Upload
teemulehtonen
View
67
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Hermeneutics of Carl F.H. Henry, a neo-evangelical statesman
Citation preview
HERMENEUTICS OF CARL F.H. HENRY
by
Teemu Lehtonen, PhD
A research paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements of "Change Agents:
Biblical Scholars and Theologians Who Changed the Direction of the Church"
DMIN 8223X5
Acadia Divinity College, D.Min. Program
Wolfville, NS
May 20, 2011
2
OUTLINE
Introduction......................................................................................................................... 3
Why Carl F.H. Henry? .................................................................................................... 3
Biography........................................................................................................................ 4
Publications..................................................................................................................... 5
Thought and Discourse ....................................................................................................... 6
Analysis............................................................................................................................... 9
Uneasy Conscience ......................................................................................................... 9
God, Revelation and Authority..................................................................................... 11
Revelation ................................................................................................................. 11
Inerrancy and Infallibility ......................................................................................... 14
Historical Criticism................................................................................................... 16
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 19
Legacy............................................................................................................................... 20
Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 22
3
HERMENEUTICS OF CARL F.H. HENRY
By Teemu Lehtonen
Introduction
Why Carl F.H. Henry?
In this paper I will study the hermeneutics of Carl F.H. Henry (1913-2003). He was one
of the most important evangelical theologians in the late 20th
century, a "senior
statesman" of evangelicalism1. Stanley Grenz writes: "The most prominent theologian in
the neo-evangelical movement is without doubt Carl Henry".2 Bob Patterson regards
Henry as "the prime interpreter of evangelical theology, one of its leading theoreticians,
and … the unofficial theologian for the entire tradition".3
My interest in Henry grew as I found him to be an "eminence" behind various laudable
ideas of other excellent contemporary thinkers. He popped up everywhere. To my
delight, to date there is a fair amount of biographical and analytical information on him
and his thought. However, nothing can replace the study of the original writings and
thoughts of the author himself.
In this paper, after reviewing a considerable amount of first- and second hand sources, I
will concentrate in Henry's most famous works. They are an 89-page book "The Uneasy
Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism", published in the year 1947, and a six-volume
set of over 3000 pages, "God, Revelation and Authority Vol. I-VI", his magnum opus
published 1976-1983. Especially helpful for preparing this paper has been G. Wright
1 John D. Woodbridge, "Carl F. H. Henry: Spokesperson for American Evangelicalism," in God and
Culture : Essays in Honor of Carl F.H. Henry (Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, Mich., 1993), 393. 2 Stanley Grenz, Renewing the Center : Evangelical Theology in a Post-Theological Era (Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Baker Academic, 2000), 86. 3 Bob E. Patterson, Carl F.H. Henry (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1983), 11.
4
Doyle's introduction to Henry's magnum opus, "Carl Henry - Theologian for All
Seasons" (2010).
Biography
Carl Ferdinand Howard Henry, born in 1913, was a son of German Immigrants, Karl F.
Heinrich4 and Johanna Väthröder. Their home was not religious at all. There was not a
Bible in their home and virtually no religious activity in the family. Instead, his father
had a drinking problem and he ran a small distillery during the prohibition in their
kitchen. In order to avoid debate, his Lutheran father and Roman Catholic mother sent
him to an Episcopal Mission Church for Sunday school. By his own words, Carl Henry
was a genuine worldling before his conversion in 1933.5
Henry's conversion was a radical one. Commenting on Ephesians 2, he admits: "I, like the
rest, lived my life in sensuality and obeyed the prompting of my own instincts and
notions. Yet by God's grace I chose the road less traveled. I became … a follower of
Jesus Christ." In a later interview he reflects on his conversion: "Christ has been real to
me in a vital way ever since June 1933. … I know he is real. He's alive. He is the Risen
One. I've never, even in the most serious crises of life, doubted that."6
Carl Henry's non-religious background and radical conversion is an apparent background
for his lifelong commitment. He believed that Christian conversion changes a person
supernaturally and that this is also the key for the change of society: Redemption is
needed for regeneration, both in the individual and at the collective level. The way of
redemption is revealed in the Word of God, inspired, inerrant, and infallible, and that has
authority over all other worldviews and ways for life or salvation.
4 Their family name was changed to Henry because of the anti-German sentiment during the World War I
5 Woodbridge, 379-380.
6 Ibid.
5
Carl Henry, a Southern Baptist, is classified as a reformed theologian and he is genuinely
reformed in every aspect of his thought.7 On the whole, he is more often listed among
Baptist theologians than reformed ones.8 He was not constrained by denominational
traditions for, from the very beginning, he was engaged with various ecclesiastical bodies
and interdenominational agencies which shared the common denominators of faith, zeal
for evangelism, and the battle against social and cultural evils.
