# Who was the greatest Christian thinker of the 20th Century?



## Tim

Who was the greatest Christian thinker of the 20th Century?

Please pick who you think is the greatest according to the following criteria. 
1.	He is able to see things that others cannot, or connects things in a new way (while still being faithful to revealed Truth of old);
2.	He is able to articulate his ideas well and make them understood;
3.	His ideas have real meaning for people (i.e., they make a difference).

My vote would be Francis Schaeffer for helping us understand our history and our possible future. A close second would be Greg Bahnsen for his ability to explain apologetics.


----------



## discipulo

Tim said:


> Who was the greatest Christian thinker of the 20th Century?
> 
> Please pick who you think is the greatest according to the following criteria.
> 1.	He is able to see things that others cannot, or connects things in a new way (while still being faithful to revealed Truth of old);
> 2.	He is able to articulate his ideas well and make them understood;
> 3.	His ideas have real meaning for people (i.e., they make a difference).
> 
> My vote would be Francis Schaeffer for helping us understand our history and our possible future. A close second would be Greg Bahnsen for his ability to explain apologetics.



I really appreciate Schaeffer, for his understanding that Culture, Arts and Philosophy are not optional to understand the modern man.

I would say: *Abraham Kuyper*

Kuyper founded the VU (Free University in Amsterdam), a University (Universal Knowledge) where Philosophy was researched in a Calvinist Frame of Thought - Herman Dooyeweerd, Th Vollenhoven (who were actually brothers in law) are just the most renowned of many Reformed Scholars.

For instance Cornelius Van Til was heavily influenced by both, while 
Banshen and Frame owe a lot to Van Til.

As Schaeffer was very influenced by Hans Rookmaaker, the Art Historian that made his doctorate in the VU and lectured worldwide.

All this can traced back to the vision of Abraham Kuyper.

Kuyper on his speech at inaugural address at the dedication of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, said:

_There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: ‘Mine!’_

It had a lasting impact on the audience, some said: _we left ready to make another reformation._ 

And Holland had a Reformation, in the Church, in Government and in Society.


In 1898 Abraham Kuyper was invited to deliver several lectures at Princeton University, he spoke on this:

Lecture 1: Calvinism as a Life System 
Lecture 2: Calvinism and Religion 
Lecture 3: Calvinism and Politics 
Lecture 4: Calvinism and Science 
Lecture 5: Calvinism and Art 
Lecture 6: Calvinism and the Future

http://www.kuyper.org/main/publish/books_essays/printer_17.shtml


----------



## Manuel

I would say it is Joel Osteen for helping us understand that Christ came so we can get rid of the bad habits that make our lives unhappy.



Okay, put the rocks down, I admit it was a bad joke.

me very sorry


----------



## Tim

Wikipedia says that Kuyper was homeschooled!


----------



## discipulo

Tim said:


> Wikipedia says that Kuyper was homeschooled!


I guess that means that his primary school was at home,


but he made the Gymnasium (roughly equivalent high school), in Holland this means, even today, 5 years of latin and 5 years of Greek, plus all else, ufff

Later he graduated with highest honors from Leyden University. 

He went on to receive his Doctorate in Sacred Theology also from Leyden.

He taught Dogmatics, and later, being nominated by the Queen: Prime Minister of Holland, was replaced by Herman Bavinck.


----------



## Hamalas

Manuel said:


> I would say it is Joel Osteen for helping us understand that Christ came so we can get rid of the bad habits that make our lives unhappy.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, put the rocks down, I admit it was a bad joke.
> 
> me very sorry



  

What a silly joke! Everybody knows who the _real_ powerhouses are:


----------



## Staphlobob

There are so many that it might just be impossible to say with any sense of finality. Schaeffer was/is great. Kuyper too. But I just finished reading a biography of *Gresham Machen* and would like to throw his name into the ring as all of the criteria definitely apply to him. (Also, he was from Baltimore and is buried here.)


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Gordon Clark


----------



## brianeschen

I would say it was RJ Rushdoony for his 1) Institutes of Biblical Law and 2) reviving the Christian school and homeschool movement.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

brianeschen said:


> I would say it was RJ Rushdoony for his 1) Institutes of Biblical Law and 2) reviving the Christian school and homeschool movement.



Good pick. Of course he is just an "amateur" theologian...


----------



## Kevin

RJ Rushdoony.

1) Without him to read, what would Francis Scheaffer have had to say?

2) Also I would think that the Christian School & Home School movements are possibly the most signifigant trends in protestantism of the last 40 years.

3) His followers were key in debunking dispensationalism.

4) He introduced the Old Testament to an entire generation of evangelicals, who BTW have still never heard of him.


----------



## Anton Bruckner

1. Gary North
2. Van Til
3. Bahnsen

-----Added 2/6/2009 at 08:15:36 EST-----



Tim said:


> Wikipedia says that Kuyper was homeschooled!


so was Tim Teabow and Mozart.


----------



## TimV

Rushdoony said Van Til was the greatest, but one can not underestimate the influence of the homeschooling movement, and Rushdoony is the central figure.

Today there are scores of thousands, and it will soon be millions, of people entering the workforce and gaining the franchise that where homeschooled largely because of Rushdoony's influence. He constantly wrote about it and defended it in courtrooms all across the nations (and almost never was thanked by the people he helped afterwards).

He didn't care if anyone was Presbyterian, Baptist, Pentecostal, Catholic, etc..as a young man I did some tree trimming work for a guy who was Arminian Baptist, and we were all in a coffee shop, and in explanation of why his daughter was in the Chalcedon Christian school, he said "All my Children have to have at least one year in Rushdoony's school".


