5 Carl Truman on B B Warfield 08-03-2013

I want to talk in the final lecture about B.B. Warfield. B.B. Warfield, a bit of a hero.

If you have not read him I do commend him to you. His writings are available in a number

! of different collections. There is the ten volume edition that Oxford University Press

put together in the early 1930s that contains most of his longer writings. There is a two

volume set put together by Presbyterian Reform still in print, selected shorter writings

of B.B. Warfield, that was his more popular stuff. And there is, there were five volumes

of thematically organised Warfield writings put out by Presbyterian Reform I think in

the 1950s. They are out of print now but you might be able to get them second hand. If you

have Logos software you can get the complete B.B. Warfield for Logos which contains all

that and more. And Princeton Theological Seminary are at the moment scanning their entire archive

which will be available for free on the internet in the next few years. So all of the correspondence

etc. of B.B. Warfield will be freely available to anybody with a computer. They may be gastardly

liberals but they have a lot of money and they are making all this stuff available for the rest

of us. A very significant thing I think if you are looking for somebody who has real exegetical

acumen then B.B. Warfield is the man. He is famous for writing, you know most evangelicals

will know him for writing on the authority of scripture. But some of his most important

stuff I think are the articles, the long articles he did on the definition of biblical words.

also his essay on the emotional life of the Lord Jesus Christ is I think unprecedented

in Christian history and a very powerful piece. And his writings on perfectionism are important

as well. I had a student just recently did a long paper for me on perfectionism and it

struck me how little studied his writings on perfectionism have been and yet how perennially

important actually much of what he has to say there is. Interesting enough by a slightly

circuitous route I've ended up being the owner of probably the last letter that B.B. Warfield

ever wrote dated December the 21st 1920. He has a stroke just a few days after that and he

dies in early 1521. Warfield made it a letter to Professor Mackay at Free Church College in

Edinburgh. And Warfield, the letter is, he's just foaming at the mouth in this letter. He's

about to engage the perfectionist once again. And he's been reading up on the Keswick, he's

been reading the Keswick Week and he has some pretty harsh words over the Keswick Week. And

one gets the impression that he's gearing up for round three with the perfectionists. And

I often wonder, you know, did that help precipitate the stroke? He's pretty angry in this letter.

He's telling Mackay that he's coming out swinging against the perfectionists again and then a couple

of days later, sadly, he falls ill and then dies. But a lot of people don't know much about

his life, so I thought it would be a fairly laid back ending to reflect on his life.

The interesting thing about the Ferrari pulpit, does it kind of lift up if I press a button,

Paul? It's just rather flat. I'm going to put my wallet on the website. Sorry?

Well, I was going to say, if Paul actually paid me, it might be a little bigger. I was in

Northern Ireland and Chuck said, I'll give you a check for your speaker. I said, I speak

for Paul Levy. I'm quite used to the speaker to people who are not getting paid. You know,

trying to get the bank to accept the five per set of peace he gave me last time. It was

quite an effort. Anyway, B.B. Warfield, born November 5, 1851, near Lexington in Kentucky.

Born really to the extent that America has an aristocracy. Born really to sort of American

aristocracy. He was the result of the convergence of two great families, the Breckenridges and

the Warfields. A bit of trivia, if you look up Warfield, if you're looking for Warfield

books second hand, you type Warfield into ABE Books, you'll probably find a lot of books

popping up on Edward VIII. Why, when you search for Warfield, you get books on Edward VIII?

Well, Mrs. Simpson was a Warfield. Connected to the Warfield family. So, the Warfields are

an important family, a kind of noble family, if you like, if that's appropriate in the American

context. His family were members of Lexington's Second Presbyterian Church. Kentucky, of course,

is one of those sort of borderline states. Is it north or is it south? I've got friends

who teach at Southern Seminary in Louisville, and they'll say, you know, it's just too southern

for us. A British guy in America, all Americans seem the same to me. It's north, south, it's

all the same. But to Americans, these minor marginal differences are very important to

the extent that a northern person is living in Kentucky. It's like living in another country.