Although ordained in 1941, he was not predominantly a pastor-preacher, but more a
versatile journalist-writer, evangelist-teacher, theologian-apologist, and a strategic leader
for an evangelical cause. In many ways, he was a prophet of our time, sharing also the
fate of the prophets: he was misunderstood and opposed - or even rejected - by his own
ranks. Today, there is both a controversy over and vindication of Carl Henry as one of the
most prominent evangelical theologians in the 20th
Century.9
Henry is often associated with famous persons such as Billy Graham, Harold Ockenga,
Samuel J. Fuller, and Gordon Clark, or institutions like the National Association of
Evangelicals (1942; founding board member, book editor), Fuller Theological Seminary
(1947; founder, dean and teacher 1947-1956), Christianity Today (1956; founder, editor
1956-1968), Berlin 1966 and Lausanne 1974 World Congresses on Evangelism, and
World Vision (lecturer-at-large 1974-86). He had B.A. from Wheaton College (1938),
Th.D. from Northern Baptist Theological Seminary (1942), and Ph.D. in Philosophy from
Boston University (1949), as well as other advanced degrees in theology, biblical studies
and philosophy.
Publications
Carl Henry authored almost 30 books and edited many more, held numerous
symposiums, and wrote hundreds of articles during his lifetime. The Uneasy Conscience
of Modern Fundamentalism (1947) is often regarded as a "neo-evangelical manifesto"
7 G. Wright Doyle, Carl Henry - Theologian for All Seasons : An Introduction and Guide to God,
Revelation and Authority (Eugene, Or.: Pickwick Publications, 2010), 38-50. 8 Ibid., 33, 41.
9 Ibid., 13-20.
6
shaping the emerging new evangelical movement, and initiating its final separation from
fundamentalist isolation. The book was light and relatively easy to read – an ignition for
further action. In the following years, Henry wrote extensively about Christian ethics and
challenges of culture. His major work God, Revelation and Authority was published in
1976-1983, a six-volume set of over 3000 pages. It has been widely hailed as the most
important work of evangelical theology in the 20th
century. On the other hand, being such
a heavy piece of literature, it is also dismissed and even ridiculed by critics.10
Thought and Discourse
Carl Henry was not an exegete: he wrote only one commentary in John11
as a chapter for
a series he was editing. He presented neither exegetical step-by-step guides nor concise
definition of his hermeneutics.12
His program was far more comprehensive: he built a
complete theological system starting from philosophy, epistemology, and the nature of
theology and went on to ethics, apologetics, systematic theology, and programs for
education and national awakening. Assuming the simple definition for theological
hermeneutics as "the rules of interpretation and application of the Bible", we can
formulate his hermeneutics from the ample material he produced during his career.
His doctrinal position was to the end that of the original writers of "Fundaments of faith"
at the beginning of the 1900s. He deviated from later fundamentalists for sociological,
not doctrinal reasons. According to H.R. Niebuhr's typology,13
Henry's position was
"Christ the transformer of culture", whereas to his contemporary fundamentalists it was
"Christ against culture". He defended and elaborated his position with the fundaments of
inerrancy, infallibility, and authority of the Bible to the end – not as blind doctrinal
beliefs, but in terms of modern philosophy.
10 Ibid. Doyle analyzes in depth the reasons why Henry is belittled and bypassed in current reviews of
contemporary theology. 11 Carl F.H. Henry ed., The Biblical Expositor, 3 vols., 1960; Henry was the author of chapter on John. 12
Alan Padgett, "Review: God, Revelation, and Authority by Carl F. H. Henry" in Journal of the American
Academy of Religion 52, no. 4 (Dec., 1984), 785-786. Padgett points out that works of modern
hermeneutic philosophy are not even listed in Henry's comprehensive bibliographies of "God, Revelation
and Authority". 13
Woodbridge, "Preface", viii.
7
Henry engaged in debate especially with modernists (19th
century liberals) and neo-
liberals (i.e. 20th
century neo-orthodox), as well as any other party of philosophers or
theologians who advocated dangerous misrepresentations of Christianity.14
He had
rejected his theological relatives in the right (fundamentalists) and left (neo-orthodoxy).15
In the debate, he gave fair credit for all parties involved as much as they were in
agreement with his system of thought. When rejecting an idea, he gave his opponents fair
treatment and argumentation - as a true gentleman.
