Read Your Bible, Find Your Saviour.

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."

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...

In this post, I will draw comparisons between Arminius and Berkouwer.  * Bangs points out that the historical situation in Holland was not a simple one - Calvinism coming in, Arminius nearly ruining it and the Synod of Dort restoring it: “The earliest Dutch Reformed leaders don’t seem to be Calvinists at all. They rise out of the soil, here and there, nurtured by the old Dutch biblical piety, not seized by dogmatic insights, but steadily pressing toward a purified life of faith according to Scripture” (p. 21). This emphasis is similar to Berkouwer’s insistence that election is not a special gnosis for the theological elite. Rather, it is a confession of faith, arising from the hearts of those who have come to know the grace of God ( Divine Election (DE), p. 216).    * Bangs observes that Arminius’ theological method is “practical and through faith”: “For the Theology which belongs to this world, is practical and through faith: Theoretical Theology belongs to the o...

In his post, Theological autobiography , Ben Myers writes, "Although there hasn’t been much theological autobiography in the past century, G. C. Berkouwer’s A Half Century of Theology (1977) deserves mention. It’s a stimulating discussion of major developments in twentieth-century theology from the perspective of Berkouwer’s own experience and development."

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...

Berkouwer criticizes "an incorrect conception of theology, a conception of theology, a conception which considers it possible to discuss Holy Scripture apart from a personal relationship of belief in it, as though that alone would constitute true 'objectivity'." (Holy Scripture, pp. 9-10). He holds that those who view Scripture in this way "wrongly ... see involvement and correlation as subjectivism" (Holy Scripture, p.10). Such a misguided fear of subjectivism lapses into a false objectivism with its suggestion that Christian truth can be considered without direct reference to the believer's personal involvement with that truth. Berkouwer maintains that there must be a proper understanding of the correlation between faith and its object. He emphasizes that "faith is decisively determined by the object of faith, namely God and His Word". He rejects the idea that "Scripture ... derives its authority from the believer's faith...

"Men have tried to construct abstract and causal answers to this question of sin's origin and ... have violated the very limits of objectivity ... Whoever reflects on the origin of cannot engage himself in a merely theoretical dispute; rather he is engaged intimately, in ... the problem of sin's guilt." (G C Berkouwer, Sin, p. 14).

Concerning the confession 'Credo Ecclesiam' (I believe in the church), Berkouwer insists that the church's objectivity is not subjectivized by the affirmation that "the only framework in which the Church can remain the Church of the Lord (is) the framework of faith, prayer, obedience and subjection" ( The Church, p. 19).

"Authority ... cannot be a darksome power that compels us to subject ourselves without reason" (A Half Century of Theology, p. 158). Berkouwer insists that the authority of God is unlike what is usually meant by "external authority" (A Half Century of Theology, p. 159). He emphasizes that the authority of God brings "perspective, joy and hope" (A Half Century of Theology, p. 159). Berkouwer emphasizes the need for a correct understanding of the true nature of authority. He warns against getting "caught up in an emotional reaction against such phrases as 'believing on authority', insisting that '(e)verything depends on the character of the authority and the character of believing" ( A Half Century of Theology, p. 159). The authority of God, as understood by Berkouwer, is " ... not ... an arbitrary, external authority" ( Holy Scripture, p. 349), demanding "blind obedience" ( Holy Scripture, p.350). He vie...

Holding that the Bible is all that God wants it to be in accordance with His precise purpose, Berkouwer insists that it is unnecessary to posit a perfection that extends beyond the confines of the specific purpose of Scripture. He speaks of the sufficiency of Scripture in terms of “sufficiency for the Christian life” ( Holy Scripture, p. 302). Interpreting Scripture’s reliability in terms of its purpose, he writes, “ Scripture itself shows us clearly that a yardstick of reliability may not be applied which is not in agreement with its purpose” (p. 264, emphasis mine). The reliability of the God-given Scriptures is to be understood in connection with their God-given purpose. Our confession of faith in the reliability of Scripture is rooted in the prior confession of faith in the reliability of God. Concerning the reliability of Scripture, Berkouwer writes, “To this reliability of the biblical witness corresponds an unlimited trust that in our interaction with Scripture by faith ...

" ... the authority of God's Word is not an arbitrary, external authority ... (But) a wooing and conquering authority ... Scripture's authority does not demand blind obedience ... rather a subjection that spells redemption ... a subjection to Christ whereby he is never out of view ... in which acceptance occurs with joy and willingness." (Holy Scripture, pp. 349-350). As a biblical theologian, Berkouwer is aware of "the dangers of an experience-theology" (Holy Scripture, p. 348). As a modern theologian, he is critical of the suggestion that "all scriptural questions could possibly be solved by excluding them on the basis of a childlike faith" (Holy Scripture, p. 348). He has sought to understand the authority of Scripture in a way that acknowledges fully both the objectivity of biblical authority and the subjectivity of the believer's experience of that authority. He emphasizes that his view is "not a subjectification of a...

