Skip to main content

The Apologetics of James McCosh (1811-1894)

After sixteen years' service as a parish minister at Arbroath and Brechin, he moved from his native Scotland when, in 1851, he was appointed to the Chair of Logic at Queen's University, Belfast. This appointment came as a result of his growing reputation as a natural theologian, achieved as a result of the publication of his book, The Method of Divine Government, Physical and Moral, in 1850. He moved to the U. S. A. in 1868 when he was appointed by Princeton College to the dual position of the Chair of Philosophy and the President of the College. In 1888, he resigned from the Presidency, continuing in the Chair of Philosophy until his death. He was an enthusiastic supporter of the Scottish Common Sense Philosophy - 'the principles of common sense' - propounded by Thomas Reid (1710-96) in opposition to the scepticism of David Hume (1711-86). Though lacking in originality, his vigorous writings on the Scottish Common Sense Philosophy, e.g. Intuitions of the Mind (1860), The Scottish Philosophy (1874), have exerted a significant influence on the theological development of 'old Princeton and Westminster', Different conclusions have been reached concerning the extent to which old Princeton and Westminster theology is built on Scottish Common Sense Philosophy. Vander Stelt - Philosophy and Scripture (1978) - draws a close connection between the two while Calhoun - The Majestic Testimony (1996) - does not. In his defence of theistic evolution, e.g. The Typical Forms and Special Ends of Creation (1855) and The Supernatural in Relation to the Natural (1862), he adopted a view which was extremely uncommon among orthodox evangelicals of his day. Those who share his outlook will regard his work as apologetically significant. He also engaged in the kind of apologetics which argues for the Christian faith by challenging the validity of alternative philosophies. In these controversial writings, e.g. An Examination of Mr. J. S. Mill's Philosophy (1866) and Christianity and Positivism (1871), he often advanced rather superficial criticisms which were based on a failure to achieve an adequate understanding of the views he attacked.
Bibliography
David B. Calhoun, Princeton Seminary: The Majestic Testimony (1869-1929), (Edinburgh, 1996)
J. C. Vander Stelt, Philosophy and Scripture: A Study in Old Princeton and Westminster Theology, (Marlton, New Jersey, 1978)

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Berkouwer on Barth’s Distinction Between Universal Election And Universal Salvation

Some people are impressed by Barth’s distinction between universal election and universal salvation. They defend his position. Some have been influenced by Barth and have become universalists. Berkouwer’s view was that our critique of Barth must begin with looking closely at his teaching concerning universal election. * By speaking of the idea of the depth-aspect of salvation, Berkouwer distances himself from double predestination. * In his critique of Barth, Berkouwer distances himself from universal salvation. * With such a strong emphasis on both grace and faith, Berkouwer guards against any suggestion that, by our faith, we contribute anything to our salvation. It is always God’s free gift, and all the glory belongs to Him. I think that the distinctive feature of Berkouwer’s teaching is that he emphasizes that everything we say about God’s salvation is said from within the experience of having been saved by grace through faith. We have heard the Good News - “Christ Jesus came...
Post a Comment
Read more

Berkouwer’s “Holy Scripture” and E J Young’s “Thy Word is Truth”

E J Young argues that one’s doctrine of Scripture is derived from either experience or Scripture, either natural man or supernatural God. Young does speak of the human character of Scripture. It does, however, seem that the supernatural-natural dichotomy underlies his doctrine of Scripture. He turns to the Bible “to discover what it has to say of itself” (p. 40). It is questionable, however, whether his view is not grounded in a notion which tends to set divine and human activity over against each other. Young rejects a mechanical theory (p. 65). It does, however, appear that his own view is really no more than a modification of this view. His interpretation of the working of the Spirit in the inspiration of Scripture is not directly identifiable with mechanical dictation (pp. 79-80). It does seem, however, that there is a tendency to move in that direction.  * Here are some statements from Young.  - “Without Him (God) there could have been no Bible. Without man th...
Post a Comment
Read more

Psalm 105

‘Look to the Lord and His strength ; seek His face always. Remember the wonderful works that He has done...’(Psalm 105:4-5). The Lord gives strength to those who put their trust in Him. Trusting in Christ, we have this great testimony: ‘I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me’(Philippians 4:13). How do we receive the Lord’s strength? We must ‘seek His face always. We must not think we can face difficult circumstances in our strength. Without the strength of the Lord, we will be defeated. He has helped us in the past. Never forget this. Give thanks to Him for every victory won. As you face temptation, remember the Lord’s promise of victory: ‘God is faithful, and He will not let you be tempted beyond your strength. With the temptation, He will also provide the way of escape...’(1 Corinthians 10:13). ‘He brought His people out with joy ’(Psalm 105:43). When things are going badly and we feel like giving up, we must remember the Word of the Lord: ‘The joy ...
Post a Comment
Read more