In Hans W. Frei's classification of five different types of theology, Carl Henry is
frequently mentioned as a conservative evangelical representative of "Type 2". For this
type of theology, the truth is validated by the logical consistency of a given system of
thought for the best explanation is the most coherent one and has the greatest power to
explain the phenomena it studies.16
Henry states it this way:
Christian theology is the systematization of the truth-content explicit and implicit in
inspired writings. It consists essentially of the repetition, combination and
systematization of the truth in revelation in its propositionally given biblical form. The
province of theology is to concentrate on the intelligible content and logical relationships
of this scripturally given revelation, and to present its teaching as a comprehensive
whole. … Scriptures is itself implicitly systematic. No one who contends that the Bible as
a literary document is a canon of divinely inspired truths can hold otherwise without
reflecting adversely on the mind of God. … [T]he content of revelation does indeed lend
itself to systematic exposition, and the more orderly and logical that exposition is, the
nearer the expositor will be to the mind of God in his revelation. (italics mine) 17
Henry has been criticized for being heavily influenced by Gordon H. Clark, an inventor
of scripturalism,18
who was Henry's mentor and teacher in Wheaton College. Henry cites
14 Doyle, 27-36. 15
Patterson, 7. 16
Hans W. Frei, George Hunsinger, and William C. Placher, Types of Christian Theology (New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1992); Frei's calassification: Type 1: Theology equals philosophy (Kant); Type 3:
Theology is "internal" (Schleiermacher); Type 4: Theology is made without philosophy (Barth); Type 5:
Theology is Christian self-description by language game (Phillips). 17
Carl F.H. Henry, God, Revelation and Authority: Vol I-IV (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1976; 1983), 1:238-
241. 18
Gordon H. Clark (1902-1985) was an American philosopher and Calvinist theologian. He was a primary
advocate for the idea of presuppositional apologetics. … He was an expert in pre-Socratic and ancient
philosophy and was noted for his rigor in defending propositional revelation against all forms of
empiricism and rationalism, in arguing that all truth is propositional and in applying the laws of logic. His
theory of knowledge is sometimes called scripturalism. (Wikipedia)
8
Clark often, and admits openly his indebtedness to his teacher. Alan Padgett in his review
of God, Revelation and Authority writes:
With respect to content, Henry's greatest weakness is an undefended reliance on the
philosophy of Gordon H. Clark. This has lead [sic] to rationalistic theology, where logic
is over-valued and propositions alone are considered to be true. … Henry's understanding
of Scripture is the heart of his theology, and that is the least acceptable aspect of it. An
inerrant Bible of coherent propositions satisfies the mind, but does it fit the phenomenon
of Scripture? … His point is well argued though, and [is] the best defense of it to date.19
However, G. Wright Doyle shows in detail that Henry's critics just do not understand his
overall program or the flow of his thought.20
Henry's own description of propositional revelation is as follows:
God supernaturally communicated his revelation to chosen spokesmen in the express
form of cognitive truths, and that the inspired prophetic-apostolic proclamation reliably
articulates these truths in sentences that are not internally contradictory.21
All this being said, it is also noteworthy that Carl Henry was not a boring rationalist or
dry academic. On the contrary, he waged his war in both spiritual and intellectual arenas.
He was a committed follower of Christ, a firm believer of God's regenerative power in
"pentecostal fire":
…[A] baptism of Pentecostal fire resulting in a world missionary program and a divine-
empowered Christian community could turn the uneasy conscience of modern
evangelicalism [sic] into a new reformation - this time with ecumenical significance. 22
He spoke in massive evangelistic campaigns with Billy Graham and led some of the most
important missionary congresses ever. In his personal life, he experienced a healing
miracle in his college days when God healed him from acute appendicitis that demanded
urgent surgery for to which he had no time23
. Moreover, he even found himself as a
"mystic", in a New Testament sense:
19 Padgett, 786. 20
Doyle, 52, 92-115. Doyle dedicates three whole chapters just for showing that critics have either not red
the text or understood Henry's theological system. 21
Henry, God, Revelation and Authority, 3:457. 22 Carl F.H. Henry, The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans,
2003; 1947), 89. 23
Carl F.H. Henry, Confessions of a Theologian : An Autobiography (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1986), 58-
59.
9
I have always been open to some so-called mystical aspects of the Christian life. … Too
many theologians have hastily dismissed apostle Paul's teaching on "union with Christ".
… New testament doctrine is remarkably different from what in philosophical circles is
generally meant by mysticism. The Christian's relationship to Christ involves no
absorption or disappearance of the self into the Infinite; distinctions of personality are not
cancelled, but rather are intensified in man's relationship to the Deity. Equally important
is the fact that the Bible anchors the most intimate divine-human relations in redemption
… Scripture knows nothing of a sinful humanity with immediate access to the holy God
in man's own right or man's own terms; communion with God presupposes the God who
speaks and saves. God has revealed his nature normatively to the inspired prophets and
apostles as set forth in Scripture. … But when God becomes my God, when divine
revelation penetrates not only the mind but rather the whole self, when the Spirit
personally illumines the believer, dynamic fellowship with God opens possibilities of
spiritual guidance in which the Holy Spirit personalizes and applies the biblical revelation
individually to and in a redeemed life.24
Furthermore, Henry had a prophetic insight into the moral and intellectual decay of
western civilization. According to Henry, our civilization is in great danger because "the
barbarians are coming" and Christianity is the only force that keeps them from taking
over. Thus, defending and propagating the gospel was not an option for Henry. It was a
necessity for our salvation in the eternity, for he held classical views of heaven and hell,
as well as for our survival in this age.
Analysis
In the following, we will concentrate in some of Carl Henry's key writings and ideas for
finding an essence of his hermeneutics. First we will explore The Uneasy Conscience
(1947), and then some themes in God, Revelation and Authority (1976-83).
Uneasy Conscience
We will find the key for Henry's thought and lifelong program from his breakthrough
book The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. This thin book made him one
of the leaders of new evangelical movement.
24
Ibid., 52-53
10
A reader of Henry's book will find the key idea is God's redemptive message that
transforms people and society with its regenerative power. The dynamics of this message
is lost to the fundamentalists, as well as to modern and liberal churches. Henry writes:
Hebrew-Christian thought, historically, has stood as a closely-knit world and life view.
