Wolfe on Worldview Thinking … Worldview Thinking on Wolfe

“Against the autonomy [of man] and its consequent anarchy, the Christian worldview fights with all its strength. Man is not autonomous, but always and everywhere bound to laws not invented by himself, but prescribed by God as rule for human life. In religion and morality, in science and art, in the family, in society and in politics – everywhere there are ideas and norms greater than him, which forms a whole in that all of it finds its origin and existence in the Creator and Lawgiver of the universe.”

~ Herman Bavinck

Stephen Wolfe writes in his usual rant against Worldview thinking;

“We Protestants must stop applying  ‘biblical theology’ to questions that can only be understood fundamentally in their own domains. Climate change is not a theological question.

Do carbon emissions warm the earth, or cause more catastrophic weather events? is not a theological question. It’s a question of science, answered through scientific investigation.

Thinking that we can dismiss such questions by appealing to theology has, frankly, made us dumb and also unwilling to enter these fields. Not every question can be answered by simply having the right ‘worldview.'”

Bret responds;

Really…. so somebody’s worldview that teaches that this planet is our only hope isn’t going to have a bias in favor of embracing Global Warming being true as opposed to a Christian whose eschatology (part of a worldview) teaches him that Gen. 8:22 is true and so global warming, as advocated by the Green-Red alliance should be viewed with large amounts of suspicion?

“While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.”

I suppose that Christian Global Warming Alarmist could insist that the earth was going to quit remaining because of Global Warming.

Wolfe here, believing as he does in the power of science as fostered by “scientific investigation” refuses to ask, as all Thomists do, “by what standard scientific investigation?” Trofim Lysenko was a Soviet Scientists who used “scientific investigation,” to conclude that summer wheat could be turned in to winter wheat,

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/12/trofim-lysenko-soviet-union-russia/548786/

Anthony Fauci, insisting, “I am the science,” made deathly false claims in the name of “science,” after doing “scientific investigations” into the Covid pandemic. We now know that Fauci like Lysenko was full of shizer.

Wolfe misses the truth that science is only as good as the theology that drives the science. Stephen Wolfe should spend some time reading Thomas Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” or Gordon H. Clarks, “Philosophy of Science and Belief in God,” or Vern Poythress’ ” Science and Hermeneutics.”

It may indeed be true in some sense, as Wolfe says, “Not every question can be answered by simply having the right ‘worldview,'” but it is more true to say that no question can be answered correctly by beginning with an errant worldview.

I always find it fascinating that despite Wolfe’s loathing for R2K he has accepted the same principles of R2K. You see, R2K fanboys, like Wolfe, abominate worldview thinking. The linkage between Wolfe and R2K, despite their intramural debate, is the fact that they both believe that autonomous man can enter different fields (science, economics, education, etc.) and by means of autonomous reason, quite apart from presupposing God, come to legitimate conclusions. As such, the Wolfe club and the R2K fanboys together agree that Worldview thinking is a bad thing. The ironic part here is that it is due to their Thomistic worldview that they conclude that non-Thomistic worldviews are bad.

We must constantly remember that science outside the preusppositions that a Christian Worldview requires ends up as Trofim Lysenko and Anthony Fauci science. We must remember our Bahnsen,

“In terms of the Calvinist’s transcendental challenge, the unbeliever’s espoused worldview or philosophy cannot make counting and measuring intelligible, even though the unbeliever continues to count and measure. This is due to the fact that counting involves an abstract concept of law, universals, or order — which contradicts the unbeliever’s view of the universe as a random or chance realm of material particulars. By rejecting God’s Word, the unbeliever would not in principle be able to count and measure things. As it is, unbelievers do engage in counting and measuring, but they cannot give a philosophical accounting of how they can do so.”

Wolfe’s problem when he talks about “questions that can only be understood fundamentally in their own domains,” is to begin with the given that questions can have domains that are isolated from Christian theological givens. There is no domain … no discipline that can make sense of itself outside presupposing Christian theology. Because all domains have to answer theological questions before getting underway (ontology, epistemology, axiology, teleology, anthropology, etc.) all domains/disciplines are theological in their beginning point. If Global Warming (Wolfe’s example) wants to use science the question must be asked of them, for example, “tell me about your ontological beginning premises,” because depending on their ontological premises about the nature, purpose, and role of the cosmos we will get different answers per their scientific investigations.

Respectfully, anybody who thinks that the Christ hating heathen can do “objective” science is just dumb.

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.

2 thoughts on “Wolfe on Worldview Thinking … Worldview Thinking on Wolfe”

  1. I’m currently reading “Against the Machine: On the Unmaking of Humanity” by Paul Kingsnorth. He has some interesting insights about science. I wonder if you’ve read it.

    Reply

    1. Hello Deb… I have not read it. I looked it up and it looks like a great read. I’ve read the people they listed that he writes in the tradition of (Wendell Berry, Jacques Ellul, etc.).

      Thank you for stopping bye. Let me know how the reading goes.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *