Abstract:
Karl Barth was critical of the hermeneutics of biblical historical criticism, based on his own theological understanding, especially with regard to revelation, and proposed a form of biblical exegesis known as “analogia fidei.” In the area of epistemology, the label of fideism was often attached to Barth, and his exegetical method also encountered criticism. Modern Reformed Epistemology shares theological common ground with Barth in relation to its denial of traditional rational theology, especially foundationalism, while Barth’s thought also influenced the development of reformed epistemology. Based on discussions about Karl Barth and Reformed Epistemology in terms of their epistemological and exegetical claims, this article argues that although Barth had reservations on the application of philosophy to theology, Reformed Epistemology considers Barthian epistemology and its relevant biblical exegesis as sufficient defense and warrant, granting a rational base for Barthian biblical exegesis as a faith-originating approach.
Keywords:
The Word of God; Rationality; Warrant; Biblical Exegesis; Belief
Full Text (International Version):
Full Text (Simplified Chinese Version):
