# Evaluate this epistemological claim?



## RamistThomist (Jun 28, 2007)

I really like Carl Henry. The following is Al Mohler's summation of his apologetic:



> "Divine revelation is the source of all truth, the truth of Christianity included; reason is the instrument for recognizing it; Scripture is its verifying principle; logical consistency of a negative test for truth and coherence a subordinate test. The task of Christian theology is to exhibit the content of biblical revelation as an orderly whole."


----------



## ChristianTrader (Jul 5, 2007)

Unfortunately that statement is Clarkian to its core as Dr. Henry unfortunately was as well.

First, I would make sure that when divine revelation is addressed, that one is not talking only about special revelation. General Revelation counts as Divine Revelation.

Next, I would saw that we do not reason our way into accepting divine revelation. We are built to recognize it. Using Calvin's example, its like recognizing bitter vs. sweet. You do not recognize bitter vs. sweet using reason.

Scripture is self attesting, and logical consistency etc are good as long as we do not put them on such a pedestal as to attempt to rule out mystery and paradox. We must not attempt to make logic, god.

Lastly, I would say that the point of Christian Theology and its study is to get our marching orders for life, and not the smaller goal of showing our system to be consistent.

CT


----------



## Civbert (Jul 5, 2007)

Draught Horse said:


> I really like Carl Henry. The following is Al Mohler's summation of his apologetic:
> 
> 
> > "Divine revelation is the source of all truth, the truth of Christianity included; reason is the instrument for recognizing it; Scripture is its verifying principle; logical consistency of a negative test for truth and coherence a subordinate test. The task of Christian theology is to exhibit the content of biblical revelation as an orderly whole."



Nothing inherently wrong in this quote. 


*"Divine revelation is the source of all truth, *

This seems pretty basic to me. It's implied in the WCF chapter 1, and that "God is true" and all truth flows from God. Man is not autonomous but depends on God for all things. 


*the truth of Christianity included; *

Clearly we could not know the Gospel if not for God's revelation.


*reason is the instrument for recognizing it; *

This is basic to being rational thinking people. You recognize truth by using reason. Right thinking is required to differentiate fact from fiction. But reason is not truth, but a tool for separating truth from false ideas. 


*Scripture is its verifying principle; *

If nothing else, we know the Scriptures are true and inerrant. Thus we can confirm which ideas are true if they are from Scripture; or if they are reasonable opinion if they do not contradict Scripture. Anything contradicting Scripture is false.


*logical consistency of a negative test for truth and coherence a subordinate test. *

Again this has to do with right thinking and the fundamentals of logic and reason. Starting with the truth of Scripture as a fundamental principle we can test ideas to see if they are coherent with Scripture, or implied by Scripture. 


*The task of Christian theology is to exhibit the content of biblical revelation as an orderly whole."*

Systematic Theology 101. And Apologetics 101. If your worldview in incoherent, it falls apart. There's no point in holding Christianity up as the truth if our theology is full of contradictions. 

I don't know if Carl Henry would say Al Mohler's summation was spot on, but if it is, I think it's pretty basic stuff. And note he is speaking of Henry's _apologetics_ specifically.


----------



## 2 Tim 4:2 (Aug 10, 2007)

> John 16:13
> Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.




The statement is not incorrect but incomplete. For reason alone is insuffcient to understand truth. We must be guided by the Holy Ghost. And all truth is Christ centered.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Aug 10, 2007)

2 Tim 4:2 said:


> > John 16:13
> > Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## panta dokimazete (Aug 11, 2007)

I just heard this on a John Piper audio sermon - great rhetorical question:



John Piper said:


> We've GOT to be content with partial knowledge...is that ok?


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 11, 2007)

jdlongmire said:


> I just heard this on a John Piper audio sermon - great rhetorical question:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No one disagrees with that.


----------



## etexas (Aug 11, 2007)

jdlongmire said:


> I just heard this on a John Piper audio sermon - great rhetorical question:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Church historic would say of course! Answer that question with a question:Can the finite absorb the infinite. We have the Holy Writ, this is called sufficient revelation, can one assume we can know ALL about God in a book? It is wrong to view it as a Biograpy. God tells us that which we need to know. Even the Holy Spirit is not going to "reveal" everything to our still fallen frames, he is God and indeed part of the Godhead but absolute revelation here and now is not His "function". Sorry for a long winded way of saying I agree with Piper on this. The Church has always talked of Holy Mysteries. Grace and Peace.


----------



## danmpem (Oct 27, 2007)

Who was it that said something to the effect of "Even the greatest theologians can only be at best eighty-percent right, and even that is an arbitrary number"? I'm probably butchering the quote to pieces. The person who told that to me a few years ago said "I think it was Calvin". Anyone have any idea?


----------

