The Historical Roots Of Christian Theological Inquiry
From the time following the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ, beginning in the first century C.E., those who embraced his teachings faced the crucial task of preserving the truth of the faith and explaining it coherently to each new generation. The earliest believers had witnessed the miracles and sayings of Christ, the promised Messiah. They saw how he fulfilled the prophecies of the Hebrew Scriptures, such as Isaiah’s words that spoke of a coming deliverer who would emerge from the line of David, serving as a means to reconcile humanity with Jehovah. As the fledgling congregations grew, they recognized the divine name, declaring that it was Jehovah who formed the earth to be inhabited (Isa. 45:18 UASV), and they placed their trust in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In the ensuing decades, these early Christians struggled to maintain doctrinal purity, guided by apostolic writings and the Spirit-inspired Word of God. As Christianity advanced into the second century C.E. and beyond, believers wrestled with a rapidly changing world, political pressures, heretical movements, and philosophical challenges that arose as the message of Christ moved from its Jewish roots into the Greco-Roman cultural milieu.
During the initial centuries, the Christian message encountered intense opposition. Some questioned the nature of the risen Christ, the authority and reliability of the Scriptures, and the correct understanding of the human condition before God. Faithful men labored to provide firm answers. They revered the Old Testament, where the divine name Jehovah appeared countless times, and they clung to the understanding that humanity is not composed of a separate immortal soul but that man was formed as a living soul from the dust of the ground (Gen. 2:7 UASV). These early believers knew that the condition of the dead was not an eternal torment in a fiery hell, but rather the common grave, a state of non-existence. As the apostolic age concluded, voices arose to defend the faith against those who abandoned the historical and grammatical meaning of the texts. Such defenders emphasized that the Scriptures meant what they said. They took solace in the consistent teaching of the Bible that God is the Creator, that humankind’s fall into sin brought mortality and estrangement, and that genuine hope lay in the redemptive sacrifice of the Messiah. The earliest centuries of the faith thus became an era of definition, refinement, and resistance against perversions of Christian truth.
In those same early centuries, challenges included the rise of spurious traditions and the blending of Christian belief with pagan philosophy. Such syncretism threatened to compromise the clarity of the gospel, reducing the transformative power of the Scriptures to merely another philosophical system. Faithful men of learning rejected the chaotic subjectivity of allegorical interpretations. They insisted that the words of Scripture, rightly understood in their historical and grammatical contexts, would yield truth that is both certain and divinely authorized. This method required careful study of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, an understanding of the cultural environment in which they were written, and a steadfast adherence to the literal meaning of the biblical text. Such faithful interpreters refused to allow the infiltration of speculative philosophical trends that minimized the historicity of the accounts given by prophets and apostles. As time progressed into the fourth and fifth centuries C.E., Christianity found itself struggling to establish sound doctrine as doctrinal debates raged over the identity of Christ and the proper understanding of divine revelation.
By the early medieval period, the faith had spread widely. The Christian community, seeking to preserve sound teaching, turned increasingly to centers of learning such as monasteries. The faithful segments of these communities insisted that any pursuit of knowledge must be subservient to the cause of true worship. They drew on the Scriptures that reminded them not to adopt human tradition over the inspired Word. As Jesus himself said to the first-century religious leaders, they invalidated God’s word for the sake of human tradition (Matt. 15:3-9 UASV). True believers in every era understood that human reasoning is limited. Without the grounding of Scripture, reason would be prone to wander into hollow speculation. Thus, the seeds of a tradition of intellectual engagement were planted, one that would bear fruit in the scholarship of later centuries. The careful study of Scripture in its linguistic and historical context reinforced the message of salvation and shaped the self-understanding of Christian communities long before Anselm’s time.
