# Best Systematic Theology



## Reformed Covenanter

Who do you think has written the best systematic theology. I go for Robert Reymond (while not agreeing with everything he says), with Louis Berkhof a close second.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

I forgot about John Brown of Haddington; could a moderator add him to the poll please?


----------



## Poimen

I voted for a Brakel: theological precision and pious warmth. Calvin would come a close second though. 

As for the others I have read small(er) portions of their work so when I get around to reading them I may change my mind but I doubt it.


----------



## JM

Gill then Reymond.


----------



## CarlosOliveira

I agree with Poimen. Brakel is theologically precise and warmth. I think Turretin comes second, Calvin in third, John Brown of Haddington in fourth and Berkhof in fifth.


----------



## FenderPriest

Calvin all the way. If I were to need one book from my library with my Bible for the rest of my life, it'd be The Institutes. Grudem is definitely up there, and I find his systematic accurate on almost all accounts (I'd disagree with his historic pre-mil position), and I think he's written it in such a way that is easily accessible by the layman reader.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

CarlosOliveira said:


> I agree with Poimen. Brakel is theologically precise and warmth. I think Turretin comes second, Calvin in third, John Brown of Haddington in fourth and Berkhof in fifth.


----------



## larryjf

I haven't read all of them, so my vote is only comparing those i have read. Here's the order i would put them from best to not best...

Charles Hodge
Robert Reymond
John Calvin
Louis Berkhof
Wayne Grudem

Robert Reymond would be #1 if he was more extensive in his work. He is right on theologically.

Charles Hodge is #1 because he is both theologically sound and has an extensive work covering many theological issues.

I have a soft spot for Calvin, but i enjoy volume 1 more than 2...i don't agree with some of his theological stances on ecclesiology, Sabbath keeping, etc. But he has a really wonderful writing style, and he was the first Reformed systematic theology that a read.

Berkhof is great because he is very easy to understand even when he tackles some tough subjects.

Grudem is also writes in a very accessible way, but his theology is not in line with mine on a few issues.


----------



## ChristopherPaul

I did not vote.

I have only read Reymond's and have referenced Calvin, Berkhof, and Grudem. As soon as I read or reference them all I will vote 

Herman Bavinck's three volume set has been highly recommended by friends of mine who attend Westminster (East).


----------



## Casey

You forgot Barth!


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

StaunchPresbyterian said:


> You forgot Barth!




Casey, don't make me angry brother.


----------



## KMK

Have you really read all of these Systematics? The young men on PB never cease to amaze me! I hope y'all set the world on fire! (You'll have to do it without me because I will never catch up with you guys)


----------



## Casey

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Casey, don't make me angry brother.




You should add to your list:

Ames
Bavinck
Witsius
and maybe G C Berkouwer


----------



## Guido's Brother

Yes, Bavinck definitely has to be on the list. His Reformed Dogmatics is unsurpassed, in my opinion.


----------



## DMcFadden

StaunchPresbyterian said:


> Ames
> Bavinck
> Witsius
> and maybe G C Berkouwer



O, come on Daniel. You are a secret Barth-ophile. Admit it. You probably harbor a longing to luxuriate in the logic defying contradictions of his dialetical thinking.

Frankly, I would unseat Berkouwer. His 14 volumes are worth having and reading, but I disagree with his wimping out on Scripture. Yes, Ames should be added along with Bavinck. 

Berkhof is a master of communicating Reformed theology in an organized and relatively concise fashion (1 volume!).

Calvin would be a given if for no other reasons than historical. However, what a goldmine!

I like Shedd and appreciate the updating of him by Biola's Gomes. He is one of the finest systematics ever produced and certainly better than anything produced by "modern evangelicals" (Gomes). Plus, it is available in Libronix format!

Hodge was a stand-by in college and seminary, although I disagree with him on a few issues (e.g., antiquity of the earth).

Reymond is probably the best of the modern Reformed theologies.

Dabney is a classic, if for no other reason than to think of Jacob and his fascination with confederate hero types.

John Gill was a BAPTIST; of course he should be on the list. I consider him somewhat hyper, but don't want to get into a fight on that one here.

Grudem has done a great service to the Christian community by writing a compendium of just about everything the Bible teaches, organized into clear and concise topics. Technical scholars fault him for thinking theology is "merely" a collection of proof texts strung together without an overt philosophy. But, it has sold more than 200,000 copies and has introduced Reformed thought to many. Plus, he is an historical pre-mill!!!

McMahon's ravings induced me to get Turretin. In seminary, Jack Rogers made him out to be the devil. McMahon's material convinced me that he was the missing link in my theological pedigree. What a precise writer!

Wilhelm a Brakel and John Brown are two I have not used much, but look forward to reading.

And, almost all of these are in either Libronix or Cross digital format.


----------



## toddpedlar

StaunchPresbyterian said:


> You forgot Barth!



Eh? Did you say barf?


----------



## Sydnorphyn

Please add Karl Barth. Thanks

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## VaughanRSmith

I voted Reymond because I am halfway through him and just over halfway through Calvin. I find Reymond clear, concise, and nice to read.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Exagorazo said:


> I voted Reymond because I am halfway through him and just over halfway through Calvin. I find Reymond clear, concise, and nice to read.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

KMK said:


> Have you really read all of these Systematics? The young men on PB never cease to amaze me! I hope y'all set the world on fire! (You'll have to do it without me because I will never catch up with you guys)



I have only read three from cover-to-cover (Calvin, Berkhof, Reymond) and have referred to others.


----------



## Casey

Could commentaries on catechisms ever be thought as being a sort of systematic theology? I mean, Ridgley's work reads like a systematic theology . . it's just arranged according to question and answer, much like Turretin. Why not Ursinus? Then there's Bullinger's _Decades_ -- do they count? How about Hodge's _Outlines_?  We certainly are not in lack regarding dogmatic theologies in the Reformed tradition!


----------



## RamistThomist

Grudem with Bavinck a distant second.


----------



## DMcFadden

Gee whiz, Daniel! You left off Feminist Systematic Theologies.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

StaunchPresbyterian said:


> Could commentaries on catechisms ever be thought as being a sort of systematic theology? I mean, Ridgley's work reads like a systematic theology . . it's just arranged according to question and answer, much like Turretin. Why not Ursinus? Then there's Bullinger's _Decades_ -- do they count? How about Hodge's _Outlines_?  We certainly are not in lack regarding dogmatic theologies in the Reformed tradition!



We have to draw the line somewhere.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

DMcFadden said:


> Daniel! You left off Feminist Systematic Theologies.



Do they have any!


----------



## DMcFadden

Daniel Ritchie said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel! You left off Feminist Systematic Theologies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do they have any!
Click to expand...


Actually, no. They do have systematic theologians by the bucket, none very orthodox in my experience. In your neck of the woods, however, Pamela Sue Anderson at Oxford is probably the most renown (although she is more of a philosopher of religion than a theologian).


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

DMcFadden said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel! You left off Feminist Systematic Theologies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do they have any!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no. They do have systematic theologians by the bucket, none very orthodox in my experience. In your neck of the woods, however, Pamela Sue Anderson at Oxford is probably the most renown (although she is more of a philosopher of religion than a theologian).
Click to expand...


Never heard of her; and I can't say that causes me much concern.


----------



## Stephen

Reymond is certainly my favorite. I sat under his teaching at Knox and he is very pastoral in his approach to systematics. I along with Daniel would vote for Berkhof as a second. Many of the others are good ones that I would recommend. I have only read and studied these two, of course all with Calvin.


----------



## ReformationArt

I must admit that I am surprised that Calvin and Berkhof aren't ranking higher in the polls. I'm also surprised that Reymond is currently ranked #1. It was never required reading for any of my ST courses at WSC or WTS. 

For those who rate it #1, I'm curious as to what specific contributions his "New" ST makes, that makes it more preferable than say Calvin or Berkhof?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

ReformationArt said:


> I must admit that I am surprised that Calvin and Berkhof aren't ranking higher in the polls. I'm also surprised that Reymond is currently ranked #1. It was never required reading for any of my ST courses at WSC or WTS.



There might be a reason for that; Dr. Reymond taught at Knox.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Stephen said:


> Reymond is certainly my favorite. I sat under his teaching at Knox and he is very pastoral in his approach to systematics. I along with Daniel would vote for Berkhof as a second. Many of the others are good ones that I would recommend. I have only read and studied these two, of course all with Calvin.





