Weaver1has's Blog

September 26 09 2020

Herman Bavinck (1854-1921)

Atelier Prinses (Amsterdam) – http://proxy.handle.net/10648/6a24ebd0-1ad9-102f-a76c-003048944028

(I took this photo from Wikipedia; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Bavinck#/media/File:HermanBavinckBig.jpg )

We have considered the Holy Trinity in the work of Edward Henry Bickersteth and we proved that there are three persons in the Holy Trinity.  Anyhow I want to move on now to a new project and it may be that my posts might be once or twice a week as I will be reading volume one of Herman Bavincks reformed ethics.  I am so glad that these manuscripts were discovered and for a Religious Studies teacher it gives a wholistic picture to us. Karl Barth was not able to do this thoroughly although I think he wanted to.  In Dogmatic theology God is talking to us.  Where is the reciprocity without falling into some heresy?  Herman Bavinck obviously gives us a road map into the 21^st century.

Herman Bavinck

I just did some reading about Bavinck on the internet. I read Wikipedia and I was horrified at one of the entries that Misrepresents Bavinck on revelation.

Taken from;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Bavinck

“Bavinck’s Doctrine of Revelation

Bavinck sensed the open question caused by the subjectivist tendency of Friedrich Schleiermacher’s doctrine of revelation. Deeply concerned with the problem of objectivism and subjectivism in the doctrine of revelation, he employed Schleiermacher’s doctrine of revelation in his own way and regarded the Bible as the objective standard for his theological work. Bavinck also stressed the importance of the church, which forms the Christian consciousness and experience. (Source: Byung Hoon Woo, Herman Bavinck, and Karl Barth)”

The Relationship of dogmatics and Ethics.

Bavinck has seriously thought about this  question and I have included it here for Christian theologians and Religious Studies pedagogy.  I enjoyed learning about Barth at KCL under professor Gunton.  We were able to dive deep into understanding a serious 20 century theologian of great stature.   At the time nearing the end of my studies I found a book by Herman Bavinck; The Doctrine of God.  Who was this theologian? Obviously I read the book and didn’t think twice about it. I became a Religious Educator and I learned tons about ethics.  Various ethics from around the world but in the grand scheme of things for Christian ethics I asked the question; Where does ethics fit and how does it work for the Christian.  I feel that I found a seriously good answer below.  Figuratively speaking the paragraphs below are dynamite in a theologians hands. 

Herman Bavinck, Reformed Ethics Page 22

“The distinction between dogmatics and ethics has become clear. The difference does not lie in the fact that the former deals with the understanding

and knowledge, while the latter is concerned with the will and conduct.

This would boil down to a division of human beings into two parts, of which

one half is purely intellectual and the other purely ethical. No. In dogmatics

we are concerned with what God does for us and in us. In dogmatics God is

everything. Dogmatics is a word from God to us, coming from outside us and

above us; we are passive, listening, and opening ourselves to being directed by

God. In ethics, we are interested in the question of what it is that God now

expects of us when he does his work in us. What do we do for him? Here we

are active, precisely because of and on the grounds of God’s deeds in us; we

sing psalms in thanks and praise to God. In dogmatics, God descends to us;

in ethics, we ascend to God. In dogmatics, he is ours; in ethics, we are his. In

dogmatics, we know we shall see his face; in ethics, his name will be written on our foreheads”

In a lot of ways Barth and Bavinck were saying the same thing but with different styles.  Both theologians had to deal with the rise of the Liberal German philosophical theology.  So, in Dogmatics God is speaking to us and what he does for us!  He goes on; Ethics is about what God expects from us now.  God is always in the driving seat and the reciprocation is real because we can give thanks.  So, Bavinck says;”. In dogmatics, he is ours; in ethics, we are his.”

This blows away the impasse of double predestination which Karl Barth struggled with.  Actually, in Karl Barth Christ became the elect and we find our election in Christ.  This was interesting but can the New Testament be interpreted this way?  I think it is one interpretation but is there another way? The answer is I don’t know yet. (For the uninitiated double predestination seems a little harsh for a compassionate God, that some are destined for bliss and others are destined to Hell.  It is a very wooden interpretation, but it gets the job done for now.) Bavinck in his doctrine of God translated by William Hendriksen is touched on but I am just working now through his ethics.

