Just so we are all on the same sheet of music, Francis Schaeffer was a zealot of Evangelical and Reformed variety. He was a Presbyterian pastor and theologian pursuing a so-called presuppositional approach to Christian apologetics, a rather militant partisan agenda aimed at completely discrediting anything that is in any way opposed to Reformed postulates. He was the pioneer of the Christian Right. He and Hagee could probably be readily interchanged.
So, you are giving me the work of a Reformed "storm trooper" for consideration. There is no chance there that Schaeffer might have twisted and cherry-picked things just a wee bit, is there?
Be it as it may, even if Heidegger has some postulates that are similar to those of Orthoodxy (I seriously doubt it), it is because even Reformed theology has some as well! Even Buddhism, FK. Many religions contain the seeds (Greek: "sporoi") of truth. Being a Westerner (1889-1976), his philosophy could only have borrowed from ancient religions. Orthodoxy and Heideggerian philosophy are neither parallel, nor comparable nor equal. Orthodoxy precedes Heidegger by 2,000 years. And if there are any similarities between them, it is only because Heidergger took them from Orthodoxy (which I doubt), and Orthodoxy cannot be blamed for that! :)
Nothing Orthoodx leads one to consider Heidegger, nor does Heidegger in any way add to, fulfill, enhance or improve Orthodoxy. Heidegger was a Nazi. That, in and of itself, makes him alien to anything Orthodox. If anything, being Protestant would be much more conducive to such extremism than being Orthodox.
Your whole premise of knowable God is based on an a priori acceptance of the Bible as literally true. Your definition of "personal" differs form what I understand personal to be. Anything we assign to God is deficient and, by definition, incomplete—imperfect. Everything we assign to God is, by necessity, anthropomorphism. Look at the universe and ask yourself if you can even imagine the logic which made it! Just as we by necessity apply anthropomorphism to our pets, we are forced to do the same with God, because natures are not exchangeable. Most of our "understanding" of God is projecting human feelings and ideas onto that which is not human.
With Christ, such projection is unnecessary. We see a human being, we can relate to his pain and suffering, his doubts, his fears, passions in general. But we also know that he is God and that he is our image of God, an icon. Otherwise, "God" is a burning bush, a voice form the heaven, or a voice from within, a dream, a delusion or even our own insanity.
The Bible reminds us that God's thoughts and ways are not ours—just as our thoughts and ways are not those of our pets, or better yet, ants and flatworms. Bad things happen to good people, FK. Good things happen to bad people. When faced with such dilemmas, we simply resign ourselves to not knowing God and his ways. But when we try to push our views of God on others, then we claim that we know God personally and with certainty.
Orthodoxy is clear that God is Mystery revealed to us in fullness through Jesus Christ. That's the beginning and the end of Orthodox "heideggerianism." What's revealed in the Old Testament is not Christ. For, if Christ's revelation were clear and unambiguous in the Old Testament there would have been no need for the New Testament. There is no way for us to know Christ trough the Old Testament. We can only "see dimly" in some instances the foreshadowing of Christ in it.
But in order for us to know Christ, it is necessary to see him as one of us, as a human being. It is only through his humanity that we can have a personal relationship with him on a human level. We don't know divine Christ, the Word. He is ineffable God. But Jesus is the same Christ in his human nature and we can relate to him without anthropomorphisms.
Orthodoxy does not teach that invisible, ineffable, eternal Spirit we call God is in any way, shape or form comprehensible to us. It does teach that we know of him through human words and concepts in the anthropomorphism of the OT, which is precisely why most of the Old Testament was understood and interpreted by the Apostolic and Church Fathers as allegory (St. Barnabas talking the extreme position that everything in it is allegorical, Marcion [c 110 AD] taking everything in it literally, while Origen [c 180 AD] took the middle position saying that some things in the OT are literal while most are allegorical). No such allegorical interpretation is necessary in the Gospels.
In my theological study I have studied about 250 pages of his material so far (across three books). I have nary a hint of militantism anywhere. He is NOT a bomb-thrower from anything I have read. In fact, of those 250 pages of theological analysis, he has spent less than 2 pages (combined) criticizing the Roman Catholic Church "by name". Instead, among other things he laments the beliefs that I think are consistent with Apostolic beliefs and explores ways to reach these people. He does NOT call them un-Christian, but he does explain why their beliefs cannot hold water, as any writer would who does what he did. He spends much more time on reaching the non-believer.
There is no chance there that Schaeffer might have twisted and cherry-picked things just a wee bit, is there?
I cannot be certain, as I am no authority on Schaeffer. However, I would doubt it. From the context, I don't think Schaeffer "needed" Heidegger to make his point. He was using Heidegger as an example of the emergence (or development) of a thought pattern that we all see prominently today.
As an aside, you might be interested to know that Schaeffer's son, Frank, an author and film maker, converted to Orthodoxy within a few years of his father's death. If you search his name on the Greek Orthodox website you will get several hits. He's on a bunch of councils and boards and such. THE PRODIGAL SON. :)
Heidegger was a Nazi.
Now THAT I did not know. :) Schaeffer makes no mention of it, presumably because he thought it irrelevant to the philosophy enunciated. But in any case, NO ONE is making any comparisons along the Nazi front. :)
If anything, being Protestant would be much more conducive to such extremism than being Orthodox.
Thanks a lot! That means you're scrambling. :)
Look at the universe and ask yourself if you can even imagine the logic which made it!
The universe is a work of art beyond human comprehension. It is logical to me that an omnipotent God would create such a place.
Just as we by necessity apply anthropomorphism to our pets, we are forced to do the same with God, because natures are not exchangeable. Most of our "understanding" of God is projecting human feelings and ideas onto that which is not human.
Then the Bible is just a tease. Of course we are not going to have FULL understanding, but that does not mean we can have NO understanding. Why would God give us so many analogies in the Bible that relate directly to us in our daily lives if He did not want us to have a partial understanding of how it is between us and Him?
The Bible reminds us that God's thoughts and ways are not ours—just as our thoughts and ways are not those of our pets, or better yet, ants and flatworms.
No. God TELLS us His ways to the extent He wants us to understand them. It is not exhaustive, but it is much more than nothing, which is what ants know of our ways.
Bad things happen to good people, FK. Good things happen to bad people. When faced with such dilemmas, we simply resign ourselves to not knowing God and his ways. But when we try to push our views of God on others, then we claim that we know God personally and with certainty.
There's that all or nothing thing again. That's just not right. Think of this, you know your wife better than anyone else on the planet knows her. Now, imagine that a team of scientists took her away and put her through a series of 100 experiments, all provoking her to make a choice, or no choice at all. Afterward, they told you the premise of each test and what her options were, and asked you to say what she did. I believe you would have gotten a very good grade, but I doubt it would have been a 100. By your reasoning, you would say that therefore you know nothing of your wife. :)
Orthodoxy is clear that God is Mystery revealed to us in fullness through Jesus Christ. That's the beginning and the end of Orthodox "heideggerianism." What's revealed in the Old Testament is not Christ. For, if Christ's revelation were clear and unambiguous in the Old Testament there would have been no need for the New Testament. There is no way for us to know Christ through the Old Testament. We can only "see dimly" in some instances the foreshadowing of Christ in it.
Wouldn't that be the CHURCH'S way, and not necessarily God's way? Christ said He came to fulfill. If the OT does not reveal Christ, then what does it reveal?