You go to the local Italian restaurant, the Olive Garden, of course, and the restrooms

and toilets are exactly the same places they are in Chicago. It's all really very much the

same. But, I always, you know, the French and the Americans are the two groups that I

will be ethnically insensitive about. More about the French than the Americans, because

the Americans pay my salary and my money. The Warfields are members of Lexington's Second

Presbyterian Church, and the significance of that is that in the American Civil War, the

Second Presbyterian Church was the only Presbyterian Church in Lexington that sided with the North.

And that's significant for understanding Warfield. Warfield, in the 1890s, Warfield writes a number

of articles on what he calls the colour question. And he's remarkably progressive on race issues,

which is important because one of the struggles I have at Westminster is you have a number of African-American

students. And to them, of course, Presbyterianism equals slaveholders, by and large. And sadly,

there's an awful lot of evidence that that's correct. A lot of African-American students have

Scottish names. Why do they have Scottish names? Because their ancestors were owned at some point

by Scottish Presbyterians. So the role of Warfield, if you like, in making Presbyterianism an easier

pill to swallow is important. So the only time Warfield falls out with Machen at Princeton,

Machen the founder of Westminster Seminary, the OPC, is when Warfield integrates the dormitories

of Princeton Seminary. And Machen objects to that. Machen's from Maryland, which of course is north

of Washington, was with the north in the Civil War, mainly because Lincoln wouldn't allow

to do otherwise. You couldn't have a southern state north of the capital. But Machen really

brought, you know, Machen was really a son of what we would call a lot of southern prejudices,

if you like. Warfield, in some ways, is a much easier sell to African-American students.

Piety of the household was very much shaped by the study of the Shorter Catechism.

The Warfields were expected to have memorized the Shorter Catechism by the age of six.

They were then expected to memorize the proof texts. And then they were expected to memorize

the larger catechism. Remember, of course, that I think, I can't remember the exact wording,

I think the Shorter Catechism says, you know, this is for those of weaker minds, I think.

That's the language that is used. I gave you the Warfield anecdote, of course, on the Shorter

Catechism yesterday. He retained a lifelong love for the catechism. He was not initially

particularly enthusiastic about theology and divinity. As a youngster, he was far more interested

in science. Of course, he was later taking a great interest in cattle breeding. I think

his editing a farmer's journal was his first literary editorial role. And it plays into his

interest in evolution and Darwinianism. That Warfield had this interest in contemporary trends

in science. In 1868, he entered what was then the College of New Jersey, now Princeton University.

He was disciplined for a fight on a Sunday afternoon, apparently. He hit somebody with a chair or

something. If you've seen, Warfield was a big man and was no doubt very capable of looking

after himself. For some of you, a family tradition, I think his uncle might have been expelled from

Princeton at some point for beating somebody up as well. So the Warfields were tough. In 1862,

he travelled to Europe, spent time studying in Edinburgh and Heidelberg. In 1873, he decided to enter the

ministry. Sorry, it was 1872, not 1862. That would have made him only 11 at the time. In 1873, he decided

to enter the ministry. And it was at this time that he became editor of the Farmer's Home Journal.

At Princeton, he studied under men such as Charles Hodge and Hodge's son, Caspar Wister Hodge. And he makes

this comment on Charles Hodge. I've sat under many noted teachers and Hodge was superior to them all.

He was in fact my ideal of a teacher, best of all men I've ever known. He knew how to make a young man think.

Went on to be licensed, May 1875, and became state of supply at the Concord Church in Nicholas County, Kentucky.

Graduated in 1876, and at that point declined a call to become the minister of First Presbyterian Church in Dayton, Ohio.

August the 3rd of 1876, he married the very beautiful, witty and charming Annie Kinkhead, and went to Europe to pursue

further study. And there he heard lectures from, among others, the great German liberal church historian Adolf von Harnack.

It's fascinating the connections between Princeton and German liberalism.

Charles Hodge, of course, had been in the house of Friedrich Schleiermacher.

There's that weird, odd, pietistic footnote in Hodge's systematic theology where he's talking about Schleiermacher,

and he says, you know, over all the problems with his theology, you know, he's got to be a Christian

because, you know, he sings hymns in his house with his children of an evening.

It's just a really sappy bit of pietism, if you like.

But it's interesting to think that Hodge knew Schleiermacher, and was good friends at Tolok in Germany.

Warfield sat under Adolf von Harnack. Machen, of course, sat under, I'm trying to think of the man's name,

Wild Hare, Wilhelm Herrmann. Machen sat under Wilhelm Herrmann.

