Knowledge and Christian Belief

Before I say anything, I will say first that Plantinga's work on warrant has been terribly misunderstood and misused in the popular sphere. In part, this is due to philosophers such as William Lane Craig, who, though I'm sure he didn't intend to make this implication, by appealing to Plantinga's proper basicality in the context of an argument for the reality of God, has implied that this is some sort of theistic argument. It is not. The problem facing Christian epistemologists is this: the vast majority of Christians today, and indeed the vast majority of Christians who have ever lived, have never studied philosophy, history, science, or apologetics. So how can they know that God exists and Christianity is true? We wouldn't deny that they have a true relationship with God in Christ, but are we forced to say that they have a true, but unwarranted belief unless they have studied apologetics or academic theology?Plantinga's answer is no: whether or not Christians have formally studied theology or apologetics, they are still warranted in holding belief in God and Christ. Essential to this is Plantinga's four criteria for a warranted belief: it must be the result of a cognitive faculty intended to produce true belief, that faculty must be functioning in the environment for which it was designed, it must be well designed, and it must be operating without defects. What the careful reader will notice is that these criteria are inescapably teleological: the implication is that if a faculty was not designed for anything at all, or if it is oriented merely towards survival and not truth for its own sake, then all of one's beliefs produced by said faculty are unwarranted. This is where Plantinga gets the evolutionary argument against naturalism. But for the sake of this book, that's besides the point. What all of us recognize is that on the Christian view, rationality is one such faculty of the mind aimed at truth: one can really have warranted beliefs derived from rationality.The critical point, for Plantinga, is that it is not the only such faculty. There is what John Calvin calls the "sensus divinitatis." This is the inherent sense of divinity we all possess. In support of this, Plantinga points to anthropological evidence suggesting that most people, under certain conditions, spontaneously form the belief that there is a person such as God. They do so when observing the beauty of the world, reflecting on the sheer gratuitous nature of existence, and so on. This is not the result of a philosophical argument like "The world is beautiful, therefore theism." Instead, it is spontaneous and formed without argument. As Plantinga points out, if Christian theism is true, there is very likely something such as the sensus divinitatis. Thus, if Christian theism is true, then a properly basic belief in God is very likely warranted.Plantinga aims to extend this beyond mere theism and towards Christian theism. Essentially, he does so by appealing to the internal witness of the Holy Spirit. Again, it's key to point out that this is not an argument for the truth of Christianity. It is not as if a person says "I have the witness of the Spirit, therefore you ought to accept the Christian faith." Instead, the argument is that if Christian theism is true, then there is probably something like the witness of the Spirit which provides warrant directly, apart from rational argument. In my estimation, Plantinga's argument is largely sound, and accomplishes the task of showing how your average believer is warranted in subscribing to Christianity, even if they are not philosophically astute.There's one question I have with respect to Plantinga's extended A-C model. In his chapter on whether pluralism constitutes a defeater for Christian belief, Plantinga cashes out the nature of an arbitrary conclusion. It's not arbitrary to subscribe to one faith in the midst of many faiths as long as one thinks one is privy to a source of warrant that most other persons are not. For example, if one has studied a set of unique arguments providing warrant for Christianity and most people have not, it's not arbitrary to hold Christianity. If one has reflected upon purported defeaters for Christian belief and concluded that they are unsound, it's not arbitrary to take them as unsuccessful. Similarly, Plantinga says, if one believes oneself to be privy to the witness of the Spirit, then it's not arbitrary to hold most others to be wrong. I follow Plantinga most of the way here, but I'm not sure how to get around the objection that there are other faiths which seek warrant in the same fashion. For example, Mormons believe that the witness of the Spirit (understood in Mormon terms) provides warrant for one's belief in the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Plantinga, presumably, holds that they are wrong.I'm not sure how one could avoid the charge of arbitrary belief if one rejects the notion that a Mormon is warranted in the same sense that a classical Christian is. Of course, one could suggest that since Mormonism is false, their warrant is not genuine, and this would be fine as far as it goes, since Plantinga's argument is that if Christian theism is true, then it is probably warranted in a basic way. Still, I think that in order to avoid the charge of arbitrary selection of beliefs, one would need a way to more substantially distinguish between the Mormon experience and the classical Christian experience. I'm sure Plantinga has discussed such objections elsewhere, and I'm certainly not claiming a decisive refutation of Plantinga's thesis (as I said, I go with it all the way with respect to theism in general). Still, this is a question I'm still working through.Altogether, I recommend that those who are interested in Plantinga's overall thesis consult this book for an introduction to his views, recognizing that he has developed them in more depth in his three volume series on warrant and Christian belief.

