The Effects of Modernism on Christianity

What is Modernism?

Modernism is the philosophy that elevates humans to the apex of authority. Postmodernism, its successor, suggests that objective truth cannot be determined. Modernism (also referred to as the Enlightenment) believed it could rescue civilization from dark superstition and Christianity by stripping away all sources of authority except that of humans.

Modernists hold that reality is limited to the physical world, eliminating all possibility of God intervening in history. There are no miracles, no opening of the Red Sea, healing of the lame, or the resurrection from the dead. As scientist Carl Sagan memorably declared, “The cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be” (4). Modernists suggest that humans were nothing more than especially well evolved animals whose value differs little from that of the other animals sharing the planet. Modernists believe that humans are inherently good, and that human progress is inevitable. Such progress seemed feasible for much of the nineteenth century, when medicines began to control diseases and technology eased lifestyles. The phrase “science says” came to carry the authority once reserved for the words “the Bible says.” Many spoke of humanity becoming more noble and rational, and many attempted to develop utopian communities on Earth.

Stan Mitchell, Vol. 5 No. 1Lyn MillerMarch 28, 2022Vol. 05 No. 1Comment

Review of Plantinga’s Where the Conflict Really Lies (Part Two)

This discussion is the second and concluding article reviewing the book by Alvin Plantinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism.1 A brief evaluation of what his book offers to the overall discussion of science and religion will follow. His primary theme, which he mentions several times throughout, is there is superficial conflict, but deep concord, between science and religion, and superficial concord, but deep conflict, between science and naturalism. Consequently, according to Plantinga the real source of the disagreement is between religion and naturalism. To be clear, Plantinga’s point is the atheism of Dawkins, Dennett, and others with their trash talk about theism makes the mistake that must be addressed. It is not that science is opposed to theism, so much as is naturalism. Plantinga argues these “super atheists” have taken science and have tried to argue it supports naturalism, when, in fact, it does not.

PART III

Jim Laws, Sufficient Evidence, Vol. 5 No. 1Lyn MillerMarch 5, 2021Vol. 05 No. 1 Comment

A Christian Worldview Response to Current Bioethical Issues (Part Three)

In this third part of my attempt to articulate a Christian response to current bioethical issues, I focus on some of the challenges associated with the beginning of life. From the innumerable issues, I have chosen to address challenges associated with in vitro fertilization, surrogacy, and prenatal diagnosis. Mentioning some texts from Genesis and the relevance of other biblical materials provides guidance for appropriate analysis of these hypothetical cases.
A Christian and biblical worldview provides context and content for coping with life, disease, and death. Our context is life as children of the Creator; our content and guidance is His revelation in our nature and in Scripture. Life is valuable, since people are created in God’s image; but not an absolute value, to be preserved always and at all costs. Though Christians can affirm that God is our Healer, people are not always immediately healed of all diseases or injuries. Because people live with the struggles of life as well as its blessings, Christians should always show God’s mercy to others (cf. Pack Sufficient Evidence Spring 2014, 3-15). Those who live life informed by God’s nature and His guidance bring an important contribution to current bioethical issues—a perspective shaped by the revelation of the Creator‘s own patient, merciful plan. As we noted in Part Two (Pack Sufficient Evidence Fall 2014, 87-94), Christian health care professionals have special opportunities to share their perspective on life’s blessings and struggles.
Today, Americans are pressed by society to accept what is described as a woman’s right to choose. However, many Christians view such choice as an inappropriate response to life in the womb.1 Dr. Andre Hellegers, an obstetrician and founding director of Georgetown University’s Kennedy Institute for Ethics, supported dignity for developing human life saying:

Sufficient Evidence Archive

FROM THE ARCHIVE