Metaphysics and ethics went everywhere together, in Biblical intent. The great doctrines
implied a divinely related social order with intimations for all humanity. The ideal
Hebrew or Christian society throbbed with challenge to the predominant culture of its
generation, condemning with redemptive might the tolerated social evils, for the
redemptive message was to light the world and salt the earth. No insistence on a doctrinal
framework alone was sufficient; always this was coupled with the most vigorous assault
against evils, so that the globe stood anticipatively at the judgment seat of Christ. Such, at
any rate, was apostolic Christianity; such too was the spirit of the post-apostolic
apologies. The emperors must come to terms with Jesus, if not in this life then in the next.
. . . The ultimate values of Biblical supernaturalism are unchanging. New Testament
ethics was no more entirely new than New Testament doctrine. The moral, as well as
metaphysical, concepts had their Old Testament foregleams, simply because the Biblical
view as a whole was rooted in the creative and revelational and regenerative God. Both in
Old Testament and New Testament thought there is but one sure foundation for a lasting
civilization, and its cornerstone is a vital knowledge of the redemptive God. In both eras
it is wrong to worship false gods, to murder, to commit adultery, and for a reason more
ultimate than that prophet Moses said so. These deeds were wrong before Moses, yea
even before Adam; they have been wrong always, because they are antagonistic to the
character and the will of the sovereign God of the universe. They are wrong for all
creatures anywhere anytime. The universe is put together on moral lines: any attempt to
build a civilization on other lines … foredooms itself. The ten commandments disclose
the only secure foundation for a society without the seeds of dissolution; all cultures, cut
loose from these principles, have in them the vitiating leaven of decay. And no culture
can hope to fulfill such high prerequisites, minus a relationship with that God, holy and
redemptive, who is the precondition for their very disclosure to man.25
It was clear from the beginning, that for Henry the Word of God was not only for
salvation of an individual soul but also it was for transformation of the society and world.
This is the reason why he later invested in the defense of the consistency, rationality,
inerrancy, and infallibility of Scriptures for without credibility there is no authority, and
without authority there is no redemptive and regenerative power in the biblical message.
He continues:
The evangelical task primarily is the preaching of the gospel, in the interest of individual
regeneration by supernatural grace of God, in such a way that divine redemption can be
recognized as the best solution of our problems, individual and social. This produces
within history, through the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit, a divine society that
transcends national and international lines. … The great contemporary problems are
moral and spiritual. They demand more than a formula. The evangelicals have a
25
Henry, The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism, 30-32.
11
conviction of absoluteness concerning their message, and not to proclaim it, in the assault
on social evils, is sheer inconsistency. But the modern mood is far more likely to react
first on the level of Christianity as a life view, than at the level of Christianity as a world
view. Obviously, from the evangelical viewpoint, the two cannot be divorced.26
Considering our question about Henry's hermeneutics, we may conclude that some "rules
of interpretation" according to this paperback are as follows:
- God's message to us is the same in all eras; God and his moral lines do not
change;
- The message demands everyone come to terms with God, whether in this life or
the next one;
- Christianity as a world view is coherent; however, Christianity as a life view is
likely more persuasive to listeners and these two should not be divorced;
- In the message, there is redemptive power for regenerating any human or society;
and
- There are doctrinal, prophetic and moral aspects in our message.
In this work - tiny in size but great in significance - nothing is said about the exegetical
dimension of the studying Scriptures. However, what is stated above informs us what to
expect from the biblical text and message. Also, this gives a framework for Carl Henry's
subsequent program as a scholar.
God, Revelation and Authority
First we will deal briefly with Henry's thought about revelation. Revelation is the major
focus of his writing in God, Revelation and Authority, and one of the leading themes of
this six-volume work. In the following, section we will study his theses on revelation and
their implications for interpretation of biblical text.
Revelation
In order to understand Henry's system of revelation it may be appropriate to list his
fifteen theses related to the nature of revelation and Scripture. In general, one can find a
26
Ibid., 89.
12
classic reformed view of revelation in Henry's thought. Theses on revelation are as
follows: 27
1. Revelation is a divinely initiated activity, God's free communication by which he alone
turns his personal privacy into a deliberate disclosure of his reality.
2. Divine revelation is given for human benefit, offering us privileged communion with our
Creator in the Kingdom of God.
3. Divine revelation does not completely erase God's transcendent mystery, inasmuch as
God the Revealer transcends his own revelation.
4. The very fact of disclosure by the one living God assures the comprehensive unity of
divine revelation.
5. The nature, content, and variety of revelation are exclusively God's determination.
6. God's revelation is uniquely personal both in content and form.
7. God reveals himself not only universally in the history of the cosmos and of the nations,
but also redemptively within this external history in unique saving acts.
8. The climax of God's special revelation is Jesus of Nazareth, the personal incarnation of
God in the flesh; in Jesus Christ the source and content of revelation converge and
coincide.
9. The mediating agent in all divine revelation is the Eternal Logos - preexistent, incarnate,
and now glorified.
10. God's revelation is rational communication conveyed in intelligible ideas and meaningful
words, that is, in conceptual-verbal form.
