Biblical Theology in America Before Vos

Receive our blog posts in your email by filling out the form at the bottom of this page.

Geerhardus Vos has often been referred to as “the father of Reformed Biblical theology.” Although his name is popularly associated in the minds of many with its origin, in fact, Biblical theology is a discipline of theological study that predates Vos, and his famous inaugural lecture as Professor of Biblical Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary, titled The Idea of Biblical Theology as a Science and as a Theological Discipline, which was delivered in 1894. To provide a simple definition for purposes of this article given by Vos himself, “Biblical Theology is that branch of Exegetical Theology which deals with the process of the self-revelation of God deposited in the Bible” (Biblical Theology [1948], p. 13). John Murray added later: “There is no better definition of Biblical Theology known to the present writer than that given by Dr. Vos” (Biblical Theology: A Book Review [1948]).

A September 2021 article by J.V. Fesko titled “Who Lurks Behind Geerhardus Vos? Sources and Predecessors” delves into the question of which sources Vos drew upon and who might be considered forerunners of Biblical Theology as Vos understood it. Fesko references two sources cited by Vos himself: “Anglican theologian Thomas D. Bernard (1815-1904) and German New Testament scholar, Karl Friedrich Nösgen (1835-1913).” Fesko also highlights an important comment made by Francis L. Patton in his 1903 lecture on Theological Encyclopedia: “I think I do not err in saying that, at least so far as we in America are concerned, Jonathan Edwards is the father of Biblical Theology.” The reference that Patton had in mind is to Edwards’ famous treatise on A History of the Work of Redemption (1774).

Most scholars identify the origin of Biblical Theology as a distinct discipline with J.P. Gabler’s (1753–1826) inaugural lecture delivered at the University of Altdorf, An Oration on the Proper Distinction between Biblical and Dogmatic Theology and the Specific Objectives of Each (1787), although some acknowledge even earlier attempts to demonstrate the progress of God’s revelation historically considered in Scripture, such as John Owen’s Latin treatise Theologoumena Pantodapa (1661), translated into English as Biblical Theology: The History of Theology from Adam to Christ (1994), which J.I. Packer described as a “proto-Biblical Theology.”

Other European forerunners of Biblical Theology could be highlighted, but to narrow the focus of our interest to American forerunners, we return to Jonathan Edwards and his History of Redemption, noting that it was published by one of our Log College Press authors, David Austin, in 1793 (the copy found here was owned by Samuel Miller). It goes beyond the close of canon to encompass “post-Biblical” history, but it takes the approach that God revealed himself more and more historically in the development of Scripture. This is consistent with Edwards’ historicist postmillennial eschatology, although we understand the eschatology of Vos to be amillennial. Fesko: “Edwards’s plan was to trace the line of revelation through history, which is the essence of Vos’s method. In fact, one historian has described Edwards’s procedure as showing how revelation is progressive, organic, and finds its eschatological realization in Christ; themes that resonate in Vos’s own method.”

Prior to his death in 1863, Charles Colcock Jones, Sr. wrote The History of the Church of God During the Period of Revelation, which his son published in 1867. It covered the Old Testament period along a plan which showed the progression of God’s dealings with his people. A companion volume covering the New Testament period does not seem to have been published. Jones argued that the “Word of God [was] one harmonious whole: one continuous revelation and development of the covenant of grace” (p. 141), which Jones labored in this volume to “unfold.”

It was close to this same time that Stuart Robinson published Discourses of Redemption: As Revealed at “Sundry Times and in Divers Manners,” Designed Both as Biblical Expositions For the People and Hints to Theological Students of a Popular Method of Exhibiting the “Divers” Revelations Through Patriarchs, Prophets, Jesus and His Apostles (1866). Here he attempted “to follow the development of the one great central thought of the Book through the successive eras of revelation” (p. iv).

Before the establishment of a chair in Biblical Theology at Princeton, such a post was founded at Union Theological Seminary in New York which was filled by Charles A. Briggs in 1891. Previously, he had published an important essay on Biblical Theology (1882), in which he goes over the history of this branch of theology, focusing on its German development, and worked “for some years past” in developing a department dedicated to this field, according to Briggs in The Edward Robinson Chair of Biblical Theology in the Union Theological Seminary, New York (1891). In that inaugural address he acknowledges the precedence of American scholars Edward Robinson and Moses Stuart in this field: “Edward Robinson was the pupil of Moses Stuart, the father of Biblical learning in America.” His definition of the discipline is similar to that of Vos: “Biblical Theology is that Theological Discipline which presents the Theology of the Bible in its historical formation within the Canonical Writings” (Biblical Theology [1882]). Briggs, however, supported Old Testament Higher Criticism; while Vos argued that “Biblical Theology is suited to furnish a most effective antidote to the destructive critical views now prevailing” (The Idea of Biblical Theology).

