Re: question

Another interesting resource that I've just about finished: John Franke's
"The Character of Theology: A Postconservative Evangelical Approach."
Franke writes from a Reformed perspective, but also as an evangelical who
wishes to engage the "postmodern" turn. Interestingly, Franke's book has a
back-cover blurb from Enns -- I wonder if Enns would identify with the
"postconservative" movement in evangelicalism. Franke and Enns certainly
seem to make some similar arguments. Many I'm sure will disagree, but I
think the "postconservative" stream of evangelicalism is promising and that
the rethinking of foundationalist epistemology is a good thing. So here is
what Franke (a Prof. at Biblical Seminary) says about accomodation, with a
"postmodern" twist:

We begin by asserting that God does not break through language and
situatedness. Rather, he enters into the linguistic setting and uses
languge in the act of revelation as a means of accomodation to the situation
and situatedness of human beings This position arises out of theological
commitments that are Christian and Reformed. The church has long maintained
the distinction between finite human knowledge and divine knowledge. Even
revelation does not provide human beings with a knowledge that corresponds
to that of God. The infinite qualitative distinction between God and human
beings suggests the accomodated character of all human knowledge of god.
For John Calivn, this means that in the process of revelation God 'adjusts'
and 'descends' to the capacties of human beings in order to reveal the
infinite mysteries of divine reality....

On 6/6/06, Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Holding: Seely appears to be assuming that 'scientific knowledge', i.e.
> > the
> > conclusions of modern science, is the only source of true
> knowledge. And,
> > amazingly for an author in a Reformed theological journal, Seely seems
> to
> > be
> > forgetting that Scripture is propositional revelation from God and
> > therefore
> > is also a source of true knowledge ­ in fact, it is the ultimate and
> final
> > source of such knowledge!
> >
>
> This is typical of the way some try to imply that people like Seely,
> myself
> and many others reject revelation in favour of science. It is another
> example of porkies or disregarding the 9th commandment.
>
> I know some of whom this charge would be true, but wouldn't it be nice if
> Holding and the likes of him could be a little more honest
>
> Michael
>
>
Received on Wed Jun 7 06:07:06 2006