Apologética Singers

This video features some of the men that I taught in Brazil.  We spent a fair amount of time on the Van Til/Clark controversy.  This video was something these guys just did on the fly in response.  Very creative!

The Gospel Under the Southern Cross (6)

Some of the students at the Reformed Reading Room in Recife.

The last few days have been a whirlwind.  We’re now near the end of my time here.  What’s been happening?

Last Saturday, we concluded the apologetics course at the Reading Room.  I was impressed that most of the people there on the Monday evening persevered all the way to the end.  Much to be thankful for!

Sunday saw us head down the coast.  I preached in the Reformed congregations at Sao Jose da Coroa Grande and Maragogi.  I was able to spend the afternoon with one of the local pastors, Rev. Alexandrino Araujo Moura.  In the evening, we enjoyed the warm hospitality of Elder Moizes Lins.  Moizes makes an awesome octopus dish!

Reformed church building in Sao Jose da Coroa Grande

On Monday morning, our students arrived at the Calvin Institute for the first apologetics course.  Most of them came from the state of Sergipe, some seven hours driving time from here.  We began in earnest on Monday afternoon.  On Monday evening, we took one more opportunity to give a lecture at the Reading Room.  I spoke on the concept of self-deception in apologetics.  There were about 30-40 people present for this, many of whom did not have a Reformed background.

Getting set up in the classroom at the Reformed seminary in Aldeia.

Yesterday (Tuesday) was spent mostly in the classroom at the seminary.  In one day (!), we finished the first introductory apologetics course.  And today and tomorrow (Wednesday/Thursday), we’ll be doing the other course.  This one deals directly with Cornelius Van Til.  We hope to wrap things up tomorrow afternoon and then I head for home again on Friday morning.

Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism

I want to make a few comments on this book, but not a full-fledged review.  This is an excellent doorway into the world of post-Reformation Reformed theologians.  It condenses the best in some of the most recent scholarship, particularly from the Netherlands.  It continues the program of deflating anti-scholastic biases.  For example, the authors illustrate in a number of places ways in which John Calvin employed scholastic methods in his writing and teaching.  Calvin’s issue was never with scholasticism as a method in general, but with the specific theologians of the Sorbonne.  The authors demonstrate how the high orthodox period was not, as is often portrayed, rationalistic, nor did it contain the seeds of the Enlightenment.

One of the important contributions of this volume is to the history of apologetics in this period.  It includes a translation of a disputation from Gisbertus Voetius on “The Use of Reason in Matters of Faith.”  There is also a reading guide to assist the novice in understanding his approach.  Elsewhere Van Asselt briefly surveys the development of “physico-theology,” a form of theology based on the study of nature, developed in response to the pressures of Enlightenment skepticism and atheism.  Fascinating stuff, this.

Richard Muller is usually touted as the go-to man for getting to know the post-Reformation.  Rightly so.  However, novices to this field can sometimes find him difficult to access.  Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism is now the best place to start.  Albert Gootjes deserves our thanks for translating it and Reformation Heritage Books for publishing it.  I’m going to be turning to it often.

Book Review: The Theology of B. B. Warfield

The Theology of B. B. Warfield: A Systematic Summary, Fred G. Zaspel, Wheaton: Crossway, 2010.  Hardcover, 624 pages, $44.00.

Ninety years after his death, Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield continues to be a respected voice in Reformed theology.  Along with Jonathan Edwards, the Hodges, and a few others, Warfield is one of the pre-eminent Reformed theologians in North American church history.  Yet for all his renown, few have given him a careful reading.  Popular ideas persist about what Warfield believed about this or that.  Part of the problem is Warfield himself never systematically laid out his theology in one place.

Fred Zaspel has therefore done us a favour by carefully collating Warfield’s theology into one helpful volume.  After an introduction surveying Warfield’s life and work, Zaspel follows the standard topics of systematic theology and distils Warfield’s thought on each one.  Here and there he also interacts with interpreters, particularly the ones whom Zaspel feels have not done justice to Warfield.

Zaspel himself is a sympathetic interpreter.  A Reformed Baptist pastor in Pennsylvania, he is broadly in agreement with Warfield’s theological bent.  Where he personally might depart from Warfield (regarding infant baptism, for instance), Zaspel remains respectfully silent, just simply laying out the Princeton theologian’s views without comment.  At the end of the volume he does offer some critique, but for the most part he allows Warfield to speak for himself.  That’s not to say the book consists mostly of quotations – most of the time Zaspel summarizes and paraphrases.

The Theology of B. B. Warfield will appeal most to pastors, scholars, seminary students and informed “lay people.”  Like Warfield himself, it is not light and fluffy.  Technical language is used and readers are expected to have an intermediate level of theological knowledge.

There are four areas in the book especially worthy of further comment.  Early on, Zaspel deals with Warfield’s views on apologetics.  He argues that Warfield has been unfairly portrayed by later Reformed apologists such as Cornelius Van Til.  Van Til argued that Warfield did not give adequate expression to the effects of sin upon the unregenerate mind.  Zaspel attempts to defend Warfield against this accusation.  He notes that Warfield did not attribute “right reason” to the unbeliever and spoke repeatedly of the pervasiveness of sin (77-78).  However, Zaspel also states that Warfield maintained that unregenerate man “is able to see the compelling force of ‘right reason.’”  Unfortunately, Zaspel is unable to see that this justifies Van Til’s complaint.  While he adds some useful nuance to Warfield’s views, Zaspel does not succeed in exculpating Warfield on his inconsistencies in apologetics.

