The Resurrection of Theism ________________________________ Prolegomena to Christian Apology ________________________________ By STUART CORNELIUS HACKETT, Ph.D. Professor and Chairman of the Department of Philosophy, Louisiana College Pineville, Louisiana ROGER WASSON COMPANY AUSTIN, TEXAS Copyright 1957, 2003 Roger Wasson Company 825 West 11th Street Suite 139 Austin Texas 78701-2009 Printed in the United States of America Affectionately Dedicated To Three of My Dearest: My Wife: Joan My Parents: Mr. And Mrs. Ray T. Hackett, Without whose constant help and encouragement This book would have been impossible FOREWORD EVER SINCE Immanuel Kant wrote his monumental The Cri- tique of Pure Reason, theistic discussion has proceeded on the postulate---an assumption generally viewed as an unquestion- able datum given ?f?pa? by the Koenigsberg titan---that the ex- istence of God can be neither demonstrated nor disproved by reason. Roman Catholic theologians, to be sure, have refused to accept the Kantian criticism as have some outstanding Prot- estants, notably F. R. Tennant. By and large, however, the al- leged demolition of the venerable “proofs” has been taken as a fait accompli by schools of all persuasion whether agnostic or liberal or neo-orthodox or even evangelical. Hence Dr. Hack- ett’s thesis, developed with a competence born of intellectual acumen and thoroughgoing scholarship, is really an audacious challenge to what he deplores as a suicidal throwing wide open of the gates of Christian supernaturalism to the Trojan horse of illogicality. He therefore finds it necessary to engage in a po- lemical analysis of positions defended by some of the most dis- tinguished thinkers of our modern era, ranging from D. C. Macintosh to Carl Henry. While his analysis may not be unan- swerably devastating in every case, it is certainly incisive, deep- cutting enough to compel a re-examination of basic premises and sufficiently penetrating to show the cogency of the rational empiricism which Dr. Hackett himself espouses. Thus no matter what conclusion one may draw concerning the success of this extraordinary attempt to rehabilitate the great tradition in theistic argument, they will be compelled to admire its daring, sweep, power, and lucidity. They will also admire its spiritual thrust and motivation; for here is a devout believer skillfully utilizing the resources of philosophy in order to bring sinful humanity inescapably face to face with God’s self- disclosure in Jesus Christ. In other words, reason for Dr. Hack- ett is propaedeutic to revelation; it is a means of evangelism. As an adherent of Protestant orthodoxy, I urge that this work be studied in our circles with the care and attention which it eminently deserves. And I venture to predict for it a wide read- ing among circles which lie theologically far beyond the boundaries of evangelicalism. VERNON C. GROUNDS, President Conservative Baptist Theological Seminary AUTHOR’S PREFACE Origin of the Present Work: the Need for a Rational Apologetic The immediate historical stimulus of the present work con- sisted in the invitation to the author to deliver the Fall Lectures on Christian Thought for 1952 at the Conservative Baptist Theological Seminary. But the more basic motivation has come from a growing conviction on my part that the Christian world view both needs and embodies a thoroughgoing rational apologetic as a manifestation of its relevance to the contempo- rary mind, together with the companion conviction that no ex- isting system of Christian apology adequately meets this need. The underlying assertion of my whole argument, therefore, is that Christian faith should be defended in terms of criteria which center in rational objectivity as the norm of truth and evaluation. If, as Peter urges, believers in Christ are to give a reason for their hope to every person, then they can do it only in terms of criteria which ought to be acknowledged by all such individuals so far as they think and act rationally in their con- course with life and experience. This consideration means, in turn, that if Christian faith is obligatory for everyone, then it is so because it embodies objective truth for all rational minds. Against such a view of the role of apologetics the objection is frequently brought that rational objectivity is impossible for real individuals and that therefore the whole enterprise we at- tempt is merely a glorious dream. Of course, all of us are con- ditioned to a certain extent by our accumulated beliefs and environmental pressures. But the very recognition of this condi- tioning is a significant step in the direction of eliminating its in- fluence. Indeed, if rational objectivity were really not attainable, even this judgment itself, that we are conditioned by our beliefs, would fall short of rational objectivity and would therefore be eliminated by its own assertion. From such a line of argument as this, it must be concluded that either rational ob- jectivity is possible or else knowledge itself is impossible and