Re: [asa] on "baconianism" & American evangelicals

On Mar 6, 2007, at 6:24 PM, George Murphy wrote:

> I don't think Barth can be classified as anti-theoretical. Whether
> or not he's really "anti-system," it's doctrine in theology that
> corresponds to theory in science. (Cf. the 3d volume of McGrath's
> A Scientific Theology.) & Barth certainly wasn't anti-doctrine
> when he was writing the Church Dogmatics.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
What I was contrasting was not theory or doctrine per se but the
inductive systemization of facts into theory. In the case of Hodge it
was the systemization of Biblical facts into doctrine. One could
argue like you did that Barth also did this despite himself. Or, you
could also argue that Barth's doctrine of the church short-circuited
this process and went straight to doctrine/theory without the prior
inductive step. Of course, the reflection of the church would itself
involve meditation on the facts of Scripture. Thus, my description of
an anti-system system. No one can write thirteen volumes of
completely disjointed "facts".

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Mar 6 22:59:27 2007