Bart also sat under Wilhelm Herrmann. They both have interesting reactions to Herrmann.

And I think I'm right in saying that Machen may have been a classmate of Rudolf Bultmann.

Bultmann does a review of Machen's book on Paul, I think.

And, you know, why does Bultmann do that?

Possibly they were, you know, we don't know much, but maybe they were friends.

Maybe Machen sent a copy, who knows.

But there are these interesting interconnections between the Princeton guys and German liberalism.

Warfield's marriage is worthy of a few moments' reflection

because it's an issue around which considerable mythology has grown up.

If you've got David Calhoun's History of Princeton Seminary, it's a two-volume history published by Bound of Truth.

It's a great, when I say it's a great beach read, I don't mean that as a criticism.

It's just one of those books, it's just a real page-turner, and it's just a straightforward story.

Calhoun says that while on honeymoon, Annie suffered some kind of a nervous breakdown

when she and Warfield were caught in a thunderstorm in Germany's Hartz Mountains,

and that she never recovered, and that through all the years of their married life,

Warfield carefully and faithfully cared for her as an invalid.

That represents the received wisdom on Warfield's marriage.

In actual fact, there's not a lot of historical evidence that that was the case.

Fred Zaspel, who lives near Philadelphia, has done quite a bit of research into Warfield.

He's this sort of comprehensive knowledge of Warfieldiana.

And he's looked long and hard to try to find early first-hand accounts of the Warfield marriage.

I'll read you what he says in his book on the theology of B.B. Warfield, which incidentally is an excellent book.

Annie is often reported to have been an invalid their entire married life.

But it does not seem that this degree of debilitation came until perhaps 1893.

A notice in the New York Times dated May 1st, 1892.

That's the kind of guy Fred is.

You can find notices in the New York Times of 1892.

Notes of Mrs. Warfield.

You get this.

Mrs. Woodrow Wilson and other prominent ladies of Princeton

served as patronesses at a lecture event

sponsored by the American Whig Society in Princeton on April 30th.

So we know that in 1892, B.B. Warfield's wife was quite capable of being a hostess at a big event.

Notice also as an aside, Warfield's are friends of the Wilsons.

Woodrow Wilson, of course, would go on to be president of Princeton

and would then go on to be president of the United States.

Apparently he liked Warfield but regarded him as a bit of a theological dinosaur.

You know, the Wilsons were a distinguished southern Presbyterian family.

But I think by the time we get to Woodrow, he's starting to sort of move.

There's starting to drift in a leftward direction.

Whatever, we do know that perhaps from 1893 onwards,

it appears that she does seem to have been more and more housebound.

The Warfields never had children,

but apparently they would learn the birthdates of all of the children of the faculty and the students

and would give little gifts to make sure that the birthdays of all these other children were celebrated.

So they sound like a very sweet couple.

And if you go to Princeton Cemetery, they're buried in magnificent tombs in the cemetery,

buried side by side, not far, incidentally, from where Jonathan Edwards is buried.

But you have Warfield and his wife buried together in the cemetery.

She died in 1915,

and it was in a sense as if Warfield himself had died with her at that point.

We have a letter from Jay Gressa Machen written to his mother.

He says,

I think that he will feel dreadfully lost without her.

As Mrs. Armstrong said,

he had only two interests in life,

his work and Mrs. Warfield.

And as she's gone,

there may be danger of his using himself up rather quickly.

If so,

I do not know who is to take his place.

I am more and more impressed with him.

He is certainly one of the very biggest men in the church,

either in this country

or in other,

or in any other.

And of course,

when Warfield dies in 1921,

there is really nobody to replace him.

And Princeton changes really rather rapidly

in the 10, 15 years

after the death of Warfield in 1921.

I was chatting to one of the historian guys at the PCA recently,

Barry Wall,

who's been doing some work on Warfield.

And he said,

he found it very hard to find obituaries of Warfield.

And it puzzled him

as to why there were no great, magnificent obituaries of Warfield.

And he finally comes to the conclusion,

they were glad he was gone.

That finally,

the last,

you know,

the last giant oak in the forest,

if you like,

had been chopped down.

And they could get on with the business of

modernising the church.

Maybe Barry's right.

