| Part 1 The Theory of Faith | Hirohumi Hoshika |
■Parable
[1] Tomita, Yasuhiko. Tetsugaku no Saizensen [The Frontiers of Philosophy]. Tokyo: Koudan-sha, 1998. Print. (14-19)
■Easy Study 1
[1] Part 2 "The Theory of Faith and Reason" Chapter 4 - Section2
[2] Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. Norman Kemp Smith. LONDON: MACMILLAN and Co., 1929. Print. (45).
[3] ibid., (55).
[4] ibid., (22). (Paraphrase). "...if we suppose that objects must conform to our knowledge."
[5] Part 2 "The Theory of Faith and Reason" Chapter 4 - Section 1
■Easy Study 2
[0] The first quest of the historical Jesus = The Original Quest, The second quest of the historical Jesus = The New Quest, The third quest of the historical Jesus = The Third Quest.
[1] Robinson, J.M. A New Quest of the Historical Jesus. Chatham: SCM PRESS, 1959. Print. (28).
[2] Mark 1:43, 5:43, 7:36, 8:26, 8:30, 9:9, etc.
[3] Bultmann, R. "Shin'yaku seisho shingakuⅠ [NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY Part One]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 3 [COLLECTED WORKS 3]. Trans. Junshirō Kawabata. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1994. Print. (40).
[4] Yamada, Kouta. "Seisho-gaku no reimei-ki no iesu kenkyū [Jesus studies in the early days of biblical studies]." Iesu kenkyū-shi [History of Jesus Studies]. Tokyo: Nihonkirisutokyōdan-shuppankyoku, 1998. Print. (95).
[5] Bultmann, R. "Shin'yaku seisho shingakuⅠ[NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY Part One]." (40). - - -. "Kyōkanfukuinsho denshō-shiⅡ [THE HISTORY OF THE SYNOPTIC TRADITION Part Two]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 2 [COLLECTED WORKS 2]. Trans. Hiromichi kayama. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1987. Print. (238).
[6] Zahrnt, Heinz. THE HISTORICAL JESUS. Trans. J.S.Bowden. London: COLLINS, 1963. Print. (44).
[7] Petersen, Norman R. Shin'yaku-gaku to bungaku hihyō [Literary Criticism for New Testament Critic]. Trans. Hidekazu Utsunomiya. Tokyo: KYO BUN KAN, 1986. Print. (23).
[8] McGrath, A.E. Rekishi no iesu to shinkō no Kirisuto [THE MAKING OF MODERN GERMAN CHRISTOLOGY]. Trans. Hiroo Yanagida. Tokyo: Kirisuto Shimbun Co., 2011. Print. (171).
[9] Schaeffer, F.A. Risei kara no tōsō [ESCAPE FROM REASON]. Trans. Hisashi Ariga. Tokyo: Word of Life Press, 1984. Print. (50, 63).
[10] Matsuki, jisaburou. Iesu to shin'yaku seisho no kankei [The Relationship Between Jesus and the New Testament]. Tokyo: Nihonkirisutokyōdan-shuppankyoku, 1980. Print. (15).
■Easy Study 3
[1] The following statement is to the effect that "historical facts do not give faith."
(1) Aono, tashio. "Burutoman to sono deshi-tachi no ronsō [The debate between Bultmann and his disciples]." Iesu kenkyū-shi [History of Jesus Studies]. (202). "Although faith is never founded on historical study, the content of faith never remains unaffected by historical study."
(2) Zahrnt, H. THE HISTORICAL JESUS. (116). "Historical scholarship can only give a negative answer to the truth of faith, not a positive one, i.e. it can destroy the grounds of faith, but it cannot supply them."
(3) Bultmann, R. "Shin'yaku seisho shingakuⅡ [NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY Part Two]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 4 [COLLECTED WORKS 4]. Trans. Junshirō Kawabata. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1994. Print. (166). "Historical reports, reports that point to past events, never reveal the saving event."
(4) Bultmann, R. "Genshi kirisutokyō no Kirisuto-shishin to shiteki Iesu tono kankei [The relationship between the early Christ message and the historical Jesus]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 9 [COLLECTED WORKS 9]. Trans. tashio Aono. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1994. Print. (135). "Faith does not arise from the knowledge of historical facts."
(5) Hunter, A.M. Shiteki Iesu to Fukuinsho [A translation of Bible and Gospel]. Trans. Gosaku Okada, and Sadao Kawashima. Tokyo: KYOBUNKWAN, 1976. Print. (214). "On the one hand, they say that Christians know Christ existentially through the kerygma, and on the other hand, they say that the soteriological center of faith and theology is a historical figure accessible through 'scientific historiography.' ... This is despite us being told that faith does not depend on such historiography."
(6) Pannenberg, W. "Kyūsai no dekigoto to rekishi [Salvation Events and History]." Soshiki shingaku no konponmondai [The Fundamental Problem of Systematic Theology]. Trans. Katsuhiko Kondō, and Tsutomu Haga. Tokyo: Nihonkirisutokyōdan-shuppankyoku, 1984. Print. (70). "It is hardly a coincidence that Gogarten, the very most important disciple of the systematic thinker Troeltsch, was one of the first to draw the radical conclusion from this situation: a complete withdrawal of theology from the history of theology. And Barth, like Gogarten, also concluded that "as far as we can see, there is nothing in history itself on which faith can be based. Revelation is history only as 'protohistory,' that is, only from the perspective of its 'unhistorical light above'. This is the thesis that one cannot encounter any divine revelation within the realm of the historically determinable. This thesis finds its main witnesses in Nietzsche and Kierkegaard. At the same time, It found the main witness in Lessing's proposition that the contingent truths of history cannot prove any eternal truths of reason."
[2] Ogawa, Akira. "Yōshikishi gakuha no iesu kenkyū [Studies of Jesus by form criticism]." Iesu kenkyū-shi [History of Jesus Studies]. (186-187).
[3] Beilby, James K, and Paul R. Eddy. The Historical Jesus FIVE VIEWS. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2010. Print. (23). Kähler, M. "Iwayuru shiteki Iesu to rekishi-teki = seisho-teki Kirisuto [The so-called historical Jesus and the historical, biblical Christ]." Gendai kirisutokyō shisō sōsho 2 [Contemporary Christian Thought Series 2]. Trans. Yūzaburō Morita. Tokyo: Hakusuisha, 1974. Print. (179-)
[4] Ogawa, Akira. "Yōshikishi gakuha no iesu kenkyū [Studies of Jesus by form criticism]." Iesu kenkyū-shi [History of Jesus Studies]. (187).
[5] For Barth and Brunner, Hunter, A.M. Shiteki Iesu to Fukuinsho [A translation of Bible and Gospel]. (203-204). For Bultmann, Bultmann, Rudolf. Jesus Christ and Mythology. New York: CHALES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 1958. Print. (72).
[6] Brunner, E. Benshōhōshingaku josetsu [Experience, knowledge and belief]. Trans. Yasuo Gotō. Tokyo: Fukumura shuppan, 1973. Print. (188-189). (Paraphrase).
[7] ibid., (212-213).
[8] Beilby, James K, and Paul R. Eddy. The Historical Jesus FIVE VIEWS. (23).
[9] Zahrnt, Heinz. THE HISTORICAL JESUS. Trans. Eiji Azumi. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1971. Print. (177).
[10] ibid., (186).
[11] Borg, M.J. Iesu Renaissance [Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship]. Trans. Akira Ogawa. Tokyo: KYO BUN KAN, 1997. Print. (363-364).
[12] Borg, M.J. Iesu Renaissance [Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship]. (373-374). "Much of the debate about the significance of historical knowledge about Jesus has focused on the question of whether historical study should be relevant to faith. ... If not, there is a danger of slipping into Docetism, Gnosticism, and other unhealthy beliefs." Bauckham, R. Iesu to sono mokugeki-sha-tachi: mokugeki-sha shōgen to shite no fukuonsho [Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitnesses Testimony]. Trans. Atsuhiro Asano. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha, 2011. Print. (15). "To say that it is inappropriate to consider Jesus and the Gospels historically is, as Thomas Wright writes, "modern docetism", and is tantamount to denying that Jesus was a verifiable historical figure to any degree." ref. Wright, N.T. The Challenge of Jesus. London: SPCK, 2000. Print. (3-10).
■Episode
[1] Henry, Carl F.H. "PREFACE." Berkouwer, G.C. et al. Revelation and the Bible. Ed. C.F.H.Henry. Grand Rapids: BAKER BOOK HOUSE, 1976. Print. (7).