----------



## RamistThomist

Sergius Bulgakov

Vladimir Lossky

Henri de Lubac

Hans urs von Balthasar

Schaeffer wasn't that profound. As others noted, he simply copied Rushdoony but he got to maintain Reformed respectability. While I learned the Reformed faith under Bahnsen and Rushdoony, most of philosophy and theology has moved on.


----------



## Tim

Ivanhoe said:


> Sergius Bulgakov
> 
> Vladimir Lossky
> 
> Henri de Lubac
> 
> Hans urs von Balthasar
> 
> Schaeffer wasn't that profound. As others noted, he simply copied Rushdoony but he got to maintain Reformed respectability. While I learned the Reformed faith under Bahnsen and Rushdoony, most of philosophy and theology has moved on.



Could you please tell us a few things about these men you listed? What makes them great? I am eager to hear of what they have done! I have never heard of them (am I sheltered?).


----------



## RamistThomist

The first two are Russian guys. They left Mother Russia when the Bolshevieks took over. They went to Paris and introduced to the West many things that were kept hidden. 

I don't agree with everything they say. I think Bulgakov's "intrapesonal" personal essence of the Trinity borders on adding another member to the Trinity, but he does clarify the current debates of his time.

Lossky is just fun to read, even when he is annoying. 

de Lubac was a Catholic who advocated a very non-Cahtolic reading of Aquinas and nature-grace.

von Balthasar, another Catholic, blessed the chuch by bringing aesthetics back into the conversation.


----------



## Hamalas

> Schaeffer wasn't that profound.



What?!?! That's like saying Francis Bacon wasn't all that smart because he didn't start the Scientific revolution he only popularized it. Schaeffer _was_ a profound thinker, one who not only wrestled with big ideas, he made them popular as well. I'm not saying this to discount any of the other names mentioned. Indeed, I'm not sure that I would call Schaeffer the greatest thinker. However, we should approach this great man with some humility.


----------



## Tripel

Hands down, Francis Schaeffer.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Without Cornelius Van Til and R.J. Rushdoony there would be no Schaeffer.


----------



## Kevin

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Without Cornelius Van Til and R.J. Rushdoony there would be no Schaeffer.





Plus he didn't footnote anything.


----------



## larryjf

Tim said:


> Who was the greatest Christian thinker of the 20th Century?
> 
> Please pick who you think is the greatest according to the following criteria.
> 1.	He is able to see things that others cannot, or connects things in a new way (while still being faithful to revealed Truth of old);
> 2.	He is able to articulate his ideas well and make them understood;
> 3.	His ideas have real meaning for people (i.e., they make a difference).
> 
> My vote would be Francis Schaeffer for helping us understand our history and our possible future. A close second would be Greg Bahnsen for his ability to explain apologetics.



I would say that R.C. Sproul and J.I. Packer should be considered as well...especially because of how the articulate ideas in an easily digestible way.


----------



## ServantofGod

C.S. Lewis. You can't read _Mere Christianity_ or _A Grief Observed_ and not be moved by this man's intellect and reason. And of course _The Pilgrim's Regress_. His ability to define between faith and reason(seems to be influenced by John Locke); and one(me at least) cannot read his works without "Wow! I never thought of it like that!" going through your(my) head every ten minutes.


----------



## RamistThomist

Schaeffer copied and pasted Rushdoony and Van Til.


----------



## discipulo

Ivanhoe said:


> Schaeffer copied and pasted Rushdoony and Van Til.



That is true, but also on Philosophy and Science there are the pure thinkers and developers and the spreaders, the ones that take it to a broader, simpler, popular audience.

Everyone can remember Isaac Asimov or Carl Sagan.

I think Francis Schaeffer did a very god job publishing books with a good depth of apologetics and cultural debate, translated in many languages (even portuguese  ) and reaching a Christian audience mainly used to read books called 5 steps with a Sun Set on the cover.

And throughout that interaction and wide reaching, Schaeffer never compromised, always stood for Scripture Inerrancy, Reformed Doctrine, Biblical Creationism…


----------



## Hamalas

ServantofGod said:


> C.S. Lewis. You can't read _Mere Christianity_ or _A Grief Observed_ and not be moved by this man's intellect and reason. And of course _The Pilgrim's Regress_. His ability to define between faith and reason(seems to be influenced by John Locke); and one(me at least) cannot read his works without "Wow! I never thought of it like that!" going through your(my) head every ten minutes.



Good point. Even though I, like many here, have some problems with much of his theology as far as greatest Christian thinkers go, he's definitely up there in the running.


----------



## greenbaggins

I'm itching to say Cornelius Van Til. However, I cannot say that he fulfills the criteria of being easy to read. I'm seminary trained and I find him hard slogging. The honor would then undoubtedly have to go to C.S. Lewis, much as I appreciate Gordon Clark (my father was his best friend), Van Til, and others that have been mentioned. The theonomist authors, unfortunately for those who claim them to be the greatest thinkers, have not had the influence outside their own relatively small circles necessary to be considered as the greatest thinker of the 20th century (with the possible exception of Rushdoony).


----------



## MMasztal

Van Til, Rushdoony, and Bahnsen (whose full potential was not realized due to his untimely death).


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

What? No Barth? I'm just sayin'. 

AMR


----------



## discipulo

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> What? No Barth? I'm just sayin'.
> 
> AMR



I think it was Somerset Maughan who received a manuscript of a candidate to publish a novel and answered him:

Your book has good and original ideas, just a pity that the good are not original and the original are not good.

