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:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A response to a comment by G. R. Osborne on Berkouwer’s understanding of the doctrine of final perseverance

In his contribution to Clark Pinnock (editor), Grace Unlimited (1975), G. R. Osborne states that Berkouwer, in Faith and Perseverance, pp. 9-10, “speaks of the time less ness of the doctrine of final perseverance, founded on ‘the richness and abidingness of salvation” (p. 188, emphasis mine). This single-sentence comment on Berkouwer’s view hardly gives a fair indication of the type of thinking found in Chapter 1 of Berkouwer’s Faith and Perseverance - “Time li ness and Relevance” (pp. 9-14, emphasis mine). Berkouwer insists that “the living preaching of the Scriptures, which offer no metaphysical and theoretical views about … ‘permanency’ as an independent theme in itself, does nothing to encourage ‘a continuity which is … opposed in any way to the living nature of faith” (p. 13). Berkouwer stresses that “The perseverance of the saints is not primarily a theoretical problem but a confession of faith” (p. 14) and that “The perseverance of the saints is unbreakably connected wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

"Praise the Lord!" (Psalm 104:1).

We have come here to praise the Lord. Why do we praise the Lord? "Lord my God, You are very great." God is great in power. His power can impress us, but it will not save us until we are touched by a special power - the power of His love. God is great in holiness. His holiness (Isaiah 6:3) shows us our sin (Isaiah 6:5). It's His love that brings us salvation (Isaiah 6:7). When we see the greatness of His love, we can truly say, "Praise the Lord."
Post a Comment
Read more

Berkouwer's Doctrine Of Scripture

Berkouwer insists that when “the concept of error in the sense of incorrectness is … used on the same level as the concept of erring in the sense of sin and deception … we are quite far removed from the serious manner with which erring is dealt in Scripture … (as) a swerving from the truth and upsetting the faith ( 2 Tim. 2:18 )” (Holy Scripture (HS), p. 181, emphasis and brackets mine). Berkouwer rejects “the formalization of inerrancy” (HS, p. 181, emphasis mine), “a mechanical, inflexible ‘inerrancy’” (HS, p. 265, emphasis mine), “a rationally developed infallibility” (HS, p. 32, emphasis mine). He does, however, seek to interpret positively both infallibility and inerrancy: “the Holy Spirit … does not lead us into error but into the pathways of truth … The Spirit, with this special concern, has not failed and will not fail in this mystery of God-breathed Scripture” (HS, pp. 265-266). When we consider Berkouwer’s criticism of “a theoretical concept of inspiration or infallibi...
Post a Comment
Read more