11. The Bible is the reservoir and conduit of divine truth.
12. The Holy Spirit intends the communication of divine revelation, first, by inspiring the
prophetic-apostolic writings, and second, by illuminating and interpreting the scripturally
given Word of God.
13. As bestower of spiritual life, the Holy Spirit enables individuals to appropriate God's
revelation savingly, and thereby attests the redemptive power of the revealed truth of God
in the personal experience of reborn sinners.
14. The church approximates the kingdom of God in miniature; as such she is to mirror to
each successive generation the power and joy of the appropriated realities of divine
revelation.
27
Henry, God, Revelation and Authority, 2:8-16.
13
15. The self-manifesting God will unveil his glory in a crowning revelation of power and
judgment; in this disclosure at the consummation of the ages, God will vindicate
righteousness and justice, finally subdue and subordinate evil, and bring into being a new
heaven and earth.
As seen above, Henry made remarkable work in defining the evangelical doctrine of
revelation. For our purposes, the main focus will be laid into theses 4 - 7 and 10 - 14, as
they help us to sketch out his hermeneutics in more detail.
- There is overall unity in Scriptures. The interpreter must explain Scriptures by Scriptures. ("4.
The very fact of disclosure by the one living God assures the comprehensive unity of divine
revelation.")
- There is variety in literary forms of scriptural revelation. The interpreter must know how to
use various literary forms in defining God's message for us. ("5. The nature, content, and
variety of revelation are exclusively God's determination.")
- Revelation involves personal thought and it is brought forth in various personal styles. The
interpreter must understand the backgrounds, personalities and styles of bearers of revelation.
("6. God's revelation is uniquely personal both in content and form.")
- Revelation is given through historical acts. The interpreter must be interested in the historical
context of the events and accounts under study. ("7. God reveals himself not only universally
in the history of he cosmos and of the nations, but also redemptively within this external
history in unique saving acts.")
- Revelation is rational and is given by understandable concepts. There is nothing inherently
mystical or hidden in biblical propositions, on the contrary. ("10. God's revelation is rational
communication conveyed in intelligible ideas and meaningful words, that is, in conceptual-
verbal form.")
- Grammatical-historical interpretation of the Bible expresses the original intent of the author,
and thus, the intent of God; the intent may be conveyed also by parable or other figure of
speech. ("11. The Bible is the reservoir and conduit of divine truth.")
- The Bible can be understood properly only with the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit.
Indeed, it will be "unlocked" for a reader who is in the same Spirit. ("12. The Holy Spirit
intends the communication of divine revelation, first, by inspiring the prophetic-apostolic
writings, and second, by illuminating and interpreting the scripturally given Word of God.")
14
- We can and must expect God to work in redemptive and life-giving way in lives of those who
receive God's message (13. As bestower of spiritual life the Holy Spirit enables individuals to
appropriate God's revelation savingly, and thereby attests the redemptive power of the
revealed truth of God in the personal experience of reborn sinners. See also analysis in the
previous chapter, "Uneasy…")
- We must interpret and apply the Bible in such a way that it is relevant for all generations.
("14. The church approximates the kingdom of God in miniature; as such she is to mirror to
each successive generation the power and joy of the appropriated realities of divine
revelation.")
It is also noteworthy that for Henry the source of redemptive revelation is in God's acts in history,
not in our reason, conscience, plain human history, or in science exploring the universe.
However, these are not in conflict with redemptive revelation. Anyway, except for regeneration
and illumination by the Holy Spirit there is no space for individual-mystical feeling, "encounter",
innovation, or experience.
Inerrancy and Infallibility
In an interview (year 1976), Carl Henry was asked about his current position on the
doctrine of Scripture, and how this related to what he had had in the past. He replied:
My position today is precisely what it has been through the years. I hold unequivocally to
the authority, the inspiration, and the inerrancy of Scripture; and I think that any
questioning of any of one or all of those emphases represents a departure from what the
Bible teaches, explicitly or implicitly, a departure from the perspective of Jesus Christ
and the apostles, and a departure from the historic Christian position.28
By inerrancy he means inerrancy of original manuscripts. Because we have now
imperfect copies of the original text, and we usually rely on more or less accurate
translations, a better term for inerrancy is the concept of infallibility of Scriptures.29
For
Henry, infallibility follows inerrancy and it means total trustworthiness of the Bible.
About inerrancy he writes as follows:
28
Interview by Donald T. Williams, Tim Erdel and Tom Garber, "The Battle for the Bible," in Carl C.F.
Henry, Conversations with Carl Henry: Christianity for Today (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press), 23. 29
Patterson, 113.
15
Verbal inerrancy implies that truth attaches not only to the theological and ethical
teaching of the Bible, but also to historical and scientific matters insofar as they are part
of the express message of inspired writings. … While the Bible is not intended to be a
textbook on scientific and historical matters, it nonetheless gives scientifically and
historically relevant information. … The inspired wording of Scripture is indeed
accommodated to the language and vocabulary of the sociocultural environment in which
the writings appear, but the sense of revelation is intelligible to readers in all times and
places. … without basic historical considerations its central message of redemption
would be nullified (1Cor15:14-15).30
One central topic for Henry is the language.31
He advocates the notion that revelation is
given in verbal propositions and plain language.
