Von
Puritan Board Sophomore
Which of their works on eschatology is the best?
Which Theologian Believes/Believed Closest To Your Own Beliefs?
- Status
I'm just starting to get into the Patristics and would love the details of what you mean! Maybe send me a dm and we can go from there on specifics and places to start? Thanks!
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I am actually going to post a list on PB.
greenbaggins
Puritan Board Doctor
Geerhardus Vos for me, hands down. I consider him the best theologian since the apostle Paul. As great as Calvin was, I think Vos surpassed even him. At any rate, I find myself most in line with Vos.
ZackF
Puritan Board Professor
Jacob is certainly more well-read and more recently read in the Fathers. I look forward to his list. If you haven't already I'd look for a second hand copy of this little edition of the ante-Nicene apostolic fathers as a good place to start.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
It is good that you are enjoying my friend, Rev. Stewart's preaching. I am not Protestant Reformed, but I occasionally attend meetings/events at his congregation. He is a great preacher.
With respect to the OP, it is hard to answer because I disagree with nearly all of the men by whom I have been most influenced. Still, I will make a stab at it (in no particular order):
1. Samuel Rutherford (excepting his voluntarism)
2. Francis Turretin (excepting the evangelical feast days)
3. Thomas Aquinas (except for the popish bits)
4. Augustine (except for the popish bits)
5. John Calvin (excepting the evangelical feast days)
6. John Owen (except for Independency)
7. James Dolezal (except for baptism)
8. Peter Sanlon (except for ecclesiology; he was converted through my current congregation)
9. William Perkins (except for advocating the death penalty for theft)
10. J. G. Vos (except for eschatology)
11. Herman Bavinck (except for common grace)
12. Thomas Boston (though I am not sure about his defence of the Marrow)
13. Thomas Houston (except for tolerating fake wine in communion)
14. Charles and A. A. Hodge (except for the WMO and creation)
15. B. B. Warfield (except for creation)
16. Henry Bullinger (excepting the evangelical feast days)
17. Martin Bucer (excepting the evangelical feast days)
18. Louis Berkhof (except for eschatology, the WMO, and common grace)
19. Herman Witsius (there were a few oddities in his Economy of the Covenants but I have forgotten what they were; perhaps some of his views on republication, though I am a moderate republicationist)
20. R. L. Dabney (except for racism, American slavery, the WMO, and church-state relations)
21. D. A. Carson (except for baptism and the Sabbath)
22. Herman Hoeksema (except for eschatology, the covenant of works, divorce and remarriage, and church-state relations)
23. John Murray (except for the WMO and rejecting the covenant of works)
24. Meredith Kline (except for the Klineanism)
25. J. C. Ryle (except for ecclesiology and hypothetical universalism)
26. John Brown of Haddington (except for not compelling church attendance and some loose statements that sounded a bit like hypothetical universalism)
27. Geerhardus Vos (I am not sure about some aspects of his Biblical Theology)
28. Lorraine Boettner (except for his preterism)
29. Greg Bahnsen (except for his presuppositionalism and some of the exegesis used to defend theonomy)
30. Alexander McLeod (perhaps too hard on John Adams and he made under-nuanced statements on textual criticism)
31. James Renwick Willson (except for insisting on lining out the psalms)
32. John Flavel (perhaps too favourable to the Glorious Revolution)
33. William Ames (except for Independency)
34. Jeremiah Burroughs (except for Independency)
35. Michael Horton (except for Klineanism, imprecatory psalms, and eschatology)
36. Mark Jones (except for his antagonism to exclusive psalmody)
37. Various Eastern Fathers that I have read (except for their synergism)
38. William Symington (perhaps too favourable to the 1859 revival in Scotland).
39. J. I. Packer (except for ecclesiology and concessions to ecumenism)
40. John Gill (except for baptism and hyper-Calvinist leanings)
41. David Engelsma (same issues as Herman Hoeksema).
42. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (except for ecclesiology and gifts of the Spirit)
43. John Stott (except for ecclesiology and compromise on eternal punishment)
44. James Durham (except for some historicist interpretations)
45. Robert Baillie (except for being unnecessarily polemical against the Independents)
46. George Gillespie (except for Christ's mediatorial kingship)
47. Alexander Henderson (except for Christ's mediatorial kingship)
48. Robert Letham (except for his criticisms of Thomas Aquinas, creation, and EO sympathies)
49. Peter Jensen (except for ecclesiology; his son is my assistant minister)
50. James Ussher (except for Royalism and hypothetical universalism)
51. Ezekiel Hopkins (except for ecclesiology and passive obedience)
That is all that I can think of for the time being.