Maybe he's wrong.

Who knows?

That's certainly what did happen.

One other important impact

that Warfield's marriage had on his life,

it meant that he didn't have a conventional,

ecclesiastical,

or conventional,

conventional,

ecclesiastical,

or academic career.

Look at Charles Hodge.

He's travelling.

He's going to General Assemblies.

He's locking horns

with people like James Henley Thornwell

on the floor of the General Assembly.

You don't get that with Warfield.

Warfield, by and large,

stays in Princeton.

The action,

such as it is,

is all in the mind.

There aren't the great anecdotes

of Warfield,

you know,

facing somebody across the room

and taking them down

in a debate.

It's all going on inside his head.

Warfield also never writes

a long monograph.

If you've got his books on perfectionism,

what it is,

it's collections of articles

thematically gathered together.

So Warfield never produces

a systematic theology

in the way that Hodge does.

It reminds me in some ways,

maybe,

of the story of Immanuel Kant.

You know,

Immanuel Kant was a very boring man

in many ways.

He would walk to his office

at the same time,

the same route,

every day.

And the story is

that one day in Königsberg,

he was late,

and the whole town

was delayed

because everybody

set their time

by when Kant

walked past their window.

You know,

and yet Kant

single-handedly almost

shattered intellectual life

and reconstructed it

in Europe.

So the fact that Warfield

lives a relatively conventional

and localised life

does not diminish

his impact.

While Warfield was in Europe,

Western Seminary,

which is now

Pittsburgh Theological Seminary,

contacted him

to offer the Old Testament position.

It's a sign of a different time,

isn't it,

where in the 19th century,

such as academia,

that one could be

competent enough

in a number of fields

to hold a chair

in any number

of disciplines.

The only person

I've ever met

in the theological world

who I think was competent

of holding a chair

in more than one field

was Richard Borka

of St. Andrews.

If you know Richard Borka,

great sister,

he's written great works

of systematics,

he's written on church history

and he's also written

in New Testament.

He could have held

a position, I think,

in any three,

any one of those

three disciplines.

19th century is very different.

The world is not awash

with information

and specialisations.

Warfield is offered

the Old Testament position.

He turns this down

not because he's fallen

in love with systematics,

but because he's fallen

in love with New Testament.

And again,

he's approached

by Western in 1878,

this time for the

cherished position

in New Testament.

And his pulpit supply

at first prayers

in Baltimore at the time

and he accepts the job

and takes up the position

in September 1878.

His time as professor

of New Testament

was not without

significant fruit.

In 1886,

he becomes the first

American period

to publish a book

on contextual criticism.

It's a fascinating book

to read.

It's a classic

19th century.

You know,

some books you read

and you can date them

within a couple of years.

I've got this

torn off Bible cover

in my office,

beautiful gilt Bible cover,

and it says,

the Holy Bible,

the secret of England's

greatness.

You know,

and you can date that

within 10 years

because you've got to look

at what point was

England at its most

arrogance and hubristic.

You know,

it's got to be published

at that point.

Warfield's book

on New Testament criticism,

he has this supreme

confidence

that text criticism

will vindicate

orthodox views

of scripture.

But what text criticism

will do

is allow you

to get back

closer and closer

and closer

to the original

manuscripts.

And slowly but surely

all of the textual

problems

will be solved.

He says this,

if then we undertake

the textual criticism

of the New Testament

under a sense

of duty,

we may bring it

to a conclusion

under the inspiration

of hope.

The orthographic

text of the New Testament

is distinctly

within the reach

of criticism.

And so immensely

the great part

of the volume

that we cannot despair

restoring to ourselves

and the Church of God

his book,

word for word,

as he gave it

by inspiration

to men.

So the first book

in North America,

written by North America,

on textual criticism

is saying,

textual criticism,

it's the friend

of orthodoxy

because it will bring

back to the Church

the very autographs

of the word of God.

Again,

this is the late 19th century.

Very, very optimistic

time for Christians.

1886,

he is offered the position

which he will then

come to occupy

for the rest of his life

and where he will do

his most significant work.

The chair of didactic

and polemic theology

at Princeton Theological Seminary.

The position previously

occupied by Charles Hodge

and unexpectedly vacated

by the premature death

of Charles Hodge's successor

and indeed Warfield's

co-author

and the little book

on inspiration,

Archibald Alexander Hodge.

