The Over-Philosophication of Theology: A Cautionary Exploration

The image features a contemplative statue set against a blue sky, accompanied by text discussing the pitfalls of over-intellectualizing theology, titled "The Over-Philosophication of Theology: A Cautionary Exploration."

"Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord." - Isaiah 1:18

At first, I thought I might’ve made up the word philosophication, but as it turns out, the earliest evidence of the word dates back to 1851, in the writing of historian Francis Palgrave. Philosophication simply means "the process of bringing something into the realm of philosophy." To understand its implications, we should first be reminded of what philosophy means.

Philosophy is an interesting term, made up of two Greek words: philo (meaning "love") and sophia (meaning “wisdom”). At its root, philosophy means “the love of wisdom.” In this light, Christians should, in some sense, all be philosophers — loving and seeking wisdom, truth, reason, and beauty in all aspects of life. At the very least, we should maintain a healthy skepticism toward falsity, dishonesty, or anything that lacks wisdom and truth. After all, our Savior is Wisdom and Truth personified (cf. Proverbs, John). Paul wrote, “In [Christ] are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3). And we are not without access, for it is His “Spirit of Truth” (John 14:17) who indwells His children.

Given these spiritual realities, it is only natural that theology (the study of God) and philosophy (the study of wisdom and truth) have been deeply interconnected from the beginning. Solomon himself makes the connection between theos (God) and sophia (wisdom) clear when he writes, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding” (Proverbs 9:10).

The idea that wisdom and truth are inseparable from the divine wasn't unique to the Hebrew worldview. Greek thinkers like Plato (c. 380 B.C.) used the term theologia, and some even glimpsed divine truths through philosophical reflection.

But as Christianity grew, so did theology—especially through figures like Origen (3rd century) and Augustine (4th–5th century). Augustine, a former rhetorician, adapted Platonic metaphysics to explain the nature of God and the problem of evil. While he remains one of the most influential Christian theologians, especially regarding doctrines like the Trinity, scholars continue to debate the extent to which pagan philosophies like Manichaeism and Neoplatonism shaped his theology.

In contrast stood Tertullian (c. 155–240 AD). Living a century before Augustine, Tertullian was deeply skeptical about relying on philosophy to articulate theological truth. He famously asked, “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church?” (Prescription Against Heretics, 7). For Tertullian, Athens represented Greek philosophy, while Jerusalem symbolized divine revelation. He didn't reject philosophy outright but believed it should remain a servant to theology—not its master. His concern was clear: philosophy must not replace divine revelation but should only be used to illuminate it.

Paul shares a similar caution in Colossians 2:8, warning believers: “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” Clearly, not all philosophies lead to truth. Some can distort or even nullify the Gospel.

That said, it's natural and often beneficial for Christians to use general philosophical concepts—like existence, rationality, or ethics—to articulate theological truths. Conversely, we often use philosophical frameworks to better understand Christian doctrine. But what happens when even these frameworks fail to capture the full truth of Scripture?

Take, for instance, the doctrine of God's sovereignty in salvation, analyzed through the lens of logic’s law of non-contradiction (which states a proposition cannot be both true and false in the same context).

Assertion: God is sovereign.

Assertion: God desires all to be saved.

Assertion: Not all will be saved.

If not all are saved, then either God is not sovereign or He does not desire all to be saved—according to strict logical reasoning. And yet, Scripture affirms all three statements. This tension has led some to reduce God’s sovereignty, others to limit the scope of His atonement, and still others to adopt a form of universalism. In doing so, each group risks twisting biblical truths—not out of ill will, but in an effort to make theological concepts conform to human logic.

This is, of course, a simplification of a complex debate. Still, the point stands: our curiosity should lead us to ask how philosophy, reason, and logic have helped—and sometimes hindered—our understanding of the Christian faith. While we worship Wisdom and Truth in the person of Jesus and are invited to reason with God, we should be cautious of philosophical systems that attempt to shrink robust biblical theology into neatly logical boxes.

In other words, while we shouldn’t and couldn’t avoid the philosophication of theology, we should remain wary of over-rationalizing God.

But those are my thoughts—what do you think?

Micah Coate, President and Host of Salvation and Stuff