Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Intersecting-plane Dogmatics

The interview between Laurence O’Donnell & Brian Mattson on the book 'Restored To Our Destiny' has a quote that immediately reminds me of what James T. Dennison said on the hermeneutics/ biblical theology of Geerhardus Vos:
'Vos transforms biblical study by introducing an intersecting-plane hermeneutic'
The quote (made bold in the interview!) is:
'I hear you saying that it is one thing to parse what Bavinck says about eschatology or anthropology by themselves; it is another to view both loci in light of each other; yet it is still another to view both in relation to their underlying “vertical” (metaphysical) and “horizontal” (covenantal) grounds. Am I understanding you correctly here? And am I right to conclude that, in your view, previous scholarship has tended to take the first two roads, but the third is the only one that does full justice to Bavinck’s anthropology?'
This confirms to me (once again) my understanding, here herehere and here that Schilder's work can (and should) also be understood/read as a Herman Bavinck/Geerhardus Vos interpretation.

At the same time, Bavinck's (& Vos') farfetched speculations in this article on Bavinck's realism, the Logos principle and Sola Scriptura by K. Scott Oliphint don't seem like an application of the intersecting-plane hermeneutics. Why it's interesting to compare it with Schilder's discussion of the Logos in the chapter on sunday 9 of the Heidelberg Catechism (you see him struggling with the tension).

1 comment:

Ann Garrison said...

Agghhhh. . . Vincent, I think I used to be able to talk like this way back in college but I lost it a long time ago. Here's to you for being able to keep it up!