Chapter 2: Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics (John T. Baldwin) Flashcards
The… approach [taken in the interpretation of Scripture—as explained by John T. Baldwin—] rests upon __(?)_\_and upon the concept that __(?)_\_. It assumes that __(?)_\_.
The… approach [taken in the interpretation of Scripture—as explained by John T. Baldwin—] rests upon the unity and clarity of the Scriptures as a whole and upon the concept that the entire Bible is the propositional, infallible Word of God. It assumes that what the text meant originally is, in principle, what the text means for us today.
Hermeneutics involves a rational process that utilizes the reasoning powers of the human intellect, thereby assigning a central role to human reason in the interpretation of Scripture. However, a series of questions addresses reason and faith as related to hermeneutics. Are the truths __(?)_\_commensurable with the truths __(?)_\_? Is __(?)_\_possible? Moreover, is reason—understood as __(?)_\_—either __(?)_\_or __(?)_\_ in the interpretation of the written Word of God? What effect might __(?)_\_have upon human reason? Moreover, can reason be influenced either positively or negatively by __(?)_\_ perhaps even __(?)_\_?
These issues are so basic that they have received major attention through the Christian era and continue to be vigorously discussed.
Hermeneutics involves a rational process that utilizes the reasoning powers of the human intellect, thereby assigning a central role to human reason in the interpretation of Scripture. However, a series of questions addresses reason and faith as related to hermeneutics. Are the truths open to discovery by reason commensurable with the truths of faith? Is discourse between the two realms possible? Moreover, is reason—understood as the human power to think, to deliberate, to solve problems, to distinguish, to judge, and to choose freely—either a fully trustworthy power or the sole factor in the interpretation of the written Word of God? What effect might sin have upon human reason? Moreover, can reason be influenced either positively or negatively by supernatural powers perhaps even unknown to the interpreter?
These issues are so basic that they have received major attention through the Christian era and continue to be vigorously discussed.
Hermeneutics involves a rational process that utilizes the reasoning powers of the human intellect, thereby assigning a central role to human reason in the interpretation of Scripture. However, a series of questions addresses reason and faith as related to hermeneutics…
…does faith—understood as __(?)_\_—play a role in hermeneutics as well? If so, what is its role and how does this kind of faith relate to __(?)_\_ in hermeneutics?
These issues are so basic that they have received major attention through the Christian era and continue to be vigorously discussed.
Hermeneutics involves a rational process that utilizes the reasoning powers of the human intellect, thereby assigning a central role to human reason in the interpretation of Scripture. However, a series of questions addresses reason and faith as related to hermeneutics…
…does faith—understood as a divinely inspired trust in, and commitment to, God and to the canonical Scripture as the authoritative Written Word of God—play a role in hermeneutics as well? If so, what is its role and how does this kind of faith relate to reason in hermeneutics?
These issues are so basic that they have received major attention through the Christian era and continue to be vigorously discussed.
Hermeneutics involves a rational process that utilizes the reasoning powers of the human intellect, thereby assigning a central role to human reason in the interpretation of Scripture. However, a series of questions addresses reason and faith as related to hermeneutics.
…are there __(?)_\_to human reason in hermeneutics? If so, __(?)_\_, and __(?)_\_? If __(?)_\_ and __(?)_\_seem to clash regarding a particular interpretation of Scripture, how shall the tension be resolved? Should either __(?)_\_ or __(?)_\_ have the final authority in such instances? If so, on what basis could either be granted final authority?
These issues are so basic that they have received major attention through the Christian era and continue to be vigorously discussed.
Hermeneutics involves a rational process that utilizes the reasoning powers of the human intellect, thereby assigning a central role to human reason in the interpretation of Scripture. However, a series of questions addresses reason and faith as related to hermeneutics.
…are there limits to human reason in hermeneutics? If so, what are they, and upon what are they grounded? If faith and reason seem to clash regarding a particular interpretation of Scripture, how shall the tension be resolved? Should either faith or reason have the final authority in such instances? If so, on what basis could either be granted final authority?
These issues are so basic that they have received major attention through the Christian era and continue to be vigorously discussed.
…in discussing faith and reason there is a sense that, in some fashion, it is good to __(?)_\_. Peter urges believers to be prepared to __(?)_\_ (1 Pet 3:15). This implies __(?)_\_and, hence, seems to endorse, in some fashion, what has been called “__(?)_\_.” [Footnote: See Alvin Plantinga’s massive influential work entitled, __(?)_\_(2000).] While the Christian may not have __(?)_\_ as __(?)_\_, the existence of __(?)_\_ may be expected.
…in discussing faith and reason there is a sense that, in some fashion, it is good to take account of criticism through rational analysis. Peter urges believers to be prepared to present a “reason” or a “defense” to anyone who asks questions regarding some Christian position (1 Pet 3:15). This implies the importance of evidence in relation to belief and, hence, seems to endorse, in some fashion, what has been called “warranted Christian belief.” [Footnote: See Alvin Plantinga’s massive influential work entitled, Warranted Christian Belief (2000).] While the Christian may not have demonstrable proof as warrants for beliefs, the existence of sufficient evidence may be expected.