Last edited:
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Evidently you put some thought into this. I like it.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
What does WMO mean?
arapahoepark
Puritan Board Professor
Well meant offer.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
I should also add that I disagree with Charles Hodge and R. L. Dabney on the Lord's Supper, as they rejected Calvin's position.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
I also added John Murray and Meredith Kline to my list.
Last edited:
JimmyH
Puritan Board Senior
Obviously I have some homework ahead of me if I want to catch up to many of the more knowledgeable participants in this thread. Though I have dabbled in Calvin's Commentaries, and have STs by the 'big guys', Bavinck, Berkhoff, Hodge among others, I haven't really gotten into them yet.
At present Martyn Lloyd-Jones and D.A. Carson have been the most influential on my view of theology. In his commentary on Romans Douglas Moo says, in the Bibliography, the section on Commentaries used, Moo says of MLJ ;
"His very relevant homiletical applications grow out of insightful, theologically informed exegesis, and the reader can see from the notes how much his exegesis has informed my own thinking about the text."
High praise from a noted theologian/teacher.
At present Martyn Lloyd-Jones and D.A. Carson have been the most influential on my view of theology. In his commentary on Romans Douglas Moo says, in the Bibliography, the section on Commentaries used, Moo says of MLJ ;
"His very relevant homiletical applications grow out of insightful, theologically informed exegesis, and the reader can see from the notes how much his exegesis has informed my own thinking about the text."
High praise from a noted theologian/teacher.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
Daniel, is there one person that you find you don't disagree with on any one thing?To be fair, my list would probably be similar if I were to try to make it, but now I'm genuinely curious. The Westminster Divines or Scottish Commissioners perhaps?
The Westminster divines represented a fairly broad range of opinion, so there will probably be some things in most of their writings with which I would not concur. I have updated the list to include more of the Scottish commissioners. I have to say that I do not recall reading anything in James Fergusson or David Dickson that I took issue with, but, then again, I have not read that much of their writings.
I thought Vos was like walking on your left leg; Bavinck like walking on your right leg. Both legs are best
His book "the dust of death: The Sixties Counterculture and How It Changed America Forever" (now out of print) had a profound impact on my thinking in my youth.
greenbaggins
Puritan Board Doctor
Daniel, I can understand all of your caveats except for these two. Why do you think that Murray rejects the CoW just because he rejects the terms? I'm not sure I agree, for instance, with T. David Gordon's analysis. Murray's description of the Adamic administration leaves almost all of the pieces of the CoW intact. He just doesn't like the name.
With regard to Vos, which aspects of his Biblical Theology do you take issue with?
I thought Vos was like walking on your left leg; Bavinck like walking on your right leg. Both legs are best
Interesting analogy. Vos stands on his own two feet, in my opinion.
However, I would not want to be without my Turretin, Hodge, Warfield, Calvin, Shedd, etc., either.
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
I know this isn't addressed to me, but I wanted to ask--isn't it true that Murray not only disliked the term Covenant of Works, but that he denied that Adam's relationship with God was covenantal in nature?
greenbaggins
Puritan Board Doctor
Tyler, my analysis is that Murray didn't like the term "covenant" to describe the Adamic situation. So he would say that the Adamic relationship with God was not covenantal. However, the terms of the relationship wind up being pretty much the same as the standard descriptions of the CoW. Murray basically committed the word-concept fallacy, in my opinion.