As we approach the century in which Anselm lived, medieval Europe was marked by educational reforms, renewed interest in grammar and dialectic, and a hunger for reasoned explanations of the faith. It was a world where Greek and Latin learning had survived and, in some places, begun to thrive again. This renewed intellectual climate was not free of error, for some had begun to drift from a Scripture-first mindset, but there were still those who held tightly to the literal interpretation of biblical texts. They knew that interpreting Scripture by its plain sense was essential. They held that “faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17 UASV). They believed that human beings were created free to make choices and that these choices, while foreknown by the Almighty, were not predetermined. Such believers acknowledged that Jehovah does not tempt humans with evil, nor does he orchestrate suffering to test them in some hidden, mysterious way. Instead, life’s difficulties arose because mankind had chosen independence from divine sovereignty, leading to a flawed world (James 1:13-15 UASV). Thus, these faithful Christians approached challenges grounded in Scripture. This stable biblical foundation would set the stage for the theological developments of the eleventh century C.E., when figures like Anselm began to explore the nature of divine truth using newly refined tools of reason and dialectic.
The Emergence Of Monastic Scholarship And Its Influence
Centuries after the apostles had departed, committed believers sought isolation from a turbulent world to focus on prayer, study, and disciplined devotion. Monastic communities, many formed in remote regions, played a significant role in preserving learning. They carefully copied the Scriptures, ensuring that the inspired Word remained accessible. They contemplated the message of the Bible day and night, following the pattern of devotion described in Psalm 1:2, meditating on Jehovah’s law. Within these quiet communities, the mastery of language, grammar, and logic advanced. Scholars within these settings reasoned that if God created the human mind in His image, as Genesis 1:26-27 UASV makes plain, then rational thought was a God-given tool to understand the truths already revealed in Scripture.
In the medieval centuries leading up to Anselm’s era, schools of grammar and dialectic began to flourish in certain parts of Europe. Such schools encouraged the pursuit of knowledge within a disciplined framework. Students learned to analyze texts rigorously, to assess arguments for logical soundness, and to seek truth patiently. The method was careful: one first established the meaning of the text, then reasoned about its implications. The aim was not to undermine the faith but to deepen understanding. Just as the apostle Paul explained that all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16-17 UASV), these scholars strove to apply reason in service to that end.
Over time, certain key figures rose to prominence within these communities of learning. They wrote treatises that engaged with Scripture, as well as philosophical arguments inherited from Greek thought. Even though many recognized the dangers of giving too much ground to philosophy not rooted in Scripture, they also saw the benefit of employing logical argumentation to strengthen the believer’s grasp of biblical truths. They felt a responsibility to make the faith comprehensible and defensible, just as the apostle Peter urged believers to be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks for the reason for their hope (1 Pet. 3:15 UASV).
By the eleventh century C.E., the stage was set for a theologian who would not only appreciate Scripture’s authority but also venture into the realm of rational argumentation, seeking to display the necessity and coherence of Christian doctrine through reasoned analysis. Anselm of Canterbury lived in an era when monastic life was still vibrant. The monastics had a deep reverence for Christ, and they maintained a rhythm of prayer and contemplation. They prayed to God through Christ, the one mediator (1 Tim. 2:5 UASV), and sought to structure their lives around devotion to divine truth. Such communities prized an intense religious life that included periods of meditation, the study of grammar, and the careful articulation of doctrines central to the Christian faith. Even as some drifted from the priority of Scripture, there were still those who insisted that the Bible’s literal meaning must remain foundational.
Anselm emerged from this environment. He had been educated in places where grammar and dialectic were taught rigorously. He entered a monastery where the emphasis was on understanding the faith. He would later assume leadership responsibilities at Canterbury, where he sought to guide believers and defend truth. Although he lived in a time when some gave too much weight to tradition and extrabiblical reverence for revered historical figures, he channeled the intellectual tools at his disposal to approach the mysteries of God’s nature and the divine plan of salvation. He did not rely exclusively on Scripture, which would have been the ideal approach, yet he never abandoned a belief in the supernatural truths revealed by God’s Word. He simply attempted to find within human reason what the Scriptures had already made known. While this approach was not without dangers, it placed him in an influential role for centuries to come. His writings and arguments would prove significant, even if his method was not always aligned perfectly with the best exegetical principles.
Faith Seeking Understanding In Anselm’s World
Anselm, born in northern Italy in 1033 C.E., found himself immersed in an intellectual climate that prized reasoned inquiry. He relocated to northern France, studying grammar and dialectic. He eventually embraced a contemplative life as a monk, devoting himself to meditation and spiritual reflection. His community at Le Bec in Normandy emphasized zealous devotion and prized scholarly excellence. The abbot-teachers he encountered were not content with surface-level piety. They encouraged reasoned discourse, ensuring that those committed to the religious life were also trained in the arts of logic and philosophical reflection.
Anselm served at Le Bec as both prior and later as a leading overseer of that community, from which he rose to a prominent position in Canterbury around 1093 C.E. Throughout these appointments, he composed theological treatises. He wrote prayers and meditations that reflected a personal and intense devotion to Christ. He believed fervently that while faith must precede understanding, one who already possessed faith could seek to deepen that faith by understanding its inner logic. He called this approach “faith seeking understanding,” adapting it from an old Latin rendering of Isaiah 7:9. Although he was never an advocate of purely human speculation divorced from divine revelation, he was willing to bracket Scripture temporarily in some of his works, in order to explore what reason alone could uncover about the truths already held by faith. This step may not have pleased some of his contemporaries who felt that Scripture must always remain at the center, yet Anselm’s motive was to strengthen belief by showing that Christian faith was not irrational.
In his writings, Anselm focused on God’s nature. He considered the essential attributes ascribed to the Highest Being. He drew heavily on Augustine, who centuries earlier had wrestled with the concept of the Trinity. While Scripture clearly teaches that there is one God (Deut. 6:4 UASV) and that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are each presented as fully divine, the precise logical formulation of the Trinity is not spelled out in the biblical text. Augustine’s influence on Anselm led him to search for rational ways to describe God’s being, self-understanding, and relationships. His works were dialogues of reason and faith, disciplined attempts to think rigorously about divine reality. Yet in this, he never rejected the truth that God’s revelation is the ultimate authority. Even when he speculated, he sought to affirm what he understood to be Christian truth.
Anselm’s first major theological writing, composed between 1076 and 1077 C.E., attempted to reason about God’s attributes, the nature of truth, and the rational basis of faith. Initially calling it an example of meditating on the rationale of the faith, he later shortened the title to something simpler. In this treatise, and others like it, he tried to uncover the logically necessary reasons that could be discerned within the nature of divine reality. By exploring concepts like the supreme nature of the Highest Being, he aimed to show that reason rightly employed could reinforce belief.
In another work, commonly known as the Proslogion, Anselm introduced what would become famous as the ontological argument for God’s existence. He described God as that being “than which no greater can be thought.” This argument was not just a logical puzzle. It was a prayerful meditation. He believed that thinking deeply about God should lead one closer to an apprehension of God’s reality. This reasoning effort fascinated many later thinkers, though not all accepted its conclusions. Thomas Aquinas, centuries later, rejected it. Philosophers like Kant would also criticize it. Yet the argument persisted through history, inspiring debates and discussions. Anselm’s reasoning demonstrated that human intellect, while far from infallible, could be employed to approach the mysteries of the divine.
Anselm did not limit himself to reflections on God’s being. He addressed various theological and philosophical questions. He considered the nature of truth, affirming a correspondence view of truth that aligns well with Scripture’s straightforward claims. He examined human free will, foreknowledge, and how these related to divine sovereignty. He reasoned about the virgin birth and original sin, considering how Christ’s birth was crucial in reversing Adam’s sin (Luke 1:35 UASV; Rom. 5:12-19 UASV). He wrote about the relationships of love within the divine being. Throughout these works, he drew on rigorous logic. Yet, even as he ventured into rational speculations, he maintained that Scripture was authoritative, even if he occasionally set it aside to highlight the rationality of what it taught.
One of Anselm’s most influential contributions was his explanation of why God became man, often known by its Latin title Cur Deus Homo. He attempted to explain rationally the necessity of the incarnation and the atonement. He argued that humankind’s fall into sin offended the honor of an upright God. Because Adam chose independence from Jehovah’s sovereignty, the entire human race suffered (Gen. 3:17-19 UASV). Yet only humanity could repay this offense. To satisfy the requirements of divine justice, a perfect human must render satisfaction. Only God could provide that perfect satisfaction. Hence the necessity of the God-man, Jesus Christ, who in his sinless sacrifice made satisfaction possible. According to Anselm’s reasoning, Christ’s sacrifice opened the way for redemption, restoring the possibility of eternal life for those who put faith in him (John 3:16 UASV), without suggesting that salvation is either universal or guaranteed once acquired. His view displaced certain earlier medieval notions that the devil had some legal right over fallen humanity, a notion not supported by Scripture. It also shifted emphasis away from earlier non-literal interpretations. Though some early Christian teachers had preferred to stress Christ as a conqueror of Satan and death, Anselm’s satisfaction theory would shape the understanding of the atonement for centuries. It focused on the absolute righteousness of Jehovah and the necessary harmony between divine justice and mercy.
Anselm’s use of reason was not a rejection of Scriptural authority. On the contrary, he believed that reason, properly applied, could serve faith. Just as believers are commanded to love Jehovah with all their heart, soul, and mind (Matt. 22:37 UASV), Anselm saw intellectual effort as an act of devotion. Reason allowed him to show that the Christian faith had an internal coherence that outsiders could recognize. He wrote as one who possessed faith, seeking understanding that would confirm and strengthen that faith. In doing so, he built upon Augustine’s tradition and foreshadowed later developments in scholastic theology, even though his work would often be interpreted and transformed by theologians with different methods and assumptions.
In apologetics, Anselm recognized that reason could help defend the truth of Christianity. He sought to give believers the intellectual tools they needed to explain their hope in Christ. He believed one could demonstrate the rationality of doctrines like the Trinity or the incarnation. Although the Scriptures are always the highest authority, he argued that many doctrines regarded as mysteries could still be shown not to be against reason. He saw this as important because pagans and Jews in his day challenged the notion that God could become man. Anselm wished to convince them that the Christian message, though not derived from human philosophy, was not absurd. By employing rational arguments, he hoped to clear away some intellectual barriers so that the truth of Scripture could be seen more clearly.
Anselm also articulated classical arguments for God’s existence other than the ontological one. Before venturing into purely conceptual territory, he reasoned from the existence of goodness or perfection in the world to the existence of a supreme source of that goodness or perfection. He argued that since things in the world possess degrees of goodness, there must be a Supreme Good that causes all lesser goodness. Similarly, the existence of beings required an ultimate being through which all others existed. While these arguments drew somewhat on a philosophical tradition influenced by Plato, their purpose aligned with a desire to show that the Christian conception of God was rational and not arbitrary.
In many respects, Anselm set a pattern for employing reason in defense of faith, a pattern that would influence scholasticism. Though some later thinkers would criticize or refine his arguments, his legacy lay in his demonstration that faith and reason need not be enemies. Rather, if Scripture is the foundation, reason can function as a helpful tool, illuminating and clarifying the truths that God had revealed long before. Anselm never intended that reason replace Scripture. He viewed Scripture as infallible and authoritative. Indeed, he accepted that the biblical writers, moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:21 UASV), had provided the church with the divine message. He knew that only through careful, literal interpretation and faithfulness to the meaning of the inspired text could believers guard the truth from corruption.
Anselm’s world was not free of controversies. His era saw debates over the procession of the Holy Spirit, the relationship of divine foreknowledge and human free will, and the nature of truth itself. He believed that sound reasoning, consistent with Scriptural teaching, could help resolve confusion. In dealing with foreknowledge, for instance, he upheld that Jehovah’s foreknowledge does not preclude human freedom. Jehovah can know in advance the free choices that humans will make without determining those choices. This understanding aligns with the scriptural view that humans bear responsibility for their actions (Deut. 30:19 UASV), reinforcing the idea that God’s foreknowledge is not the same as predestination. By clarifying such points, Anselm hoped to deepen believers’ appreciation of divine wisdom and strengthen their conviction that God’s ways, while higher than man’s ways (Isa. 55:9 UASV), are not irrational.
If there was a limitation to Anselm’s approach, it lay in his willingness to temporarily set Scripture aside in order to build arguments from pure reason. While he did so with the intention of showing that faith and reason were compatible, this method risked elevating human speculation too highly. A better approach would always begin and end with Scripture as the unshakable foundation. After all, it is the inspired Scriptures that make one wise for salvation (2 Tim. 3:15 UASV). Nonetheless, God can use human intellect to help understand and defend His truths, as long as the intellect remains subject to the authority of His revealed Word.