I don't have time to study the rest at present (though I have read 2 of C Hodges' volumes). I am currently reading Berkhof for the second time.


----------



## JonathanHunt

It is Reymond for me. Of course I don't agree with everything he says, but I have been privileged to meet him personally and he is the same on the page as in the flesh - eminently 'readable' and clear.
Almost enjoyable, in fact...


----------



## ReformationArt

Daniel Ritchie said:


> There might be a reason for that; Dr. Reymond taught at Knox.



Yes, I gathered that 

Do we have a lot of Knox grads here? I thought it was a smaller institution compared to the Westminsters and Covenant?

Also, I really am interested with regards to why it supersedes Berkhof and Calvin in its contribution to ST???


----------



## VaughanRSmith

I'm about to start (6 days) my BTh course, where in my second year I will be studying Reymond intensively, supported with Grudem and Erickson. I haven't heard anything about Erickson apart from the note in the back of Reymond (of all places!) that says "his Christology is kenotic in some regards". 

Does that mean he believes Jesus gave up aspects of his divinity to become man?

I've also got my McNeill _Institutes_ at the ready. Bring it on!


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

JonathanHunt said:


> It is Reymond for me. Of course I don't agree with everything he says, but I have been privileged to meet him personally and he is the same on the page as in the flesh - eminently 'readable' and clear.
> Almost enjoyable, in fact...



Where did you meet him; was he in the UK?


----------



## VaughanRSmith

Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Exagorazo said:


> Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.



With the book or with him personally. I wouldn't take a book like that into McDonald's - someone might put their greasy hands on it.


----------



## VaughanRSmith

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Exagorazo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With the book or with him personally. I wouldn't take a book like that into McDonald's - someone might put their greasy hands on it.
Click to expand...

I doubt it is Reymond's thing, coming downunder just to spend half an hour in a fast food restaurant with an unemployed, unshowered man, but you never know!

I'm quite pedantic about taking care of my books, but I'm enjoying this one too much, and it is built like a tank anyway


----------



## ReformationArt

Exagorazo said:


> Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

ReformationArt said:


> Exagorazo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.
Click to expand...


Ronald McReymond


----------



## ReformationArt

"Supersized" Systematic Theology......

Do you want fries with your infralapsarianism????


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

ReformationArt said:


> "Supersized" Systematic Theology......
> 
> Do you want fries with your infralapsarianism????



 I prefer Burger King.


----------



## Stephen

ReformationArt said:


> I must admit that I am surprised that Calvin and Berkhof aren't ranking higher in the polls. I'm also surprised that Reymond is currently ranked #1. It was never required reading for any of my ST courses at WSC or WTS.
> 
> For those who rate it #1, I'm curious as to what specific contributions his "New" ST makes, that makes it more preferable than say Calvin or Berkhof?



Perhaps Reymond's was not required when you were in seminary because it has not been out but about ten years. Since it has been out it has gone into its third printing and is known all over the globe. It is becoming the accepted systematic in many seminaries. Reymond's systematic is the standard text that is now used at the Baptist Seminary of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London. I would love to be a fly on the wall when they come to the section on baptism of church government.


----------



## Davidius

I thought that Reymond adhered to some form of Clarkian philosophy and that the latter was not popular in most Reformed circles.


----------



## Stephen

ReformationArt said:


> Exagorazo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.
Click to expand...


----------



## VaughanRSmith

Davidius said:


> I thought that Reymond adhered to some form of Clarkian philosophy and that the latter was not popular in most Reformed circles.


He sides with Clark on "seeming paradoxes" and some other stuff. I don't know much about the debate, but what he said seemed pretty much fine(?!?)

Maybe I'm a closet Clarkian, who knows.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Davidius said:


> I thought that Reymond adhered to some form of Clarkian philosophy and that the latter was not popular in most Reformed circles.



From what I remember, he is a presuppositionalist.


----------



## VaughanRSmith

ReformationArt said:


> Exagorazo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.
Click to expand...


----------



## Stephen

Davidius said:


> I thought that Reymond adhered to some form of Clarkian philosophy and that the latter was not popular in most Reformed circles.



Yes, he would hold to Clark and no it is held by many in Reformed circles. I lean toward Clark myself.


----------



## Stephen

ReformationArt said:


> "Supersized" Systematic Theology......
> 
> Do you want fries with your infralapsarianism????



No, I want fries (or chips) with my supralapsarianism.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Stephen said:


> ReformationArt said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Supersized" Systematic Theology......
> 
> Do you want fries with your infralapsarianism????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I want fries (or chips) with my supralapsarianism.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's right call them chips; I hate it when you go into McDonald's over here only to be asked (in a Belfast accent) "would you like fries with your burger?"


----------



## ReformationArt

In texas, "chips" has a completely different connotation, as does "patti". Maybe it's the preponderance of cows here in the TX panhandle?


----------



## G.Wetmore

Yes, Bavinck would definitely be top. For all who like Berkof: he mainly sought to summarize Bavinck.


----------



## Stephen

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Stephen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ReformationArt said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Supersized" Systematic Theology......
> 
> Do you want fries with your infralapsarianism????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I want fries (or chips) with my supralapsarianism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's right call them chips; I hate it when you go into McDonald's over only to be asked (in a Belfast accent) "would you like fries with your burger?"
Click to expand...


That is what they are Chips, not fries. Who came up with the term fries? It certainly was not an Irishman


----------



## Stephen

ReformationArt said:


> In texas, "chips" has a completely different connotation, as does "patti". Maybe it's the preponderance of cows here in the TX panhandle?



My grandparents had a farm in Arkansas and they called those things y'all in Texas call chips, cow pies. I never ate one though


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Stephen said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephen said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I want fries (or chips) with my supralapsarianism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's right call them chips; I hate it when you go into McDonald's over only to be asked (in a Belfast accent) "would you like fries with your burger?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is what they are Chips, not fries. Who came up with the term fries? It certainly was not an Irishman
Click to expand...


Too right.


----------



## DMcFadden

While Erickson claims to be only moderately Calvinistic (I'll let you parse the number of points; most people say he was kindof a 4 pointer), he has been a stalwart opponent of "progressive" evangelicalism, postmodernism, and open theism. Before Grudem, he was one of the better choices for a one volume ST. Grudem seems to have eclipsed him in that market.


----------



## Bygracealone

I've read quite a bit from Reymond's systematic; overall it's good and the thing that makes it good (in my opinion) is the fact that it's really not a "*New* Systematic"--many of the quotes are from the WCF and other older Reformed theologians... So, the title of the book is a bit awkward. 

I certainly don't care for his view on Romans 7. In the appendix of the work, he argues that Paul is writing about the experience of an unregenerate...

Robert Letham wrote a pretty critical review of Reymond's work (first edition) in WTJ, I don't know what year it was (probably 2001-2002); I photocopied the review and put it in the book, but forgot to write in the year...

FYI, Reymond does not hold to the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son (pgs. 325ff.).


----------



## N. Eshelman

Berkhof sucks the life right out of Christianity. He makes the Reformed Faith "them dry bones!"

I love Bavinck and Brakel because they are experiential, sound, and O so practical !


----------



## cih1355

Exagorazo said:


> I'm about to start (6 days) my BTh course, where in my second year I will be studying Reymond intensively, supported with Grudem and Erickson. I haven't heard anything about Erickson apart from the note in the back of Reymond (of all places!) that says "his Christology is kenotic in some regards".
> 
> Does that mean he believes Jesus gave up aspects of his divinity to become man?
> 
> I've also got my McNeill _Institutes_ at the ready. Bring it on!



Yes, kenotic Christianity holds to the view that Jesus gave up some of His divine attributes when He became a man.


----------



## VaughanRSmith

cih1355 said:


> Exagorazo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm about to start (6 days) my BTh course, where in my second year I will be studying Reymond intensively, supported with Grudem and Erickson. I haven't heard anything about Erickson apart from the note in the back of Reymond (of all places!) that says "his Christology is kenotic in some regards".
> 
> Does that mean he believes Jesus gave up aspects of his divinity to become man?
> 
> I've also got my McNeill _Institutes_ at the ready. Bring it on!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, kenotic Christianity holds to the view that Jesus gave up some of His divine attributes when He became a man.
Click to expand...

It's funny. I was reading Reymond a few minutes ago and he answered my question for me.