Karl Barth, the genuine good belongs to Calvin, the genuine original to Kirkegaard...


----------



## yeutter

I am dying to say Benjamin Breckenridge Warfield. He was brilliant but did not successfully connect beyond the circles of reformed clergy and academics.

John H. Gerstner would be my first choice. He had an insightful critique of Barthian and Brunners version of neoorthodoxy, and its links with older forms of liberalism. He showed the problems with the VanTillian approach to apologetics. Would the recovery of Jonathan Edwards have occurred without Gerstner? How many of us were pointed to B. B. Warfield by him? He provided a new and helpful way of reading St. Thomas Aquinas and Thomas Bardwardine. R. C. Sproul is fine but he built on a foundation layed by Gerstner.


----------



## CharlieJ

This did say Christian, right? Not... person unheard of outside of Reformed circles. Gordon Clark isn't even popular _inside_ Reformed circles. Most people only know him because of the controversy with Van Til. As for Van Til, I'm not sure enough time has passed to know whether some of his more distinctive ideas last or fizzle, and whether he will effectively penetrate mainstream evangelicalism.


C.S. Lewis is probably the only person that qualifies. Everyone from Fundamental Baptists to the confessional Reformed to amorphous megachurches knows him. He interacted with Catholics, critics and pagans. He wrote on both theology and piety. His works are read by children, teenagers, and adults. Also, he was a respectable, influential figure in his secular field, not something that most of these other guys can claim.

I can say all this, because I don't even really like C. S. Lewis.


----------



## Grymir

Barth? Oh the humanity. This thread has been disgraced. Sigh. 

Francis Schaeffer!


----------



## LawrenceU

I would say Schaeffer. He may have used the work of others as a basis, but he expanded upon it and was very effective at spreading the thoughts outside of the theological-intellectual community. His influence can be found in almost every stream of Western Christianity.


----------



## sotzo

Lesslie Newbigin


----------



## David FCC

I pray that one day I would be discerning enough to give an answer to a question like this. 

All i can do for now is sit back and watch


----------



## charliejunfan

Cornelius Van Til


----------



## RamistThomist

to be a good popularizer, you have to get the material right. Most scholars say Schaeffer mispresented the Greeks, Aquinas, and Hegel. I am not dissing the man--he helped me out a key time, but to say he is the greatest thinker of the 20th century is a bit naive. 

This passes right over Alvin Plantiga, Miroslav Volf, Barth (like him or not), de Lubac, Lossky, Bulgakov, etc. All of whom dwarf Schaeffer


----------



## Ivan

The one person who had the greatest influence on *me* is J.I. Packer. His book _Knowing God_ introduced me to and thrusted me into the realm of Reformed theology. In fact, there are many Anglicans who have had an influence on my thinking. I wonder what that means?


----------



## Puritan Sailor

I would say Van Til and Vos. Both started revolutions in their perspective fields, and those who followed have been building on or reacting to their ideas ever since, even outside reformed circles (even though they probably wouldn't recognize the names).


----------



## Kevin

Ivanhoe said:


> to be a good popularizer, you have to get the material right. Most scholars say Schaeffer mispresented the Greeks, Aquinas, and Hegel. I am not dissing the man--he helped me out a key time, but to say he is the greatest thinker of the 20th century is a bit naive.
> 
> This passes right over Alvin Plantiga, Miroslav Volf, Barth (like him or not), de Lubac, Lossky, Bulgakov, etc. All of whom dwarf Schaeffer



I didn't want to be the one to say it, but...

Now, I must say that Schaeffer was a key figue in my own life. My first two years in university I read his complete works & they were very influencial. 

However the question was who was the greatest "Thinker". If you plagerise (or fail to credit), AND you misunderstand (or misrepresent) in a fundamental way some of the very people you are talking about, then is it fair to consider the person a major thinker?

I would say, no. FS is not a great thinker.

I would however say he is a great & infuencial christian leader, missionary, apologist, & teacher. If we could each do half as much as him in only one of those areas, then our lives would well spent.


----------



## Iakobos_1071

Arthur W. Pink


----------



## ManleyBeasley

Ivanhoe said:


> Schaeffer copied and pasted Rushdoony and Van Til.



I'll take Schaeffer over a couple contemplative Catholics any day of the week.

-----Added 2/6/2009 at 01:22:07 EST-----

It really depends on what's meant here. Are we talking about impact or original thought? On pure impact you could throw John Piper's name in the hat. I wonder how many people on the PB became reformed through Pipers influence (I did)? That being said Dr. Piper is certainly not bringing anything new to the table. He's communicating old truths effectively to a younger generation. I would say the best answer is probably C.S. Lewis and Abraham Kuyper because they had huge impact but were also original thinkers.


----------



## Ivan

Piper help me down the road, as well as a number of other writers. Packer was the beginning of it all for me, at least offically. I was asking lots of questions in my little country Baptist church where I was a member long before I heard of Calvin, Packer, etc. I believe a clear understanding of the Bible will bring into the camp.


----------



## puritanpilgrim

> In 1898 Abraham Kuyper was invited to deliver several lectures at Princeton University, he spoke on this:
> 
> Lecture 1: Calvinism as a Life System
> Lecture 2: Calvinism and Religion
> Lecture 3: Calvinism and Politics
> Lecture 4: Calvinism and Science
> Lecture 5: Calvinism and Art
> Lecture 6: Calvinism and the Future



Kuyper is fantastic. I love that book. The stone lectures. I was really disappointed to learn that Kuyper was quite a racist. He had a very low view of blacks. And he had some involvement in Dutch colonization in Africa. I would love to be wrong on this, so if I am, please show me.