Verbal inerrancy implies that God's truth inheres in the very words of Scripture, that is, in
the propositions or sentences of the Bible, and not merely in the concepts and thoughts of
the writers.32
One must note that Henry was one of chief designers of "the Chicago Statement of
Biblical Inerrancy" (1978)33
and it was included in its entirety in Henry's book. The
article states: "We affirm that the text of Scripture is to be interpreted by grammatico-
historical exegesis, taking account of its literary forms and devices, and that Scripture is
to interpret Scripture". In "exposition" of articles it is written as follows:
Infallible signifies the quality of neither misleading nor being misled and so safeguards in
categorical terms the truth that Holy Scripture is sure, safe and reliable rule and guide in
all matters.
Similarly, inerrant signifies the quality of being free from all falsehood or mistake
and so safeguards the truth that Holy Scripture is entirely true and trustworthy in all its
assertions.
We affirm the canonical Scripture should always be interpreted on the basis that it is
infallible and inerrant. However, in determining what the God-taught writer is asserting
in each passage, we must pay the most careful attention to its claims and character as
human production. …
So history must be treated as history, poetry as poetry, hyperbole and metaphor as
hyperbole and metaphor, generalization and approximation as what they are, and so forth.
Differences between literary conventions in Bible times and also in our time must be
observed.34
30
Henry, God, Revelation and Authority, 4:205. 31
Henry has an extensive treatise on the issue of language. He is against various schools of mystical,
"language as pointer", or religious uses, as represented in various streams of modern theology. In short, he
advocates "plain language and meaning", consistent with his view of revelation and inspiration; see Henry,
God, Revelation and Authority, 3:325-401. 32
Ibid., 4:205. 33 The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) disbanded in 1988 after producing three major
statements: one on biblical inerrancy in 1978, one on biblical hermeneutics in 1982, and one on biblical
application in 1986. 34
Ibid., 4:217.
16
Henry's preferred method of interpretation is "grammatico-historical exegesis", as drafted
above, in conjunction with his view of revelation. The purpose of interpretation is God's
self-disclosure, for redemption and regeneration of human and society.
God, who is himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order
thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord,
Redeemer and Judge.35
Historical Criticism
Henry's treatise of historical-critical method sheds more light on his view on biblical
interpretation. As a starting point, his view on historical criticism must be studied against
his presuppositions; the Bible is all about our self-revealing God who speaks through
inerrant and infallible Scriptures.
According to Henry's analysis, the historical-critical method strictly interpreted is based
on rationalistic view of the history and some evangelical scholars reject it outright as
destructive of evangelical theology. As a matter of fact, the historical-critical method has
traditionally been "the scapegoat for all modern doubt about the Scriptures"36
, but Henry
does not discard the method in total. Even so, Henry asks some valid questions:
Is historical criticism only an academically refined methodology that facilitates reflective
decision on the basis of all available evidence, and hence the best means of determining
what the biblical text actually says and teaches? Or does it intrinsically involve a
compromising judgment upon the content and sense of the Bible in deference to
extraneous criteria? Is it merely an implementation of the Scripture principle championed
by the protestant reformation – that is, an obedient exploration of the text? Or is it an
elevation of critical scholarship to the arbitrary role of master and judge over the inspired
Scripture … does its origin lie rather among those who, in the mood of Enlightenment
rationalism, abandoned the tenets of transcendent divine revelation and the special
inspiration of the Bible?37
35
Henry, God, Revelation and Authority, 4:212, The Chicago Statement. 36
Ibid., 4:385; Citing Robert W. Lyon. 37
Ibid., 4:386.
17
Interestingly, what is said above tells much about Henry's position on the right method of
interpretation of Scriptures. However, Henry explores the question closely and defines
some standing points on the issue.
