[CS-FSLUG] Current vs. Scriptural Epistemology

[Ed Hurst]

On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:57:38 -0600, Jason P. Franklin  
<haronniin at gmail.com> wrote:

> What is then the epistemology of Scripture.  I ask in sincerity,  
> brother, not belligerence.  I earnestly desire to understand.

I know. I take no offense. We live in the world of the Enlightenment,  
which is an epistemology derived from that of Aristotle. If you want to  
take the time to examine more about that, let me offer this link:  
http://soulkiln.org/ew-epist.html.

I must note the Jews had embraced an earlier version of this, typically  
called "Hellenism". I contend many of the arguments Jesus had with the  
Pharisees was aimed at pointing out this difference, because the Hebrew  
people began in ancient times with a much older, Ancient Near Eastern  
(ANE) epistemology. Naturally, the whole point behind that fancy word  
"epistemology" is the question of how knowledge and belief come to be  
regarded as valid. How do we "know"? How do we come to a conclusion on  
which we can act? I hash over the history of Jewish cultural shift here:  
http://soulkiln.org/bible/basics/westnoxian.html You'll recognize some of  
it from the old Sakamuyo days, Jason.

I find it very unfortunate the Aristotelian academic framework associates  
the epistemology of the ANE with all the other stuff in the East, and  
places it under the label "mysticism." Mysticism does not necessarily  
demand a certain set of conclusions, but most people seem to think so. It  
is, rather, a word which describes the process of arriving at conclusions  
which are not rational, not derived by intellectual process, but by some  
other, presumably higher process. We know from Scripture that includes the  
idea of hearing from the Holy Spirit. He does not act directly on the  
mind, per se, but through our spirits. Our spirits are not part of the  
intellect, but a faculty God alone can awaken, which we call "born again."  
The brain is supposed to surrender to the spirit-Spirit communion, and  
take its cues from the imperatives of God speaking through convictions.

Frankly, I'm not sure I can really give an accurate clinical description,  
since I maintain ultimate truth -- Truth -- is ineffable (can't be told in  
words). I don't particularly like calling it mysticism, but that's an  
accurate label for the epistemology of the Bible. Think of it as the  
language of parables.

I don't pretend anyone who rejects this is a fool. The ANE viewpoint  
itself discourages you from taking yourself too seriously, from ever  
believing you really have it all worked out. So without being combative, I  
assert this is the key to understanding Jesus, the Apostles, and the Old  
Testament. I believe truth makes its own path, in that sense. It's not my  
job to convince anyone, only do my best to answer questions. You'll need  
your own story.

-- 
Ed Hurst
------------
Associate Editor, Open for Business: http://ofb.biz/
Applied Bible - http://soulkiln.org/
Kiln of the Soul - http://soulkiln.blogspot.com/