-----Added 2/6/2009 at 01:31:58 EST-----

Paul


----------



## brianeschen

puritanpilgrim said:


> Kuyper is fantastic. I love that book. The stone lectures. I was really disappointed to learn that Kuyper was quite a racist. He had a very low view of blacks. And he had some involvement in Dutch colonization in Africa. I would love to be wrong on this, so if I am, please show me.



What was wrong with the Dutch colonizing Africa?


----------



## Poimen

Much of the debate will be rather subjective i.e. who has influenced, encouraged, ME the most. 

Having said that I will second the nomination of Abraham Kuyper.


----------



## Scott1

Many, many good choices here. This would make a good poll with a multiple vote option.


----------



## puritanpilgrim

> What was wrong with the Dutch colonizing Africa?



I hope your kidding.


----------



## Kevin

puritanpilgrim said:


> What was wrong with the Dutch colonizing Africa?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope your kidding.
Click to expand...




New thread?


----------



## steven-nemes

Plantinga should be up there.


----------



## RamistThomist

ManleyBeasley said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Schaeffer copied and pasted Rushdoony and Van Til.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll take Schaeffer over a couple contemplative Catholics any day of the week.
> 
> -----Added 2/6/2009 at 01:22:07 EST-----
> 
> It really depends on what's meant here. Are we talking about impact or original thought? On pure impact you could throw John Piper's name in the hat. I wonder how many people on the PB became reformed through Pipers influence (I did)? That being said Dr. Piper is certainly not bringing anything new to the table. He's communicating old truths effectively to a younger generation. I would say the best answer is probably C.S. Lewis and Abraham Kuyper because they had huge impact but were also original thinkers.
Click to expand...


Neither de Lubac nor von Balthasar were contemplatives. Try readind them first. And Bulgakov and Lossky worked out their Trinitarian theology in the face of communist terror. 

I am trying not to disrespect Schaeffer. But really he wasn't a deep thinker. As to being Reformed, see how few pages are devoted to predestination. In one of the anecdotes Edith said they often refused to talk about it because it would drive people away.

Now for impact, I would agree he was decisive for the decades of the 60s and 70s, but then only. Rushdoony was far more decisive in mobilizing the Christian right (whether that was a good thing or not).


----------



## Whitefield

I vote for B.B. Warfield.


----------



## Classical Presbyterian

I think to be on this list, they must be dead.

Here are my top choices:

Reformed thought and doctrine:

Abraham Kuyper.

J. Gresham Machen

Christian Literature and imagination:

C.S. Lewis

J.R.R. Tolkien

Christian Apologetics:

Van Til


----------



## Theognome

I have to put RC Sproul on the top of my list. I don't read (or listen to) much of his stuff anymore, but his reach across the land is extreme and thus has incredible influence.

Also, I'd put up there Jay Adams and Keith Mathison. No, they're not heady theologians, but the simplicity of their work makes it very approachable for those new to both Christianity as well as Reformed thinking.

The deep thinkers are already well represented on this thread, and there's not a one of them I'd argue against. Shaeffer, Van Til and others have been very infuential to me personally.

Theognome


----------



## No Longer A Libertine

No love for Jonathan Edwards? What about Kirk Cameron?

I like me some Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Rutherford, Edwards, Spurgeon, Schaeffer in terms of influencing the progression of Christian thought.


----------



## toddpedlar

No Longer A Libertine said:


> No love for Jonathan Edwards? What about Kirk Cameron?
> 
> I like me some Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Rutherford, Edwards, Spurgeon, Schaeffer in terms of influencing the progression of Christian thought.



Considering that of the above only Schaeffer is a 20th century theologian, that's probably why the others haven't appeared on this thread which is about 20th century theologians


----------



## No Longer A Libertine

toddpedlar said:


> No Longer A Libertine said:
> 
> 
> 
> No love for Jonathan Edwards? What about Kirk Cameron?
> 
> I like me some Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Rutherford, Edwards, Spurgeon, Schaeffer in terms of influencing the progression of Christian thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Considering that of the above only Schaeffer is a 20th century theologian, that's probably why the others haven't appeared on this thread which is about 20th century theologians
Click to expand...

Theology transcends time, booyah!

In that case give me Billy Sunday, Charles Finney, Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swaggert, Jim Bakker, Pat Robertson, Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye.


----------



## Rangerus

Hamalas said:


> ServantofGod said:
> 
> 
> 
> C.S. Lewis. You can't read _Mere Christianity_ or _A Grief Observed_ and not be moved by this man's intellect and reason. And of course _The Pilgrim's Regress_. His ability to define between faith and reason(seems to be influenced by John Locke); and one(me at least) cannot read his works without "Wow! I never thought of it like that!" going through your(my) head every ten minutes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Even though I, like many here, have some problems with much of his theology as far as greatest Christian thinkers go, he's definitely up there in the running.
Click to expand...


CS Lewis for me. 

Great thread for future reference and reading!