According to Henry, many scholars in the Evangelical Theological Society and
evangelical campuses are employing the historical-critical method and compatibly with
biblical infallibility. So, the method itself is not objectionable, but the alien
presuppositions to which neo-Protestant scholars subject it are. Henry concludes:
"Combination of the method with an anti-supernaturalistic bias reflects not a requirement
of the method but a prejudice of the historian".38
Henry is in accord with scholars who champion various corresponding methods and
approaches as follows (paraphrasing Henry's text):
- historical-theological criticism recognizes the revelatory dimension in biblical history
and the revelatory nature of the Bible (Ladd)39
- historical method - that the New Testament is historical in connection with the
apostolic witness to the meaning of the Christ-event and its indispensable context
(Goppelt)40
- the exegetical demands of an evangelical hermeneutics bind us to continue using the
grammatico-historical method (Packer)41
- evangelical students’ commitment to the intention of the biblical writers involves the
fullest possible use of linguistic, literary, historical, archeological and other data
bearing on the author's environment. The natural meaning of the biblical writer's
words in the light of all this comparative material must be the starting point of any
serious discussion whether by a conservative or by a radical. And that is what
grammatical-historical exegesis means … Grammatical-historical exegesis demands
that we discover all we can of the background to the expressions and concepts used
38 Ibid., 4:393. 39
Ibid., 4:386 40
Ibid., 4:386 41
Ibid., 4:394
18
by the New Testament writers, but forbids us to interpret them as merely echoing
ideas of their non-Christian contemporaries. (France)42
- historical-critical method is inevitably destructive of supernatural concerns … it is
inadequate to cope with all the relevant data and that biblical theology must be
understood as a theological-historical discipline … Historical and theological
interpretation must go hand in hand; along with philological, linguistic and historical
considerations, faith helps bring out the full meaning of the text. (Hasel)43
As seen above, for Henry it is necessary to review and assess all relevant data concerning
the text and it's original meaning, in order to find God's original intent and message for
us. Yet, with the historical-critical method there is an inherent problem:
Historical criticism is never philosophically or theologically neutral, and it is unable to
deal with questions concerning the supernatural and miraculous. However, it is relevant
to miracles as long as they are historical events, as much as it is relevant to non-
miraculous historical events. Historical criticism cannot prove or disprove those events,
and is by no means our only source of truth.44
The main problem with the historical-critical method is not the method itself, but
unbelief. An interpreter may have weighed prejudices and uncritical attitude towards the
reliability to the text:
If the historian begins with the assumption that the most qualified or concerned witnesses
are likely to be unreliable, even when they lay down their lives in full confidence of the
truth of their cause, not only does the recovery of history become an impossible task, but
historical criticism then renders no greater service than the aesthetic self-entertainment of
the historiographer himself.45
The overall verdict for the method is as follows:
It goes without saying that the critical investigation of Scripture has raised questions,
stimulated discussion, and provoked studies that impel evangelicals to state their case
more precisely and lucidly. The spoken Word of God is not given to us directly in an
internal miracle; it is given objectively in writings and that span many centuries, involve
several languages even in their autographs, and enlist writers who personally share many
of the ideas of their age and often reflect the society in which they live. … The very fact
that the revelation has been given in objective literary form means that it can in some
respects become an object of human investigation and research. … The ready temptation
42 Ibid., 4:394 43
Ibid., 4:394 44
Ibid., 4:403. 45
Ibid., 4:404.
19
of believers to leap over issues such as the progressive character of divine disclosure, and
problems of communication in a changing historical milieu, underscores the propriety of
many of the questions posed by criticism. … But the full attention to these concerns does
not require the critical negation or sensational rejection of biblical claims. The fact that
the biblical writers say what they say, ought, all things considered, to be taken at first
glance - even by practitioner of historical criticism - as in all probability expressing what
was actually the case, that is, as a reliable and trustworthy report.46
In general, Henry is in favor of historical-critical study of Scriptures, as far it is exercised
with right presuppositions, motives and within the scope of the method. On the other
hand, it is not Henry's preferred choice, and he is not really an advocate of historical
criticism, but is not willing to bypass it, either.
Conclusion
The focus of biblical interpretation for any classic reformed or evangelical theologian
should be christological; so it is with Henry also. When reflecting on liberation theology,
he states explicitly:
The hermeneutical principle affirmed by evangelical theology is christological, not
sociological. The New Testament exalts Jesus Christ as superior to and supreme over
every political ideology and activity promoting ethical and cultural change. … For the
Church everything turns on the Lordship of Christ.47
Moreover, summing up the christological chapters in Henry's magnum opus, Doyle
concludes: "…the entire thrust of God, Revelation, and Authority … [is] the good news
of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, in the hope that some will hear,
receive, and be born again."48
How should we condense Carl Henry's hermeneutics, then? In accordance with our
analysis above and including the obvious christological focus, the key principles of Carl
Henry's hermeneutics are as follows:
46 Ibid., 4:402-3. 47
Carl F.H. Henry, Twilight of a Great Civilization : The Drift Toward Neo-Paganism (Westchester, Ill.:
Crossway Books, 1988), 67. 48
Doyle, 78.
20
1. One may be sure that God's message, inscripturated in Scriptures, is rational, coherent
and understandable by human reason. Studying the biblical text is intellectual
activity.
2. One should remember that Scriptures are inspired by the Holy Spirit, and they can be
understood properly in the same Sprit only. By the right relationship with God, one
may be confident that the intent of the original writer - and thus the message from
God - will become clear and understandable. Thus, studying the text is also spiritual
activity.
3. One should be engaged with the study by using all available and relevant information
about the passage. Even so, the text says what it says in plain language – except when
the literature genre suggests otherwise. With conflicting interpretations, one should
keep in mind the coherent nature of God's message.
4. One should seek to discover God's timeless message, both moral and redemptive. The
focus of the revelation is the person Jesus Christ and his salvific work for us.
5. One should expect to find the supernatural power of God through his message, the
Word of God; it is capable of regenerating and renewing any person, and in the long
run, the whole society.
Legacy
Without contrasting Carl Henry's thought to the streams of modern (since Enlightenment)
and contemporary (neo-liberal/orthodox) theological thought, it is hard to understand or
appreciate his significance in the intellectual arena; his radical conservatism, being a
defender of classic reformed view of Scriptures and theology. For us, contemporary
evangelicals, many of his ideas are self-evident and natural, but actually they were
revolutionary in his time.
