# Geerhardus Vos



## AV1611 (Sep 26, 2007)

What are his best works. I was thinking about purchasing _Biblical Theology_ and _Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos_. Thoughts?


----------



## ADKing (Sep 26, 2007)

Vos is wonderful. If you are able to get a copy of his (now out of print--somebody really needs to get on Banner of Truth's case to reprint it) _Grace and Glory_, which is a collection of his sermons, do so. His sermon, "Rabboni", in that volume on Mary going to Christ's empty tomb on the morning of the resurrection, is one of the most moving sermons I have ever read. 

Both _Biblical Theology_ and _The Shorter Writings_ are very valuable. _Biblical Theology_ will give you a more comprehensive explanation of his approach. In the _Shorter Writings_ you have several very stimulating articles on a variety of biblical and theological topics. "The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology" (also available online at http://www.biblicaltheology.org/dcrt.pdf) is very good. 

Also, for your interest, the newly published biography and collection of letters of Vos is good. _The Letters of Geerhardus Vos_ edited by James T Dennison Jr. The letters themselves are OK but the biography is worth the price of the book. Not only does it tell the story of Vos's life, but it sets it against the backdrop of the turbulent ecclesiastical scene at Princeton in the early 20th century with some very perceptive analysis about the so-called "Presbyterian Conflict". 

See also this site The Writings of Geerhardus Vos for many of Vos's works freely available online.


----------



## christiana (Sep 26, 2007)

Sermon 'Rabonni' here:

Kerux...The Online Journal of Biblical Theology


----------



## RamistThomist (Sep 26, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> What are his best works. I was thinking about purchasing _Biblical Theology_ and _Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos_. Thoughts?



Haven't read the latter (heard good things about it) but BT is foundational. Don't know if I fully agree at points.

My main problem with Vos: He is unnecessarily wordy. If he has chance to say something in 3 pages, he will spend the next 300 telling you that. 

His ideas on "Revelation interprets Redemption" and "Paul's eschatology structures his theology" are quite good, even if I disagree with Vos on Paul's eschatology.


----------



## Archlute (Sep 26, 2007)

Spear Dane said:


> My main problem with Vos: He is unnecessarily wordy. If he has chance to say something in 3 pages, he will spend the next 300 telling you that.



Agreed. I think that Vos can tend to be overrated in some circles. He does make some good points, and these were especially necessary for the time in which he wrote, and for the academic audience to whom he wrote, but as Jacob has pointed out, you really need to know where to prune if your are to make good use of your time with him. 

A good little book of his that we read through during our General Epistles course was his writing on the Epistle to the Hebrews. It has some thoughtful insights into the issue of the archtype in relationship to the type/antitype paradigm.


----------



## RamistThomist (Sep 26, 2007)

Archlute said:


> Spear Dane said:
> 
> 
> > My main problem with Vos: He is unnecessarily wordy. If he has chance to say something in 3 pages, he will spend the next 300 telling you that.
> ...



Yes, you definitely need to prune. Vos does spend a lot of time shadow-boxing dead theologians. I would read the parts on the Garden of Eden and the parts on the New Testament in Biblical Theology. Those were quite good. 

But instead of Vos, I would recommend Ed Clowney's Biblical Theology and Preaching. It is Vosian, shorter than Vos and better-written.


----------



## sotzo (Sep 26, 2007)

This may have already been suggested elsewhere, but I personally think you can get just as much out of Graeme Goldsworthy's _According to Plan_ as you can Vos' seminal works. As has been mentioned above, Vos tends to state and restate.


----------



## ADKing (Sep 26, 2007)

I realize this is just a matter of opinion, however, I have never had the same problem with Vos's supposed "wordiness". Most of his sentences I find to contain a profounder perception than any of the latter biblical theologians like Clowney, Graemsworthy etc. Vos does interact with a lot of liberal critics (many of whom were alive when he wrote his works). Although they are dead, their liberal works and presuppositions continue to powerfully control many biblical commentaries, exegetes and preachers encounter. Hardly a waste of time to be aware of them and have a strong refutation for them.


----------



## MW (Sep 26, 2007)

I much prefer Vos' wordiness to the modern penchant for imagination. He took the time to show how the loci of dogmatic theology are sustained by biblical theology, not undermined by it.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Oct 6, 2007)

ADKing said:


> Vos is wonderful. If you are able to get a copy of his (now out of print--somebody really needs to get on Banner of Truth's case to reprint it) _Grace and Glory_, which is a collection of his sermons, do so. His sermon, "Rabboni", in that volume on Mary going to Christ's empty tomb on the morning of the resurrection, is one of the most moving sermons I have ever read.



_Grace and Glory_ has been reprinted by Solid Ground Christian Books. It is available at a slightly cheaper price at Reformation Heritage Books. "Rabboni" is available online here.


----------



## ADKing (Oct 6, 2007)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> ADKing said:
> 
> 
> > Vos is wonderful. If you are able to get a copy of his (now out of print--somebody really needs to get on Banner of Truth's case to reprint it) _Grace and Glory_, which is a collection of his sermons, do so. His sermon, "Rabboni", in that volume on Mary going to Christ's empty tomb on the morning of the resurrection, is one of the most moving sermons I have ever read.
> ...



This is truly good news. Thanks Andrew


----------



## greenbaggins (Oct 6, 2007)

Right now I am doing research on Vos for an article to be published. I have read a good deal of Vos by now. I would say that it is not that he is wordy, but that his sentence structure is complex. It is rather Latinate. That being said, there is profound insight on almost every page of Vos. I think it is a sign of our age that many of us find him difficult. He is not difficult when compared to other writers of his time. I find many commentaries of the late 19th-early 20th century to be very difficult to read. Vos is no more difficult than they are.


----------



## ADKing (Oct 6, 2007)

greenbaggins said:


> Right now I am doing research on Vos for an article to be published. I have read a good deal of Vos by now. I would say that it is not that he is wordy, but that his sentence structure is complex. It is rather Latinate. That being said, there is profound insight on almost every page of Vos. I think it is a sign of our age that many of us find him difficult. He is not difficult when compared to other writers of his time. I find many commentaries of the late 19th-early 20th century to be very difficult to read. Vos is no more difficult than they are.



Please let us know where and when to expect the article. I would enjoy reading it,


----------



## bookslover (Oct 6, 2007)

I appreciate Vos's insistence that Biblical Theology is not meant to replace Systematic Theology; rather, the two disciplines are complementary, and both are needed. From _Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments_ (1948), pp. 24-25:

It's relation to Systematic Theology. There is no difference in that one would be more closely bound to the Scriptures than the other. In this, they are wholly alike. Nor does the difference lie in this, that the one transforms the biblical material, whereas the other would leave it unmodified. Both equally make the truth deposited in the Bible undergo a transformation: but the difference arises from the fact that the principle by which the transformation is effected differs in each case. In Biblical Theology, this principle is one of historical; in Systematic Theology, it is one of logical construction. Biblical Theology draws a _line_ of development. Systematic Theology draws a _circle_. Still, it should be remembered, that on the line of historical progress there is, at several points, already a beginning of correlation among elements of truth in which the beginnings of the systematizing process can be discerned.​
Vos wisely and conscientiously tries to keep the balance between the two.


----------

