"Exceedingly unphilosophical", Calvin

Discussion in 'Exegetical Forum' started by Puritan Sailor, Sep 21, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Puritan Sailor

    Puritan Sailor Puritan Board Doctor

    On Calvin's commentary on Ephesians 4:22-24 he made this comment:

    "In two persons, Adam and Christ, he describes to us what may be called two natures. As we are first born of Adam, the depravity of nature which we derive from him is called the Old man; and as we are born again in Christ, the amendment of this sinful nature is called the New man. In a word, he who desires to put of the old man must renounce his nature. To suppose that the word Old and New contain an allusion to the Old and New Testaments, is exceedingly unphilosophical."

    What did Calvin mean by this criticism in bold? He clearly has some school of interpretation in mind but does not name them, and just dismisses them with this passing judgment. I don't disagree with the position he states. I'm just curious what he meant by the term. Does unphilosophical mean unreasonable? Illogical? Irrational? Or is he criticizing it as an irrational or unfeasible exegesis? He doesn't elaborate on the criticism and moves on to the next subject after this quote. I'm just curious what you all think.
     
  2. Parmenas

    Parmenas Puritan Board Freshman

  3. JimmyH

    JimmyH Puritan Board Junior

    The etymology of philosophy is "love of wisdom.' The Greek word 'sophia' σοφια translates as 'wisdom.' Philio φιλιο translates as love, as in brotherly love, so I suppose Calvin is thinking along the lines of the Greek roots and saying applying OT and NT to the old and new man is 'unwise' ?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page