Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Spotify | Email | RSS
John Locke (1632-1704) is one of the greatest philosophers of all time. He was also a careful, thoughtful, and fair-minded Christian. Hardly allergic to argument, like many Christian philosophers then and now, he had no taste for hot-blooded, public theological feuds, particularly over what should be regarded as non-essentials. Such feuds were legion in late seventeenth century England.
But what are the essentials? Specifically, what are the essential teachings which one must accept to be a Christian? Many have a rather expansive view of those. But Locke suspected they had inflated something simpler. In the winter of 1694-5, he decided to be a good Protestant and to go back to the sources. What does the New Testament, he wondered, demand of us, as far as beliefs are concerned? Does it require, for instance, believing “grace” as taught by Calvinists? Or the contents of the “Athanasian” creed about the Trinity and the two natures of Jesus? The simplified but vague “deity of Christ” so insisted upon by present-day evangelical Protestants?
Locke examined this question, and found an explicit answer in scripture. All that Christians must believed, he argues, can be summarized like this: Jesus is the Messiah.
Is Locke correct? This episode, a sampling of his positive case for the central claim of this book.
In our next episode, we’ll hear Locke answer some objections, discuss what else is required besides belief, and hear how Locke thinks that the simplicity of this message reflects the wisdom of God.
You can also hear this episode on youtube. If you would like to upload audio feedback for possible inclusion in a future episode of this podcast, put the audio file here.
Links for this episode:
- John Locke: Writings on Religion, edited by Victor Nuovo. (Includes the Reasonableness and other writings.)
- John Locke: The Reasonableness of Christianity as Delivered in the Scriptures. A reprint edition, which also includes reprints of two follow-up books in which Locke defends himself against a hot-headed Calvinist polemicist who charged him with “Socinianism.” Includes helpful introduction by philosopher Victor Nuovo. (I quote from Nuovo’s comments here in the introduction to this episode.)
- John Locke: Vindications of the Reasonableness of Christianity. The definitive scholarly edition of the two follow-up books, edited with extensive notes by Victor Nuovo. Extracts of numerous writings relevant to Locke’s book and the ensuing controversy. Includes parts of John Edwards’s Socinianism Unmasked
- John Locke and Christianity: Contemporary Responses to The Reasonableness of Christianity, ed. Victor Nuovo.
- Victor Nuovo‘s page at Middlebury College.
- Overviews of Locke’s life and work at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Good comments, David.
Yes, Locke was accused of plenty of things, that among them, I think, on the basis of this book. I’m choosing to ignore the ensuing ugly controversy that was whipped up by a gun-slinging Calvinist polemicist. Locke says he ignored the epistles in this book because all those were written to people who were already Christians. He wants to know the publicly proclaimed requirement, as it were, for joining the club.
About belief in resurrection… I think Locke thinks that “Jesus is the Messiah” implies a lot of other things, including that God raised him. I hope to discuss this a bit in the next episode – just what belief in the aforementioned statement includes.
Very interesting podcast. Locke really does bring a lot of scripture to bear to confirm his thesis that believing in Jesus means believing that he is the Messiah, and that as believing in Jesus is the criterion for salvation as per John 3:36, believing that he is the Messiah is sufficient.
But I can’t help also thinking of Romans 10:9 and the belief in the resurrection.
I remember reading somewhere – I can’t remember where – that Locke was accused of not knowing the epistles well. This accusation was obviously made before the intensive study of the NT in the mid-1690s that prepared him to write the Reasonableness of Christianity. I also read – in the same place – that he sought to rectify this lacuna by a thorough study of the letters. This may have been the one you refer to in the mid-1690s.
Comments are closed.