I would say this is a book every Christian should read, I found Alvin Plantinga’s points and claims to be very solid. It makes sense that because of the Holy Spirit’s work, we have a proper knowledge of the truth, with a proper functioning cognitive process.I would buy this book and read it all the way through whether you are a new or seasoned Christian. Especially for new Christians, it may help them mature more in understanding the rationality of their faith in Christ/God. Buy it! ;)

Plantinga shows that belief in Christianity is rational and presents a philosophical model of how Christian belief could function. This book is derived from the author’s larger book Warranted Christian Belief.The major premise of the book is that we have a built in sense that perceives of God (sensus divinitatus) and that this belief in God is basic. That is, just as belief that reality is real and that you actually exist, so too belief in God is a foundational belief that is just as much simply known than figured out through argument.Plantinga builds on the work of Aquinas and Calvin and presents what he terms an Extended A/C Model. The book gives the background for the model, presents the model, and addresses several possible objections to the rationality of Christian belief.This is a philosophical book, but it is much simplified from the larger Warranted Christian Belief. This book will be challenging, but not impossibly so, for the average reader with a basic understanding of logic.

Illuminary Alvin Plantinga, twice Gifford Lecturer and “America’s leading orthodox Protestant philosopher of God” (TIME), curtails his 530 paged magnum opus, Warranted Christian Belief, into an accessible 126 paged Knowledge and Christian Belief. Alvin’s highly nuanced language insists attentive reading despite his simplistic thesis: Christian belief, if true, warrants belief. There are four major characteristics of warranted belief: (1) cognitive faculties functioning properly; (2) appropriate cognitive environment for those faculties; (3) according to design; and (4) successfully aimed at truth (see italicized at the bottom of p. 28). Alvin follows the “A/C (Aquinas and Calvin) model” of sensus divinitatis as “basic” or presuppositional. Just as seeing the sun rise is basic–without the arduous need of cognitive activity–warranted belief arises through the work of the Holy Spirit and sensus divinitatis (seed of divinity), if true, as basic. What does this mean? Christian belief on its own ground is firmly rooted; the question of “is it true?” cannot be answered by the philosophers: it is God’s domain.[...]

Even if one disagrees with Plantinga’s beliefs, it would be quite difficult to come against and find defeaters against them. A good and solid defense of Christian belief as warranted. Although from a “Reformed” (which I take to mean Calvinist) perspective, with a thorough and robust understanding of prevenient grace this system works well for Arminians as well.

The author’s model, A/c is worth learning and putting in your back pocket if you get cornered by an atheist. This idea of warrant is helpful. Thinking right in a good epistemic environment aimed at truth is a good, intellectual and logical defense.

I was once asked WHY I believed. Though I have a solid spiritual foundation, I needed a tool to express this to someone who did not believe. Philosophy is that tool. This book has helped me to articulate much of what has been evident to my spirit. I am looking forward to my next Plantinga book.

This book is aimed at the layman rather than the professional philosopher, but nevertheless is still quite technical, showing why no scientific or other knowledge can negate Christian belief. What particular bit of knowledge about the human condition or science can refute the belief of the New Testament writers and the Church? This book is a pared down version of the technical book Warranted Christian belief which few laymen including me will have read. Prof Plantinga considers that various branches of knowledge do indicate a Creator, but the Christian belief is stronger than that, becoming a certainty in the minds of inumerable Christians. He considers why they are justified in this belief. He also considers the objections (defeaters) of certain strands of Historical Biblical Criticism, of the plurality of religions, and of the problem of suffering, pain and sin. None of these things can disprove the Christian belief. This is not a science book, it is on the epistemology of religious belief ie the theory of knowledge and the difference between justified belief and mere opinion (unfortunately for some New Atheists a little - or narrow - knowledge is a dangerous thing). So this book shows why Christian belief is not falsifiable, but no book is going to prove or disprove it as truth, in the end personal experience and faith is the validator of religion.

Very dense and intricate, even though this is meant to be more accessible version of the author's longer work. I'd probably need to read it again after a while. Several aspects of his definition of "warrant" are not self-evident, or are at least open to interpretation and could be accused of begging the question. This is more a reflection of my difficulty in comprehension than a criticism of the philosophical position.

When you are confused this nook is an asset. Good index and explanations. Would use it again.

I found this to be a very helpful treatment of Plantinga's view on the warrant for Christian belief. Plantinga's style is plain and concise, and where any kind of jargon is used it is clearly explained and extrapolated. This will serve as an excellent introduction to Reformed Epistemology, as well as a good 'in' to Plantinga's larger works on the theme. The Kindle edition provides a smooth reading experience. Highly recommended.

Excellent summary of his work on basic warranted belief.