Analytic Theology: Breaking It Down

Analytic Theology (AT) emerged from the combination of Christian theology and analytic philosophy in the late 20th century. Moreover, it shares a relationship with the philosophy of religion, is influenced by Anglo-American philosophy, and adopts similar approaches to traditional scholarly theology. Notably, analytic theologians seek answers to theological questions through historic philosophy, leading them to reexamine familiar Christian concepts

Exploring Analytic Theology

AT combines analytic thought and theological insights to enhance theological understanding. By encompassing sociological and methodology changes, AT impacted academic theology, causing a significant shift. Exploring analytic literature allows an analytic approach that goes beyond religion’s philosophy. Specifically, theologians seek answers to theological questions, especially on philosophical concepts including world semantics and speech-act theory. Additionally, AT provides a more versatile method of theological inquiry when it’s broadly provided, resulting in its inclusion in the theological work of popular religions, such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. 

Analytic Philosophy and Philosophic Theology

Many academic circles explore AT’s boundaries as it\’s a hot topic among analytic theologians. For many scholars, the differences between the analytic philosophy and philosophical theology of religion, remain unclear and are heavily debated. According to William Abraham, an Irish theologist regarded for his work in the philosophy of religion, AT should be considered a systematic theology. 

Due to the similarities between the two concepts, his theory would gain more popularity over time. Likewise, British theologist, Oliver Crisp, shared similar feelings as Abraham by citing prominent theologians to show how systematic theology lacks a universal definition. Yet, opposing views don’t stop any acknowledgment of AT’s relationship with systemic theology.

Universal Definition Complication

Defining AT remains a challenge due to its similarities with the philosophy of religion, philosophical theology, and analytic philosophy. For instance, Abraham’s description of AT as a systematic theology was informed by his own skills and insights of analytic theology. In contrast, philosopher, Michael Rea, suggests analytic theology is theological inquiry using the discourse and style of analytic philosophy.

Specifically, Rea outlines analytic philosophy’s characteristic features in the introduction of Analytic Theology, a collection of philosophical perspectives on analytic theology. For instance, examining theological concepts, like Jesus’ cry of dereliction, leads to criticism as it uses the term “broken” in a divine Trinity contest. By exploring historical concepts, these theologians seek clarity of Christ’s forsakenness by God. Consequently, Cambridge theologian, Sarah Coakley, cautions against defining AT as it may reduce production engagement for rigid categorization. Instead, Coakley implores flexibility so it can evolve organically and without disruption. 

Early History 

Initially, contemporary AT seemingly emerged during the mid-20th century in responses made by Christian philosophers to opposing views. In general, these criticisms involved the terminology and religious epistemology of God and are backed by scholars like Oliver Crisp and Michael Rea. Before shifting focus to traditional theology, Christian philosophers originally addressed linguistic and epistemological concerns. Although the philosophical theology of Medieval Europe is believed to have influenced this resurgence, Friedrich Schleiermacher’s theology and Immanuel Kant’s philosophy originally led to its downfall. 

The 1950s saw a shift in theological and philosophical discussions as verifying truths and falsehoods of claims gained popularity. American theologian, Nicholas Woltrstoriss, suggests that the decline of logical positivism led to criticizing or questioning epistemological boundaries, including Kant’s work. When classical foundationalism collapsed, it led to the progression of dialogical pluralism to take its place. 

As a result, diverse perspectives could coexist, leading to the development of two key mechanisms for justifying beliefs: reformed epistemology and evidentialist approaches using Bayesian probability. Adopting these frameworks allowed informed discourses and critical evaluation without problems as theological and philosophical debates emphasize rigorous belief justification.

Recent History

Interestingly, 1978 was a year marked by the formation of the Society of Christian Philosophers. Six years later, in 1984, American analytic philosopher, Alvin Plantinga gave his presidential address, Advice to Christian Philosophers, encouraging these individuals to challenge prevailing assumptions. During both the 80s and 90s, scholars, including David Brown and Richard Swinburne, explored various theological topics like the attributes and atonements of God.

Specifically, Swinburne acknowledges Brown’s The Divine Trinity as a pioneer in analyzing Christian doctrine as an analytic philosophy book. Yet, even despite progress, the mid-2000s was a period of stagnation as both theologians and philosophers weren’t sharing resources. However,  AT regained momentum with the publication of Analytic Theology in various theological and philosophical circles in recent years. In 2012, the American Academy of Religion dedicated a session to discussing the collection of work. Articles in publications, such as 2013’s Journal of Analytic Theology, also solidified AT’s presence, further progressing rigorous theological exploration. 

Final Thoughts

Fortunately, various departments worldwide are exploring the complexities of analytic theology. Even the John Templeton Foundation has made significant contributions to supporting analytic theology initiatives worldwide. These notable centers include St. Andrews University’s Logo Institute, Oxford’s Oriel College, the Universe of Innsbruck, Fuller Theological Seminary, and Notre Dame’s Center for Philosophy of Religion.