Why is Bavincks Ethics so important in the 21^st Century?  It is important because it gives us another way of reading ethics in a Christian manner.  It opens up Dogmatics in some form from various centuries to deal with serious issues; abortion, Euthanasia, splitting DNA, mixing DNA with animals, growing human body parts on and in animals.  Today ethics is a minefield and it is getting worse all the time.  I despair sometimes because of utilitarianisms in the world.  Life is getting cheaper all the time. Philosophical ethics and Christian ethics start from different foundations and a lot of the time come to different conclusions.  Unfortunately, a lot of Christians don’t know the difference.  Bavinck is a breath of fresh air for the believer looking for answers to these most fundamental questions of life.  In Bavinck there is no room for Pelagian views that somehow man can make it on his own strength.  Below is a link to what Pelagianism is and who came up with it; https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pelagianism

Karl Barth and Bavinck are certainly correct to fight Pelagianism.  God is Sovereign and we were created in the image of God thus there will always be a relationship between God and humans.  I found this in Bavincks Ethics.  I found this really interesting because Bavinck looks at the creation of Adam and Eve and at that moment humanity was perfect, there were no flaws. Then the fall happened, and the story of redemption started.  This is where Bavinck from my estimation is correct about a lot of these philosophies of his time that had their feet in an evolutionary process.  The Bible is going in the opposite direction as he says.  Enough of what I think let us let Bavinck now speak for himself.

Now I decided to go over this section again.  I felt that it was important to look at some key words that can help us get deeper into the text.  So, the first thing I will do is just give a word list based on the text below.  Once we have gotten acquainted with the words, we can start to find out what Paul was really trying to say to the Corinthians.  When I do give the list of words don’t fret.  Like in English a word can have several meanings or interpretations.   But I felt it was important for you to see other ways it has been translated in the Bible.

⁴ Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. ⁵ And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. ⁶ There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. ⁷ But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. ⁸ For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; ⁹ to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, ¹⁰ and to another the effecting of  miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the  distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. ¹¹ But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. 1 Corinthians 12:4-11

So in verse 4 Paul  says that there  are a varieties of gifts.  It just means that there are various gifts.  The word for gift here is χάρισμα charisma which is to do with grace. In other words a free gift from God that has positive implications and is supposed to benefit the whole church.   I went on to Wikipedia and I found it interesting that this word come from being happy (from χαίρω (khaírō, “I am happy”)) + -μα (-ma).) . 

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CF%87%CE%AC%CF%81%CE%B9%CF%83%CE%BC%CE%B1

Anyway, we should be happy that God loves us so much that he meets all our needs.  From the point of view of the 21^st century however, people can interpret this in a selfish manner.  For example, this is a gift for me.  God wants to bless the whole church and not just the individual although I am not saying that you are not important.  When you are given a gift what do you do with it?  Perhaps you were given some money for some new clothes; Did you spend it on alcohol instead?  The gifts that are given here are by God, so we ought to show them the greatest of respect for we stand on holy ground.  If we stand on holy ground, then the gifts must be holy and must be used in a holy manner and how the Giver intended them to be used.

These gifts whatever they are those mentioned here and elsewhere have been given by the Holy Spirit for the Church.  Not any one person has all the gifts.  They are shared out.  Paul keeps saying ‘to another’ 4 or 5 times. 

The gift that has the most contention I suppose in the 21^st century outside of Pentecostal and charismatic circles is tongues. Glossolalia from my point of view ought to be understood as a divine language rather than a foreign language.  Why do I come to this conclusion?  The reason is that as well as Christian glossolalia there were other mystic religions at the time that used it.  It was part of the ancient universal culture of the Middle East at the time. 

This article is interesting even if you don’t agree with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossolalia

I don’t claim to really understand what is going on in these chapters but I can say that God is bigger than us, his love is bigger than us, and his gifts are bigger than we could imagine or think.  God became a man and died in our place so that we could be in an eternal relationship with the divine.  What a blessing. Let us look beyond the gifts to our great Trinitarian God; Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

9/21/2020

6 Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” Galatians 4:6

As we have said earlier the Holy Spirit intercedes on our behalf. God the Holy Spirit intercedes in the closest language to the Father through and in the Son. I have heard ministers say that as Christians we can speak with this ‘abba’.  But is it not the Holy Spirit that says ‘abba’ on our behalf? The Holy Spirit speaks on our behalf.  We should always remember that God also speaks from the mountain tops. When we are in front of the Ultimate Royalty, we should guard our speech a bit more.