Monism’s Impossibility

“The ancient pagan Greeks were ready to believe all kinds of marvels could take place because nature had divine power inherent in it. Thus, Aristotle was interested in every kind of freakish birth, because that freakish birth could represent the next step in evolution. This is why when Paul at Athens spoke about the doctrine of the Resurrection, the philosophers were immediately interested, because here was a man declaring that somebody had risen from the dead. Their interest was premised on the fact that maybe this is in the next stage in the development of nature in evolution.”

RJR
Lecture — Author and Authority

The significance here is that the Greeks viewed nature as pantheistic. Per RJR if nature had divine power inherent in it, what this means is that their naturalism had supernaturalism poured into it so that the natural and the super-natural co-existed together in the same reality. There was no distinction between the natural and the supernatural. We might say that the Greeks were supernatural naturalists.

This is the way it goes whenever someone either claims the monism of pure materialism (everything is of nature) or the monism of pure spiritualism ( everything is of the supernatural). If one is a pure materialists (naturalist) then by necessity they fold the supernatural into the natural and contradictorily claim that they are “naturalists.” If one is a pure Spiritualist then by necessity they fold the natural into the supernatural and contradictorily claim that they are “supernaturalists.” The monistic Supernaturalist always sneaks nature into their supernaturalism and the monistic Naturalist always sneaks the supernatural into their naturalism. One simply cannot consistently get practice monism consistently.

This is seen increasingly in the world of Academia. Many of these people viciously deny the existence of God insisting that they are rationalists and naturalists but in one and the same breath they will talk about “para-psychology,” or about having concourse with the demonic. How one can believe in the Occult without believing in God is curious beyond measure.

Author: jetbrane

I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling. I am postmillennial in my eschatology. Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity Reformed in my Soteriology Presuppositional in my apologetics Familialist in my family theology Agrarian in my regional community social order belief Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place Some of my favorite authors, Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc. My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture. Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him. View all posts by jetbrane