__(?)_\_ has described the relationship between evidence and faith as follows:
God never asks us to believe, without __(?)_\_. His existence, His character, the truthfulness of His word, are all __(?)_\_; and __(?)_\_. Yet God has never removed __(?)_\_. Our faith must rest upon evidence, not demonstration. Those who wish to doubt __(?)_\_; while those who really desire to know the truth __(?)_\_ (SC105).
Ellen White has described the relationship between evidence and faith as follows:
God never asks us to believe, without giving sufficient evidence upon which to base our faith. His existence, His character, the truthfulness of His word, are all established by testimony that appeals to our reason; and this testimony is abundant. Yet God has never removed the possibility of doubt. Our faith must rest upon evidence, not demonstration. Those who wish to doubt will have opportunity; while those who really desire to know the truth will find plenty of evidence on which to rest their faith (SC105).
…in discussions of faith and of reason, we also recognize the value of __(?)_\_, experiencing the self-authenticating power of __(?)_\_ upon the mind.
…in discussions of faith and of reason, we also recognize the value of personal faith, experiencing the self-authenticating power of the Holy Spirit upon the mind.
The question arises: What is the relationship between reason, faith, and the Holy Spirit? Could the answer be that __(?)_\_? The Holy Spirit __(?)_\_. This __(?)_\_of the reasoning powers respecting __(?)_\_, particularly __(?)_\_. It also endorses __(?)_\_ as __(?)_\_. However, are the human reasoning powers always and fully dependable? This question introduces us to the… discussion of the distinction between __(?)_\_ and __(?)_\_ human reason.
The question arises: What is the relationship between reason, faith, and the Holy Spirit? Could the answer be that these elements are related functionally? The Holy Spirit draws us through the evidence. This amplifies the importance of the reasoning powers respecting evidence, particularly textual evidence. It also endorses the necessary contemporary work of God as leading to truth through the evidence. However, are the human reasoning powers always and fully dependable? This question introduces us to the… discussion of the distinction between unregenerate and regenerate human reason.
According to the biblical worldview the human rational power, reason, or mind consistently is characterized as __(?)_\_. Describing the natural rational power as __(?)_\_,” Jeremiah claims that it is “__(?)_\_” (Jer 17:9, NEB). Can this “__(?)_\_” natural reason that, according to the Word of God, __(?)_\_” (Eph 5:3-4, NKJV) and __(?)_\_” (Eph 5:8) interpret the Bible correctly? Paul responds as follows to this question: “__(?)_\_” (1 Cor 2:14, KJV).
According to the biblical worldview the human rational power, reason, or mind consistently is characterized as impacted by sin. Describing the natural rational power as the “heart,” Jeremiah claims that it is “more deceitful than all else and desperately sick” (Jer 17:9, NEB). Can this “sick” natural reason that, according to the Word of God, loves “uncleanness, covetousness” and “foolish talking and jesting” (Eph 5:3-4, NKJV) and other works of “darkness” (Eph 5:8) interpret the Bible correctly? Paul responds as follows to this question: “The natural man, [unchanged reason, or rationality] receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor 2:14, KJV).
Paul admonishes his listeners to “__(?)_\_” (Rom 12:2). This passage seems to suggest that __(?)_\_. Paul equates __(?)_\_with __(?)_\_” (Titus 3:5). Ellen G. White concurs: “__(?)_\_” (RH, Sept. 23, 1884, p. 609).
This raises the question of whether __(?)_\_or __(?)_\_ should hold priority in hermeneutics when apparent conflicts arise between these two contrasting ways of knowing.
The NT, in particular, addresses this issue. Using military metaphorical language, Paul admonishes his hearers to bring “every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor 10:5, NKJV). The implication is that __(?)_\_. In other words, __(?)_\_.
Placing __(?)_\_above __(?)_\_ in this fashion prepares the Christian to __(?)_\_…
Paul admonishes his listeners to “be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom 12:2). This passage seems to suggest that a renewed reason is required for a person to understand properly the will of God. Paul equates the renewing of the mind with the “regeneration by the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5). Ellen G. White concurs: “The grace of Christ is needed to refine and purify the mind” (RH, Sept. 23, 1884, p. 609).
This raises the question of whether faith or reason should hold priority in hermeneutics when apparent conflicts arise between these two contrasting ways of knowing.
The NT, in particular, addresses this issue. Using military metaphorical language, Paul admonishes his hearers to bring “every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor 10:5, NKJV). The implication is that the teachings of Christ, as found in the Scriptures, are to be elevated in authority over competing claims of human reason. In other words, all thoughts, whether geological, philosophical, or theological, will resonate with, and thus be “captive to” the teaching of Christ.
