.

Protestant

Protestants often speak of paradox. Luther held that faith lives with paradox, as when the believer is both saint and sinner. Reformed writers speak of what is revealed and what is secret, saying that some questions cannot be answered. Others, particularly analytic philosophers such as Plantinga, work to show that apparent contradictions are only apparent.

Philosophical and secular views

Philosophers distinguish a true contradiction from a puzzle. Critics argue that appealing to mystery can be a way of avoiding scrutiny. Defenders reply that every field of knowledge has unresolved puzzles, such as the interpretation of quantum physics, and that unresolved does not mean false.

Why it matters

The next lessons require stating tensions and recording a position on each. A student who has a clear method can avoid two common errors: pretending that Christian doctrine has no difficulties, and treating every difficulty as fatal. The skill is useful in any discussion where two sides talk past each other.

Common misunderstandings

Knowledge check

Think it through

1. Which tension in your own beliefs have you been avoiding?
2. When have you seen someone resolve a tension by quietly dropping one side?
3. How comfortable are you with saying that you do not know?

Independent assignment

State one tension

In your own notebook, write 500 to 700 words stating one theological tension of your choice, using the five steps. Give at least one Scripture passage for each claim, show the collision as a numbered argument, describe at least two proposed resolutions with their costs, and state your own position and how firmly you hold it.

Further study

• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Trinity A careful statement of the problem of the Trinity.
• Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church On antinomy and mystery in Orthodox thought.
• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fallacies On equivocation and other errors.
• Alvin Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil A model of stating and testing a supposed contradiction.
• Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction On the place of mystery in theology.
• Deuteronomy 6:4 The Lord our God is one Lord.
• Joshua 24:15 Choose you this day.
• Ephesians 1:11 Who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.