Warfield's acceptance

of this position

was very controversial.

No less a man

than the great British

scholar William Robertson

Nicoll was upset.

Warfield had agreed

to provide a volume

to Nicoll

for his Expositors Bible series.

And when he takes

the chair of systematics

Nicoll realizes

this is probably

never going to happen.

And he writes to Warfield,

Permit me, he says,

first of all

to congratulate you

on your new position.

I do not know

if I can do so

with unmixed feelings.

You will no doubt

do a great work

in Princeton

for us all

but I grudge

very much

that you should be

taken away

from the study

of the New Testament.

I do not release you

from the Expositors Bible

though you be

a professor

of dogmatic theology.

You owe this debt

to the position

you have forsaken.

So that's a real

that's like a Pharrell

I curse your rest

for moving on

at this point.

Ethelburn,

Warfield's brother

wrote after his death

he says he venerated

as only a pure

and unselfish spirit can

the great men

and hallowed memories

that should make Princeton

one of the most notable

seats of theological scholarship.

His reverence

for those who taught him

was equaled

by his admiration

of his colleagues

and the love

which he delighted

to express

for those who taught him

was constantly reproduced

in his affection

for younger colleagues

and the successive classes

of students

who thronged his classroom.

Say the Warfields

never had children

but because of

because of their love

for children

they

as I said

memorized

even the dates of birth

of the students

kids at Westminster

so they could give them

presence.

Warfield was to engage

in significant correspondence

with many of the great

theologians

and figures of his day

William Robertson

Nichol

John Broadus

Charles Briggs

Warfield of course

would become

Briggs' nemesis

Kellogg

G.F. Wright

Barber

and Kuyper

as a recipient

of various

academic honors

from other institutions

received the DD

and the Doctor of Laws

from the College

of New Jersey

he received an honorary

doctorate from

Lafayette College

and the University

of Utrecht

and indeed

the University

of Utrecht

took the unprecedented

step

because of his

inability to travel

from Princeton

because of his

wife's circumstances

of awarding his

doctorate

in absentia

death

when it came

came suddenly

finally on this

started on December

the 24th

1920

so the letter

I have

is December

the 21st

so you see

how quickly

Warfield goes

downhill after that

Warfield had a

habit of every

evening he would

walk around

Princeton

with his

colleague

Gerhardus Voss

some of you

know with Voss

who Banner of Truth

publishes

biblical theology

Gerhardus Voss

very significant

in developing

a redemptive

historical approach

to the reading

of scripture

Warfield and Voss

were very close

friends and

colleagues

so you know

I have the

last letter of

Warfield

my colleague

Dick Gavin

he has Gerhardus

Voss' walking

stick

not that Protestants

are into relics

saints

anyway

at all

but

I have you know

a couple of

students have been

cured of leprosy

just by looking

at him

it's quite amazing

it has an eerie

glow at night

which is

kind of spooky

Warfield is going

to see his

friend Gerhardus

Voss on December

the 24th

and he

collapses

some weeks later

after resting

he returns to

the classroom

but on February

the 16th

having taught

his class

he goes home

to his house

and apparently

suffered

a fatal

heart attack

on February

the 16th

so Warfield

then

that's

his life

relatively

the facts

the marriage

is a bit

mysterious

but the facts

are relatively

straightforward

what about

his contribution

what are the

things that he

does that are

perhaps still

significant for us

today

well first of all

I think

most obviously

and most famously

his work

on scripture

the famous article

he co-wrote

with A.A.