When Vos was inaugurated as Professor of Biblical Theology at Princeton in 1894, it was Abraham Gosman, who had studied under Archibald Alexander and Samuel Miller, who delivered the charge (James McCosh gave the benediction), and in his address he credited Joseph Addison Alexander and Caspar Wistar Hodge, Sr. as early precursors of this theological discipline. Gosman claimed that although Biblical Theology as a department was new, the path had been paved before by those men and others. And he spoke of the place of Biblical Theology within the scope of theological study as a whole:

Biblical Theology stands in close relations both to Exegetical and Systematic Theology, and yet has its own well-defined bounds. It presupposes Exegetical Theology; it furnishes the material for Systematic Theology. If Systematic Theology is, as we may conceive it to be, the finished building, harmonious in its proportions, symmetrical and beautiful; then Exegetical Theology may be regarded as the quarry from which the material is taken; and Biblical Theology, as putting the granite blocks into form, not polished and graven, but shaped and fitted for the place they are to fill, as the structure grows in its vastness and beauty. It seeks the saving facts and truths as they lie in the Word, and are embedded, and to some extent expressed, in the history of the people of God. God's methods are always historical and genetic, and it conforms to His methods. It views these words and facts in their historical relations and their progressive development. It aims not merely to arrive at the ideas and facts as they appear in particular authors and in the books justly ascribed to them, and as they may be modified in their form by time, culture, influences friendly or hostile; but to set forth these facts and truths thus ascertained in their relation to the other books in which they may appear in clearer light, — to trace their progress and unfolding from the germ to the ripened fruit. As the stream of sacred history runs parallel with that of revelation, it borders closely upon Historical Theology. But the two conceptions are distinct.

Gosman grasped the role of Biblical Theology within the various branches of theological study, and how it fits into the overall goal of making known and vindicating the truth, that is, through “the more complete and orderly unfolding of it, as it lies in the Word, and for the confirmation of the faith of God's people.”

In this brief look at earlier American forerunners of a discipline that is so closely associated in the minds of many today with Geerhardus Vos, we can see, as Fesko suggests, that there were currents of development both in Europe and America prior to his 1894 inauguration at Princeton. The idea of historical development in the field of Biblical Theology itself, of course, makes logical sense, but it is easy to overlook. The details of this historical development warrant much greater study and explanation — or unfolding — than is found here, but at the very least we can say that Biblical Theology did not spring fully formed from Vos’ mind like Athena from the mind of Zeus in Greek mythology. But — like B.B. Warfield, who said that “He was probably the best exegete Princeton ever had” [Letter, Louis Berkhof to Ned B. Stonehouse, December 21, 1954], and John Murray, who wrote that “Dr. Vos is, in my judgment, the most penetrating exegete it has been my privilege to know, and I believe, the most incisive exegete that has appeared in the English-speaking world in this century” [Eerdmans Quarterly Observer and inside jacket cover of original edition of Biblical Theology (1948)] — we do appreciate and recognize the influence of Vos on the method of Biblical Theology as he built on what preceded him and put his stamp on the discipline going forward.

R.L. Dabney: Poet

Receive our blog posts in your email by filling out the form at the bottom of this page.

When we think of Robert Lewis Dabney, most associate him with his systematic theology or the War Between the States. He was one of the most prominent American theologians of the 19th century, and notably served as chief of staff for Gen. Stonewall Jackson during the War. He wore many others hats as well as a farmer, an architect, a professor, a pastor, and a poet.

The last hat mentioned is one that — contrary to popular impressions of Presbyterian divines as disinclined to artistic interests — is shared by many authors on Log College Press: B.B. Warfield, Geerhardus Vos, J. Addison Alexander, Samuel Davies, Charles L. Thompson, Henry J. Van Dyke, Jr., and many more come to mind, who were all known for their poetry. Dabney is a name rarely included in such a list, but it should be.

In Dabney’s case, there are some remarkable and fascinating poetic compositions that are very much worth noting, which help us today to better understand the many facets of his character. Some of his poems were published — in periodicals and/or Thomas C. Johnson’s biography of Dabney — and some were instead shared privately. His biographer notes that his poetry was not of the highest quality, but often expressed his passion. Few would say that Dabney's poetry was his forte, but he certainly applied himself to verse in his "leisure hours."

