# Which Systematic Theology Should I Read?



## Taylor (Sep 17, 2016)

Hello, all.

I am just curious for your collective opinion. I am currently taking a class on Calvin in seminary and am having to read through the _Institutes_ for it. However, I also want to read another systematic theology alongside it. Here is my question: Which one would you read were you in my position? Here are the three choices:

- W. à Brakel
- F. Turretin
- W.G.T. Shedd


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Sep 17, 2016)

Of the choices you listed I would read Turretin.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 17, 2016)

If you are able to, there is no question: Turretin. Of those three, he is certainly the most challenging; but he will enable you to understand what the mainstream Reformed position is over against a variety of errors. If you have the time and concentration for his compressed form of expression and technical language, he will give you a very solid grounding.

à Brakel will be substantially easier to read, and will cover a lot of the same material (and then some) in a very edifying way. He is also a worthy choice, but at some point you are going to want the technical exactitude of Turretin.

I like Shedd for several reasons, including that he actually read Coleridge and took him seriously; but I think you are better served to be thoroughly introduced to the consensus of Reformed orthodoxy before coming to Shedd's sometimes idiosyncratic take on things.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Sep 17, 2016)

Francis Turretin.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Sep 17, 2016)

Turretin...may be still available here, too...
http://www.puritanboard.com/showthread.php/90475-Pruning-Library


----------



## Taylor (Sep 17, 2016)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> Turretin...may be still available here, too...
> http://www.puritanboard.com/showthre...runing-Library



I have in my possession all three of the options. That's the reason I limited it to three, because they are in my library and catching my eye, as of late.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 17, 2016)

py3ak said:


> I think you are better served to be thoroughly introduced to the consensus of Reformed orthodoxy before coming to Shedd's sometimes idiosyncratic take on things.



Is this a reference to, for instance, his traducianism and his particular view of the atonement?


----------



## John P (Sep 17, 2016)

The Bible.

Ok, now that I got that out of the way, I really do like Calvin's Institutes. The Beveridge translation is readable if you like older, more complex English lol (but not KJV English, it came after that). However, there are many nice newer translations of it that go for around $40-$100. However, if you're going to pay $100 I think you've been ripped off lol.


----------



## reaganmarsh (Sep 17, 2016)

Turretin first; then a'Brakel. 

You're in for a wonderful feast of the richest biblical theology. 

Enjoy!


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 17, 2016)

A Brakel. Just because he is easier. It depends on where you are at. If you really want polemics then go to Turretin.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 17, 2016)

John P said:


> Ok, now that I got the source text out of the way, I really do like Calvin's Institutes. The Beveridge translation is readable if you like older, more complex English lol (but not KJV English, it came after that). However, there are many nice newer translations of it that go for around $40-$100. However, if you're going to pay $100 I think you've been ripped off lol.



As I said, I am already having to read Calvin for class. I am looking for something to read _alongside_ him.


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 17, 2016)

Turretin. He epitomizes solid Reformed scholasticism at its best. Rightly known for his incredible precision, he was important to the doctrine of inerrancy, much to the frustration of revisionists since! Those who tried to pit Calvin against the Calvinists (a conceit that Richard Muller pretty effectively demolished!), loved to demonize Turretin.

aBrakel is wonderful, warm, and devotional. But, Turretin is as precise as you can get. Prior to the production of Hodge's three volume masterpiece, Turretin (in Latin!) was the standard seminary text at Princeton.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 17, 2016)

Taylor Sexton said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > I think you are better served to be thoroughly introduced to the consensus of Reformed orthodoxy before coming to Shedd's sometimes idiosyncratic take on things.
> ...



Yes, that's part of it. Shedd saw himself as consciously recovering an older Augustinianism, but there seems to be a sort of gravitational attraction towards highly individual formulations that is particularly difficult for American theological writers to resist.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 17, 2016)

py3ak said:


> Yes, that's part of it. Shedd saw himself as consciously recovering an older Augustinianism, but there seems to be a sort of gravitational attraction towards highly individual formulations that is particularly difficult for American theological writers to resist.



That makes sense.

By the way, I can't help but notice you are not far from me on the map. ;-)


----------



## John P (Sep 18, 2016)

Taylor Sexton said:


> John P said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, now that I got the source text out of the way, I really do like Calvin's Institutes. The Beveridge translation is readable if you like older, more complex English lol (but not KJV English, it came after that). However, there are many nice newer translations of it that go for around $40-$100. However, if you're going to pay $100 I think you've been ripped off lol.
> ...