Hodge

on inspiration

remains foundational

I think

for evangelical

and conservative

protestant

discussions

of the subject

love it

or hate it

one either

agrees with it

reacts against it

or does something

somewhere

in between

Warfield and Hodge

I think

basically set

the terms

of debate

for discussions

of scripture

as they continue

today

second major

area of

contribution

is his work

on perfectionism

what is interesting

in that work

is that Warfield

makes the connection

there

a clear connection

between

liberalism

mysticism

pragmatism

and perfectionism

that all of them

reduce

the gospel

to some sort

of psychological

state

if you like

to some form

of psychological

pragmatism

and it's amazing

reading

Warfield

some of Warfield's

critiques

as we shall see

in a few moments

some of Warfield's

critiques

of 19th century

liberalism

could be critiques

of contemporary

evangelical thought

on some fronts

with the difference

that the 19th century

German liberals

were very sophisticated

and by and large

a lot of

evangelical thought

seems to take

its cue

from sort of

Oprah Winfrey

level

of theology

a third area

of significance

and this is where

I think he's

interesting for debates

and discussions

that I know

the IPC

are having

is the area

of subscription

and confessional

revision

and actually

Fred Zastel

and I

just

we're gathering

together

Crossway

are interested

in publishing

a volume

of Warfield's

writings

on confessional

subscription

and

this sounds

horribly patronising

but I'll say it

anyway

Fred has said

to me

look I'm a

Baptist

I don't understand

confessional

subscription

but I love

Warfield

if I gather

the stuff together

will you write

the introduction

so we're putting

together a volume

on Warfield's

discussions of

confessional subscription

and confessional revision

which is a hot

button issue

in the 1890s

in American

Presbyterianism

as it was in

Scottish Presbyterianism

and in some ways

as it continues

to this day

Warfield of course

had been

he'd opposed

the founding

of a journal

called the

Presbyterian

Review

the journal

was founded

in order

to try to

bring together

the different

sides that

were emerging

in the

Presbyterian

Church

in America

at that time

and the idea

was to have

two editors

a liberal

and a conservative

to sort of

hold the show

together

and Warfield

had opposed

the founding

of it

and the first

editors

the two editors

were Charles Briggs

and the conservative

was Francis Landy

Patton

and Landy

Patton

retired

or resigned

in 1888

and Warfield

was chosen

as his successor

you can just

imagine what

Briggs must have

thought when

word came down

that oh the guy

you're going to

work with from

now on

is B.B.

Warfield

it was

my notes here

say it was

a problematic

relationship

I suspect

that's good

English

understatement

they lasted

together less

than a year

actually no

sorry

oh I've got a

minute

only a little

over a year

and then Warfield

resigned

Briggs resigned

and the journal

folded

shortly

thereafter

the names of

Warfield and Briggs

of course

epitomise

or symbolise

perhaps there's

no others

the growing

tensions

within American

Presbyterianism

over confessional

subscription

indeed

when Warfield

is asked

about 1915

1916

do you think

the Presbyterian

church will

split

his answer

by that point

is you can't

split rotten

wood

it's just so

bad

you can't even

think of it

in terms of

a split

these days

and

I know

the IPC

are thinking

about office

bearing

and about

confessional

issues

if you're

interested

I can send

you some

of the

Warfield

articles

that aren't

readily available

I've got them

on a CD-ROM

back home

Warfield's got

some interesting

stuff to say

he's a thoughtful

engager on this

issue

I want to give

you here a

quotation from

his first

inaugural address

when he was

inaugurated as

a professor

at Western

Theological

Seminary

he says this

about

signing up

to the

Westminster

Standards

!

