With this being said, the affirmation of the Old Testament as being an inspired form of special revelation for the Christian faith has brought several critical questions about the epistemological value of the scriptures. In his book Divine Revelation and the Limits of Historical Criticism, William Abraham quotes the philosopher Basil Mitchel on his account of the epistemological nature of the Christian Canon on the assumption that it is, in fact, divinely inspired. Basil Mitchel states:
“Although if I do not know you I can learn a certain amount about you by observing and responding to your behavior, unless I am very familiar with the work you do and the way you live I am likely to find this somewhat ambiguous… If, however, you talk to me about …show more content…
Andrei Buckareff challenges the beliefs of William Abraham in Abraham’s book Crossing the Thresholds of Divine Revelation. In this book, Abraham argues for a methodical epistemological approach rather than a particular epistemological approach to the revelation of scripture. By this, Abraham is intending that the most appropriate way to encounter scripture is to find the “epistemic fit” to that which is being revealed. To this, Andrei Buckareff responds by claiming that any epistemological approach to the problem of the validity of the divine inspiration of scripture besides the particular epistemological approach, which begins with a kernel on knowledge believed to be known certainly true, will dissolve into epistemological relativism. Therefore, Abraham’s book commits to the idea of epistemological …show more content…
In this article, Blaauw explains three major philosophical epistemological questions that are necessary to ask when discussing the validity of divine revelation. These are: what it is, whether it has occurred, if it can produce religious knowledge for us. He claims that we can begin to discern these question sonly by first addressing the question “what is it”. After this question has been addressed, the question “whether it has occurred” and “can it produce religious knowledge for us” becomes
“Although if I do not know you I can learn a certain amount about you by observing and responding to your behavior, unless I am very familiar with the work you do and the way you live I am likely to find this somewhat ambiguous… If, however, you talk to me about …show more content…
Andrei Buckareff challenges the beliefs of William Abraham in Abraham’s book Crossing the Thresholds of Divine Revelation. In this book, Abraham argues for a methodical epistemological approach rather than a particular epistemological approach to the revelation of scripture. By this, Abraham is intending that the most appropriate way to encounter scripture is to find the “epistemic fit” to that which is being revealed. To this, Andrei Buckareff responds by claiming that any epistemological approach to the problem of the validity of the divine inspiration of scripture besides the particular epistemological approach, which begins with a kernel on knowledge believed to be known certainly true, will dissolve into epistemological relativism. Therefore, Abraham’s book commits to the idea of epistemological …show more content…
In this article, Blaauw explains three major philosophical epistemological questions that are necessary to ask when discussing the validity of divine revelation. These are: what it is, whether it has occurred, if it can produce religious knowledge for us. He claims that we can begin to discern these question sonly by first addressing the question “what is it”. After this question has been addressed, the question “whether it has occurred” and “can it produce religious knowledge for us” becomes