The Universal Tradition and the Clear Meaning of Scripture: Benjamin Keach’s Understanding of the Trinity

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION Perichoresis Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.2478/perc-2022-0003
Jonathan W. Arnold
{"title":"The Universal Tradition and the Clear Meaning of Scripture: Benjamin Keach’s Understanding of the Trinity","authors":"Jonathan W. Arnold","doi":"10.2478/perc-2022-0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Leading Particular Baptist theologian Benjamin Keach (1640-1704) came to prominence just as an antitrinitarian theology native to England gained a stronghold. What had previously been deemed off-limits by the Establishment became a commonplace by the end of the seventeenth century based on a strict biblicism that eschewed the extra-biblical language of trinitarian orthodoxy. As one who considered himself a strong biblicist, Keach deftly maneuvered his theological writings between what he saw as two extremes: the one that refused to consider any language that moved beyond the mere words of scripture, represented by many of his General Baptist contemporaries and the other that over-emphasized the role of tradition with no eye toward biblical truth, represented by the Roman Catholics. Keach’s explication of trinitarianism demonstrated that these two extremes did not have to be seen as competing with each other. Instead, the correct understanding of the Bible included ‘the just and necessary consequences’ that could be deduced from Scripture, and the ‘universal tradition’ aided the pastor theologian in ascertaining the truth. The result, for Keach and his audience, was an ancient view of trinitarianism that offered a way of peace between the the two extremes vying for the public ear in the late seventeenth century.","PeriodicalId":40786,"journal":{"name":"Perichoresis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perichoresis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2022-0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Leading Particular Baptist theologian Benjamin Keach (1640-1704) came to prominence just as an antitrinitarian theology native to England gained a stronghold. What had previously been deemed off-limits by the Establishment became a commonplace by the end of the seventeenth century based on a strict biblicism that eschewed the extra-biblical language of trinitarian orthodoxy. As one who considered himself a strong biblicist, Keach deftly maneuvered his theological writings between what he saw as two extremes: the one that refused to consider any language that moved beyond the mere words of scripture, represented by many of his General Baptist contemporaries and the other that over-emphasized the role of tradition with no eye toward biblical truth, represented by the Roman Catholics. Keach’s explication of trinitarianism demonstrated that these two extremes did not have to be seen as competing with each other. Instead, the correct understanding of the Bible included ‘the just and necessary consequences’ that could be deduced from Scripture, and the ‘universal tradition’ aided the pastor theologian in ascertaining the truth. The result, for Keach and his audience, was an ancient view of trinitarianism that offered a way of peace between the the two extremes vying for the public ear in the late seventeenth century.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
普遍传统与圣经的明确意义:本杰明·基奇对三位一体的理解
杰出的浸礼会神学家本杰明·基奇(Benjamin Keach, 1640-1704)在英国本土的反三位一体神学获得大本营的时候开始崭露头角。以前被当权派视为禁区的东西,在十七世纪末变得司空见惯,这是基于一种严格的圣经主义,它避开了圣经之外的三位一体的正统语言。作为一个认为自己是坚定的圣经主义者的人,基奇在他所看到的两个极端之间巧妙地运用他的神学著作:一个是拒绝考虑任何超越圣经文字的语言,以他同时代的许多浸礼会教徒为代表;另一个是过分强调传统的作用,无视圣经真理,以罗马天主教徒为代表。基奇对三位一体论的解释表明,这两个极端并不一定要被视为相互竞争。相反,对圣经的正确理解包括可以从圣经中推断出的“公正和必要的结果”,而“普遍传统”则帮助牧师神学家确定真理。结果,对基奇和他的听众来说,是一种古老的三位一体观,为17世纪后期争夺公众耳朵的两个极端提供了一种和平的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Perichoresis
Perichoresis RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Rev 3:10: Rapture or Preservation? Analyzing Professions of Faith in the Fourth Gospel: is Everyone Who Believes Saved? Sin and Perfection in 1 John Theological Affinities Between the Fourth Gospel and the Book of Revelation John and the Synoptic Gospels. What John Knew and What John Used
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1