Anselm’s reasoning, especially concerning the atonement, displayed a clarity that reshaped how many understood Christ’s sacrifice. The idea that God’s honor required satisfaction, and that only the God-man could satisfy it, made sense in the framework of divine justice. Although the Bible itself does not cast the atonement primarily in terms of divine honor, Anselm’s portrayal helped Christians at his time move away from unscriptural notions that somehow the devil held rights over humanity that God was obligated to respect. By focusing on God’s righteousness and the necessity of a perfect sacrifice, Anselm’s approach brought theology closer to the scriptural emphasis on Christ’s death as the ransom that satisfies divine justice (Mark 10:45 UASV; 1 Pet. 1:18-19 UASV). This emphasis on satisfaction underlined the seriousness of sin and the magnitude of Christ’s loving sacrifice for sinners. Such clarity is consistent with the Scriptures, which present Christ’s death as indispensable for reconciliation to Jehovah (Col. 1:20 UASV).
While Anselm’s thought world might seem distant from our own, his desire to integrate faith and reason remains instructive. Christians, committed to a literal interpretation of Scripture and guided by a historical-grammatical hermeneutic, can appreciate that the mind, though not the final authority, is a gift from Jehovah. It can help the believer delight in the ordered harmony of God’s creation and see that biblical truths are never irrational. The Bible itself encourages believers to use reason. The prophet Isaiah, speaking the word of Jehovah, said: “Come now and let us reason together” (Isa. 1:18 UASV). This is not an invitation to challenge the authority of God’s Word, but to think deeply about its implications, to understand its message fully, and to remove misunderstandings that can arise from a careless reading.
The fact that Anselm’s arguments continued to be discussed long after his death in 1109 C.E. shows the enduring importance of serious theological reflection. He contributed to the tradition that would later be known as scholasticism, a tradition that sought to clarify doctrine, eliminate contradictions, and provide rational support for the truths found in Scripture. While we must not endorse approaches that elevate human reason above Scripture, we can learn from the sincerity and intensity of his efforts. His life demonstrates that those devoted to Christ can engage intellectually, as long as their ultimate loyalty remains to the biblical text and the inspired Word that directs the faithful believer’s path.
Anselm lived in an era when rigid ecclesiastical structures were growing. Some might have hoped he would challenge all traditions not anchored in Scripture. Yet he operated within his historical circumstances. He influenced a small circle of fellow scholars in his own lifetime, but his written works eventually reached far beyond his own context. He inspired other Christians to think more carefully about the doctrines of God, Christ, and salvation. Although he did not always adhere to the priority that Scripture should have in all theological inquiry, he never denied Scripture’s truth. He took comfort in the faith once delivered to the saints and built upon that foundation with the tools of reason.
What can we learn from Anselm? We learn that Scripture is non-negotiable. We do not concede to philosophies that undermine the historicity or clarity of God’s Word. We also learn that the human mind, created by Jehovah, is not to be disregarded. Instead, it can help the believer articulate, defend, and comprehend the truths that flow from the inspired text. We see that sincerity in seeking truth matters. If the mind is anchored in Scripture and guided by the Holy Spirit’s inspired Word recorded in the Bible, it can remove obstacles, clarify misunderstandings, and provide a deeper appreciation for the faith that the believer already treasures. It can show that what is revealed by Jehovah is always consistent with the nature of truth He has woven into His creation.
In the centuries since Anselm’s day, believers have been reminded time and again that nothing supersedes the Word of God. Scripture stands as the defining authority. Church history records many attempts to integrate philosophy with Christianity. Some have erred by giving too much place to rationalistic speculation. The believer must stand firm, recognizing that the Bible, interpreted literally and historically, is the final arbiter of truth. Yet this does not mean that reason is useless. When reason humbly submits to revelation, it becomes a servant of truth. It can show that the biblical message is not only spiritually nourishing but also rationally defensible. The harmony between faith and reason that Anselm pursued, if tempered by unwavering commitment to Scripture’s authority, can still enrich the believer’s understanding today.
