Cognitive Idolatry and the Trinity in Paul K Moser's Philosophy

2017·0.34 MB·English

by  Nasmith, Benjamin B

COGNITIVEIDOLATRYANDTHETRINITY
INPAULK.MOSER’SPHILOSOPHY
BenjaminB.Nasmith
Athesispresentedinpartialfulfillment
oftherequirementforthe
DegreeofMasterofArts
BriercrestSeminary
February2017

SIGNATURESHEETFORTHETHESIS
IcertifythatIhavereadandamwillingtosponsorthisthesissubmittedbyBenjaminB.
Nasmith. Inmyopinion,itconformstoacceptablestandardsandisfullyadequateinscope
andqualityasathesisforthedegreeofMasterofArtsatBriercrestSeminary.
(date) DavidGuretzki,PhD
FirstReader
IcertifythatIhavereadthisthesisandinmyopinionitconformstoacceptablestandards
forathesisforthedegreeofMasterofArtsatBriercrestSeminary.
(date) GrantPoettcker,PhD
SecondReader
AbstractofathesispresentedtoBriercrestSeminary
inpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthe
degreeofMasterofArts
COGNITIVEIDOLATRYANDTHETRINITY
INPAULK.MOSER’SPHILOSOPHY
by
BenjaminB.Nasmith
February2017
ChristianphilosopherPaulK.Moserdevelopsanaccountofhumaninquiryon
whichtruth-seekerscandonobetterthantoseekoutthebestavailableexplanationoftheir
perspective-boundnonconceptualexperiences,usingcategoriesandinterpretive
commitmentsthatvaryaccordingtotheirpurposesasinquirers. Wheninquiryconcernsa
Godwhoisworthyofworship,MoserarguesthatinquirymustconformtoGod’spurposes
inbeingknown. Thesepurposesincludeestablishingfellowshipwithhumansandbetween
humansaccordingtoGod’scharacterofperfectlove. Theperspectivalevidenceneeding
theologicalexplanation,forsuchaGod,willconsistofGod’sself-manifestationthrough
I-Thouencounter. Toreceivesuchevidence,inquirersmustconformtoanethicsfor
inquirythatenablesGodtoself-manifestandinquirerstoreceivethatself-manifestation.
RefusaltoinquireaboutGodonGod’stermsamountstocognitiveidolatry. Assuch,
theologicalbeliefisjustifiedforapersoninasmuchasitbestexplainstheirexperienceof
iv
God’sself-manifestationusingcategoriesandinterpretivecommitmentsthatcomportwith
God’spurposesinbeingknown.
IfweapplyMoser’stheologicalepistemologytoinquiryabouttheTrinity,wemust
requirethatourconstrualoftheTrinityaccountforGod’sself-manifestationinexperience.
ItmustthereforeincorporatesomenotionofselfhoodintheTrinity,whereselfhoodmeans
beingcapableofI-Thouencounter. Theevidenceneedingexplanationconsistsofthe
ChristianexperienceoftheSpiritofGodastheSpiritofJesus. Thatis,ajustifiable
accountoftheTrinitymustbestexplainwhyitisthatChristiansreceivetheHolySpiritas
conveyingthepersonalpresenceoftheexaltedJesusyetalsoperceivethatthehuman
Jesusisaco-recipientoftheHolySpiritastheSpiritofhisFather. Evenso,noaccountof
theTrinityservesGod’spurposesinbeingknownifdivorcedfromtheinquirer’sown
experienceofGod. ThispneumaticapproachtotheTrinityattendstoGod’spurposesin
beingknownbyGod’sSonandSpirit. Itrepresentsanexperientialapproachtothe
doctrineoftheTrinityandtheologydistinctfromvariousbiblicalortraditionalapproaches.
v
ToAmber,Miles,Lucy,andJane
vi
“IownItaxyou,andIamsorry,butithastaxedmemore.”
PeterTaylorForsyth,TheCrucialityoftheCross.
vii
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
God’sPurposesinBeingKnownandCognitiveIdolatry . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
PaulMoserandtheNaturalTheologians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
PaulMoserandFideism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
PaulMoserandtheDoctrineoftheTrinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
TrinitarianTheologyinLightofGethsemaneEpistemology . . . . . . . . . . 18
2. PHILOSOPHICALPRELIMINARIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
ThePerspectivalFeatureofPaulMoser’sPhilosophy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
ObjectivityasConceiving-Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
TheChallengeofGlobalSkepticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
ConditionalOntologicalAgnosticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
TheIntentionalMeaningFeatureofPaulMoser’sPhilosophy . . . . . . . . . 28
TheUbiquityofConceptsandMinimalConceptual-Taking . . . . . . . . 29
MeaningviaInterpretationRatherThanLanguageUse . . . . . . . . . . 30
MeaningandConceptsasPurpose-Relative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
AnalyticityinPerspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
TheEvidentialFeatureofPaulMoser’sPhilosophy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
viii
TheJustificationNeededforKnowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
FoundationalEvidenceandItsAlternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
ImmediateJustification,Experience,andExplanation . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3. COGNITIVEIDOLATRYANDETHICSFORTHEOLOGICALINQUIRY . . 50
GodasWorthyofWorship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
WorthinessofWorshipandRelationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
PersonalKnowledgeandEvidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
DivineSelf-ManifestationinExperienceasConviction . . . . . . . . . . 58
EthicsforInquiryaboutGod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
SuitablySeekingGod’sSelf-Manifestation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
CognitiveIdolatryinTheologicalInquiry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
TowardaTheologyofDivineSelf-Manifestation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
TheFundamentalDisputeaboutI-ThouEncounterandSelfhood . . . . . . . 70
4. APNEUMATICAPPROACHTOTHETRINITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
MysteryandConceptualCommitments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
ATaxonomyofAccountsoftheTrinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
MysteryandCognitiveIdolatry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
JesusandtheSpiritofGod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
TheExaltedJesusandtheSpiritofGod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
TheHistoricalJesusandtheSpiritofGod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
ConceptualCategoriesandtheSpiritofJesus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
AppropriatingtheChristianProclamation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
TranslatingtheChristianProclamation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
ix
5. SUMMARYANDEVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
FromGeneralInquirytoInquiryabouttheTrinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
TheTrinityandChristianExperienceinOutline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
TheBenefitsandChallengesofaPneumaticApproach . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
FutureDirectionsforPaulMoser’sPneumaticTheology . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
x