If the art of poetry be the art of apprehending and interpreting ideas by the faculty of the imagination, the art of idealizing in thought and expression, then Dr. Dabney possessed the art. That he had the necessary constructive imagination, and the power of expressing himself in the concrete, simply and sensuously, there is no ground for doubt. He usually attempted poetical composition, too, only on subjects on which he felt very deeply. In consequence, most of his work of this sort had the ring of passion. (T.C. Johnson, The Life and Letters of Robert Lewis Dabney, p. 455)

Recently, we have made an effort to identify and compile many of his known, published poems to provide a glimpse into his powers of imagination. Today, we will look briefly at some of his poems as found on Log College Press.

• Tried, But Comforted — First published in The Central Presbyterian in 1863, this poem is also found in Johnson’s biography. It was written after the death of his five-year-old son, Tom, who died in 1862 and was buried in the same cemetery in which his father would later be laid to rest. Dabney’s heart was “bursting,” but he had hope that he would follow little Tom “to Christ, our Head.”

• The Christian Womans Drowning Hymn: A Monody — Written in 1886, this poem was published in his Discussions, Vol. 4 (1897). The story behind the poem is this: “(A Christian lady and organist, went July 1886, with, and at the request of her sister, for a few days" excursion to Indianola. They arrived the day before the great night storm and tidal wave, which submerged the town. Both the ladies and children, after hours of fearful suspense, were drowned, the house where they sought refuge being broken to pieces in the waves. A survivor stated that the organist spent much of the interval in most moving prayer. Their re- mains were recovered on the subsidence of the tempest, and interred at their homes., amidst universally solemn and tender sympathy. The following verses are imagined, as expressing the emotions of the Christian wife, sister and mother, during her long struggle with the waters.”

• Dream of a Soldier — This poem was written in 1886, but only referenced, not included, in Johnson’s biography, apparently because it was so dark and bitter (reflecting Dabney’s feelings about the War) that Dabney’s biographer thought it best to not publish it.

• General T.J. Jackson: An Elegy — Written in 1887 (over two decades after the death of his beloved general), this tribute appeared in Discussions, Vol. 4. (1897). It is a noble lament for his dear friend, highlighting the loss keenly felt by Robert E. Lee and the South.

• The Texas Brigade at the Wilderness — Written in May 1890, this poem also appeared in Discussions, Vol. 4 (1897). It memorializes the valor of the Texas Brigade at the Battle of the Wilderness, which took place in central Virginia in May 1864.

• The Death of Moses — This poem was published in the Jan.-Feb. 1891 issue of The Union Seminary Magazine. It is largely an imagined speech delivered by Moses before his entrance into the Heavenly Canaan.

• Annihilation — This eschatological defense of traditional views of heaven and hell as opposed to the idea of “soul sleep” (an idea refuted by John Calvin in his Psychopannychia, but which nevertheless lingers) appeared in the January 1893 issue of The Presbyterian Quarterly.

• The San Marcos River — Dabney’s time spent in central Texas inspired this poetic composition, which is found in Discussions, Vol. 4 (1897).

• A Sonnet to Lee — This tribute to General Robert E. Lee appeared in Discussions, Vol. 4 (1897).

• Lines Written on the Illness of His Granddaughter — Dictated in 1897 (he was blind by then), these verses were composed when his beloved granddaughter Marguerite lived with him for a time at Asheville, North Carolina. She died in 1899, a year after Dabney, at the age of 17.

• Conquest of the South — An extract from this poem is given in Johnson’s biography (1903) which expresses his his angst at “the present and impending degradation of his country.”

• Christology of the Angels — This epic poem, reminiscent of Milton’s Paradise Lost, remained unpublished in manuscript form until it was included in Discussions, Vol. 5 (1999). It is a 115-page long celestial discourse between Gabriel, Michael and other angels on the second night after Jesus’ crucifixion.

The poetic side of Dabney is not well-known, but is worth exploring. Take time to peruse his poetry at Log College Press here, and to look at more Presbyterian poetry here.

Click here to join the Dead Presbyterians Society

Resources on Calvinism at Log College Press

(Receive our blog posts in your email by clicking here. If the author links in this post are broken, please visit our Free PDF Library and click on the author’s page directly.)