[2] Muchiki, Yoshiyuki. "Seisho shinkō to mugo-sei [Bible Faith and Inerrancy]." Seisho shinkō to sono sho-mondai [Bible Faith and Its Problems]. Tokyo: Seishosenkyōkai 2018. Print. (281).
[3] Tosa kurisuchan gunzō kankō-kai [Tosa Christian Group Publishing Association]. Tosa kurisuchan gunzō [Tosa Christian Group]. Kōchi: Kōchi fukuinshobō 1979. Print. Ref."Mori Katsushirō","Mori-ha". Kawaguchi, yōko, and Yōichi Yamaguchi.Shirarenakatta shinkō-sha-tachi yasokirisuto no shin'yaku kyōkai e no dan'atsu to Terao Kishichi "jinmon chōsho" [Unknown Believers: The Persecution of the New Testament Church of Christ and Terao Kishichi's "Interrogation Record"]. Tokyo: Inochinokotoba-sha, 2020. Print.
■Argument 1
[1] Troeltsch, E. "Shinkō ni taisuru iesu no rekishi-sei no igi [The significance of Jesus' historicity for faith.]." Toreruchi chosaku-shū 2 [Troeltsch Collected Works Japanese Edition 2]. Trans. Akira Takamori. Tokyo: Yorudan-sha, 1986. Print. (169). (Paraphrase).
[2] Ref. below.
Henry, C.F.H., et al. Seisho-ron ronshū [Biblical theory treatises]. Tokyo: Inochinokotoba-sha, 1974. Print.
Fujimoto, Mitsuru. Seisho shinkō ― sono rekishi to kanōsei [Bible Faith: Its History and Possibilities]. Tokyo: Inochinokotoba-sha, 2015. Print.
Seishosenkyōkai. Seisho shinkō to sono sho mondai [Bible Faith and Its Problems]. Tokyo: Inochinokotoba-sha, 2017. Print.
Kobayashi, kazuo., et al. Ronshū seisho [Essays on the Bible]. Tokyo: Tōkyōseishogakuin, 1983. Print.
■Argument 1-2
[1] The Israelites were originally made up of 12 tribes, but later lost 10 tribes, and the main tribe that remained was the tribe of Judah, hence the name.
■Argument 1-3
[1] Kantzer, K.S. "Keiji no dentatsu [Transmission of Revelation]." Seisho-ron ronshū [Biblical theory treatises (The Bible - The Living Word of Revelation)]. (24).
■Argument 2
[1] Warfield, B.B. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible., The PRESBYTERIAN AND REFORMED PUBLISHING COMPANY, 1970. Print. (210).
[2] ibid., (211-212).
[3] Akasaka, izumi. "Seisho shinkō no sho-mondai [Problems of Bible Faith]." Seisho shinkō to sono sho-mondai [Bible Faith and Its Problems]. (21).
■Argument 3
[1] The meaning of "Bible Faith is possible".
[2] B.B. Warfield and J.I. Packer's arguments (The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible and "Fundamentalism" and the Word of God) on the basis of Bible Faith make the same kind of error as Anselm's "ontological argument" of the early 12th century. The "ontological argument", which is a proof of God's existence, first defines God as a perfect being, and then argues that if God is perfect, then God must have existence as an attribute. This is because an "existing God" is superior to a "non-existing God" and is the one that meets the definition of divine perfection. Therefore, it follows that God necessarily exists. Warfield and Packer first demonstrate from texts such as the Hebrews that the biblical writers undoubtedly believed in the inspiration of Scripture. They then argue that, since a Christianity that denies the views and beliefs of the biblical writers cannot exist by definition, Christian faith must necessarily include faith in the inspiration of the Bible, and therefore faith in the Bible is necessarily established in our faith. However, this argument commits a well-known logical error in modern times, confusing the logical necessity that comes from the definition of a concept with the correspondence between concepts and the external world. (For this point, see below.)
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason.Trans. Norman Kemp Smith. LONDON: MACMILLAN and Co., 1929. Print. (501-506). (B621-629).