----------



## danmpem

Where's Robert Duncan Culver on the list? I've read some very good things about. But since I have only read Grudem, I did not vote.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

nleshelman said:


> Berkhof sucks the life right out of Christianity. He makes the Reformed Faith "them dry bones!"
> 
> I love Bavinck and Brakel because they are experiential, sound, and O so practical !



No way; Berkhof gets straight to the point, no pussy-footing around.


----------



## CatechumenPatrick

Bavinck #1


----------



## larryjf

Could someone post a link to Bavinck's systematic theology. These high ratings of him are giving me an interest in reading him.


----------



## Casey

As far as I know, the fourth volume will come out in March.

Amazon (the top four in the list)
Christianbook.com
Reformation Heritage Books

Bavinck also wrote a shorter systematic theology translated into English and called Our Reasonable Faith.


----------



## ChristopherPaul

larryjf said:


> Could someone post a link to Bavinck's systematic theology. These high ratings of him are giving me an interest in reading him.



I linked volume one earlier in the thread



ChristopherPaul said:


> Herman Bavinck's three volume set has been highly recommended by friends of mine who attend Westminster (East).


----------



## shackleton

I like to read Hodge and then once I have a good understanding of the topic read Turretin, since Hodge is based on Turretin. I also make sure to read everything Calvin, Wayne Grudem, Reymond and Berkhoff have to say on a subject. I even read Armminian, Pentecostal and liberal theology just to see what everyone has to say. 
The non-reformed includes, J. Rodman Williams (Pentecostal, Regent College), Lewis Spery Chafer, Darrel Bock just to get the Dallas perspective, the mildly Calvinistic but Dispensational viewpoint, sometimes even Norman Geisler. I have found that all these men have something good to say on various topics, plus I can see where they are all familiar, even with Calvinistic teaching. 
The Liberal theology mostly comes from commentaries since liberals are not to big on theology, (it is to concrete, they like everything to be gray), New, and old, Interpreters Bible Commentary, and Dictionaries, Tillich, Pannenberg, just getting into Bonhoffer and Barth. 
I will even throw in the Catholic and Lutheran, just for kicks. The Lutheran is Mueller, I have heard it is the theology book they use at Concordia. 

But Hodge and Turretin are consistantly my favorite.


----------



## Stephen

Bygracealone said:


> I've read quite a bit from Reymond's systematic; overall it's good and the thing that makes it good (in my opinion) is the fact that it's really not a "*New* Systematic"--many of the quotes are from the WCF and other older Reformed theologians... So, the title of the book is a bit awkward.
> 
> I certainly don't care for his view on Romans 7. In the appendix of the work, he argues that Paul is writing about the experience of an unregenerate...
> 
> Robert Letham wrote a pretty critical review of Reymond's work (first edition) in WTJ, I don't know what year it was (probably 2001-2002); I photocopied the review and put it in the book, but forgot to write in the year...
> 
> FYI, Reymond does not hold to the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son (pgs. 325ff.).



The word "New" in the title was chosen by the publisher, Thomas Nelson, not Bob Reymond. 

I believe he makes a strong case for his interpretation of Romans 7. He is not alone in this view. I am not familiar with Letham's critique.

I happen to agree with Robert Reymond on his position regarding the eternal generation of the Son. In his discussion he is refuting Origen's doctrine. He is not holding to a heretical positon but guarding against heresy. His discussion covers about seven pages. He is interacting with the language of the Nicene Creed, which he feels is problematic and tends towards Origen's view of the modes within the Godhead. He states, "the general consensus among twentieth-century scholars that *monogenes*, does not mean "only begotten," alluding to some form of generation, but rather "one and only" or "one of a kind" or "unique." Reymond takes the position of the Reformer's, especially Calvin on this view. He is very careful in outlining his concern with the language of the Nicene Creed. His position is very convincing and well presented. This is certainly not a new position.


----------



## Stephen

nleshelman said:


> Berkhof sucks the life right out of Christianity. He makes the Reformed Faith "them dry bones!"
> 
> I love Bavinck and Brakel because they are experiential, sound, and O so practical !



I wonder if you have studied Berkhof. Like Daniel said he is very straight forward. I like him because he is easy to follow. He is the classic systematician in many Reformed seminaries.


----------



## shackleton

How many of you who read all these works are *NOT* pastors, teachers or elders? You just read it for your own enjoyment?


----------



## JonathanHunt

Daniel Ritchie said:


> JonathanHunt said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is Reymond for me. Of course I don't agree with everything he says, but I have been privileged to meet him personally and he is the same on the page as in the flesh - eminently 'readable' and clear.
> Almost enjoyable, in fact...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where did you meet him; was he in the UK?
Click to expand...


He is a visiting professor for the London Reformed Baptist Seminary and he comes to the Met Tab School of Theology every couple of years or so...


----------



## toddpedlar

Daniel Ritchie said:


> ReformationArt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exagorazo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just spent half an hour at McDonalds with Hot Cakes, Coffee and Reymond. Very enjoyable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ronald McReymond
Click to expand...


that's funny... all I could think of was, "Hey, is that Edmund Clowney holding a copy of Reymond?"


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

JonathanHunt said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JonathanHunt said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is Reymond for me. Of course I don't agree with everything he says, but I have been privileged to meet him personally and he is the same on the page as in the flesh - eminently 'readable' and clear.
> Almost enjoyable, in fact...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where did you meet him; was he in the UK?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is a visiting professor for the London Reformed Baptist Seminary and he comes to the Met Tab School of Theology every couple of years or so...
Click to expand...


Interesting; I have never been to the School of Theology, I rarely leave Ireland - I have not even been over the border for 2 years when I saw the All-Blacks slaughter us in Dublin.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

toddpedlar said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ReformationArt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ronald McReymond
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's funny... all I could think of was, "Hey, is that Edmund Clowney holding a copy of Reymond?"
Click to expand...


Not exactly the best surname for a theologian to have.


----------



## Davidius

shackleton said:


> How many of you who read all these works are *NOT* pastors, teachers or elders? You just read it for your own enjoyment?





I don't understand how they do it! I have hours of homework every night and am glad to get in the bible, much less chapters and chapters of secondary theological material.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Davidius said:


> shackleton said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many of you who read all these works are *NOT* pastors, teachers or elders? You just read it for your own enjoyment?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't understand how they do it! I have hours of homework every night and am glad to get in the bible, much less chapters and chapters of secondary theological material.
Click to expand...


Here is how you do it; if you don't have much time during the week - and I don't have time to read systematic theologies myself - then you read a small portion out of one or two on the Sabbath (maybe ten pages or less). If you do this, you will be surprised how much you get through.


----------



## Rev. Todd Ruddell

How about the Westminster Standards? That'd get my vote!


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Rev. Todd Ruddell said:


> How about the Westminster Standards? That'd get my vote!



 They are Confessional Standards, not a Systematic Theology.


----------



## Gesetveemet

*1. Herman Hoekesma 

2. Wilhelmus a' Brakel

3. G. H. Kersten*

Also like J. L. Dagg

Next purchase D.v. may be Hodge, Turretin and Reymond in that order.








.


----------



## D. Paul

I voted Turretin. This is due to the fact that I own only two, Berkhof's and Turretin's, and like DMcFadden said:


DMcFadden said:


> McMahon's ravings induced me to get Turretin. In seminary, Jack Rogers made him out to be the devil. McMahon's material convinced me that he was the missing link in my theological pedigree. What a precise writer!



Berkhof was my introduction. Turretin *forces* me to think through my frequent shallow assumptions. Yes, indeed, "What a precise writer." My hope is that by reading him I may become a "precise thinker"!


----------



## bookslover

Bygracealone said:


> FYI, Reymond does not hold to the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son (pgs. 325ff.).



Yes, that's one of the book's strengths, in my opinion. Reymond is a very clear and cogent writer, and it's easy to tell that he's thought long and deeply about all areas of his subject. I'm pleased to see his book rated so highly.

I'm also surprised by Grudem's popularity, with his charismatic tendencies and all...

Nice to see Berkof far down the list. Thoroughly orthodox, but thoroughly boring. Berkhof was no stylist as a writer.


----------



## DMcFadden

bookslover said:


> I'm also surprised by Grudem's popularity, with his charismatic tendencies and all...



