Mere Orthodoxy

has been moved to new address

http://www.mereorthodoxy.com

Sorry for inconvenience...

Mere-Orthodoxy: Total Truth...

Friday, November 19, 2004

Total Truth...

Personal friend and friend of Torrey Nancey Pearcey is getting press for her latest book, Total Truth. She's secured a C-SPAN2 spot to talk about it. Total Truth offers the best explanation possible for why Kerry manages to be a Catholic while still supporting abortion. In short, he adopted the Fact/Value division and relegated his faith to the private sector. This was never so obvious as when he was questioned about it in the second(?) debate. Pearcey argues that once the Fact/Value split is adopted, religious claims (of any sort!) automatically lose credence in the public square. Pearcey also gives an excellent history of the evangelical movement. It's brief, but insightful and illuminating, particularly if you are interested in the origins of evangelical anti-intellectualism. It's been some months since I have read it--I read an advanced copy--but I would recommend it to anyone interested in cultural analysis. Pearcey has her finger on the cultural pulse of America, and analyzes it (to mix metaphors!) as well as anyone.

1 Comments:

At 3/03/2005 12:55:00 PM, Blogger David P. Smith said...

As someone who is doing a Ph. D. in historical theology and a dissertation on Warfield, I can tell you that her "history" of the nineteenth century is seriously indebted to an historiography that is slanted in one direction, and its not very accurate, though it is popular within the mainstream academy and Neo-Orthdox and Neo-Calvinist circles. She offers no footnotes on anyone from "the other side of the aisle". There is a great mass of historiography that seriously calls into question this simplistic analysis of saying that the Old School Presbyterians at Princeton were simply Baconian inductionists who were indebted to Common Sense Realism. She might have started by reading John Woodbridge's Biblical Authority or Brad Gundlach's doctoral dissertation at the Univesity of Rochester on "The Evolution Question at Princeton: 1845-1929", or Kim Riddlebarger's dissertation on Warfield, or David Calhoun's two volume work on the Princetonians, or Paul Helseth's doctoral dissertation on Machen that demonstrates his working out Charles Hodge and Warfield's epistemology that is NOT dependent on Scottish Common Sense Realism, as well as Helseth's articles on Warfield and "right reason", or Peter Hicks on The Philosophy of Charles Hodge. Her work demonstrates no attempt to engage in understanding these works that simply undermine this whole thesis of SCSR being simply the fountain from which these men drew. Frankly she is simply repeating a story-line that dates back to Sydney Ahlstrom's 1950's work at Yale, and has been perpetuated by all those who appear to be very uncomfortable with any sort of correspondence theory of truth and knowledge that leads to all people being accountable for their sin in light of the revelation of God in creation. I have an article on Warfield in the Mid-America Journal of Theology in the 2004 edition, "The Scientifically Constructive Scholarship of B. B. Warfield" for those interested.

David P. Smith

 

Post a Comment

<< Home