And I have my own private opinion that there is no such a thing as preaching Christ and him crucified, unless you preach what now-a-days is called Calvinism. I have my own ideas, and those I always state boldly. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in his dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering, love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the peculiar redemption which Christ made for his elect and chosen people; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having believed. Such a gospel I abhor. The gospel of the Bible is not such a gospel as that. We preach Christ and him crucified in a different fashion, and to all gainsayers we reply, "We have not so learned Christ." (Charles Spurgeon, Sermon no. 98, New Park Street Pulpit 1:100)

It is no novelty, then, that I am-preaching; no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines, which are called by nickname Calvinism, but which are surely and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus. By this truth I make a pilgrimage into the past, and as I go, I see father after father, confessor after confessor, martyr after martyr, standing up to shake hands with me. Were I a Pelagian, or a believer in the doctrine of free-will, I should have to walk for centuries all alone. Here and there a heretic of no very honorable character might rise up and call me brother. But taking these things to be the standard of my faith, I see the land of the ancients peopled with my brethren - I behold multitudes who confess the same as I do, and acknowledge that this is the religion of God’s own church. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermon on Election 1:551)

Although Calvinism (which Charles Spurgeon has described as “the gospel, and nothing else”) permeates the works of American Presbyterians on numerous topics, and we have pages dedicated to the topics of Systematic Theology the Westminster Standards, there are particular resources on Calvinism to be found at Log College Press which we aim to highlight today. These may be worth bookmarking for future study by the student of the doctrines of grace.

Calvinism is also known by the acrostic TULIP, which is intended to make the so-called ‘Five Points of Calvinism’ easier to remember. It was the Synod of Dort (1618-1619) in The Netherlands which articulated the Calvinistic Five Points in response to the Arminian Remonstrants. And it was Loraine Boettner who popularized (and modified) the TULIP acrostic summarizing those Five Points in The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (1932), but it was Cleland Boyd McAfee who is believed to have coined it in the first place c. 1905. We have noted this previously, but it is worth mentioning again.

The history of McAfee’s utilization of TULIP as an aid to teaching the doctrines of grace was perhaps first recorded by William H. Vail in an important 1913 article as was discussed previously here. What’s particularly interesting about Vail’s historical study of the Five Points is that is draws from multiple authorities, including the Synod of Dort, Jonathan Dickinson, and several living (at that time) leading clergymen.

William H. Vail’s chart showing the Five Points of Calvinism compared historically. A represents the list derived from Abbott’s Dictionary of Religious Knowledge; B comes from Dr. Francis Landey Patton; C is from Dr. Hugh Black; D is from the Rev. George B. Stewart; and E is from the Rev. Isaac N. Rendall.

The Five Points, says Mr. Vail, “as formulated by the Synod of Dort, according to two authorities, are as follows:

1. Personal, Gratuitous Election to Everlasting Life.
2. Particular Redemption.
3. Depravity, Native and Total.
4. Effectual Calling, or Re generation, by the Holy Spirit.
5. Certain Perseverance of Saints unto Eternal Life.

1. Divine Predestination.
2. The Redemption of Men through the Death of Christ.
3. Total Depravity.
4 Redemption through Grace.
5. Perseverance of Saints.”

The list from Jonathan Dickinson is as follows:

1. Eternal Election. Ephesians i. 4, 5.
2. Original Sin. Romans v. 12.
3. Grace in Conversion. Ephesians ii. 4, 5.
4. Justification by Faith. Romans iii. 25.
5. Saints' Perseverance. Romans viii. 30.

The TULIP list from Cleland B. McAfee, as noted by Vail, is as follows:

1st, T stands for Total I)epravity.
2d, U “ “ Universal Sovereignty.
3d, L -- “ Limited Atonement.
4th, I -- “ irresistible (, race.
5th, P -- “ Perseverance of the Saints.

Jonathan Dickinson covered this ground in The True Scripture Doctrine Concerning Some Important Points of Christian Faith (1741).

Robert L. Dabney wrote on The Five Points of Calvinism (1895) [not yet available at Log College Press] and identified them as follows:

1.. Original Sin
2. Effectual Calling
3. God’s Election
4. Particular Redemption
5. Perseverance of the Saints

The works by Dickinson and Dabney have been republished by Sprinkle Publications in 1992 as one combined volume.

Loraine Boettner in 1932 wrote: “The Five Points may be more easily remembered if they are associated with the word T-U-L-I-P; T, Total Inability ; U, Unconditional Election; L, Limited Atonement; I, Irresistible (Efficacious) Grace; and P, Perseverance of the Saints.” This has become the standard meaning of the TULIP acrostic.