----------



## ManleyBeasley

Ivanhoe said:


> ManleyBeasley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Schaeffer copied and pasted Rushdoony and Van Til.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll take Schaeffer over a couple contemplative Catholics any day of the week.
> 
> -----Added 2/6/2009 at 01:22:07 EST-----
> 
> It really depends on what's meant here. Are we talking about impact or original thought? On pure impact you could throw John Piper's name in the hat. I wonder how many people on the PB became reformed through Pipers influence (I did)? That being said Dr. Piper is certainly not bringing anything new to the table. He's communicating old truths effectively to a younger generation. I would say the best answer is probably C.S. Lewis and Abraham Kuyper because they had huge impact but were also original thinkers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither de Lubac nor von Balthasar were contemplatives. Try readind them first. And Bulgakov and Lossky worked out their Trinitarian theology in the face of communist terror.
> 
> I am trying not to disrespect Schaeffer. But really he wasn't a deep thinker. As to being Reformed, see how few pages are devoted to predestination. In one of the anecdotes Edith said they often refused to talk about it because it would drive people away.
> 
> Now for impact, I would agree he was decisive for the decades of the 60s and 70s, but then only. Rushdoony was far more decisive in mobilizing the Christian right (whether that was a good thing or not).
Click to expand...


I was more commenting on your use of RCs then I was defending Schaeffer being the greatest mind. That's for another thread (which has already been done).

-----Added 2/6/2009 at 05:28:36 EST-----



steven-nemes said:


> Plantinga should be up there.



Plantinga is one of the most brilliant philosophers I have ever read regardless of the era.


----------



## steven-nemes

ManleyBeasley said:


> Plantinga is one of the most brilliant philosophers I have ever read regardless of the era.







No Longer A Libertine said:


> In that case give me Billy Sunday, Charles Finney, Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swaggert, Jim Bakker, Pat Robertson, Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye.


----------



## Hippo

Iakobos_1071 said:


> Arthur W. Pink



The problem with Pink is that you cannot overlook his dismal view of the visible Church, when he flirted with the concept of encouraging Christians to leave the Church and failed to attend Church himself he left the path of Christian orthodoxy.

I do like Pinks lack of originality, anything novel is usually wrong and reconecting with past wisdom is much more valuable than speculating where the Apostles were silent.


----------



## MW

All these assessments are based on writings. It is possible that the greatest Christian thinker never wrote a thing, and perhaps even did so out of principle.


----------



## jambo

I am surpised no one has mentioned Martyn Lloyd-Jones. He may not have been a theologian, yet his sermons are full of wisely applied theology. He may not have written any books (all his books are collections of his sermons) the way Schaeffer, van Til, CS Lewis etc did, but books bearing his name are a rich legacy for us to enjoy as he had his finger on the pulse of the contemporary church scene sounding out the alarm calls with clarity when necessary. He had a big influence on the resurgence of reformed literature in the last century. He was a doctor of medicine but his ability to diagnose the problem and proclaim the cure for hard, distant, cold, rebellious, complacent, proud hearts made him a spiritual doctor. He certainly meets the criteria given in the thread.


----------



## Jesus is my friend

Tim said:


> Who was the greatest Christian thinker of the 20th Century?
> 
> Please pick who you think is the greatest according to the following criteria.
> 1.	He is able to see things that others cannot, or connects things in a new way (while still being faithful to revealed Truth of old);
> 2.	He is able to articulate his ideas well and make them understood;
> 3.	His ideas have real meaning for people (i.e., they make a difference).
> 
> My vote would be Francis Schaeffer for helping us understand our history and our possible future. A close second would be Greg Bahnsen for his ability to explain apologetics.



I would go with R.C Sproul-I just love that Man!,
1) I'm not so sure that he's seeing things that others have not,however, he made the best use of the available technology in the 20th century,Radio,Internet etc.,and in doing so opened up multitudes to the beauty of God in Reformed Theology,so I suppose he utlilized this medium wonderfully 
and should recieve credit for this
2+3)Given his intellectual brilliance,the fact he is able to articulate the deepest truth and bring them to the simplest person (people like me)is massive,I deeply respect any man that can have the God given talents like R.C and humbly,lovingly care enough for his hearers to go to great lengths and reach their level,from the Theologian to the common laborer (me)I believe that cannot be underestimated,I often think of William Tyndale in this light with his "ploughboy edition" of the New Testament


----------



## Ivan

jambo said:


> I am surpised no one has mentioned Martyn Lloyd-Jones. He may not have been a theologian, yet his sermons are full of wisely applied theology. He may not have written any books (all his books are collections of his sermons) the way Schaeffer, van Til, CS Lewis etc did, but books bearing his name are a rich legacy for us to enjoy as he had his finger on the pulse of the contemporary church scene sounding out the alarm calls with clarity when necessary. He had a big influence on the resurgence of reformed literature in the last century. He was a doctor of medicine but his ability to diagnose the problem and proclaim the cure for hard, distant, cold, rebellious, complacent, proud hearts made him a spiritual doctor. He certainly meets the criteria given in the thread.



For me, yes, he was a great influence and I know many others who can say the same.


----------



## Jesus is my friend

Iakobos_1071 said:


> Arthur W. Pink



Excellent Choice Brother!!!


----------



## Classical Presbyterian

I still want to argue more for Machen. He used his academic credentials to take on the 20th century Liberals and beat them at their own game. Point for point, he used sound exegesis, the wisdom of historic Christianity and profound communication skills to effectively point out what others had missed--the obvious point that theological liberalism is NOT Christianity.

I would say that this makes him not only an original thinker (in his approach to confronting the issues of the time) but also a man who avoided the sins of so many of his Reformed peers. He fought for the faith once delivered and avoided the fads of shallow fundamentalism, dispensationalism and intellectual malaise.

And he did it with style! More than you can say for the pretenders like Barth or Niebuhr!


----------



## reformed trucker

On my shelf & looking forward to digging into:

Kuyper 
Machen
Schaeffer
(only gave Machen & Schaeffer brief readings so far)

For me the most influential has been Dr. Bahnsen. Can't wait to meet him and give him a great big man-hug for being faithful to his calling. Since I am always driving, I have between 300 - 400 hours of his lectures on CD.