Warfield is known as the great defender of biblical inspiration and inerrancy.  Therefore, one would expect a book of this nature to deal with those subjects at length.  Zaspel does not disappoint.  He outlines how contemporaries of Warfield and latter-day interpreters have accused the Princetonian of “rationalistic scholasticism” in his doctrine of the Bible.  He helpfully illustrates how these charges fall well short of the mark.

A third area of interest is Warfield’s thought on evolution.  The claim is often made that Warfield had an appreciation for evolution.  The argument is advanced that if Warfield can be regarded as a great Reformed theologian and he held to evolution, then how can contemporary advocates of evolution be excluded from Reformed churches?  Those making such claims ought to read Zaspel’s careful summary of Warfield’s views and how they developed.  He concludes Warfield could at best be said to have been noncommittal or to be critically agnostic (386-387).  However, Warfield also developed a “strengthening conviction against evolution” (385).

Finally, one of Warfield’s greatest concerns was the influence of perfectionism or Keswick “higher life” spirituality.  In his day there were popular preachers and writers claiming it was possible for Christians to no longer sin in this age.  There were also those who claimed that Christians should not regard themselves as sinners, since they are a “new creation in Christ.”  They denied the biblical teaching that, in this age, we are both justified and sinners (simul iustus et peccator).  These false teachings are still around today.  Today we still need Warfield’s biblical defense against these errors.  Zaspel provides a helpful door.  Warfield approvingly quoted Thomas Adam, “The moment we think we have no sin, we shall desert Christ” (465).

The Theology of B. B. Warfield is a comprehensive guide to the thought of “the Lion of Princeton.”  There’s no question it will be a standard reference for decades to come.  Anyone interested in the development of Reformed theology on our continent needs to have it and read it.

Book Review: The Passionate Intellect

The Passionate Intellect: Christian Faith and the Discipleship of the  Mind, Alister McGrath, Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2010.  Hardcover, 210 pages, $24.50

Back in the mid-1990s, I reviewed a book which began with the memorable words:  “The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.”  If you don’t recognize them, they’re from Mark Noll’s The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind.  In the years since, many authors have echoed Noll’s lament.  Others have sought to remedy the situation.  The Passionate Intellect can be considered another attempt at rectifying the intellectual laziness of many Christians today.  The author’s purpose is to do this with an eye to engaging challenges to the Christian faith in the public square.

McGrath is the author of many books and articles.  He speaks widely at conferences around the world.  Trained in molecular biophysics, chemistry, and theology, he’s currently the chair of theology, ministry and education of the Centre for Theology, Religion and Culture at King’s College, London, England.  He is also the head of that institution.  McGrath has served as an assistant pastor in an Anglican church and his wife is also an ordained Anglican minister.

The Passionate Intellect is based on previously unpublished lectures and addresses on the subjects of theology, apologetics, and cultural engagement.  The first part of the book deals with “The Purpose, Place and Relevance of Christian Theology.”  This is the better part of the book.  One of the highlights is chapter 4, exploring the connections between Martin Luther and C. S. Lewis with regards to suffering and a “theology of the cross.”  There are differences, but also some commonalities: “For all their differences, Lewis and Luther both believed that we dwell in a world of shadows, which will one day give way to the brilliance and clarity of heaven” (68).  Both Luther and Lewis came to understand that the best theologians are forged in the furnace of suffering and hard experiences.  If you were to buy this book, pay the most careful attention to this chapter.

The second part is titled, “Engaging With Our Culture,” and this section is more outwardly focussed and relates to apologetics.  Here too, McGrath has some helpful and engaging points.  For instance, I appreciated his critique of several aspects of the new atheism of Hitchens, Dawkins, etc.  He describes his own personal journey to the discovery that atheism is a belief system rather than “a factual statement about reality” (106).  He notes, “The new atheism conducts its polemic against a notion of God that bears little relation to that of Christianity” (111).  He takes on Dawkins’ theory that “belief in God is a delusion caused by ‘memes.’”  He identifies this theory as entirely based on speculation (115-118).  Also, throughout the volume, McGrath correctly notes how Christianity offers the most “comprehensive, coherent, and compelling account of reality” of all worldviews and belief systems.

Yet I have some reservations that prevent a whole-hearted recommendation.  First off, McGrath does not see Darwin’s evolutionary theory as being inconsistent with Christian belief.  In a recent Clarion article with some colleagues, we argued quite the opposite.  One cannot hold to Darwinian evolution and have a high view of Scripture.  The two are mutually exclusive.

That brings me to a second reservation:  how does McGrath view the relationship of Scripture to apologetics?  It’s not clear to me from this book and that makes me uncomfortable.  This is not to say that he ignores Scripture or biblical teachings.  Rather, my reservation is with the fact that he does not come right out and say that the Bible must be the foundation for faithful Christian apologetics.  Perhaps this is why we don’t hear anything from McGrath on the effects of sin on the human mind and reasoning and even imagination.

Finally, in chapter 10, McGrath portrays Jesus Christ as the ultimate pacifist: “He was the object, not the agent, of violence.”  Wasn’t whipping money-changers out of the temple a bit on the violent side?  Doesn’t he reveal himself in Revelation 19 as the rider on the white horse “who judges and makes war”?  Revelation 19:15, “Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations…He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.” McGrath asks, “Does the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ command anyone to kill in his name?” (156).  Um…yes.  Unless he is a Marcionite, McGrath should have Exodus 12 in his Bible.  The LORD sends his angel to kill all the first-born of Egypt.  There are other examples.

McGrath is at his best when dealing with Lewis and Luther.  If the whole book was along the lines of chapter 4, I would be pleased to recommend it.  Unfortunately, McGrath falls into a similar pit as Noll did in The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind.  He sees the problems rightly, but his solutions are often lacking.  The “passionate intellect” must be informed by Christian presuppositions firmly grounded only in the Word of God.