I wish to

declare that

I sign

these standards

I'm going to be

saying this in

public

I wish to

declare that

I sign

these standards

not as a

necessary form

which must

be submitted

to

but gladly

and willingly

as the

expression of

a personal

and cherished

conviction

and further

that the

system taught

in these

symbols

is the

system which

will be

drawn out

of the

scriptures

in the

prosecution

of the

teaching

to which

you have

called

me

not

indeed

because

commencing

with the

system

the

scriptures

can be

made

to teach

it

but

because

commencing

with the

scriptures

I cannot

make them

teach

anything

else

it's a

powerful

statement

and it's

worth

pondering

because

behind that

statement

lies

a subscription

issue

that I think

is incredibly

hard to get

at

but is

vitally

important

I think

that one

can

Westminster

the language

is when we

subscribe to

the standards

we have to

subscribe

ex animo

from the

bottom

of our

hearts

with

absolute

sincerity

if you

like

and that's

often the

key

I think

there are

those who

honestly

subscribe to

the confession

and there are

two ways

of doing it

they're both

honest

subscription

but the

attitude

makes all

the difference

I think

there are

those who

subscribe to

confessions

and say

this is what

I believe

this is where

I want to

stand

this represents

who I am

and what I

stand for

and there are

those who

sign believing

everything that's

in the

confession

and standards

but the

underlying is

okay now I've

signed up

what can I

get away

with

and I

would say

that I

would not

want to say

that either

group don't

sign sincerely

and they

genuinely believe

everything that's

in the standards

but the difference

in attitude

is a huge one

do the standards

represent where

you want to

stand

what you stand

for

or do they

represent

yeah I

believe them

let me take

my vow

and now

what room

for maneuver

do I

have

that second

attitude

over time

is lethal

I think

to confessional

subscription

and that statement

of Warfield

I think

captures

beautifully

what should be

one's attitude

in subscribing

and

if you can't

subscribe

in that sense

that's not a

problem

there are other

denominations

where you can

serve as a

minister

nobody's going

to put you

in prison

because you

can't sign

nobody's going

to say

you're not

a Christian

because you

can't sign

up like that

nobody's going

to say

you can't

do ministry

in the absolute

sense

because you

can't sign

up

but you

couldn't be

a minister

in the OPC

for example

unless

that's your

attitude

and I think

that's important

to grasp

and those of you

who sit on

whatever the IPC

equivalence of

Canada's credentials

of training the

ministry committee

is

that's the kind

of question

you have to ask

John have you

done your

exam

John here

have you done

your exam

oh well

do you see

they're going

to change

the exam

before you

come in

so I'm

thinking about

your answer

to that one

yeah

well I would

say you know

think about it

for 72 hours

or so guys

before you

change the

way he

did it

so

Warfield

opposed

the movements

of the late

1880s and

the early 1890s

for revision

it's important

to note

that he was

not against

revision

if you're

truly confessional

you cannot

be opposed

to revision

because

Western's

Confession

chapter 1

makes it

absolutely

clear

the

confession

is

subordinate

to scripture

you have

to be

in favour

of the

principle

of revision

the questions

are

how and when

and who

by whom

such revision

is done

Warfield saw

very clearly

that the

proposed

revisions

and the

motivation

for the

revisions

seem to

involve a

weakening

of theology

and of the

terms of

subscription

it's interesting

to me that you

have almost

exactly the

same thing

going on in

Scotland

with the

declaratory

acts

and of course

the birth of

the Free

Presbyterian

Church

and the Free

Church of

Scotland

at this

point

it's interesting

how church

history across

denominations

events often

seem to happen

almost simultaneously

1830s and

40s

is there a

main established

denomination in

Europe that

doesn't split

Cardinal Newman

converts to

Rome

1845

and you have

the decade

the 15

years of

Oxford

movement

before that

destruction

1843

1834

you have a

split in

the Dutch

Reformed

Church

it's interesting

how often

events in

one denomination

are mirrored by

events in another

round at the

same time

indicating I

think there are

often powerful

social and

cultural reasons

for these

tensions emerging

as well

clearly Irish

immigration into

England during

the 1820s

1830s

1840s

the Reform

Act

these things

are very

powerful

it has a

powerful impact

on the

established

it

put tensions

on churches

and it's

interesting

confessional

revision

1880s and

1890s

it's there in

Scotland

it's there in

England

Warfield says

this

the chief reason

why I'm

personally opposed

to revision

of the

confession

of faith

is because I

believe it's

doctrine to be

the truth of

God

and because I

believe it's

formal statements

about doctrine

to be at once

exact and

Catholic

broad enough to

include all

sadly

Calvinistic

thinking

and precise

enough to

exclude all

tampering with

Calvinistic

truth

I'm confirmed

in my conviction

that the

confession

closed the

true doctrine

in admirably

chosen language

