Encyclopedia of sacred theology - pagina 342

318

§ 63.

FALSIEICATIONS OF

[Div. Ill

and can take no stand excej^t in a science which embraces It is unscientific, these correlated phenomena as a whole. therefore, to speak of a "science of the Christian religion." If I confess a Revelation, is

a

phenomenon

which has no

correlates

of an entirely singular kind, it

be the object of an independent science. the

Christian religion as

But

may well one views

one of several religions, even

though it is comparatively the highest of developments known to us, he is as unable independent science of the Christian religion ist is to

if

and which

all

religious

to create

an

as the botan-

speak of a special science of the cedar.

If,

on the

other hand, with other more or less orthodox theologians,

we

assert that the Christian religion

all other religious

phenomena by a

tion, its distinguishing

element

in the revelation of Christianity,

is

is

distinguished from

special specific revela-

not in the religion, but

and hence

this revelation

must be the object of this science. This was felt by Hodge, the chami^ion of scientific orthodox}' in America, and therefore he tried to escape from the dilemma by choosing the facts of the Bible as the object His intention was good, for in the main of his theology. he was correct in saying that the Holy Scriptures offer us no scientific theologj^ but contain the facts atid truths, "which theology has to collect, authenticate, arrange and relation

exhibit in their internal Theology,

I., p. 1),

And

yet

to

we may

each other "

(^Syst.

not rest content even

with Hodge's definition. For in this way the conception of "ectypal Theology" is lost, and from all sorts of facts we are to conclude what must follow from them with respect to " His combination of " facts and truths the Being of God.

He

overthrows his

own

must

But then, of course, they and only become such, when I authenticate

are

system.

declares that the theologian

authenticate these truths.

no

them. science,

truths,

His idea was, of course, to save theology as a positive and to do this in a better way than the}^ who took

the "Christian religion" as the given object; but it can scarcely be denied that he succumbed to the temptation of

placing Theology formally in a line witli the other sciences.

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen