Replies

This is condemning the falseness of the Calvinist legalistic mind.

Maybe not so much false, except in application, as hopelessly limited. There is no map or model that is as complex or complete as the thing it is attempting to represent. A systematic Christian theology is an attempt, using reason, experience, and a scriptural data set, to model both God and his relationship to the creation. It will necessarily be limited and, to the degree that the theologian attempts to make it universally or exhaustively applicable or predictive or descriptive beyond that allowable by the boundary conditions, mentioned above, increasingly more inaccurate.

The systematic theologian may, on the basis of his own insight or through ideas he has acquired consciously and unconsciously from his own culture or through ideas he has adopted through his study of other writers from other times and places, attempt to posit a relationship between what are taken by him and others in his current milieu to be commonly accepted truths in scripture. And even if he could be sure that his characterization of these truths are, in an originalist sense, completely accurate, it doesn't follow that the relationships he posits to exist between them are necessarily accurate or that they even exist. There are theological correlates to the phlogiston theory of combustion.

You don’t have to go any farther than daily life and human history (or the threads of FR) to see how quickly and easily it is to go so wrong by acting upon what one believes is true that was derived by reasoning from faulty or limited information. This is no less true in theology, but probably a whole lot more deadly.