by the

straits and

inconsistencies

to which

those are

driven

who are

trying to

point out

passages

in it

which need

revision

so Warfield

then

opposed to

what he

saw as

the

underlying

agenda

and that's

why I

say the

key to

confessional

revision

has to

be

who's it

done by

and what's

the process

for doing

it

the editor

revised the

confession

than to have

people crossing

their fingers

of course

that is

even more

problematic

fourth area

which Warfield

made great

contributions

and where

he's comparatively

neglected

is the

articles he

wrote for

various dictionaries

on the

definition of

biblical terms

I remember

when I was

teaching in

Aberdeen

and asked

Professor Howard

Marshall what

he thought of

Warfield

he said

oh nonsense

on scripture

but he wrote

brilliant essays

on the

definitions of

biblical terms

I thought it

was interesting

that Howard

Marshall was

not somebody

sympathetic to

Warfield's

doctrine as a

whole

but he saw

the brilliance

of the man

when it came

to biblical

definitions

he mentioned

his essay

on the

emotional life

of Christ

and finally

I think

his book

reviews

are well

worth looking

at as well

what time

am I meant

to wrap

up Paul

you want me

to bring

this to a

close in

five minutes

okay

his book

reviews

one of the

things he

does very

well is

book reviews

of German

and American

liberal

theologians

of the

19th

century

and draws

out very

clearly

that the

key

difference

between

orthodox

theology

and liberal

theology

lies in

well

as he sees it

liberal theology

is really

talk about

the psychological

state of

human beings

doctrine

is a

projection

or a

reflection

upon human

religious

psychology

you see that

stemming in many

ways from

Schleiermacher

it also comes

from

pietism

which of course

provides

the background

much of the

background

to Schleiermacher

as well

what it does

and what

Warfield does

so well

is bring out

that sometimes

it is not

what you

believe

that's a

significant

thing

it's what

significance

you give

to it

and this is

where I think

Warfield's

writings on

German

liberalism

can speak

to

evangelical

theology

today

you may

not be

familiar

with the

figure

is Joe

Osteen

does that

name

mean anything

to anybody

here

your best

life now

or make

everyday

Friday

or something

I make

everyday

Saturday

morning

myself

what's

interesting

about

figures

what I

would call

the sort

of self

help

figures

within

evangelicalism

is

I'm not

sure that

they're

heterodox

on one

level

the key

question

sometimes

is not

what do

you believe

if you

sat

Joel

Osteen

down

and said

do you

believe

in the

trinity

my guess

is

you'd probably

say yeah

do you believe

Jesus was

the son of

God

yeah

do you believe

Jesus was

God

manifest in

flesh

you'd probably

say yes

what Warfield

brings out

beautifully

in his

interaction

with

German

and American

liberalism

in the

late

19th

century

is

it's

what

significance

you

ascribe

to this

doctrine

what

difference

does it

make

when

Joel

Osteen

or somebody

preaches

the question

is

!

is a

reality

does that

make any

difference

of what

he's

preached

that's

an

interesting

question

to ask

about

any

sermon

you hear

does

Christian

truth

make a

difference

to what

you've

heard

or does

what you

heard

assume

a generic

Christian

truth

but

really

doctrine

makes

them

in fact

it's

a great

little

book

it's

very

American

in its

orientation

but the

basic

points

I think

are quite

brilliant

and would

apply in

Britain

the same

as they

do in

the States

Christless

Christianity

by Michael

Horton

which in

some ways

I read

that

this is

a sort

of

updated

application

of what

Warfield's

doing in

the late

19th

century

the point

that Horton

makes in

that book

is not

that a lot

of modern

evangelicalism

has lost

its doctrine

it's still

on paper

pretty orthodox

but Christianity

has become

something

that helps

you

live a

fulfilled

life

do this

do that

do the

other

I'm going

to really

stick my

neck out

at this

point

but I

stuck my

neck out

on this

point

before

and the

people

who I'm

thinking of

know it

and don't

like me

for it

I get

worried

about the

massive

expansion

of Christian

counselling

because so

much of it

is

it looks

horribly

self-help

to me

and I know

that it's not

being articulated

in that way

but when the

primary concern

of the gospel

becomes putting

your marriage

back together

or how to

bring up

your children

I just get

concerned that

we're starting

to de-center

things

and that the

gospel is being

sidelined

for what it

does and how

it helps me

and Horton

has a great

anecdote

in the book

and I'm

guessing that

any of you

who preach

or pastor

church

even in my

short time

pastoring

I can confirm

we have

similar things

in our church

he talks about

a lady who

comes to his

church

and says

something to

affect her

I went to

my church

and my

marriage is

falling apart

and all we

had was a

sermon

on how to

put your

marriage back

together

and I came

to your

church

and I heard

the gospel

and that was

what I needed

to hear

I didn't want

somebody giving

me a how to

how to put

my marriage

back together

I needed to

know that

God was

sovereign

and that

Christ had

died for

my sins

and that

the church

would triumph