Systematic Theology: The Complete Three Volumes

Product Information

The Reformation era saw a new lease of life for systematic theology, as can be seen in the numerous confessions of faith that different groups of Protestants produced. The earliest ones were only systematic in a very loose sense, but as time went on, they became more sophisticated. By common consent, the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) was the most highly developed of them all. Intended to be common to England, Scotland, and Ireland, it fell victim to the civil wars in the British Isles, though it was reinstated in Scotland in 1690 and remains one of the defining standards of Presbyterian churches around the world. A slightly revised form of it was adopted by the English Baptists as the Second London Confession (1689), though it is less widely known today. Coming Soon: Joel Beeke and Paul Smalley, Reformed Systematic Theology: Volume One: Revelation and God (March 2019) (the first volume of a multi-volume work) and Robert Letham, Systematic Theology (November 2019). These promise to be strong additions to the stable of Reformed theologies. The textbook that Alexander used, and then Hodge used, was Francis Turretin's Systematic Theology, three volumes. But here was the challenge with Turretin—it was in Latin. By the 1860s, early 1870s, all these students coming to Princeton did not know Latin, and so Hodge very reluctantly wrote a new Systematic Theology that would be in English for all these students who struggled with their Latin. So, from 1871 through 1873, the three volumes of Hodge's Systematic Theology rolled off the press. This is not what Hodge was like. Instead, we find in his work an almost classic realization of the kneeling, as opposed to sitting, theologian. He had seen the grace and glory of God, and in his Systematic Theology he turns to the world to explain his vision. When he writes, he writes clearly; what he writes has that extraordinary and elusive ability of reproducing in the reader the sense of worship that was its own original inspiration. Here is no armchair theologian, but one who has felt the deep imprint of divine truth in his own inner life and whose sole desire, as a result, is to let God be God over all that he thinks, does, and writes. What Hodge writes, therefore, has a purpose seldom found in contemporary theological writing, whose jargon and complexity are lost on all but an initiated elite.

In 1825 Hodge began a theological quarterly entitled The Biblical Repertory, devoted mainly to reprinting European biblical scholarship. It was not entirely successful so in 1829 it was reorganized as The Biblical Repertory and Theological Review. Hodge edited it for the next forty years, and in 1871, the British Quarterly Review went so far as to say that it had become “the greatest purely theological Review that has ever been published in the English tongue.” Once upon a time Princeton University had a very fine theological seminary. If wanted to study theology that was consistent Orthodox Presbyterian theology, consistent what was taught by the Puritans and the Westminster Confession of Faith. Hodges Systematic Theology is consistent with what Princeton University was then and no longer. Princeton fell into the suede to the popular intellectual pursuits of other theological seminaries. This work is comprehensive in presenting sound theological thought. Comparisons are made between theological thought of the Presbyterian church and Calvinism with other schools of thought in theology: Roman Catholic (called Romanist), Lutheran, liberal theology and nonChristian thought. The arguments for historic theology of the Reformed theology are sound and give a fair presentation of contrary thought. This article includes content derived from the public domain Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, 1914. Further reading [ edit ] Hugh graduated from Princeton College in 1773 and served as a military surgeon in the Revolutionary War, after which he practiced medicine in Philadelphia. Hodge was a leader of the Old School faction of Presbyterians during the division of the Presbyterian Church (USA) in 1837. The issues involved conflicts over doctrine, religious practice, and slavery. Although prior to 1861 the Old School refrained from denouncing slavery, the issue was a matter of debate between Northern and Southern components of the denomination.April 1876). "Christianity without Christ". The Princeton Review. New York: G. & C. Carvill. 5 (18): 352–362 . Retrieved March 23, 2013. The doctrine of God, which now usually comes immediately after Holy Scripture, is almost always subdivided into the oneness of the divine being and the threeness of his Persons. It is the tradition of Western theology to begin with the one and move on to the three, a method that can be justified from the Bible, which reveals the oneness of God in the Old Testament and the Persons of the Trinity in the New. Proponents of this approach may choose a theme like love (Augustine) or revelation (Karl Barth) and then look at the Trinity as a pattern revolving around this principle. God may then be seen as the Lover (Father), the Beloved (Son) and the Love that flows between them (Holy Spirit), or correspondingly, as the Revealer, the Revealed and the Revelation. Recently, Gerald Bray has attempted to take the principle of divine love and apply it across the board, combining the inner nature of the divine being with its outward expression in the Bible. He continues to put the doctrine of Scripture ahead of the doctrine of God but does so in a way that combines them by making the former an expression of the latter. By way of contrast the Mercersburg theologians, Nevin and Gerhart, relied heavily upon German Idealism and Romanticism in their efforts to reformulate traditional Reformed prolegomena. Gerhart, for example, thought that Baconianism could be applied to the natural sciences, but not to the study of Christianity. Their rejection of Baconianism and Common Sense Realism led them away from the exegetical approach of Princeton’s theological method to the Christological approach, which argued that Christ (rather than scripture) was the ultimate source of theology. Moreover, Schaff’s application of Hegel’s dialectic to church history and Nevin’s appropriation of the ideas of the English poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge were further indicators of the influence of Romanticism. It should not be assumed, however, that Mercersburg had a monopoly in relation to its interaction with German theology. Both the Mercersburg Review and the Princeton Review took great interest in German Protestantism. Even Hodge appreciated aspects of German theological works, especially philological, critical, and exegetical studies which could be used to support Reformed orthodoxy. Hodge, in fact, had studied in Germany and interacted carefully with various strands of German theology. (6) Thus, the author has provided a balanced assessment of the interaction between the Princeton divines and German theology, helpfully correcting the assertion that Hodge was ‘anti-German’. (7) A sermon, preached in Philadelphia ... American Sunday-school Union, May 31, 1832. Philadelphia: The Union. LCCN 96229925. LCC YA 30459 YA Pam.

Bradley J. Gundlach, "McCosh and Hodge on Evolution: A Combined Legacy," Journal of Presbyterian History 1997 75(2): 85-102, John Halsley Wood Jr., "The 1861 Spring Resolutions: Charles Hodge, the American Union, and the Dissolution of the Old School Church," Journal of Church and State, Spring 2005, Vol. 47 Issue 2, pp 371-387 Hodge’s education was unusual for its thoroughness and its Presbyterian emphasis. He went from small schools to Princeton Academy, Princeton College, and the newly founded Princeton Theological Seminary. A few years after he had begun his teaching career, in 1826 and 1827, he went to Germany for the finishing touches. Perhaps we have gone beyond that age of theology-making of which Hodge is so excellent an example. Perhaps the never-ending literary output of biblical scholars today makes it well nigh impossible that anyone will master this world of learning adequately enough to do for us, in a post-Kantian and post-Christian world, what Hodge did for his. Perhaps what we need now is apologetic rather than systematic studies, since so many of the truths that Hodge took for granted are no longer self-evident and have first to be established.At Princeton, the first president of the new seminary, Archibald Alexander, took a special interest in Hodge, assisting him in Greek and taking him with him on itinerant preaching trips. Hodge would name his first son after Alexander. Hodge became close friends with future Episcopalian bishops John Johns and Charles McIlvaine, and future Princeton College president John Mclean. In 1815, during a time of intense religious fervor among the students encouraged by Green and Alexander, Hodge joined the local Presbyterian church and decided to enter the ministry. Shortly after completing his undergraduate studies he entered the seminary in 1816. The course of study was very rigorous, requiring students to recite scripture in the original languages and to use the dogmatics written in Latin in the 17th century by Reformed scholastic Francis Turretin as a theological textbook. Professors Alexander and Samuel Miller also inculcated an intense piety in their students. [3]

Michael Horton, The Christian Faith (2011). While the organization and layout are not as user-friendly as Grudem, Horton is a much more sophisticated theologian. Horton is especially good if you want a reliable contemporary writer who is conversant with the history of theology and with the best theologians from other traditions. See also Horton’s shorter Pilgrim Theology and Core Christianity. Level: Medium (one volume)Starting in the 1830s Hodge suffered from an immobilizing pain in his leg, and was forced to conduct his classes from his study from 1833 to 1836. He continued to write articles for Biblical Repertory, now renamed the Princeton Review. During the 1830s he wrote a major commentary on Romans and a history of the Presbyterian church in America. He supported the Old School in the Old School–New School Controversy, which resulted in a split in 1837. In 1840 he became Professor of Didactic Theology, [8] retaining, however, the department of New Testament exegesis, the duties of which he continued to discharge until his death. He was moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (Old School) in 1846. [ citation needed] Hodge's wife died in 1849, shortly followed by Samuel Miller and Archibald Alexander, leaving him the senior professor of the seminary. He was recognized as the leading proponent of the Princeton theology. On his death in 1878 he was recognized by both friends and opponents as one of the greatest polemicists of his time. [9] Of his children who survived him, three were ministers; and two of these succeeded him in the faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary, C. W. Hodge, in the department of exegetical theology, and A. A. Hodge, in that of dogmatics. A grandson, C. W. Hodge, Jr., also taught for many years at Princeton Seminary. The constitutional history of the Presbyterian church in the United States of America. Philadelphia: W.S. Martien. ISBN 9780790551555. LCCN 42027085. OCLC 390536. LCC BX8936 .H6 1839. Why is so much technical theology still being written today? Judging from the reams of complex linguistic and historical data issuing from the university presses, one might well conclude that an omnivorous army of scholars is poised nearby, eager to consume every newly discovered verbal form. It is not so. One does not have to be overly cynical to agree with Hexter that these presses have gone into high production to advance not so much the world of learning as the private careers of the learned. Every ambitious scholar wants to be able to demonstrate in print his mastery of this whole world of strange equations and forgotten languages. Professional mobility upward (promotion) and sideward (a better job) depends on what and how much such a person has published. Anthony Hoekema, Created in God’s Image (1986), Saved by Grace (1989), The Bible and the Future (1979). I’ve always found the structure in these volumes intuitive and the exegesis particularly careful. Excellent and easy to use in pieces if you don’t want to read the whole thing. Level: Medium Hodge could tolerate slavery but he could never tolerate treason of the sort he saw trying to break up the United States in 1861. Hodge was a strong nationalist and led the fight among Presbyterians to support the Union. In the January 1861 Princeton Review, Hodge laid out his case against secession, in the end calling it unconstitutional. James Henley Thornwell responded in the January 1861 Southern Presbyterian Review, holding that the election of 1860 had installed a new government, one which the South did not agree with, thus making secession lawful. [12] Despite being a staunch Unionist politically, Hodge voted against the support for the "Spring Resolutions" of the 1861 General Assembly of the Old School Presbyterian Church, thinking it was not the business of the church to involve itself in political matters; because of the resolutions, the denomination then split North and South. When the General Assembly convened in Philadelphia in May 1861, one month after the Civil War began, the resolution stipulated pledging support for the federal government over objections based on concerns about the scope of church jurisdiction and disagreements about its interpretation of the Constitution. In December 1861, the Southern Old School Presbyterian churches severed ties with the denomination. [13] Darwinism [ edit ]