Grudem has special qualities to commend him to a PB crowd:

1. He is exceptionally clear.
2. He takes a high view of Scripture.
3. He has been a leader in the campaign against evangelical feminism and a strong supporter of male headship.
4. He holds his M.Div. from Westminster (E) . . . and it shows.
5. His soteriology is thoroughly Calvinist (unlike Erickson and a host of other 20th century alternatives).
6. He walks the talk as a complementarian who was willing to relocate (with great uncertainty to his "career" considering he had 20+ years at TEDS) because of his wife's illness. Since most feminists tar us as knuckle draggers who are "insensitive" to our wives, Grudem's sacrifice speaks loudly as to a man who takes ALL of the Eph. 5 text seriously, not just the wifely submission part.


----------



## danmpem

DMcFadden said:


> 6. He walks the talk as a complementarian who was willing to relocate (with great uncertainty to his "career" considering he had 20+ years at TEDS) because of his wife's illness. Since most feminists tar us as knuckle draggers who are "insensitive" to our wives, Grudem's sacrifice speaks loudly as to a man who takes ALL of the Eph. 5 text seriously, not just the wifely submission part.



I never knew that about him. Come to think of it, outside of his systematic theology and a couple of books to which he has contributed, I know very little about Grudem.


----------



## JM

I've heard Grudem is working on an ESV study Bible that will be Calvinist, charismatic and premil.


----------



## Stephen

Daniel Ritchie said:


> JonathanHunt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where did you meet him; was he in the UK?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is a visiting professor for the London Reformed Baptist Seminary and he comes to the Met Tab School of Theology every couple of years or so...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting; I have never been to the School of Theology, I rarely leave Ireland - I have not even been over the border for 2 years when I saw the All-Blacks slaughter us in Dublin.
Click to expand...


Brother, you need to get out more.  Robert Reymond teaches at the London seminary every summer and preaches some at the Metropoliatan Tabernacle. Him and Dr. Peter Masters are great friends and he is well received there. Now that he is retired I would suspect that he will be teaching there more, at least I hope so. If you get an opportunity this summer take the ferry from Stranrare to London and sit in on his lectures. It will be a great holiday for you.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Stephen said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JonathanHunt said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is a visiting professor for the London Reformed Baptist Seminary and he comes to the Met Tab School of Theology every couple of years or so...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting; I have never been to the School of Theology, I rarely leave Ireland - I have not even been over the border for 2 years when I saw the All-Blacks slaughter us in Dublin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Brother, you need to get out more.  Robert Reymond teaches at the London seminary every summer and preaches some at the Metropoliatan Tabernacle. Him and Dr. Peter Masters are great friends and he is well received there. Now that he is retired I would suspect that he will be teaching there more, at least I hope so. If you get an opportunity this summer take the ferry from Stranrare to London and sit in on his lectures. It will be a great holiday for you.
Click to expand...


You can't get a ferry from Stranrair to London - that is a journey over land. Instead you have to get a ferry from Larne or Belfast to go to Stranrair, then drive down to London.


----------



## Stephen

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Stephen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting; I have never been to the School of Theology, I rarely leave Ireland - I have not even been over the border for 2 years when I saw the All-Blacks slaughter us in Dublin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brother, you need to get out more.  Robert Reymond teaches at the London seminary every summer and preaches some at the Metropoliatan Tabernacle. Him and Dr. Peter Masters are great friends and he is well received there. Now that he is retired I would suspect that he will be teaching there more, at least I hope so. If you get an opportunity this summer take the ferry from Stranrare to London and sit in on his lectures. It will be a great holiday for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can't get a ferry from Stranrair to London - that is a journey over land. Instead you have to get a ferry from Larne or Belfast to go to Stranrair, then drive down to London.
Click to expand...


Sorry about that it has been along time since I made that journey from London to Belfast. It was a real eyeopening experience, especially the taxi ride in Belfast to the train station.


----------



## DMcFadden

danmpem said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 6. He walks the talk as a complementarian who was willing to relocate (with great uncertainty to his "career" considering he had 20+ years at TEDS) because of his wife's illness. Since most feminists tar us as knuckle draggers who are "insensitive" to our wives, Grudem's sacrifice speaks loudly as to a man who takes ALL of the Eph. 5 text seriously, not just the wifely submission part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never knew that about him. Come to think of it, outside of his systematic theology and a couple of books to which he has contributed, I know very little about Grudem.
Click to expand...


""We moved to Phoenix Seminary in Arizona in 2001, primarily because of Margaret’s health. She had been experiencing chronic pain after an auto accident a number of years earlier, and we found that the pain was aggravated by cold and humidity. Well, the Chicago area is cold in the winter and humid in the summer! After a couple of trips to Arizona, which is hot and dry, we realized that Margaret felt much better there. So I phoned the academic dean at Phoenix Seminary and asked if there might possibly be a job opportunity there for me. It is a long and wonderful story of the Lord’s guidance and provision, but the result is that we have been here since June of 2001, Margaret has felt much better, and I also love the seminary where I am now teaching. So we are thankful for God’s blessings in many ways. I am thankful to the Lord that when we were making a decision about whether to move to Phoenix, on the very day we were talking and praying about it, I came to Ephesians 5:28 in my regular schedule of daily Bible reading, and the Lord used this verse strongly in my own decision process: “In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.” After reading that, I thought it was important for me to move for the sake of Margaret’s physical body, her physical health." (Interview with Wayne Grudem)


----------



## danmpem

DMcFadden said:


> danmpem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 6. He walks the talk as a complementarian who was willing to relocate (with great uncertainty to his "career" considering he had 20+ years at TEDS) because of his wife's illness. Since most feminists tar us as knuckle draggers who are "insensitive" to our wives, Grudem's sacrifice speaks loudly as to a man who takes ALL of the Eph. 5 text seriously, not just the wifely submission part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never knew that about him. Come to think of it, outside of his systematic theology and a couple of books to which he has contributed, I know very little about Grudem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ""We moved to Phoenix Seminary in Arizona in 2001, primarily because of Margaret’s health. She had been experiencing chronic pain after an auto accident a number of years earlier, and we found that the pain was aggravated by cold and humidity. Well, the Chicago area is cold in the winter and humid in the summer! After a couple of trips to Arizona, which is hot and dry, we realized that Margaret felt much better there. So I phoned the academic dean at Phoenix Seminary and asked if there might possibly be a job opportunity there for me. It is a long and wonderful story of the Lord’s guidance and provision, but the result is that we have been here since June of 2001, Margaret has felt much better, and I also love the seminary where I am now teaching. So we are thankful for God’s blessings in many ways. I am thankful to the Lord that when we were making a decision about whether to move to Phoenix, on the very day we were talking and praying about it, I came to Ephesians 5:28 in my regular schedule of daily Bible reading, and the Lord used this verse strongly in my own decision process: “In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.” After reading that, I thought it was important for me to move for the sake of Margaret’s physical body, her physical health." (Interview with Wayne Grudem)
Click to expand...



It really means a lot to me to see that. Thank you


----------



## puritanpilgrim

*Robert Culver*

Have any of you heard of Robert Culver. I have really enjoyed this book. I think it is one of the best ever written.

CFP | Systematic Theology: Biblical and Historical | Robert Duncan Culver


----------



## danmpem

puritanpilgrim said:


> Have any of you heard of Robert Culver. I have really enjoyed this book. I think it is one of the best ever written.
> 
> CFP | Systematic Theology: Biblical and Historical | Robert Duncan Culver



Yeah, I was wondering that too. I have heard so much about him and want to read it so much. Come on, he was 89 when he wrote it, how awesome is that?


----------



## Wannabee

Thanks for the comments on Grudem. It's no surprise that he would be working on an ESV study Bible. One of the main editors of the ESV, living in Chicago, is a friend of his. I know a student who went to Phoenix and said he's the real deal. While I don't agree with his position on spiritual gifts, it should come as no surprise that I voted for his systematic, for all the reasons listed above. It might also be the only systematic I would feel comfortable giving to anyone to work through, regardless of their maturity or theological understanding. It's a good scholarly work, deals well with languages (except in the gifts, in my opinion), while remaining clear and engaging along with devotional in style.


----------



## BertMulder

Believe Hoeksema should have been on that list.


----------



## DMcFadden

BTW, I just counted and found that there are 31 Systematic Theologies on my laptop (including the 14 vols. of Berkouwer, 7 vols. of Bloesch, 7 vols. of Chafer, 6 vols of Henry, and most of the classics listed above in the list. Many of these were available for free or pennies on the dollar. Additionally, thanks to the good Reformed folks at Doxa, you can have the "complete works" of people like Kuyper, Berkoff, and Boettner for as little as $10! Those with budgetary restrictions should really consider the option of building part of their library with electronic books. They don't look as "impressive" as a wall full of books. But, you can build a library worth tens of thousands of dollars for a little bit of nuthin'


----------



## cih1355

What do you think of _Foundations of the Christian Faith _by James Montgomery Boice? I'm taking a two-year class at my church that prepares people for lay ministry and that is one of the books that I have to read.


----------



## DMcFadden

I liked it. Boice is biblical, clear, and organized. He writes from a Calvinistic perspective and does so quite nicely. It would not be one of the heavier tomes, but it is orthodox and helpful.


----------



## bookslover

JM said:


> I've heard Grudem is working on an ESV study Bible that will be Calvinist, charismatic and premil.



Well, two out of three isn't bad!


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

BertMulder said:


> Believe Hoeksema should have been on that list.



One of the mods could put him on; I can't remember everybody.


----------



## JM

> Currently I am working as general editor for the ESV Study Bible (Crossway), which we hope will be published in late 2008. We have 84 different specialists writing on various parts of the Bible and also contributing additional essays to put in the matter in the back. All of that material goes through some other editors, then comes to me. It is taking all of my time and it’s a huge, but I think very worthwhile, project. - Wayne Grudem



source


----------



## D. Paul

cih1355 said:


> What do you think of _Foundations of the Christian Faith _by James Montgomery Boice? I'm taking a two-year class at my church that prepares people for lay ministry and that is one of the books that I have to read.



Boice's is an excellent contribution. Very readable; well laid-out with profuse use made of scripture. He may not delve as deeply as some but then I think his intent was to prompt further study.


----------



## JohnOwen007

Well, I must confess I'm no fan of Reymond. I find his methodology (or lack thereof!) lets him down. One sees this particularly in his treatment of ecclesiology.

For me, Calvin is far and away the most impressive, especially given his context. What still speaks today is his exegetical sensitivity, ability to see the important and neglect the trivial, and married with warm devotion! Unbelievable.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> CarlosOliveira said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with Poimen. Brakel is theologically precise and warmth. I think Turretin comes second, Calvin in third, John Brown of Haddington in fourth and Berkhof in fifth.
Click to expand...


I'll stick with Carlos' list, as previously noted, but I'd like to squeeze Ames in there too, maybe Pictet and Wollbeius. I've been reading Kersten too and I like his writings a lot.

If I knew Latin, I would probably want to include Johannes a'Marck's _Christianae Theologiae Medulla_ (which is, I think, an edition that Marck abridged from a larger work called _Compendium Christianae Theologiae_); Francis Junius' _Theses Theologicae_ [note: I posted links to online Latin editions of Turretin, Pictet, Ames, Marck and Junius in another thread  recently]; and there are probably others I am missing.

For what it's worth (and I don't agree with all suggestions, rankings or comments made by the authors), there is a list of recommended systematic theologies in _The Essential Commentaries for a Preacher's Library_ by Derek Thomas and John W. Tweeddale; as well as a brief similar list by Ligon Duncan as an appendix to his edition of Witsius' _On the Character of a True Theologian_.

From the former:

Thomas/Tweeddale
One Volume Systematic Theology Texts
Berkhof, Louis. _Systematic Theology_
Grudem, Wayne. _Systematic Theology_
Hodge, A.A. _Outlines of Theology_
Macleod, Donald. _A Faith to Live By_
Packer, James I. _Concise Theology_
Reymond, Robert L. _A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith_
_Westminster Confession of Faith_ (Free Presbyterian Publications)
Ames, William. _Marrow of Theology_ (Thomas and Tweeddale actually cited _Marrow of Modern Divinity_ but that was written by Edward Fisher and I think they have the other title in view)
Boice, James Montgomery. _Foundations of the Christian Faith_
Boyce, James P. _Abstract of Systematic Theology_
Dabney, Robert L. _Systematic Theology_
Erickson, Millard. _Christian Theology_
Heppe, Heinrich. _Reformed Dogmatics: Set Out and Illustrated from the Sources_
McGrath, Alister E. _Christian Theology: An Introduction_
Shedd, William G.T. _Dogmatic Theology_
Sproul, R.C. _Essential Truths of the Christian Faith_
Strong, Augustus H. _Systematic Theology_
Van Til, Cornelius. _An Introduction to Systematic Theology_

Multi-Volume Systematic Theology Texts
Calvin, John. _Institutes of the Christian Religion_ (2 volumes)
Edwards, Jonathan. _The Works of Jonathan Edwards_ (2 volumes)
Hodge, Charles. _Systematic Theology_ (3 volumes)
Murray, John. _Collected Writings of John Murray_ (4 volumes)
Warfield, Benjamin B. _The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield_ (10 volumes)
Bavinck, Herman. _Reformed Dogmatics_ (2 volumes published at the time of printing, 4 total)
Berkouwer, G.C. _Studies in Dogmatics_ (12 volumes)
Bloesch, Donald. _Christian Foundations_ (7 volumes)
Cunningham, William. _Historical Theology_ (2 volumes)
Muller, Richard. _Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics_ (4 volumes)
Turretin, Francis. _Institutes of Elenctic Theology_ (3 volumes)

From the latter:

Ligon Duncan
1. John Calvin, _Institutes of the Christian Religion_
2. Louis Berkhof, _Systematic Theology_
3. Robert Louis Dabney, _Lectures in Systematic Theology_
4. John Murray, _Collected Writings_
5. Francis Turretin, _Institutes of Elenctic Theology_
6. Charles Hodge, _Systematic Theology_


----------



## D. Paul

*Why has no one mentioned Finney's?*

I could mention my very first ST which I doubt anyone here has even heard of...Henry Thiessen. It was before I knew what an ST really was.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

D. Paul said:


> *Why has no one mentioned Finney's?*



Probably because this is a Reformed discusssion forum. If you want Finney you will have to go to the Pelagian Board.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

William Cunningham in his _Theological Lectures_ notes that Calvin, Turretin, Mastricht, Pictet, Marckius, and Witsius were the systematic theologians most studied in Scotland, and also commends George Hill's _Theological Institutes_ and John Dick's _Lectures in Theology_.


----------



## Puritan Sailor

Berkhof, then Bavinck, then Shaw's Commentary on the WCF.


----------



## bookslover

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> William Cunningham in his _Theological Lectures_ notes that Calvin, Turretin, Mastricht, Pictet, Marckius, and Witsius were the systematic theologians most studied in Scotland, and also commends George Hill's _Theological Institutes_ and John Dick's _Lectures in Theology_.



I have Dick's set: _Lectures on Theology by the Late Rev. John Dick, D.D., Minister of the United Associate Congregation, Greyfriars, Glasgow; and Professor of Theology to the United Session Church; Published Under the Superintendence of His Son, with a Preface, Memoir, etc., by the American Editor_ 2 volumes (Philadelphia: F. W. Greenough, 1838). I've read them, too. Good stuff.


----------



## bookslover

Puritan Sailor said:


> Berkhof, then Bavinck, then Shaw's Commentary on the WCF.



Shaw's commentary on the WCF is excellent. According to the _Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology_ (1993), under the entry for Shaw (1795-1863): "His _Exposition of the Westminster Confession_ (Edinburgh, 1845) is the most thorough commentary by a Scottish Presbyterian. Writing in sympathy with its writers, Shaw elucidates the opposing views against which the Confession was framed." (p. 770) (Article by Sherman Isbell)


----------



## fredtgreco

bookslover said:


> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Berkhof, then Bavinck, then Shaw's Commentary on the WCF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shaw's commentary on the WCF is excellent. According to the _Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology_ (1993), under the entry for Shaw (1795-1863): "His _Exposition of the Westminster Confession_ (Edinburgh, 1845) is the most thorough commentary by a Scottish Presbyterian. Writing in sympathy with its writers, Shaw elucidates the opposing views against which the Confession was framed." (p. 770) (Article by Sherman Isbell)
Click to expand...


Shaw is very helpful, and very pastoral. A little tidbit. You all can read Shaw (in part) because of the work of one of my elders, who helped to get it back in print.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## bookslover

D. Paul said:


> *Why has no one mentioned Finney's?*
> 
> I could mention my very first ST which I doubt anyone here has even heard of...Henry Thiessen. It was before I knew what an ST really was.



I remember Henry Clarence Thiessen's book. He was Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis at Dallas Theological Seminary (1931-1936) and Chairman of the Faculty of the Graduate School at Wheaton College, among other posts, presumably. I had to read parts of it as an undergrad. Originally published back in the 1940s, I think.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

fredtgreco said:


> bookslover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Berkhof, then Bavinck, then Shaw's Commentary on the WCF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shaw's commentary on the WCF is excellent. According to the _Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology_ (1993), under the entry for Shaw (1795-1863): "His _Exposition of the Westminster Confession_ (Edinburgh, 1845) is the most thorough commentary by a Scottish Presbyterian. Writing in sympathy with its writers, Shaw elucidates the opposing views against which the Confession was framed." (p. 770) (Article by Sherman Isbell)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shaw is very helpful, and very pastoral. A little tidbit. You all can read Shaw (in part) because of the work of one of my elders, who helped to get it back in print.
Click to expand...


Robert Shaw is useful as he defends the Establishment Principle; even if you do not agree with this, it is useful to have a defense of the original position of the WCF.


----------



## Bygracealone

If we're including commentaries on the WCF, then I would include another Scottish Presbyterian--David Dickson. His work "Truth's Victory Over Error"--was the first commentary ever produced on the WCF, coming out just a few years after the WCF was produced. The elenctic format of the work is very helpful. 

Of course A.A. Hodge's commentary on the confession is also good. I especially like it for what is included in the appendix. There, you will find two articles by Charles Hodge. One defining Presbyterianism and the other explaining what it means to "adopt" the WCF. Good stuff there...


----------



## Stephen

D. Paul said:


> *Why has no one mentioned Finney's?*
> 
> I could mention my very first ST which I doubt anyone here has even heard of...Henry Thiessen. It was before I knew what an ST really was.



That is the standard systematic text for Jimmy Swaggert's Bible College


----------



## Romans922

Reymond? Unless you want to be wrong on the doctrine of the Trinity.


----------



## Stephen

Romans922 said:


> Reymond? Unless you want to be wrong on the doctrine of the Trinity.



Brother, be careful in accusing a man of heresy. You simply do not know what you are talking about. Robert Reymond is strongly trinitarian. You obviously have not ready his systematic theology.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Stephen said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reymond? Unless you want to be wrong on the doctrine of the Trinity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brother, be careful in accusing a man of heresy. You simply do not know what you are talking about. Robert Reymond is strongly trinitarian. You obviously have not ready his systematic theology.
Click to expand...


I thought Andrew was saying he was right on the Trinity? Could he clarify please?


----------



## Romans922

Stephen said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reymond? Unless you want to be wrong on the doctrine of the Trinity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brother, be careful in accusing a man of heresy. You simply do not know what you are talking about. Robert Reymond is strongly trinitarian. You obviously have not ready his systematic theology.
Click to expand...


I have read it and I could be wrong but isn't his view of eternal generation of the Son a little off?


----------



## DMcFadden

118 posts and nobody missed L.S. Chafer???  

When I was a junior in high school, his 2,700 pg. Sys Theo was my first introduction to the subject. Although having already read George Ladd on the Kingdom, reading Chafer gave me a bit of epistemic indigestion as a 16 yr. old. Man was I really confused then. Come to think of it . . . at 54 I'm still pretty confused.


----------



## Bygracealone

A number of folks have found Reymond to be in error WRT his understanding of the eternal generation of the Son. 

Refer to the previous threads on this matter:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/eternal-generation-son-22040/

http://www.puritanboard.com/f18/nicene-christology-21767/

A reminder per the above link: To deny the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son is an error per the standards of this board.


----------



## Stephen

Romans922 said:


> Stephen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reymond? Unless you want to be wrong on the doctrine of the Trinity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brother, be careful in accusing a man of heresy. You simply do not know what you are talking about. Robert Reymond is strongly trinitarian. You obviously have not ready his systematic theology.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have read it and I could be wrong but isn't his view of eternal generation of the Son a little off?
Click to expand...


No, I do not think he is off on this issue. He is arguing against Origen's position and takes issue with the language of the Nicene Creed. His view is consistent with Calvin and he certainly upholds the doctrine of the Trinity and full deity and humanity of Christ. This has not been dealt with in much systematic theology. If you had the privilege of sitting under his teaching he brings out in his discussion more detail on his position.


----------



## Stephen

Bygracealone said:


> A number of folks have found Reymond to be in error WRT his understanding of the eternal generation of the Son.
> 
> Refer to the previous threads on this matter:
> 
> http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/eternal-generation-son-22040/
> 
> http://www.puritanboard.com/f18/nicene-christology-21767/
> 
> A reminder per the above link: To deny the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son is an error per the standards of this board.



Let me make some points of clarification:

1. I am well aware of the standards of PuritanBoard and take no exception. I am clearly Trinitarian and hold to the confessional standards.

2. Robert Reymond has *never* denied Christ's pre-existence or His eternal existence. He affirms that Christ was with the Father from all eternity (John 1:1; 3:13; 17:1,5). He denies as a heretic position the Arian position of the JW's. 

3. His systematic theology clearly states that He believes that all three persons are distinct and yet fully and equally God. He affirms with the council of Nicea the doctrine of the trinity.


----------



## Civbert

DMcFadden said:


> BTW, I just counted and found that there are 31 Systematic Theologies on my laptop (including the 14 vols. of Berkouwer, 7 vols. of Bloesch, 7 vols. of Chafer, 6 vols of Henry, and most of the classics listed above in the list. Many of these were available for free or pennies on the dollar. Additionally, thanks to the good Reformed folks at Doxa, you can have the "complete works" of people like Kuyper, Berkoff, and Boettner for as little as $10! Those with budgetary restrictions should really consider the option of building part of their library with electronic books. They don't look as "impressive" as a wall full of books. But, you can build a library worth tens of thousands of dollars for a little bit of nuthin'



Links?


----------



## DMcFadden

Doxa Digital Press Downloads
They only publish Calvinist (Reformed and Reformed Baptist) stuff.

Bible Explorer - Free Bible Software
FREE copy of the Bible Explorer/WordSearch/Bible Navigator engine and LOTS of free books

http://www.stilltruth.com/category/technology/libronix-downloads
JCM's PBB Page
The first reference is to a site with lots of PBB format materials to run on the Libronix platform, including links to get the engine for the Logos Libronix.

e-Sword - the Sword of the LORD with an electronic edge
David Cox's E-Sword Resource Page
E-Sword Modules Locator Database
The main site and a couple of other locations for LOTS of free books to run on the excellent (free) e-Sword enginge.

*Here are the only sites in this list that cost money:
*Welcome to Rejoice Christian Software!
Discount prices with pre-pub sales that beat almost everyone.

AGES Library - Christian Bible Studies, Commentaries, Reference, Sermons, and more
Lots of classics, including loads of Puritans and Reformed writers in PDF format.

Plus, you can use Google books to get PDF classics for free. And, if you google "PDF AND [whatever name you are looking for]" you can often find things published on the Net for free.


----------



## danmpem

And don't forget Free Bible Software


----------



## puritanpilgrim

> I've heard Grudem is working on an ESV study Bible that will be Calvinist, charismatic and premil



He is amil.

I don't care for Grudem so much. He is very superficial for me. I like systematics which are more indepth.


----------



## danmpem

puritanpilgrim said:


> I've heard Grudem is working on an ESV study Bible that will be Calvinist, charismatic and premil
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is amil.
> 
> I don't care for Grudem so much. He is very superficial for me. I like systematics which are more indepth.
Click to expand...


Woah, did he change his views in the new edition? In the one I have, he states in the introduction that he holds a post-trib premil view.


----------



## DMcFadden

puritanpilgrim said:


> He is amil.
> 
> I don't care for Grudem so much. He is very superficial for me. I like systematics which are more indepth.



1. Grudem is not amil, he is premil



> "I believe that Christ’s second coming could occur any day, that it will be premillennial—that is, that it will mark the beginning of his thousand-year reign of perfect peace on the earth—but that it will be post-tribulational—that is, that many Christians will go through the great tribulation (chapters 54, 55)."



2. His Sys Theo is not intended to be an advanced text. The primary use that has led to 200,000+ being in print relates to its use in Bible colleges, Christian liberal arts schools and the like. Pursuant to his primary demographic, he eschews technical jargon in favor of plain English. Why say "perspicuity" when "clarity" will serve just as well?

3. I don't agree with lots of his stuff (e.g., some of his views on NT prophecy). However, who does a better job of summarizing the scope of theology in such readable, clear language? Plus, his education was top rate (Harvard, Westminster, Cambridge). 

4. He handles the Greek with exceptional skill for someone claiming to be a systematic theologian. Indeed, much of what some feel to be "shallow" in Grudem is simply the preference for building one's theology on the exegesis of the biblical text rather than the using the seedbed of the latest trends in philosophy. This gives his book more of a textbook feel, granted. However, it also makes it more "classic" and less time-bound. Try reading some of the theology of Tillich, written during the fad of existentialism -- yech! Rather than locking his theology into a time capsule of a particular decade, it will probably wear rather well over time.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

I must admit I have never been tempted to buy Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology, but the comments on this thread are persuading me otherwise. While he might have some views I disagree with, nonetheless, it would be good to see these presented in such a format.


----------



## DMcFadden

Daniel,

I still prefer a couple of others to Grudem. However, given the wide hearing he has been given and his essentially Reformed orientation, it would be a mistake to discount him. It is kindof weird to see everyone from Pentecostals (Hayford) to dispensationalists to Asbury Arminians to Southern Baptists (Patterson) to Westminster Calvinists all swearing by him.


----------



## DavidCPorter

Daniel Ritchie said:


> I must admit I have never been tempted to buy Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology, but the comments on this thread are persuading me otherwise. While he might have some views I disagree with, nonetheless, it would be good to see these presented in such a format.



Daniel, if you would like to borrow my copy of Grudem for a few months I would be very happy to let you have it. It would give you time to see if it would be worth buying. Personally, I have not used it that much probably because I know and like several others better - Berkhof, Shedd, Dabney and recently Bavinck.

Yours in Christ,


----------



## RamistThomist

puritanpilgrim said:


> I've heard Grudem is working on an ESV study Bible that will be Calvinist, charismatic and premil
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is amil.
> 
> I don't care for Grudem so much. He is very superficial for me. I like systematics which are more indepth.
Click to expand...


Grudem helped convince me of premil


----------



## Coram Deo

John Gill.....


----------



## D. Paul

bookslover said:


> D. Paul said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Why has no one mentioned Finney's?*
> 
> I could mention my very first ST which I doubt anyone here has even heard of...Henry Thiessen. It was before I knew what an ST really was.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I remember Henry Clarence Thiessen's book. He was Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis at Dallas Theological Seminary (1931-1936) and Chairman of the Faculty of the Graduate School at Wheaton College, among other posts, presumably. I had to read parts of it as an undergrad. Originally published back in the 1940s, I think.
Click to expand...


That is precisely the one! I lost interest when it became obviously Dispensational.


----------



## bookslover

Romans922 said:


> Reymond? Unless you want to be wrong on the doctrine of the Trinity.



Au contraire. Reymond is excellent on the Trinity. He ably defends the self-existence of the Second Person of the Trinity. He is a strongly trinitarian writer.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

DavidCPorter said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I must admit I have never been tempted to buy Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology, but the comments on this thread are persuading me otherwise. While he might have some views I disagree with, nonetheless, it would be good to see these presented in such a format.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel, if you would like to borrow my copy of Grudem for a few months I would be very happy to let you have it. It would give you time to see if it would be worth buying. Personally, I have not used it that much probably because I know and like several others better - Berkhof, Shedd, Dabney and recently Bavinck.
> 
> Yours in Christ,
Click to expand...


I may hold you to that.


----------



## cih1355

I just started reading Frame's, _Salvation Belongs to the Lord_, and I've been enjoying it so far. Later on in the year, I will start to read Boice's, _Foundations of the Christian Faith_, which is required for the lay ministry class that I'm going through. 

From time to time, I'll read McGrath's, _Christian Theology_, to see what the various Christian thinkers thought about different doctrines. 

Do you read every one of your systematic theology books from cover to cover or are there some books that you use for reference when you are teaching a class or when a certain doctrine comes up in Bible study?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

cih1355 said:


> I just started reading Frame's, _Salvation Belongs to the Lord_, and I've been enjoying it so far.


----------



## bookslover

danmpem said:


> Yeah, I was wondering that too. I have heard so much about him and want to read it so much. Come on, he was 89 when he wrote it, how awesome is that?



Well, he was 89 when he published it. He's probably spent the last 40 years working on the thing. 

Robert Duncan Culver was born in Harrah, Washington, in July, 1916. So, he'll be 92 this year.


----------



## RamistThomist

Culver is quite good. I heartily recommend him.


----------



## DMcFadden

Culver is an eleventh generation descendent of American Puritans.

His theology represents an attempt to deal with the exegetical issues honestly and biblically.

One curiosity comes in his handling of eschatology. When he gets to the issue of tribulational speculations among evangelicals, he demurs.



> Premillennial Views of the Millennium.
> 
> One matter of importance has been excluded from discussion: the precise time-relation of the resurrection and translation of believers (the so-called rapture of the church ) to the coming great tribulation, for two reasons.
> 
> 1. While the millennium rests on what most millenarians hold to be clear Scripture texts, the 'Rapture debate' depends on inferences from Scripture passages which primarily treat other subjects. Some supposedly direct affirmations of a pre-, post- or mid-tribulational rapture are irrelevant.
> 
> 2. Though the firmness with which competing views (pre-, mid- and post-tribulational) of the coming resurrection and translation of believers is sometimes advocated suggests otherwise, the Scriptures indicate that God may have rendered this problem incapable of full solution until He gives more light. There is always danger in going beyond that which is written, especially in speculative matters and in biblical prediction.


(from Systematic Theology © 2005 by Robert Duncan Culver. All rights reserved.)

BTW, Culver is available as an add-on to the Biblesoft software system.


----------



## Ivan

DMcFadden said:


> Doxa Digital Press Downloads
> They only publish Calvinist (Reformed and Reformed Baptist) stuff.
> 
> Bible Explorer - Free Bible Software
> FREE copy of the Bible Explorer/WordSearch/Bible Navigator engine and LOTS of free books
> 
> http://www.stilltruth.com/category/technology/libronix-downloads
> JCM's PBB Page
> The first reference is to a site with lots of PBB format materials to run on the Libronix platform, including links to get the engine for the Logos Libronix.
> 
> e-Sword - the Sword of the LORD with an electronic edge
> David Cox's E-Sword Resource Page
> E-Sword Modules Locator Database
> The main site and a couple of other locations for LOTS of free books to run on the excellent (free) e-Sword enginge.
> 
> *Here are the only sites in this list that cost money:
> *Welcome to Rejoice Christian Software!
> Discount prices with pre-pub sales that beat almost everyone.
> 
> AGES Library - Christian Bible Studies, Commentaries, Reference, Sermons, and more
> Lots of classics, including loads of Puritans and Reformed writers in PDF format.
> 
> Plus, you can use Google books to get PDF classics for free. And, if you google "PDF AND [whatever name you are looking for]" you can often find things published on the Net for free.



I am going to have fun when I get broadband.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

bookslover said:


> danmpem said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I was wondering that too. I have heard so much about him and want to read it so much. Come on, he was 89 when he wrote it, how awesome is that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, he was 89 when he published it. He's probably spent the last 40 years working on the thing.
> 
> Robert Duncan Culver was born in Harrah, Washington, in July, 1916. So, he'll be 92 this year.
Click to expand...


That is impressive; a fine example of perserverance.


----------



## crhoades

Although not a full blown systematics, I find Richard Muller's Post Reformation Dogmatics extremely useful. My votes are for Brakel and then Calvin and Bavinck.


----------



## Stephen

crhoades said:


> Although not a full blown systematics, I find Richard Muller's Post Reformation Dogmatics extremely useful. My votes are for Brakel and then Calvin and Bavinck.



I have always used Reymond and Berkhof, but started using Brakel within the last year, and really like him. He has a real pastoral approach and is not difficult to follow. 
 I really like your avatar, brother. I voted for him and think he will do better than most people think. I really fear the outcome of this election.


----------



## crhoades

Stephen said:


> crhoades said:
> 
> 
> 
> Although not a full blown systematics, I find Richard Muller's Post Reformation Dogmatics extremely useful. My votes are for Brakel and then Calvin and Bavinck.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have always used Reymond and Berkhof, but started using Brakel within the last year, and really like him. He has a real pastoral approach and is not difficult to follow.
> I really like your avatar, brother. I voted for him and think he will do better than most people think. I really fear the outcome of this election.
Click to expand...

