| | I've written about this matter before. In Monday's edition of Nederlands Dagblad, Stefan Paas responded to his critics. You can find the Dutch original here. Here follows a translation of some of the important parts:
*********************************
“The Word of God is my food and drink and has absolute authority for me in doctrine as
well as life. When I was appointed as a lecturer at the Theological University, I
wholeheartedly signed the Form for Subscription. With this signature, I indicated that I
uphold the Reformed Confession(s).”
[...]
The manner in which the concerned ministers went to work has hurt him, says Paas. They
did not approach him with their difficulties, but immediately went public with their
objections in a letter. “That surprised me. The objections were made hastily and were
based on a small part of what I had written. After my promotion, I explained my position
in various articles. Why don’t they make a thorough study of my position, I then think to
myself. Then none of this would have been necessary. I don’t recognize myself in this
way of doing things.”
[...]
“I have been completely misunderstood,” replies Paas. They took a number of isolated
quotations out of my dissertation and pulled them out of their context. In his dissertation,
he did not make theological, but religious historical statements, he says. This science
describes the origin of religions and how they influence each other. “Before a forum of
critical peers, who most certainly are not orthodox Reformed, I precisely defended that
the exodus from Egypt is historically probable. They assume the opposite. I had
apologetical motives for doing this. Anyone who has ever been involved in evangelism or
apologetics will be familiar with how this works. You try to connect with premises that
are indisputable for others and from there you try to change their thinking.
With these [i.e. religious historical statements] he is saying nothing about God. Thus, his
dissertation may not be seen as a personal creed, Paas emphasizes. To explain what he
means, Paas mentions the example his Liberated critics object to. The Canaanites
worshiped a god called El. The Israelite understanding of God—they believe in Yahweh,
the God of the Bible—would be an offshoot of this worship of El. This is proof for the
concerned that the new lecturer at the Theological University puts the God of the Bible
on the same level as other gods, Paas outlines.
“But this is not at all a theological statement,” he retorts. “With this statement I am not
saying that God is on the same level as other gods. Israel worshipped the true God, with
the help of terms and concepts that in part were derived from the Canaanite worship of
El. These terms and concepts were claimed for Yahweh, the God of the Bible. That is the
same as that missionary in Suriname who hears natives speak about a god called the big
Canoe Navigator. This missionary can connect to this understanding of their god and say
that there is only one Master Canoe Navigator. This is quite common in mission.”
The lecturer in missions considers the first chapter of the Bible dealing with creation to
be historically reliable. This does not mean, however, that God created in six 24-hour
days. With theological reflection I mean that Genesis is a prophetic book, a book with a
message. What if later in heaven it will appear that the earth was created in six 24-hour
days? Then I say: nice to know this, but it is only historical information. More important
is the question what the Bible narrative means for us as believers. What does the Bible
want to say to us today?
(translation by Dick Moes)
******************************
I'm not reassured by this interview. Some remaining questions:
Why did Paas defend the position that the Exodus is "historically probable" rather than "historically certain"?
Why did this interview not mention anything about his adoption of the language of the documentary hypothesis? Is that a non-issue?
Is it legitimate to contrast "theological statements" with "the history of religions"?
Why does he compare the "religious development" of Israel with a missionary context in Suriname? Is such a comparison valid?
The lesson here is that method is not neutral. I'm reminded of the words of Charles Hodge, "If a man adopts a false method, he is like one who takes a wrong road which will never lead him to his destination." (Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, p.3).
|
| | Posted 3/17/2009 11:16 AM - 49 Views - 0 eProps - 0 comments
- recommend
  - recs0
- share
- email
 - sent0
|