I've listened to so much Bahnsen, I'm almost convinced to become Presbyterian... almost!


----------



## Tim

MMasztal said:


> Van Til, Rushdoony, and Bahnsen (whose full potential was not realized due to his untimely death).



Just a quick comment on Bahnsen. I would actually say that Bahnsen _did_ realize his full potential - he did everything God had ordained for him to do and then was taken to be with his Lord, according to the Plan.  

But I know what you are saying, brother, it was sad that Bahnsen died young.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek

Tim said:


> Who was the greatest Christian thinker of the 20th Century?
> 
> Please pick who you think is the greatest according to the following criteria.
> 1.	He is able to see things that others cannot, or connects things in a new way (while still being faithful to revealed Truth of old);
> 2.	He is able to articulate his ideas well and make them understood;
> 3.	His ideas have real meaning for people (i.e., they make a difference).



When I look back at the OP and the stated criteria, I don't see that it implies widely read (outside certain circles) or popularity. Number 3 implies significance, but to me this doesn't necessarily mean significant and formative to Christianity-at-large, but profound in his own right . . . and according to one's own opinion.


----------



## OPC'n

Sproul...hands down!!!


----------



## ThomasCartwright

I think it is impossible to say what constitutes a great thinker as God ordained different men to think, write, and preach in different ways for the Body of Christ. The most influential is probably Martyn Lloyd Jones, the most insightful Edward Poole Connor, the most scholarly probably Van Til, Machen or Warfield.


----------



## Devin

I could spend all day thinking about this. However, when I read the criteria, I couldn't keep R.J. Rushdooney out of my head. Give me different criteria and I may change my vote, but Rush hits the OP out of the park.


----------



## fredtgreco

This thread is way too subjective - but maybe that is OK.

Rushdooney doesn't even make my top 10 (that I can rattle off now) and likely doesn't even make my top 25 or 50 if I think real hard.


----------



## toddpedlar

fredtgreco said:


> This thread is way too subjective - but maybe that is OK.
> 
> Rushdooney doesn't even make my top 10 (that I can rattle off now) and likely doesn't even make my top 25 or 50 if I think real hard.



Certainly it's too subjective. Usually one puts at the top of their list people who have personally impacted THEM the most. (hence Schaeffer's predominance, and Sproul's even being on the list, etc. Neither of them, in my book, are particularly astounding contributors to theological development in the 20th century. They were/are great popularizers of theology, but I dont' see much, if anything, truly new in their writings. Rushdoony too for the same reason)


----------



## Adelphos

Wouldn't Francis Shaeffer be considered more of a philospher than a theologian?

On the other hand, if you're talking about Franky Shaeffer...well then...

On a more serious note, how about F. F. Bruce?


----------



## ExGentibus

I'd say Warfield. In a century that saw the preeminence of irrationality and of the unconscious, and the rise of Charismaticism and Liberalism, I think his opposition to both by simply upholding the traditional Reformed faith, as the last great Princeton theologian, gives his work particular significance.


----------



## py3ak

Ivanhoe said:


> Sergius Bulgakov
> 
> Vladimir Lossky
> 
> Henri de Lubac
> 
> Hans urs von Balthasar
> 
> Schaeffer wasn't that profound. As others noted, he simply copied Rushdoony but he got to maintain Reformed respectability. While I learned the Reformed faith under Bahnsen and Rushdoony, most of philosophy and theology has moved on.



Any thoughts on Karl Rahner?


----------



## discipulo

py3ak said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sergius Bulgakov
> 
> Vladimir Lossky
> 
> Henri de Lubac
> 
> Hans urs von Balthasar
> 
> Schaeffer wasn't that profound. As others noted, he simply copied Rushdoony but he got to maintain Reformed respectability. While I learned the Reformed faith under Bahnsen and Rushdoony, most of philosophy and theology has moved on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any thoughts on Karl Rahner?
Click to expand...


I read some Karl Rhaner to understand the RCC theology of Mary, and in my opinion it was really
week.

He stated that the immaculate conception and sinless perfection of Mary was a necessary condition to have conceived in her the Son of God.

It was of course more elaborated. 

My first simple naïve thought was how about the mother of Mary then?

Second thought how about original sin? How about the imputation of Adam’s sin in Romans 5?

Jesuits can be so liberal on basic doctrines, and yet on these «favourite Marian dogmas» of the Roman Church they are champions.

One Jesuit teacher I know doesn’t believe in the devil or in the physical bodily resurrection of Christ, but try questioning Mary’s Ascension, really sad…


----------



## Whitefield

ExGentibus said:


> I'd say Warfield. In a century that saw the preeminence of irrationality and of the unconscious, and the rise of Charismaticism and Liberalism, I think his opposition to both by simply upholding the traditional Reformed faith, as the last great Princeton theologian, gives his work particular significance.



Not to mention his analysis of perfectionism.


----------



## Adelphos

*Malcom and Jurgen?*

How about Malcom Muggeridge, and Jurgen Moltmann?


----------



## discipulo

Jesuits are also very proud of these rebel thinkers like Urs von Balthazar or Teilhard de Chardin, since the Roman Church has a hard time to digest their works, but after Vatican 2, everything goes.
Theilhard just made something like Inevitable Sanctification of the Human Race out of Natural Evolution. We don’t really see it do we?