In 1976 Newsweek's cover story announced "The Year of the Evangelical". By this time,
fifty million Americans denoted themselves as born-again evangelicals, whereas at the
beginning of the 1940's the new evangelicalism was only a vision of the few. Carl Henry
was at the heart and core of the new evangelicalism, and was a key player in bringing
forth the ideas and values of the new movement. Henry writes:
21
Year 1976 … marked the peaking of the movement that had slowly emerged from its
cultural ghetto through incentives like the Graham crusades, the founding of the Fuller
Seminary?, and the launching of Christianity Today as a thought journal. Those events
coalesced in a transdenominational alliance of evangelical theology, evangelism, and
social concern that impacted on the church world and the larger culture and helped
reshape the face of American Protestantism.49
Was Carl Henry a significant "change agent" in the course of Christian history? Without
any hesitation, the answer is crystal-clear "yes". We should not only consider his impact
in establishing remarkable institutions that have shaped post-war evangelicalism, but also
his presence in contemporary evangelical thought, especially in the North American
evangelicalism.
49
Henry, Twilight, 163.
22
Bibliography
Ashcraft, Morris. "Response to Carl F H Henry, 'Are we Doomed to Hermeneutical Nihilism?'"
Pp 197-215, Rejoinder]." Review & Expositor 71 no. 2 (Spr 1974): 217-223.
"Henry Center :: Carl F. H. Henry " http://www.henrycenter.org/about/carl-f-h-henry/ (accessed
3/21/2011, 2011).
Dorrien, Gary J. The Remaking of Evangelical Theology. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox
Press, 1998.
Doyle, G. Wright. Carl Henry, Theologian for all Seasons : An Introduction and Guide to God,
Revelation, and Authority. Eugene, Or.: Pickwick Publications, 2010.
Frei, Hans W., George Hunsinger, and William C. Placher. Types of Christian Theology. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1992.
Grenz, Stanley. Renewing the Center : Evangelical Theology in a Post-Theological Era. Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2000.
———. Revisioning Evangelical Theology : A Fresh Agenda for the 21st Century. Downers
Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993.
Henry, Carl F.H.. The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. Grand Rapids, Mich.:
W.B. Eerdmans, 2003; 1947.
———. Twilight of a Great Civilization : The Drift Toward Neo-Paganism. Westchester, Ill.:
Crossway Books, 1988.
———. Christian Countermoves in a Decadent Culture. Critical Concern Books. Portland, Or.:
Multnomah Press, 1986.
———. Confessions of a Theologian : An Autobiography. Waco, Tex: Word Books, 1986.
———. Conversations with Carl Henry : Christianity for Today. Symposium Series. Vol. 18.
Lewiston: E. Mellon Press, 1986.
———. God, Revelation, and Authority. Waco, Tex: Word Books, 1976; 1983.
———. "Interpretation of the Scriptures : Are we Doomed to Hermeneutical Nihilism?" Review
& Expositor 71, no. 2 (03/01, 1974): 197-215.
———. The Biblical Expositor : The Living Theme of the Great Book, with General and
Introductory Essays and Exposition for each Book of the Bible. Philadelphia: A. J. Holman
Co, 1973.
———. A Plea for Evangelical Demonstration. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1971.
23
———. Jesus of Nazareth, Saviour and Lord. Contemporary Evangelical Thought. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966.
———. Revelation and the Bible : Contemporary Evangelical Thought. Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1958.
———. Contemporary Evangelical Thought. Great Neck, N.Y.: Channel Press, 1957.
———. Evangelical Responsibility in Contemporary Theology. Pathway Books. A Series of
Contemporary Evangelical Studies. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.
———. "The Spirit and the Written Word." Bibliotheca Sacra 111, no. 444 (10/01, 1954): 302-
16.
Henry, Carl F.H., D. A. Carson, and John D. Woodbridge. God and Culture : Essays in Honor of
Carl F.H. Henry. Grand Rapids, Mich.; Carlisle, England: Eerdmans; Paternoster Press,
1993.
Henry, Carl F.H. and Merrill Chapin Tenney. The Word for this Century. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1960.
Leung, Mavis M. "With what is Evangelicalism to Penetrate the World? a Study of Carl Henry's
Envisioned Evangelicalism." Trinity Journal 27, no. 2 (09/01, 2006): 227-44.
Lindsell, Harold, Carl F.H. Henry, and Joel A. Carpenter. Two Reformers of Fundamentalism :
Harold John Ockenga and Carl F.H. Henry. Fundamentalism in American Religion, 1880-
1950. New York: Garland Pub, 1988; 1947.
Padgett, Alan. "Review: God, Revelation, and Authority by Carl F. H. Henry." Journal of the
American Academy of Religion 52, no. 4 (Dec., 1984): pp. 785-786.
Patterson, Bob E. Carl F.H. Henry. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1983; 1983.
Patterson, James A. "Cultural Pessimism in Modern Evangelical Thought: Francis Schaeffer,
Carl Henry, and Charles Colson." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 49, no. 4
(12/01, 2006): 807-20.
Walvoord, John F. Inspiration and Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.
Wikipedia contributors. "Gordon Clark" Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2011.