Question: can modern man access truth in scripture or in prophecy from reason alone?
From the article: "The issue here is that such truths are not easily accepted by the modern man who is awakened, so they say, to critical consciousness."
The first person who comes to mind is Jordan Peterson. In his interview with Joe Rogan, he refers to scripture as "Roughly speaking ... a bedrock of agreement." He also seems to have adopted critical consciousness as part of his central philosophy. Yet, he is simultaneously pursuing a deep dive into the scriptures in his Genesis and Exodus series. Do you think that someone like him can ever grasp scripture, or the prophesies contained therein, in its fullest sense?
Great question, Cecilia. Not coincidentally, I recently read a book on Peterson ("Jordan Peterson, God, and Christianity: The Search for a Meaningful Life" by Christopher Kaczor and Matthew Petrusek). I would say that in regard to Peterson, no. In his current analysis, he does not and cannot grasp the fullest sense--as in a living sense present to us now through the Holy Spirit--of the Gospel and the living prophecy within it. I think Pieper would agree.
While Peterson's deep dive into Scripture has drawn rich insights into the psychological and symbolic facets of Scripture, which has certainly enriched my own scriptural experience, they stop short just there. His views of the Gospel and Christ remain in a pragmatic archetype-ism, i.e., he accepts the human nature of Christ, as the exemplary, ideal man who embraces suffering as we ought to and as teacher of archetypal truths from which we can draw fundamental lessons from in our own lives, but not the divine nature, as God incarnate who has saved us, in a truly real sense, from sin and has given us the gift of grace and the Holy Spirit, etc. It is in the latter, as believers, that we are made priests, *prophets*, and kings. While I'm assured that Peterson is being led by the Holy Spirit, he has yet to reach the point of accepting the latter view of Christ: (*que southern accent*) as Lord and Savior.
Regarding the broader question you ask, I think Pieper would also answer in the negative. Of course, it's not that modern man can't ultimately accept divine revelation, but the primacy of critical consciousness (what you might call skepticism for the sake of skepticism) puts him at a disadvantage. I don't believe that man can access the fulness of truth in Scripture by reason alone. I do believe, however, that it can lead him to the door of faith, which he can only enter via faith--and inside, the fulness of prophecy, unseen by the outside world. To know Scripture through reason is to read a wonderful love story, to believe what it purports is to fall in love (an analogy I hijacked from the book I mentioned above).
Question: can modern man access truth in scripture or in prophecy from reason alone?
From the article: "The issue here is that such truths are not easily accepted by the modern man who is awakened, so they say, to critical consciousness."
The first person who comes to mind is Jordan Peterson. In his interview with Joe Rogan, he refers to scripture as "Roughly speaking ... a bedrock of agreement." He also seems to have adopted critical consciousness as part of his central philosophy. Yet, he is simultaneously pursuing a deep dive into the scriptures in his Genesis and Exodus series. Do you think that someone like him can ever grasp scripture, or the prophesies contained therein, in its fullest sense?
Great question, Cecilia. Not coincidentally, I recently read a book on Peterson ("Jordan Peterson, God, and Christianity: The Search for a Meaningful Life" by Christopher Kaczor and Matthew Petrusek). I would say that in regard to Peterson, no. In his current analysis, he does not and cannot grasp the fullest sense--as in a living sense present to us now through the Holy Spirit--of the Gospel and the living prophecy within it. I think Pieper would agree.
While Peterson's deep dive into Scripture has drawn rich insights into the psychological and symbolic facets of Scripture, which has certainly enriched my own scriptural experience, they stop short just there. His views of the Gospel and Christ remain in a pragmatic archetype-ism, i.e., he accepts the human nature of Christ, as the exemplary, ideal man who embraces suffering as we ought to and as teacher of archetypal truths from which we can draw fundamental lessons from in our own lives, but not the divine nature, as God incarnate who has saved us, in a truly real sense, from sin and has given us the gift of grace and the Holy Spirit, etc. It is in the latter, as believers, that we are made priests, *prophets*, and kings. While I'm assured that Peterson is being led by the Holy Spirit, he has yet to reach the point of accepting the latter view of Christ: (*que southern accent*) as Lord and Savior.
Regarding the broader question you ask, I think Pieper would also answer in the negative. Of course, it's not that modern man can't ultimately accept divine revelation, but the primacy of critical consciousness (what you might call skepticism for the sake of skepticism) puts him at a disadvantage. I don't believe that man can access the fulness of truth in Scripture by reason alone. I do believe, however, that it can lead him to the door of faith, which he can only enter via faith--and inside, the fulness of prophecy, unseen by the outside world. To know Scripture through reason is to read a wonderful love story, to believe what it purports is to fall in love (an analogy I hijacked from the book I mentioned above).