----------



## Brian Withnell

My thoughts are varied. Impact on the world? Some of that would have to be RC Sproul. He had a great influence on my early reformed walk. Schaeffer would probably be the next most influential in my life, if for no other reason than my wife coming to Christ through reading Schaeffer (he would be high on my list without anything else). Kuyper I've got a lot of respect for as a thinker, but it is somewhat tempered ...

I reserve the high point for Van Til.

While others may have influenced him (as everyone owes much to the shoulders upon which they stand) I find his development of presuppositional apologetics as the most salient theological development of the century. Classical apologetics (Sproul, Packer, et al) I always saw as a mathematician; presuppositions were affirmed, but not acknowledged. Van Til was the first that stated what was patently obvious to me; there are things that have to be taken as true without proof (axiom) and those axioms are the basis of all that derives from them.


----------



## Jon Lake

For about a week in 83 I was considered the BEST ALL AROUND, I however lost this position in a game of Rock/Paper/Scissors. DOH! Why did I pick rock!


----------



## Calvinist Cowboy

Part of me wants to say R.C. Sproul. Even though he isn't the most "original" thinker, he has had a tremendous influence on thousands of people in clearly stating and communicating Reformed doctrine. Not only that, but he has this philosophical precision about him, this ability to take history, philosophy, and theology and dissect and cut and examine truth with all the precision of a lawyer or a surgeon, and build a comprehensive worldview that is soundly biblical. So, even though he is not the most original thinker, he is, in my opinion, the most logical, precise, and gifted thinker of the 20th century who is able to communicate his thoughts in a simple fashion to the laypeople.

As for most "original", I would say C.S. Lewis. Read the first half of Mere Christianity (the second half isn't all that great), the Weight of Glory, the Screwtape Letters (brilliant!), or the Last Battle. He could, without question, make you think.


----------



## timmopussycat

Tim said:


> Who was the greatest Christian thinker of the 20th Century?
> 
> Please pick who you think is the greatest according to the following criteria.
> 1.	He is able to see things that others cannot, or connects things in a new way (while still being faithful to revealed Truth of old);
> 2.	He is able to articulate his ideas well and make them understood;
> 3.	His ideas have real meaning for people (i.e., they make a difference).
> 
> My vote would be Francis Schaeffer for helping us understand our history and our possible future. A close second would be Greg Bahnsen for his ability to explain apologetics.



By these criteria, you appear to be asking for the most influential Christian worldwide.There is no question as to who has been the most significant theologian in terms of worldwide impact. 

Whatever we may think of his theology on a couple of points, John RW Stott stands head and shoulders above everybody else.

He saw the need for a theologically educated Anglican clergy in the third world and Africa particularly and moved to meet that need through the Langham trust. He is the single main reason that African and Asian Anglicans have remained faithful to the gospel, have built churches that are bright lights in their countries, and can wipe the theological floor with their NA and English counterparts.


----------



## nicnap

armourbearer said:


> All these assessments are based on writings. It is possible that the greatest Christian thinker never wrote a thing, and perhaps even did so out of principle.



Well, thank you for thinking of me Rev. Winzer, but my humility keeps me from accepting this now...maybe it can be applied posthumously?

Okay, but on a serious note, do you have someone in mind?


----------



## BertMulder

Anyone wonder why I pick Herman Hoeksema?


----------



## Whitefield

BertMulder said:


> Anyone wonder why I pick Herman Hoeksema?



His _Voice of Our Fathers_ was my first introduction to the Synod of Dort.


----------



## DMcFadden

The original criteria were a bit contradictory, or at least self-limiting.

* If you want general acceptance in the wider culture, we almost have to pick C.S. Lewis.

* If you mean an academic theologian, Barth took on the liberal establishment and had a greater impact on the world of theology and generations of ministerial training (not an altogether good thing, in my opinion). Only small and insular groups know most of the names mentioned. NO conservative rises to the level of "greatest" Christian thinker in the 20th century (in the theology category) . . . unfortunately. Several Christian philosophers have made an impact but their works are hardly accessible.

* Machen deserves a Daniel of the Year award for his courageous stand for truth and academic prowess. 

* George E. Ladd pioneered conservative engagement with the liberal establishment and was for a time the most famous evangelical Harvard trained NT PhD.

* Schaeffer, Sproul, Packer, and some of the others were primarily communicators and popularizers, not seminal thinkers. But, then, considering that I have taken classes or attended lectures from some of the so-called top Christian writers in the later 20th century, give me popularizers like Schaeffer, Sproul, or Packer any day!


----------



## Grymir

DMcFadden said:


> * If you mean an academic theologian, 'He who we will not name' took on the liberal establishment and had a greater impact on the world of theology and generations of ministerial training (not an altogether good thing, in my opinion).



Amen brother, preach on!!! I've seen first hand the problems in church's and in my local church. Hence my dis-like of Neo-Orthodoxy.



DMcFadden said:


> * Schaeffer, Sproul, Packer, and some of the others were primarily communicators and popularizers, not seminal thinkers. But, then, considering that I have taken classes or attended lectures from some of the so-called top Christian writers in the later 20th century, give me popularizers like Schaeffer, Sproul, or Packer any day!



Mega Ditto's! Schaeffer, although most don't consider him a 'giant', was a giant to me because he condensed the philosophical trends and was able to explain them and the impact that has on society and theology. His theological analysis was perhaps his best stuff. The ability to explain clearly and draw proper conclusions isn't easy, and yet he does it like a master. As much as I like to delve deeply into theology/philosophy, sometimes a good overview can just make ones day!