In reflecting on Anselm, we also see the importance of intellectual rigor in defending Christian truth against those who deny it. He believed that it was possible to engage Jews, pagans, and other opponents of the faith with rational arguments, demonstrating that key Christian claims were not nonsensical. He aimed to show that the incarnation and atonement could be understood as coherent and necessary solutions to the human predicament of sin, consistent with divine justice and mercy. While he presupposed the truth of Scripture, he attempted to present reasoned explanations that could help honest inquirers recognize the depth and consistency of Christian doctrine.
This approach, refined and informed by a more careful exegesis of Scripture, can still serve believers who seek to share the good news of the kingdom of God with a skeptical world. Unbelievers often hold that the Christian faith is irrational. A balanced use of reason, always subordinate to Scripture, can dispel such misconceptions. It can show that the Christian message is not a product of mystical irrationality but of divine revelation, which is in harmony with the mind created by Jehovah.
Thus, the story of Anselm of Canterbury is not merely that of a medieval scholar immersed in philosophical speculation. It is a reminder that throughout church history, believers have wrestled with how best to understand, communicate, and defend the truths of the faith. It points us back to the Scriptures themselves, which remain the ultimate source of wisdom. While some of Anselm’s methods or conclusions may not align perfectly with a strictly literal interpretation of the biblical text, his sincere quest to integrate faith and reason underscores a timeless lesson. The human mind, though fallen, is still capable of grasping truths about its Creator. When guided by Scripture and humility before Jehovah’s Word, intellectual effort can fortify and enrich faith. The answer to the question posed by his life and work—what can we learn about early Christian thought from him—is that we learn the enduring value of interpreting Scripture literally, maintaining unwavering confidence in its authority, and using reason as a tool to clarify and defend the life-giving truths of God’s Word.
About the Author
EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220 books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).
YOU MAY ALSO ENJOY
Discover the deeper significance behind miracles and their role in strengthening belief. Uncover the truths that have puzzled many.
Explore the essence of miracles versus the predictable world of nature. Discover how faith intertwines with reality.
Are miracles and sign gifts still active today? Dive into the debate over their cessation or continuation in the modern church.
Are miracles real or just myths? Explore the debate challenging the existence of the miraculous.
Explore the criteria used to differentiate genuine divine acts from deceptive wonders. Is there a biblical way to tell?
Explore the fine line between divine acts and mere trickery in scripture and today's world.
Explore the fine line between divine acts and mere trickery in scripture and today's world.
Explore the authenticity of biblical miracles. Are they literal or symbolic? Discover the debate.
RECOMMENDED READING FOR CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS AND EVANGELISM
THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS: for Pastors, Teachers, and Believers
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS: Answering the Tough Questions: Evidence and Reason in Defense of the Faith
REASON MEETS FAITH: Addressing and Refuting Atheism's Challenges to Christianity
BATTLE PLANS: A Game Plan for Answering Objections to the Christian Faith
CREATION AND COSMOS A Journey Through Creation, Science, and the Origins of Life
ANSWERING THE CRITICS: Defending God's Word Against Modern Skepticism
IS THE BIBLE REALLY THE WORD OF GOD?: Is Christianity the One True Faith?
DEFENDING OLD TESTAMENT AUTHORSHIP: The Word of God Is Authentic and True
YOUR GUIDE FOR DEFENDING THE BIBLE: Self-Education of the Bible Made Easy
THE BIBLE ON TRIAL: Examining the Evidence for Being Inspired, Inerrant, Authentic, and True
THE HISTORICAL JESUS: The Death, Burial, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ
THE HISTORICAL ADAM & EVE: Reconciling Faith and Fact in Genesis
UNSHAKABLE BELIEFS: Strategies for Strengthening and Defending Your Faith
BIBLICAL CRITICISM: What are Some Outstanding Weaknesses of Modern Historical Criticism?
THE CHRISTIAN APOLOGIST: Always Being Prepared to Make a Defense
THE EVANGELISM HANDBOOK: How All Christians Can Effectively Share God’s Word in Their Community
Comentarios