Placing faith above reason in this fashion prepares the Christian to be willing to deny the evidences of the human senses if empirical phenomena appear to dispute some teachings of Scripture…
Placing faith above reason… prepares the Christian to be willing to deny the evidences of the human senses if empirical phenomena appear to dispute some teachings of Scripture, e..g, Jesus predicted counterfeit comings of future false Christs (__(?)_\_). In view of this, __(?)_\_ asks, “Are the people of God now so firmly established upon His word that they would not yield to the evidence of their senses? Would they, in such a crisis, cling to the Bible and the Bible only?” (GC 625).
Placing faith above reason… prepares the Christian to be willing to deny the evidences of the human senses if empirical phenomena appear to dispute some teachings of Scripture, e..g, Jesus predicted counterfeit comings of future false Christs (Matt 24:24-27). In view of this, Ellen White asks, “Are the people of God now so firmly established upon His word that they would not yield to the evidence of their senses? Would they, in such a crisis, cling to the Bible and the Bible only?” (GC 625).
While it is important in instances of apparent conflict to place faith in the Bible and its claims above those of secular human reasoning, we may need to confess temporarily and freely __(?)_\_. However, we also may rest by faith on the assurance that __(?)_\_. [Footnote: Cr. Jon Paulien, “The Final Deception: An Evil, Counterfeit Trinity Is Now Making Ready for War,” Adventist Review, Oct. 29, 1998, p. 10.]
While it is important in instances of apparent conflict to place faith in the Bible and its claims above those of secular human reasoning, we may need to confess temporarily and freely our current level of ignorance in finding methods of resolving certain issues. However, we also may rest by faith on the assurance that when God finally reveals all things in the new earth, genuine harmony will be seen in matters that now appear dissonant and irreconcilable. [Footnote: Cr. Jon Paulien, “The Final Deception: An Evil, Counterfeit Trinity Is Now Making Ready for War,” Adventist Review, Oct. 29, 1998, p. 10.]
In addition to the impact of sin upon human reason, accepting __(?)_\_highlights reasons why it is difficult, if not impossible, for the natural mind to interpret the Bible correctly. Fallen spiritual powers, Satan and his angles, can __(?)_\_. This is particularly true when __(?)_\_. The attempts of Satan and evil angels to __(?)_\_ cannot be dismissed. We must also consider the positive hermeneutical role of __(?)_\_upon __(?)_\_. While the effect of these forces is easily overemphasized, in hermeneutics we need to __(?)_\_.
In addition to the impact of sin upon human reason, accepting a literal interpretation of Scripture highlights reasons why it is difficult, if not impossible, for the natural mind to interpret the Bible correctly. Fallen spiritual powers, Satan and his angles, can influence the exegete. This is particularly true when the biblical interpreter denies that these fallen supernatural powers exist as real beings, able to influence the mind, and allegorizes them into mere symbols of evil. The attempts of Satan and evil angels to redirect interpretations of the Bible cannot be dismissed. We must also consider the positive hermeneutical role of the holy angels upon humans. While the effect of these forces is easily overemphasized, in hermeneutics we need to be sensitive to the influence of both holy and unholy angels.
[On the dangers inherent in biblical interpretation wherein the “interpreter denies that… fallen supernatural powers exist as real beings, able to influence the mind, and allegorizes them into mere symbols of evil,” __(?)_\_ refernences the following:]
See Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol. III, part 3: The Doctrine of Creation (Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1960), pp. 519-531; Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951-1957), 1:134, 2:27; Rudolf Bultmann, “New Testament and Mythology,” in Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate, ed. Hans Werner Bartsch, trans. Reginald H. Fuller (London: S.P.C.K., 1957), pp. 4-5.
[On the dangers inherent in biblical interpretation wherein the “interpreter denies that… fallen supernatural powers exist as real beings, able to influence the mind, and allegorizes them into mere symbols of evil,” John T. Baldwin refernences the following:]
See Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol. III, part 3: The Doctrine of Creation (Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1960), pp. 519-531; Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951-1957), 1:134, 2:27; Rudolf Bultmann, “New Testament and Mythology,” in Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate, ed. Hans Werner Bartsch, trans. Reginald H. Fuller (London: S.P.C.K., 1957), pp. 4-5.
In some biblical passages angels are commissioned to __(?)_\_. A classic example is recorded in Daniel 8 in which __(?)_\_” (Dan 8:16). In the following chapter Daniel asks for further assistance and __(?)_\_; Gabriel tells him, “__(?)_\_” (Dan 9:22-23).
In some biblical passages angels are commissioned to work with specific individuals in understanding the Word of God. A classic example is recorded in Daniel 8 in which Gabriel is sent to “give this man [Daniel] understanding of the vision” (Dan 8:16). In the following chapter Daniel asks for further assistance and receives it; Gabriel tells him, “I have now come forth to give you insight with understanding… give heed to the message and gain understanding of the vision” (Dan 9:22-23).