Job title can make one a presumptive expert witness. He's more qualified than I am to define the term. Moreover, he teaches ancient history as well as specializing in 16-17C Dutch Reformed theology, which is directly pertinent to the definition in question.
What does it accomplish for you to suggest that every theological tradition has a different definition of the term? In that case, you can't really criticize his usage. You've reduced the issue to different language games with different rules for each.
"If I offered RC or Arminian exegesis (either for their position or against a position such as Calvinism) by specialists in the field, would you agree with them because of their presumptive expertise based on their job title? Or would you challenge their positions if you disagreed and feel not much compunction about it?"
Neither. I'm not invested in the term one way or the other. Theological terms are often terms of art. I'm more concerned about the truth or falsehood of theological concepts.
"If I offered RC or Arminian exegesis (either for their position or against a position such as Calvinism) by specialists in the field, would you agree with them because of their presumptive expertise based on their job title?"
Depends on whether or not it's obviously biased. For instance, a good Catholic historian will distinguish his personal beliefs from what he reports.
Comment has been blocked.
If you read the review, you will see that the reviewer defines his terms.
DeleteComment has been blocked.
Since the reviewer is a church historian, I doubt his definition is idiosyncratic.
DeleteComment has been blocked.
Job title can make one a presumptive expert witness. He's more qualified than I am to define the term. Moreover, he teaches ancient history as well as specializing in 16-17C Dutch Reformed theology, which is directly pertinent to the definition in question.
DeleteWhat does it accomplish for you to suggest that every theological tradition has a different definition of the term? In that case, you can't really criticize his usage. You've reduced the issue to different language games with different rules for each.
Comment has been blocked.
Cletus Van Damme
Delete"If I offered RC or Arminian exegesis (either for their position or against a position such as Calvinism) by specialists in the field, would you agree with them because of their presumptive expertise based on their job title? Or would you challenge their positions if you disagreed and feel not much compunction about it?"
Neither. I'm not invested in the term one way or the other. Theological terms are often terms of art. I'm more concerned about the truth or falsehood of theological concepts.
Cletus Van Damme
Delete"If I offered RC or Arminian exegesis (either for their position or against a position such as Calvinism) by specialists in the field, would you agree with them because of their presumptive expertise based on their job title?"
Depends on whether or not it's obviously biased. For instance, a good Catholic historian will distinguish his personal beliefs from what he reports.