Other resources to be found at Log College Press which concern Calvinism either historically or theologically considered include:

• Ashbel Green Fairchild, The Sovereignty of God, Especially in Election; The Great Supper: or, An Illustration and Defence of Some of the Doctrines of Grace; and What Presbyterians Believe;

• Abel M. Fraser, Calvinism: A Bible Study;

• John L. Girardeau, Calvinism and Evangelical Arminianism;

• A.A. Hodge, Calvinism;

• Samuel Miller, Introductory Essay to the Thomas Scott’s Articles of the Synod of Dort (available in print here); Presbyterianism the Truly Primitive and Apostolical Constitution of the Church of Christ (available in print here); and Mole-Hills and Mountains, or The Difficulties of Calvinism and Arminianism Compared;

• Nathan L. Rice, God Sovereign and Man Free: Or, The Doctrine of Divine Foreordination and Man's Free Agency, Stated, Illustrated and Proved From the Scriptures;

• W.G.T. Shedd, Calvinism: Pure and Mixed - A Defence of the Westminster Standards;

• William D. Smith, What is Calvinism?; and

• B.B. Warfield, Calvinism and Calvinism: The Meaning and Uses of the Term; and Calvinism.

There are additional works on the subject that Log College Press hopes to add in the future such as Robert Hamilton Bishop, An Apology For Calvinism; and Samuel A. King, Presbyterian Doctrines, as Contained in the Five Points of Calvinism. And many more are already on the site relating to the thought of both John Calvin and Augustine. Also, be sure to consult, David N. Steele, et al., The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented.

It is a core belief of historic Presbyterianism that people who are saved are saved by grace alone and not by works (Eph. 2:8-9). This is a reflection of both God’s sovereignty and man’s inability to save himself. The works referenced above concerning the doctrines of grace, and many more not mentioned by name here, are resources to take up and study by those who wish to better understand historic doctrine, which is, in the words of Spurgeon, “no novelty…no new doctrine,” but simply the fundamental teaching of God’s Word on soteriology. To God be the glory!

Click here to browse our Bookstore!

Why the need for systematic theology? Charles Hodge answers

(If the author links in this post are broken, please visit our Free PDF Library and click on the author’s page directly.)

The systematization of the Holy Scriptures has been a tremendous blessing to the Church. But some wonder why it was necessary. To this query, Charles Hodge responds:

It may naturally be asked, why not take the truths as God has seen fit to reveal them, and thus save ourselves the trouble of showing their relation and harmony?

The answer to this question is, in the first place, that it cannot be done. Such is the constitution of the human mind that it cannot help endeavoring to systematize and reconcile the facts which it admits to be true. In no department of knowledge have been satisfied with the possession of a mass of undigested facts. And the students of the Bible can as little be expected to thus satisfied. There is a necessity, therefore, for the construction of systems of theology. Of this the history of the Church abundant proof. In all ages and among all denominations, such systems have been produced.

Second, A much higher kind of knowledge is thus obtained, than by the mere accumulation of isolated facts. It is one thing, for example, to know that oceans, continents, islands, mountains, and rivers exist on the face of the earth; and a much higher thing to know the causes which have determined the distribution of land and water on the surface of our globe; the configuration of the earth; the effects of that configuration on climate, on the races of plants and animals, on commerce, civilization, and the destiny of nations. It is by determining these causes that geography has been raised from a collection of facts to a highly important and elevated science. In like manner, without the knowledge of the laws of attraction and and motion, astronomy would be a confused and unintelligible collection of facts. What is true of other sciences is true of theology. We cannot know what God has revealed in his Word unless we understand, at least in some good measure, the relation in which the separate truths therein contained stand to each other. It cost the Church centuries of study and controversy to solve the problem concerning the person of Christ; that is, to adjust and bring into harmonious arrangement all the facts which the Bible teaches on that subject.

Third, We have no choice in this matter. If we would discharge our duty as teachers and defenders of the truth, we must endeavor to bring all the facts of revelation into systematic order and mutual relation. It is only thus that we can satisfactorily exhibit their truth, vindicate them from objections, or bring them to bear in their full force on the minds of men.

Fourth, Such is evidently the will of God. He does not teach men astronomy or chemistry, but He gives them the facts out of which those sciences are constructed. Neither does He teach us systematic theology, but He gives us in the Bible the truths which, properly understood and arranged, constitute the science of theology. As the facts of nature are all related and determined by physical laws, so the facts of the Bible are all related and determined by the nature of God and of his creatures. And as He wills that men should study his works and discover their wonderful organic relation and harmonious combination, so it is his will that we should study his Word, and learn that, like the stars, its truths are not isolated points, but systems, cycles, and epicycles, in unending harmony and grandeur. Besides all this, although the Scriptures do not contain a system of theology as a whole, we have in the Epistles of the New Testament, portions of that system wrought out to our hands. These are our authority and guide.

Thus Hodge accounts for the need to systematize the truths of Scripture. His magnum opus, the Systematic Theology in three volumes, is a gem worthy of thoughtful, prayerful study. Explore it further here.