Point taken. I was just saying that I like the Institutes haha.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## py3ak (Sep 18, 2016)

Taylor Sexton said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, that's part of it. Shedd saw himself as consciously recovering an older Augustinianism, but there seems to be a sort of gravitational attraction towards highly individual formulations that is particularly difficult for American theological writers to resist.
> ...



Indeed! It'd be nice to meet you if you are ever down this way.


----------



## MW (Sep 18, 2016)

I would suggest Berkhof, and I am surprised his ST is not already required reading. When Calvin and Berkhof have been read and understood, then a work like Turretin's will provide deeper waters.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 18, 2016)

MW said:


> I would suggest Berkhof, and I am surprised his ST is not already required reading. When Calvin and Berkhof have been read and understood, then a work like Turretin's will provide deeper waters.



I wish it were required! Unfortunately, it seems that at TEDS Berkhof has been moved to the "recommended reading" section in most systematics syllabi. My Systematic Theology III professor (Dr. Graham Cole) referenced him a good bit. I would imagine this is because 1) he is "outdated" and 2) he is thoroughly Reformed, which would not be fitting for a "broadly evangelical" seminary, despite the fact that we have many and a growing number of Reformed students and professors here.


----------



## MW (Sep 18, 2016)

Taylor Sexton said:


> I wish it were required! Unfortunately, it seems that at TEDS Berkhof has been moved to the "recommended reading" section in most systematics syllabi. My Systematic Theology III professor (Dr. Graham Cole) referenced him a good bit. I would imagine this is because 1) he is "outdated" and 2) he is thoroughly Reformed, which would not be fitting for a "broadly evangelical" seminary, despite the fact that we have many and a growing number of Reformed students and professors here.



In that case I would definitely follow up on this "recommended reading." 

Most of the present systematics function as a collection of topics. The idea of system itself, in the sense of how doctrines interconnect, is rarely explored. The student is virtually left to frame his own system. A work like Berkhof's can be very helpful in showing the importance of integration and order.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Sep 18, 2016)

And so readily available, too:

https://www.biblicaltraining.org/library/systematic-theology-louis-berkhof
https://www.biblicaltraining.org/library/summary-christian-doctrine-louis-berkhof


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Sep 19, 2016)

MW said:


> I would suggest Berkhof, and I am surprised his ST is not already required reading.


I agree. The Erdmans Ed is best as it includes BOTH the Introduction to the Systematic Theology as well as the main Systematic Theology


----------



## Taylor (Sep 19, 2016)

Stephen L Smith said:


> I agree. The Erdmans Ed is best as it includes BOTH the Introduction to the Systematic Theology as well as the main Systematic Theology



I have the Banner of Truth edition. I considered getting the Eerdmans edition, but I heard that the binding is rather poor, which is a big deal for bibliophiles like me.


----------



## JimmyH (Sep 19, 2016)

The binding on the hardcover isn't bad. It is sewn, and the current edition includes the introduction to systematic rheology which used to be a separate volume. The author considered it essential to read before the main systematic.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk


----------



## lynnie (Sep 19, 2016)

_Prior to the production of Hodge's three volume masterpiece, Turretin (in Latin!) was the standard seminary text at Princeton._

If you don't mind me asking, why don't you guys recommend Charles Hodge in your fave top picks? Just curious.


----------



## ProtestantBankie (Sep 19, 2016)

Turretin - I affirm against the others.


----------



## Logan (Sep 19, 2016)

lynnie said:


> _Prior to the production of Hodge's three volume masterpiece, Turretin (in Latin!) was the standard seminary text at Princeton._
> 
> If you don't mind me asking, why don't you guys recommend Charles Hodge in your fave top picks? Just curious.



Probably because the OP restricted the choices to one of the three he had 

I like Hodge quite a bit.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 19, 2016)

lynnie said:


> If you don't mind me asking, why don't you guys recommend Charles Hodge in your fave top picks?



I do have Hodge. I guess I should've listed him, as well.



ProtestantBankie said:


> Turretin - I affirm against the others.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 19, 2016)

lynnie said:


> _Prior to the production of Hodge's three volume masterpiece, Turretin (in Latin!) was the standard seminary text at Princeton._
> 
> If you don't mind me asking, why don't you guys recommend Charles Hodge in your fave top picks? Just curious.



There might be a few reasons. One is that there's no edition of Hodge that's comparably user-friendly to the most recent edition of Shedd. You'll find more Latin in Hodge than in translated Turretin, along with tracts of German. Another is that Hodge is a trifle eccentric compared to Turretin or Berkhof. A third is that if someone has the commitment to read a multi-volume systematic theology, they might as well go for the cream of Turretin or Bavinck. 

Because Hodge is neither the shortest, most accessible, most influential, most standard, most popular, most eloquent, most comprehensive, or most exact, barring a particular interest in Princeton there's probably not a compelling reason to _begin_ with him.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 19, 2016)

Taylor Sexton said:


> he is thoroughly Reformed, which would not be fitting for a "broadly evangelical" seminary, *despite the fact that we have many and a growing number of Reformed students and professors here.*



Growing yet never grown! This was the story in the early 90s when a dear friend of mine attended there... and it was the same reality in the late 90s/early 00s when I was in proximity to the school. (Most of my friends attended there and I worked right across the street at Hewitt...) Some things never change! At TEDS Reformed theology is to its students an exotic woman with whom they have a summer fling before going back home to the girl next door.


----------



## johnny (Sep 19, 2016)

Feeling a lot of love for Mr T on this thread.
Maybe we should change our name to TurretinBoard.


----------



## MW (Sep 19, 2016)

lynnie said:


> If you don't mind me asking, why don't you guys recommend Charles Hodge in your fave top picks? Just curious.



There are specific "strains" of reformed theology in the 19th cent., and each one relies on different types of philosophy. Hodge, Dabney, and Shedd, are different from each other though they are all "Calvinist" in the main. It is good to read them in order to understand the intricacies of doctrine in terms of philosophical theology, but not necessarily the best for learning the reformed system as a whole.


----------



## MW (Sep 19, 2016)

ProtestantBankie said:


> Turretin - I affirm against the others.



I distinguish.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 19, 2016)

SolaScriptura said:


> At TEDS Reformed theology is to its students an exotic woman with whom they have a summer fling before going back home to the girl next door.



That's an interesting way to put it. Lol.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Sep 19, 2016)

SolaScriptura said:


> Taylor Sexton said:
> 
> 
> > he is thoroughly Reformed, which would not be fitting for a "broadly evangelical" seminary, *despite the fact that we have many and a growing number of Reformed students and professors here.*
> ...


Always a pleasure to see you weighing in when we are flailing about and manage to summarize the matter in a way that all can understand, brother. You have been sorely missed. I have been remembering you and your new pastorate in my prayers often. I hope all is well with you and yours.


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 19, 2016)

> Because Hodge is neither the shortest, most accessible, most influential, most standard, most popular, most eloquent, most comprehensive, or most exact, barring a particular interest in Princeton there's probably not a compelling reason to begin with him.



Wow! What an amazing turn of phrase! I concur with the preference for Bavinck or Turretin over Hodge. Either Turretin or Bavinck would be a more substantial alternative to Shedd (and Berkhof is just Bavinck light). If you don't want to tackle the full Bavinck, you can always do abridged one volume edition. I'm a little surprised that the TEDS folks don't want you to read Grudem. You could always tackle the Systematic Theology of Joel Osteen or Rick Warren.


----------



## reaganmarsh (Sep 19, 2016)

DMcFadden said:


> You could always tackle the Systematic Theology of Joel Osteen.



At the risk of derailing the thread:

I struggle to imagine Osteen utilizing a book allowance, much less possessing a work of systematic theology...

Ok, got that off my chest. 

As you were.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 19, 2016)

DMcFadden said:


> I'm a little surprised that the TEDS folks don't want you to read Grudem.



Although Grudem is a big name at TEDS, the issue is that Grudem's systematic theology is essentially popular level. Secondly, Grudem's area of expertise (and his Ph.D.) is New Testament, not systematics. Hence, others are chosen. One of the big texts used is Michael Horton's systematics text.



DMcFadden said:


> You could always tackle the Systematic Theology of Joel Osteen or Rick Warren.



I thought about that, but I want to keep it light before digging into too deep to the things of God. That's why I thought I might start out with a little Turretin before diving in to something as technical as Osteen or Warren.


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 19, 2016)

reaganmarsh said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > You could always tackle the Systematic Theology of Joel Osteen.
> ...



What do you mean?


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 19, 2016)

Taylor Sexton said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a little surprised that the TEDS folks don't want you to read Grudem.
> ...



How true. And, for most of us on the PB, we lack the linguistic skill to read Osteen. All Glossalalia and Blarney.


----------



## reaganmarsh (Sep 19, 2016)

Ok, I'm stopping now. My recommendation re: the OP is still as per above.


----------