----------



## DMcFadden

Tim,

My profs at Westmont loved to dis Schaeffer as "nothing more" than a somewhat ignorant evangelist with a big vocabularly. But, in a time when I was captive to the nostrums of dispensationalism, growing up on the "wrong side of the tracks" with parents who never got beyond 8th grade (hey, my mom only went to school for 5 years before leaving home!), and attending a mainline church that did not teach much, discovering Schaeffer during my later high school years opened my eyes to the possibility of a Christian worldview. 

While it was disappointing to see my profs pooh-pooh my hero, his impact on me and on the general Christian world will always be cherished by me. That is why people like Sproul, Piper, Packer, and Schaeffer matter to me much more than some of the "giants" of the last century. Greatest thinkers? You've got to be kidding. More important to me than the greatest thinkers? Priceless!


----------



## TimV

Something else inherent in a question like this is the limitations of those answering the question. When I read Barth, I generally like what I can understand, but the problem is that I can't understand much, so I have to leave the interpretation of some things that he wrote to those I trust who _can_ understand him.

It's true he could have been purposely sneaky, and writing in ways that give him a back door when cornered, kind of like NT Wright. But I must admit I just don't have the wherewithal to understand Barth fully.

Interesting info from Timmo, like always. I do think there are things intrinsic in African and Asian cultures that had a bigger impact on the "conservative" positions of especially African churches. There is a deep seated revulsion of homosexuality, easy punishment for crime, women leading etc... that does coincide with conservative Western Christianity, but when it comes to weak points, they are really, really, weak. For instance I would not recommend anyone getting their hopes up that "conservative" African church leaders typically are faithful to their wives, don't practice nepotism with donations etc....


----------



## Theogenes

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Gordon Clark



I wholeheartily agree!


----------



## Craig

I think my reading is a bit too narrow to say definitively...

Van Til's thinking has influenced me greatly...but indirectly. I still can't understand him particularly well.

I do think Bahnsen belongs on the list, and Rushdoony. I would also consider Ravi Zacharias simply because he is thought-provoking and makes connections at times in ways I wouldn't have imagined.

As much as I hate to say it, C.S. Lewis probably does belong on the list if Schaeffer does...but I really think he is overly hyped up by people.

As far as thinkers that have influenced me...David Bayly, Tim Bayly, Dr. Forney, Bahnsen, Rushdoony, R.C. Sproul, James White, and Ravi Zacharias.


----------



## kalawine

Manuel said:


> I would say it is Joel Osteen for helping us understand that Christ came so we can get rid of the bad habits that make our lives unhappy.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, put the rocks down, I admit it was a bad joke.
> 
> me very sorry



Ewwww... terrible! OK, I'll put my rocks down. 

-----Added 2/8/2009 at 10:01:12 EST-----



greenbaggins said:


> I'm itching to say Cornelius Van Til. However, I cannot say that he fulfills the criteria of being easy to read. I'm seminary trained and I find him hard slogging. The honor would then undoubtedly have to go to C.S. Lewis, much as I appreciate Gordon Clark (my father was his best friend), Van Til, and others that have been mentioned. The theonomist authors, unfortunately for those who claim them to be the greatest thinkers, have not had the influence outside their own relatively small circles necessary to be considered as the greatest thinker of the 20th century (with the possible exception of Rushdoony).



Wow! Your Dad was Clark's best friend? I'd like to hear more about that! PM me a little about it sometime if you don't mind.

-----Added 2/8/2009 at 10:07:49 EST-----



Theogenes said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gordon Clark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wholeheartily agree!
Click to expand...


I know that loving Clark goes against the popular grain but I love to read Clark and I have learned an awful lot from him though I wouldn't agree with him on everything (as I wouldn't agree with anyone else on everything). 

I'm amazed at how much I love Clark and yet, right now I'm reading Bahnsen and I love him. A dichotomy which would no doubt puzzle the late Dr. John Robbins. 

Anyway, I meant to say that (even though I'm not as educated and well read as some of you here in the area of theology) with me, Gordon Clark is hard to beat in logic and originality.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Don't worry Kevin somehow in my messed up brain I have taken to love Clark, Van Til, Bahnsen, and Rushdoony.


----------



## kalawine

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Don't worry Kevin somehow in my messed up brain I have taken to love Clark, Van Til, Bahnsen, and Rushdoony.



I haven't read Rushdoony but I have some mp3's and I've heard him quoted by many preachers. Can't we just love 'em all?  I can't imagine getting to the "pearly gates" and being asked, "Are you a Van Tillian or a Clarkian?"

"A Clarkian (or whatever)"

"Depart from me you worker of iniquity! I never knew you!"


----------



## RamistThomist

py3ak said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sergius Bulgakov
> 
> Vladimir Lossky
> 
> Henri de Lubac
> 
> Hans urs von Balthasar
> 
> Schaeffer wasn't that profound. As others noted, he simply copied Rushdoony but he got to maintain Reformed respectability. While I learned the Reformed faith under Bahnsen and Rushdoony, most of philosophy and theology has moved on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any thoughts on Karl Rahner?
Click to expand...


Intellectually he is very smart and did much to get the church re-interested in Trinitarian theology. I am not so sure I would want him as a pastor, though.


----------



## py3ak

No, I wouldn't want him as a pastor either, though he seems to have been rather a good preacher. I was wondering why he didn't make the list when Urs von Balthazar did.


----------



## RamistThomist

py3ak said:


> No, I wouldn't want him as a pastor either, though he seems to have been rather a good preacher. I was wondering why he didn't make the list when Urs von Balthazar did.



good question. my list was completely aribtrary


----------

