This reminds me of Paul’s description of his apostolic ministry and life in 2 Corinthians. And of our Lord’s promise to us: In this world we will have trouble, but to be of good cheer, because he has overcome the world!
Also what’s the alternative. To whom shall we go. You, Lord, have the words of eternal life! (Peter)

It reminds me of Daniel who continued to pray knowing the king’s men were watching to see if he would obey the law. Thanks for doing this series, Scot.

Scott,
Just read your recent article in the current CT. Are you sure you are representing Vanhoozer correctly? Or am I taking him out of context from his JETS article where he states,(Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, March, 2005)
“Biblical interpretation is the soul of theology. Truth is the ultimate accolade that we accord an interpretation. Christian theology therefore succeeds or fails in direct proportion to its ability to render true interpretations of the word of God written (87).
“Mining the deposit of truth”: The Hodge-Henry hypothesis. For large swaths of the Western tradition, the task of theology consisted in mining propositional nuggets from the biblical deposit of truth (94).
“Charles Hodge. . . . 19th-century Princeton, Charles Hodge and B. B. Warfield laid the groundwork for conservative evangelical theology by insisting on the importance of propositional truth, not least as a counter to . . . liberalism, which doctrine is merely religious feeling set forth in speech. . . . the Bible is the deposit of revealed truth (94).
“Carl F. H. Henry. Henry’s magisterial defense of propositional revelation follows in the same tradition. He defines a proposition as “a verbal statement that is either true or false.” (God, Revelation and Authority, vol. III (Waco, TX: Word, 1979) 456). The Scriptures, says Henry, contain a divinely given body of information actually expressed or capable of being expressed in propositions (94-95).
“In what we may call the Hodge-Henry (H-H) hypothesis, doctrine is the result of biblical induction and deduction, a capsule summary of the meaning of Scripture . . . (95).
“. . . The H-H hypothesis is heavily invested in a particular theory of language, meaning, and truth. Language according to the H-H hypothesis is primarily concerned with stating truth, which in turn is a function of describing reality, representing the world, or recording a series of events (95).
“. . . The Bible is more than a system of philosophy or moral truths. It is good news. The instinct of cognitive-propositional theology is sound. The gospel is informative: “he is risen” (100).”
Don’t we think in propositions? Or has the word taken on a techical-theological meaning? If people don’t think and communicate in propositions, when does everything become nonsense? Who is out of touch with reality?
Thanks for your response.
Eldon

Eldon,
I have to say you’ve read my inclusion of Vanhoozer in my CT piece the way you’ve read this post: I’m not sure you are paying attention to context.
I included Kevin Vanhoozer as an example of an example of one who has found value in postmodernity; I don’t think anything more than that is implied.
In all honesty, I have to ask what leads you to connect my inclusion of Vanhoozer in anything having to do with propositions? The expression about propositions is connected to LeRon Shults, not Vanhoozer.
Now back to you: Who’s been fair? McKnight on Vanhoozer or DeBoer on McKnight?