Doulos McKenzie
Puritan Board Freshman
I think my views are pretty well summed up in the writings of the greatest Reformer: his majesty Michael Servetus
greenbaggins
Puritan Board Doctor
I think my views are pretty well summed up in the writings of the greatest Reformer: his majesty Michael Servetus
BURN HIM QUICKLY!!!
U
Username3000
Guest
Is a man who was burned at the stake for a heterodox view of the Trinity and of Christ a worthy source of comedy?
That man had an eternal soul, and he is even now, as we speak, experiencing something of his eternal destination.
Would we not be better off deriving our enjoyment from the ale house or the theatre than from the circumstances of Servutus' life and death?
It is only by God's grace that you or I are not ourselves the punch line of that joke.
That man had an eternal soul, and he is even now, as we speak, experiencing something of his eternal destination.
Would we not be better off deriving our enjoyment from the ale house or the theatre than from the circumstances of Servutus' life and death?
It is only by God's grace that you or I are not ourselves the punch line of that joke.
Last edited by a moderator:
greenbaggins
Puritan Board Doctor
E.R., he meant it as a funny line. I thought it was funny. I responded in kind. It's fine if you don't think it is funny.
On your position, though, we could not laugh at any of the Darwin Awards. We couldn't laugh at Haman in the Bible. Do you think it is possible that laughing at such foolishness is one of the ways God's grace keeps us from going down that road?
On your position, though, we could not laugh at any of the Darwin Awards. We couldn't laugh at Haman in the Bible. Do you think it is possible that laughing at such foolishness is one of the ways God's grace keeps us from going down that road?
U
Username3000
Guest
I don't find Haman funny.
The 'Darwin Awards' don't involve people being burned at the stake and going to hell. Entirely different categories.
greenbaggins
Puritan Board Doctor
E.R., I wasn't drawing a direct comparison between the Darwin awards and Servetus. I was saying that your position would not allow us to laugh at either. I find Haman funny, and I believe rather strongly that the Bible paints him in a funny light.
However wrong it was for Servetus to be burned at the stake, there is more to the story, and there is rather strong evidence that Servetus had a martyr complex, and basically goaded the entire world (the Romanists and the Lutherans all congratulated Geneva on executing him) into executing him. This is strongly foolish behavior.
However wrong it was for Servetus to be burned at the stake, there is more to the story, and there is rather strong evidence that Servetus had a martyr complex, and basically goaded the entire world (the Romanists and the Lutherans all congratulated Geneva on executing him) into executing him. This is strongly foolish behavior.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
While I admit that somethings that T. David Gordon said may be a bit over the top, I would agree with Tyler that John Murray's position is a significant modification of traditional covenant theology. Moreover, if you do not view the arrangement with Adam as a covenant of works you run huge exegetical problems when confronted with the text of scripture (Romans 5 and Galatians 4, for instance). And I do not think that it is going too far to suggest that he was a seminal influence on Shepherdism and the Federal Vision.
I am trying to read/re-read most of his major works this year (I read the first two volumes of Reformed Dogmatics 12-18 months ago). I have not read Biblical Theology since 2004, when my levels of comprehension were much lower than they are now. I recall reading in his inaugural lecture that the modern practice of Biblical Theology was "born under an evil star", which raises questions about its utility as a theological method. I certainly do not like the direction some of his disciples have taken Biblical Theology, as I think they undermine the ethical authority of the Old Testament and lend weight to the idea that biblical authors have different theologies. But I will be able to say more after further reading.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
I edited that bit, changing it to "I am not sure about some aspects of his Biblical Theology", which more accurately reflects my position.
Gforce9
Puritan Board Junior
David,
I agree that R.C Sproul was a very smart guy, a good theologian and that Ligonier is a blessing. My best guess for this lack of showing is that he was too covenantal for many Baptists and too independent for many Presbyterians (St. Andrews is an independent Presbyterian church, which is an oxy-moron and, for an ordained Presbyterian minister and theologian, this is problematic). He held a few controversial views (who doesn't?), but my place in glory will be a lawn seat compared to his front row seat.......
Rev. Todd Ruddell
Puritan Board Junior
Dr. William Young is also one of my contemporary favorites.
- Status
Similar threads
