Charles Johnson
Puritan Board Junior
Hi all,
I was doing some readings in J.H. Heidegger's Medulla Theologiae Christianae when I came across a noteworthy misrepresentation of Heidegger's thought by Westminster California's Scott Clark. Clark posts a single paragraph excerpt from Heidegger's Medulla Medullae, ch. 13 (A yet more concise version of the Medulla) with the following title: J.H. Heidegger on the Mixed Quality of the Covenant of Grace Under Moses.
What's the issue here? For starters, Heidegger explicitly opposes the idea the Mosaic Covenant is a mixed covenant in the same-numbered chapter in the Medulla. His words are the following:
At nec Lex illa legis fidei & operum mixtura fuit, qui error Pseudapostolorum, Nazaraeorum, aliorumque fuit. Nam Lex fidei & operum ἀσύστατος in unam commisceri non potest. Si ex Lege est justitia, Christus frustra mortuus est, Gal. 2:21. Si ex Lege est haereditas, non est ex promissione, Gal. 3:18.
"But neither is that Law a mixture of the laws of faith and works, which was the error of the False Apostles, the Nazarenes, and others. For the laws of faith and works, being mutually incoherent, cannot be mixed together in one. If righteousness is from the Law, Christ died in vain. Gal. 2:21. If the inheritance is from the law, it is not from the promise, Gal. 3:18."
How did Scott Clark come to mischaracterize Heidegger's views? Three thoughts.
1) The translation he quoted from in his post isn't very good. Heidegger wrote admixtum, as in 'admixture'. The translator rendered it mixture. This is not exculpatory for Clark, given that he's the editor of the work.
2) Clark did not read the Corpus Theologiae or the Medulla Theologiae before making his post. Clark appears to be relying only on this translation of the Medulla Medullae, an abridgment of an abridgment, for his post, because in the longer versions Heidegger quite clearly states that the Mosaic Covenant is a covenant of grace through and through.
3) Clark likes to read his own views into historic authors. This should not come as a surprise to anyone.
I was doing some readings in J.H. Heidegger's Medulla Theologiae Christianae when I came across a noteworthy misrepresentation of Heidegger's thought by Westminster California's Scott Clark. Clark posts a single paragraph excerpt from Heidegger's Medulla Medullae, ch. 13 (A yet more concise version of the Medulla) with the following title: J.H. Heidegger on the Mixed Quality of the Covenant of Grace Under Moses.
What's the issue here? For starters, Heidegger explicitly opposes the idea the Mosaic Covenant is a mixed covenant in the same-numbered chapter in the Medulla. His words are the following:
At nec Lex illa legis fidei & operum mixtura fuit, qui error Pseudapostolorum, Nazaraeorum, aliorumque fuit. Nam Lex fidei & operum ἀσύστατος in unam commisceri non potest. Si ex Lege est justitia, Christus frustra mortuus est, Gal. 2:21. Si ex Lege est haereditas, non est ex promissione, Gal. 3:18.
"But neither is that Law a mixture of the laws of faith and works, which was the error of the False Apostles, the Nazarenes, and others. For the laws of faith and works, being mutually incoherent, cannot be mixed together in one. If righteousness is from the Law, Christ died in vain. Gal. 2:21. If the inheritance is from the law, it is not from the promise, Gal. 3:18."
How did Scott Clark come to mischaracterize Heidegger's views? Three thoughts.
1) The translation he quoted from in his post isn't very good. Heidegger wrote admixtum, as in 'admixture'. The translator rendered it mixture. This is not exculpatory for Clark, given that he's the editor of the work.
2) Clark did not read the Corpus Theologiae or the Medulla Theologiae before making his post. Clark appears to be relying only on this translation of the Medulla Medullae, an abridgment of an abridgment, for his post, because in the longer versions Heidegger quite clearly states that the Mosaic Covenant is a covenant of grace through and through.
3) Clark likes to read his own views into historic authors. This should not come as a surprise to anyone.
Last edited: