Which Pink books are okay?

[passingpilgrim]

I know Pink changed his views pretty dramatically and pretty much recanted his earlier teachings?

So, my question is, which books are the ones to stay away from?

 

[JML]

Don't buy his book on the Anti-Christ. I figured out pretty soon after I purchased it that something wasn't quite right. That was before I knew that he had changed his views.

---------- Post added at 11:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 AM ----------

By the way, an easy way to find out is to check the publisher. I doubt a good reformed publisher will put their stamp on some of his not so solid works.

 

[Berean]

Can someone explain how his "views" changed? I wasn't aware of this. I read The Sovereignty of God and found it to be quite good. I did see that he wrote a series of 5 articles refuting dispensationalism in 1952, which would be a good thing. I thought he started out Dispensational and became Reformed. I'd like to hear from others on this.

 

[JonathanHunt]

Folks, the bottom line is:

If you are a sensible person with a brain you can benefit from nearly all of Pink's teachings. Banner of Truth is too sniffy by half about some of his writings.

I say 'nearly all' because his early work on specific eschatological topics can be avoided. So, 'the antichrist' and other pre 1930 work on endtimes topics and dispensations.

'The Sovereignty of God' is excellent, as is 'The Divine Covenants' (from a reformed baptist point of view) and many others. Pink's eschatology and hermeneutic were definately off-base for some time, but His soteriology and view of God seems to have been essentially sound (although early versions of 'The Sovereignty of God' would seem to espouse a slightly higher calvinism, from what I understand in reading his biography by Murray).

All of his commentaries are beneficial and suggestive. Several are out of print, and a number are shortly to be republished by The Wakeman Trust. I don't have the list to hand at the moment.

Bear in mind that Pink would be horrified at some of the republishing that has occurred. A rule of thumb is that if a work was written entirely before 1930, and never later revised, you migt want to avoid it.

 

[JM]

I can suggest the following:

The Divine Covenants
Sovereignty of God
Hebrews
The Divine Inspiration of the Bible
Interpretation of the Scriptures
The Satisfaction of Christ
The Ten Commandments
A Study of Dispensationalism
Studies on Saving Faith
The Doctrine of Sanctification
The Doctrine of Justification

 

[Hippo]

The thing to understand is that Pink wrote very few books, the majority of the writings attributed to him are collections pulled from his many contributions to "Studies in the Scriptures" and were not intended to be stand alone books, even if they serve very well in that function.

His actual "books" are (according to the bibliography in Murrays excellent biography of Pink)

1914 The divine inspiration of the bible
1918 The redeemers return
1918 The sovereignty of God
1919 The seven sayings of the Saviour on the cross
1921 Why four Gospels
1922 Gleanings in Genesis
1923 The antichrist
1922-7 Exposition of Gospel of John


Anything prior to the early 1930's may be tinged with dispensationalism error or be unduly influenced by his Brethren influences but as long as that is realised it is really all profitable stuff (after all he made points in these works that still have to be refuted and challenged to this day). The least of Pinks problems were his early dispensationalism when compared with him not even going to Church for the greater part of his later life, which is much more serious in my mind.

 

[NB3K]

What about His book the doctrine of ELection?

 

[Hippo]

I believe that "The Doctrine of Election" originates from monthly articles in Studies in the Scriptures dating from January 1938 to January 1940 so this was not originally intended to be a discrete book but was written well after his suspect period.

Mike