Butler seems to think that the "enlightened" opponents of traditional Christianity are not nearly as reasonable as they claim. What does Butler seem to think motivates them? To what extent are his criticisms valid?
Tuesday, June 17, 2025
The Unreasonableness of Reason (Joseph Butler)
Butler seems to think that the "enlightened" opponents of traditional Christianity are not nearly as reasonable as they claim. What does Butler seem to think motivates them? To what extent are his criticisms valid?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Butler believed that you could not be able to just justify Christianity based on Christianity. He says on his "Analogy of Religion" that "the general analogy between the principles of divine government, as set forth by the biblical revelation, and those observable in the course of nature, [an analogy which] leads us to the warrantable conclusion that there is one Author of both." In other words, by what is told in the Bible and what has been observed in history, he concludes that there must be a higher power of design. That is what's most interesting to me about Butler.
ReplyDeleteKent Johnsen
I’m not quite sure what Butler thinks motivates the opponents of Christianity, but it might be our sinful nature. He says that some who reject Christianity simply live life seemingly free from the restraints of religion, never thinking much of it, while others take things much further. “They deride God’s moral government over the world: they renounce his protection, and defy his justice: they ridicule and vilify Christianity, and blaspheme the Author of it; and take all occasions to manifest a scorn and contempt of revelation.” What would make someone go to such lengths? Why do some seem to not only disagree with Christianity, but to literally hate it and all who follow it? I think at least some blame must be placed on our tendency to sin against God. Are Butler’s criticisms valid? I think so. He, as well as the other apologists we’ve read, took their job seriously. They presented logical arguments and attempted to prove their viewpoints through reasoning. An unjust, emotional, illogical attack based on hatred and ignorance would’ve likely been the least-respected way to counter their Christian beliefs.
ReplyDeleteButler is an interesting character considering he believed that people can't justify Christianity with Christianity. This clearly makes the point that Christianity can be explained by non-Christianity. How is this helpful to people trying to get their friends or others to join the Christian church or convert them to Christianity? The truth is, it doesn't. With this quote in mind, they must be careful in what they say to their friends because if they say something too Christian, their friends may not believe them, but if they say something with a mix of both Christianity and philosophy, or strictly just philosophy, their friends are more likely to listen and convert to Christianity.
ReplyDeleteIn The Analogy of Religion, Joseph Butler argues that many critics of Christianity are not truly unimpressed by reason but by a desire to avoid its moral demands. He believes they reject religion not because it lacks evidence, but because it challenges how they want to live. Butler points out that these critics hold religion to a higher standard than they do other things, like nature or science, which also have mysteries and unanswered questions.
ReplyDeleteButler’s criticisms are partly fair. He rightly shows that rejecting Christianity just because it's hard to understand is inconsistent if we accept similar mysteries in life and nature. However, he may be too quick to assume bad motives in all critics. Some had real, thoughtful concerns about faith. Even so, Butler makes a strong case that people should judge religion with the same fairness they use elsewhere.
I believe the most telling part about what Butler thinks of people using 'reason' and 'logic' to deny the existence of God is highlighted in the following sentence:
ReplyDelete"They deride God’s moral government over the world: they renounce his protection, and defy his justice: they ridicule and vilify Christianity, and blaspheme the Author of it; and take all occasions to manifest a scorn and contempt of revelation."
The context to this (from what I could gather) was that people are always seeking justification on why they sin. If someone loves to seek pleasure, they will justify why they are doing so if others look down on them for it.
If a religion bars seeking for alcohol or sex, people will 'justify' it by denying the existence of whatever is denying them that pleasure, especially if the person intended to stop them (God) is not there to physically stop them.
Is Butler justified in his reasoning?
Well, yes. At least by the assumption that God is real and everything that is discussed in the Bible is true. He is merely following the logic and reason that would entail believing that everything within the book is the truth.
Additionally, outside of Christianity, there are plenty of examples of people doing the same thing - justifying what they do when they know others look down on them for it, even if they are alone.
It isn't too far fetched to believe the same could be said for Christianity.