 
In my humble opinion the pastoral approach should by definition be the best. 

And as far as the election is concerned...take comfort in Psalm 146 today.


----------



## puritanpilgrim

> I don't care for Grudem so much. He is very superficial for me. I like systematics which are more indepth.



I stand corrected. My systematic theology teacher from New Orleans was amil. I must have associated Grudem with my teacher.


----------



## YoungCalvinist

*Best Systematic*

Sorry everyone, but it has to be...Louis Berkhof's work followed very closely by Dr. Grudem's, albeit I would take variance on his views of the charismata


----------



## elnwood

The ones I own are Charles Hodge, Berkhof, Calvin, Erickson, Thiessen, Chafer, Grudem, J. P. Boyce, Ryrie and McGrath. I think Grudem or Erickson would be what I recommend for a beginner because they more accessible and flow well.

Alister McGrath does a fantastic job of covering all the doctrines from an historical Christian perspective instead of the typical polemics on why the author's view is correct that has become part and parcel of Reformed systematics.

No one has mentioned Paul Enns' Moody Handbook of Theology, which also avoids the polemics but is concise, precise and very comprehensive and is one of my favorites when supplemented with something more devotional like Grudem.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Poimen said:


> I voted for a Brakel: theological precision and pious warmth. Calvin would come a close second though.
> 
> As for the others I have read small(er) portions of their work so when I get around to reading them I may change my mind but I doubt it.



Where can I find Wilhelm a Brakel?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Poimen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I voted for a Brakel: theological precision and pious warmth. Calvin would come a close second though.
> 
> As for the others I have read small(er) portions of their work so when I get around to reading them I may change my mind but I doubt it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where can I find Wilhelm a Brakel?
Click to expand...


It's available at RHB.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Sweet. (My Wife is going to kill me.)


----------



## FenderPriest

For those interested, Herman Bavinck's 4 vol. Reformed Dogmatics is now available from Westminster Bookstore for $100 here.


----------



## cih1355

elnwood said:


> The ones I own are Charles Hodge, Berkhof, Calvin, Erickson, Thiessen, Chafer, Grudem, J. P. Boyce, Ryrie and McGrath. I think Grudem or Erickson would be what I recommend for a beginner because they more accessible and flow well.
> 
> Alister McGrath does a fantastic job of covering all the doctrines from an historical Christian perspective instead of the typical polemics on why the author's view is correct that has become part and parcel of Reformed systematics.
> 
> No one has mentioned Paul Enns' Moody Handbook of Theology, which also avoids the polemics but is concise, precise and very comprehensive and is one of my favorites when supplemented with something more devotional like Grudem.



I have McGrath's, Christian Theology, and I noticed that it covers a lot of historical theology, which is good if you want to learn what various Christian thinkers believed about different doctrines.


----------



## jogri17

REFORMED DOGMATICS 
BY HERMAN BAVINCK 

I just finished the 4th volume. Amazing translation.


----------



## Greg

Poimen said:


> I voted for a Brakel: theological precision and pious warmth. Calvin would come a close second though.
> 
> As for the others I have read small(er) portions of their work so when I get around to reading them I may change my mind but I doubt it.





CarlosOliveira said:


> I agree with Poimen. Brakel is theologically precise and warmth. I think Turretin comes second, Calvin in third, John Brown of Haddington in fourth and Berkhof in fifth.



What's the name of Brakel's systematic?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Greg said:


> Poimen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I voted for a Brakel: theological precision and pious warmth. Calvin would come a close second though.
> 
> As for the others I have read small(er) portions of their work so when I get around to reading them I may change my mind but I doubt it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CarlosOliveira said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with Poimen. Brakel is theologically precise and warmth. I think Turretin comes second, Calvin in third, John Brown of Haddington in fourth and Berkhof in fifth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What's the name of Brakel's systematic?
Click to expand...


_The Christian's Reasonable Service_ (4 vols.)


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> Greg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poimen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I voted for a Brakel: theological precision and pious warmth. Calvin would come a close second though.
> 
> As for the others I have read small(er) portions of their work so when I get around to reading them I may change my mind but I doubt it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CarlosOliveira said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with Poimen. Brakel is theologically precise and warmth. I think Turretin comes second, Calvin in third, John Brown of Haddington in fourth and Berkhof in fifth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What's the name of Brakel's systematic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The Christian's Reasonable Service_ (4 vols.)
Click to expand...


Is that available anywhere Andrew?


----------



## CDM

Monergism has the set

Excellent price.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

mangum said:


> Monergism has the set
> 
> Excellent price.



My wife is going to kill me.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

I think that RHB is $90.00 and SGCB is around $94.00 or so for a'Brakel. The RHB website is not working for me at the moment though.


----------



## jogri17

even though i'm not baptist nor charismatic I do love Grudem's. It's a great intro and first time systematic theology. And Berkohf is just so dry to me.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> I think that RHB is $90.00 and SGCB is around $94.00 or so for a'Brakel. The RHB website is not working for me at the moment though.



Have it ready to order from SGCB. Thanks!!!


----------



## servantofmosthigh

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Who do you think has written the best systematic theology. I go for Robert Reymond (while not agreeing with everything he says), with Louis Berkhof a close second.


 
There are several other Systematic Theologies I hold of equal rank because depending on the topic, each author has weaknesses and strengths. Some of the other works I highly regard include (not in any particular order):

- Millard Erickson's _Christian Theology_. Albeit moderate Calvinist in perspective, this work is wider and more detailed than any I've seen in anywhere else.
- Robert Duncan Culver's _Systematic Theology_. I still have not read it entirely, but what I have read thus far impressed me.
- Daniel Akin's _A Theology For The Church_. Albeit Southern Baptist in perspective, it is nonetheless a very good systematic theology work that keeps ecclesiology and piety in the context. For example, Eric Redmond  was interviewed by Mark Dever at 9Marks Ministry
where he explains his glaring letters he had sent to several SBC leaders, including Akin, Dever and Patterson, about Akin's _A Theology For The Church_ failure to include the topic of American Slavery or Racial Relations from a systematic theology perspective. Redmond's argument is that it was Southern Baptist's theology that endorsed the practice of American Slavery. And Redmond is hoping that future Systematic Theology works that come out will start to look at the theology of slavery and/or racial relations from a systematic theology perspective for application in corporate ecclesiology and personal piety. On all other areas that are standard Systematic Theology grounds, Akin does a superb job of doing just that.
- J.I. Packer's _Concise Theology_. Of course, because of its size it is not a true systematic theology work. And it is geared more for the lay person. But it remains for me one of the best quick reference books I always first dig into for a quick, immediate refresher of the key points of the basic theological concepts or points.

But, given the list, I voted for Grudem's 3rd edition, despite his continuationist leaning on the topic of spiritual revelatory gifts.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Since I have the patience of a 2-y/o I went to the Library and picked up the first Vol. to read...


----------



## DMcFadden

servantofmosthigh said:


> - Millard Erickson's _Christian Theology_. Albeit moderate Calvinist in perspective, this work is wider and more detailed than any I've seen in anywhere else.
> - Robert Duncan Culver's _Systematic Theology_. I still have not read it entirely, but what I have read thus far impressed me.



Erickson is now available in Libronix format. Culver is a pre-pub with Logos and is already available from Biblesoft for their P.C. Study Bible. Incidentally, the _Christian's Reasonable Service _ is available in digital form too.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> VirginiaHuguenot said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think that RHB is $90.00 and SGCB is around $94.00 or so for a'Brakel. The RHB website is not working for me at the moment though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have it ready to order from SGCB. Thanks!!!
Click to expand...


You're welcome!



Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Since I have the patience of a 2-y/o I went to the Library and picked up the first Vol. to read...



Enjoy!


----------



## pilgrim3970

CaseyBessette said:


> Could commentaries on catechisms ever be thought as being a sort of systematic theology? I mean, Ridgley's work reads like a systematic theology . . it's just arranged according to question and answer, much like Turretin. Why not Ursinus? Then there's Bullinger's _Decades_ -- do they count? How about Hodge's _Outlines_?  We certainly are not in lack regarding dogmatic theologies in the Reformed tradition!




Bullinger's Decades - Good Stuff!


----------



## holyfool33

I would go with Louis Berkholf because of the clarity of writeing and through explinantion of the doctrines.


----------