Russell, Bertrand. "Ronribunseki no tetsugaku [Philosophy of Logical Analysis]." Seiyō tetsugaku-shi 3 [History of Western Philosophy]. Trans. Saburo Ichii, Tokyo: Misuzu Shobo, 1976. Print. (824).
Quine, W.V.O. "Nani ga aru no ka ni tsuite [About what is there]." Ronri-teki kanten kara [From a Logical Point of View]. Trans. Takashi īda, Tokyo: Keisōshobō, 1996. Print. (22-23).
For example, a "Pegasus" must by definition exist as both a horse and a winged creature, but whether such a creature actually exists is an entirely different matter. Similarly, it is true that if a faith is to be orthodox, it must include Bible Faith, but whether such a faith is actually possible is another matter. In the arguments of Warfield and others, the necessity for faith to be orthodox is conflated with the possibility of such faith existing. There, what was merely a definition of faith is asserted as the existence of faith. In this respect, their argument commits a logical fallacy. However, after the above argument, Warfield goes on to state, "Inspiration is not the most fundamental of Christian doctrines, nor even the first thing we prove about the Scriptures. It is the last and crowning fact as to the Scriptures." "We do not think that the doctrine of plenary inspiration is the ground of Christian faith," etc., as if retracting his previous arguments, indicating that Bible Faith should maintain its position as faith. The point is that Bible Faith does not occupy a fundamental position in doctrine, nor should it be used as a basis for argument. This maintains the validity of Warfield's argument as an argument for Bible Faith, but on the other hand, Packer's argument, which is only based on the argument as above, can only be described as simply incorrect.
[3] Bultmann, R. "Kyōkanfukuinsho denshō-shiⅠ [THE HISTORY OF THE SYNOPTIC TRADITION Part One]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 1 [COLLECTED WORKS 1]. Trans. Hiromichi kayama. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 2004. Print. (89).
[4] Akasaka, izumi. "Seisho shinkō no sho-mondai [Problems of Bible Faith]." Seisho shinkō to sono sho-mondai [Bible Faith and Its Problems]. (24). (Paraphrase).
[5] ibid., (30). (Paraphrase).
[6] Robinson, J.M. A New Quest of the Historical Jesus. (31).
■Essay 3
[1] Osamu Dazai "Ougon fūkei" Kirigirisu. Shinchō bunko.
■補論2
[0] Part 2 The Theory of Faith and Reason Chapter 2 - Section 2 [→]
[1] Satō, Toshio. Kirisutokyō rinri gaisetsu [Outline of Christian Ethics]. Tokyo: Fukuin to gendai-sha, 1978. Print. (107-115).
[2] Phil. 4:8 "Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things." Jas 2:16 "If one of you says to them, 'Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,' but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? "
[3] 春名純人『哲学と神学』「キリスト者と非キリスト者の『関係の原理』」法律文化社 1994年 pp.325-378
[3.5] ここで「天上的な救いに結びついた欲得的なキリスト教倫理」ということで考えられているのは、Chapter 1 - Essay 2 の「愚かな金持ちのたとえ」で「神」が告げたような倫理のことである。
[4] 佐藤潤「イスラエルによるカナン侵攻物語をどう読むか――カナン人虐殺を命じたのは誰か？――」『福音主義神学54』pp.55-73 日本福音主義神学会 2025年1月」
[5] 第二部 Chapter 2 Easy Study 3「キリスト教の救済の概念は、そういった、我々が精一杯考えた末に見いだせるようなものとは違っていて教えてもらわなければ知ることができないものであるように思える」
第一部 Chapter 1 Proposition 2「神と罪について、我々は『啓示』によらなければそれを正しく知ることができないとされている」
[6] 日本福音主義神学会東部部会 2025年春期公開研究会「旧約聖書における戦争」2025年5月12日
[7]「ヘブライ語『ヘーレム』は術語であるが、新共同訳では『滅ぼし尽くす』など、文脈に応じて様々に訳される。旧訳聖書では、神の命じたカナンの先住民（申7:1-26）、および宿敵アマレク人（サム上15:1-3）との戦いにおいては、敵を捕虜にすることなく、皆殺しにしなければならないとされた。戦利品も、自分のものにしてはならず、家畜はすべて殺し、財産も神に捧げることが義務づけられていた（ヨシュ6:18）。」『聖書学用語辞典』"聖戦／聖絶"より。日本キリスト教団出版局 2008年