Berkouwer emphasizes that “the purpose of the God-breathed Scripture is not at all to provide a scientific gnosis in order to convey and increase human knowledge and wisdom, but to witness of the salvation of God unto faith” ( Holy Scripture, p. 180). He insists that “This approach does not mean to separate faith and knowledge. But the knowledge that is the unmistakable aim of Scripture is the knowledge of faith, which does not increase human wisdom, but is life eternal” (p. 180).

These comments are taken from the Jack Rogers book, "Confessions of a Conservative Evangelical" (Philadelphia, 1974). Berkouwer was reared in a denomination which "began in rather conservative isolation ... he has developed a scholarly, pastoral, evangelical stance. And he has brought a whole denomination with him" (p. 143) - "you can become less conservative and more evangelical" (12).

On the whole, Berkouwer shows considerable agreement with Calvin. Where there is disagreement, this tends to be minimized through sympathetic interpretation which accentuates their agreement. Whenever disagreement is inevitable, it is always respectful disagreement. Berkouwer’s criticisms of Calvin are never offered without the greatest respect for the great Reformer. While Berkouwer offers much sympathetic exposition and interpretation of Calvin, it is clearly not his intention ‘to defend every one of Calvin’s utterance concerning the doctrine of election’ (Divine Election, p. 190). In particular, he is critical of the ‘imbalance in the causa-concept which we observe in Calvin’ (p. 181). Even here, however, Berkouwer’s criticism is sympathetic rather than scathing. He refers to an imbalance which requires correction rather than presenting an equally unbalanced and categorical rejection of Calvin’s valid insight into the central importance of the doctrine of election. Emphasizing th...

In my book on Berkouwer ("The Problem of Polarization: An Approach based on the writings of G C Berkouwer"), I wrote quite a bit about his book, “A Half Century of Theology.” I focused on what he had to say about apologetics and social concern. The discussion ranged quite widely, drawing upon passages from all over the book. At the outset of this discussion, I made the point that a study of Berkouwer’s theology would be incomplete without any detailed discussion of this late work, ‘A Half Century of Theology’ (Dutch, 1974; English, 1977). This is the way in which I introduced the discussion. “This discussion of Berkouwer’s appreciative analysis of apologetics and social concern focuses attention on his later work, ‘A Half Century of Theology.’ Having ‘personally experienced this half-century of theology… as a continuing event’ (p. 7), Berkouwer discusses today’s questions in its light: ‘even at the beginning questions were being raised and answered that are still naggi...

"If theology is to speak adequately of the gospel of Jesus Christ, it must be thoroughly committed to hearing “the powerful witness of the ‘tremendous’ Word that always speaks against us so that we can learn to stop speaking against it.” (A Half Century of Theology, p. 74). This quotation is taken from Berkouwer’s account of Karl Barth’s reaction to the theological method of Rudolf Bultmann.

Sometimes, it is said that Berkouwer's theology is not very systematic. I think that, to appreciate the systematic quality of Berkouwer's theology, you need to get deeply into it, reading quite a bit of his work and thinking along with him. I have tended to regard his work on 'Holy Scripture' & 'Divine Election' as important though, admittedly, many others are less happy with these volumes). The more I reflected on these books, the more I felt that he wasn't being unsystematic. He was opening up perspectives which shed new light on these doctrines. In my book, I expound Berkouwer's doctrines of Scripture & election, seeking - along the way - to defend his approach against his critics. An important aspect of Berkouwer's approach is summed up in the two principles - Speak where Scripture speaks. Remain silent where Scripture remains silent. There is, however, another aspect of Berkouwer's approach which is worthy of mention. He was a ...

For much of modern theology, the question, “What is man?” must precede the question, “Who is God?” The approach which begins with man (’from below’) can be set against the approach which begins with God (’from above’). Berkouwer’s doctrine of man has been commended as “a middle course between conflicting theologies … achieved by a strenuous independence of mind” (these words of A. Willingdale . from a review in  The Evangelical Quarterly,  are cited on the front / inside dust cover of Berkouwer’s Man: The Image of God. Berkouwer writes, “all sorts of theoretical knowledge does not answer the question, What is man?” ( Man: The Image of God, p. 20). He insists that “man’s nature … is not self-enclosed, and … can never be understood outside of its relation to God … The relation of man’s nature to God is not something which is added to an already complete, self-enclosed, isolated nature; it is essential and constitutive for man’s nature, and man cannot be understood ...

Berkouwer and the Free University of Amsterdam Berkouwer’s confrontation with scholasticism has been immediate. The Free University of Amsterdam, at which he taught, as Professor of Systematic Theology, from 1945 until his retirement in 1973, provides an interesting study of the influence of scholasticism in Dutch Reformed theology. Berkouwer’s predecessors in the Chair of Systematic Theology were Abraham Kuyper, Herman Bavinck and Valentinius Hepp. The contrasting way in which Berkouwer has treated the views of his predecessors provides a useful illustration of his own relationship to scholasticism. It should be noted that Kuyper, Bavinck and Hepp are not equally scholastic in their theological method. Berkouwer’s evaluation of the theological significance of each of his predecessors varies rather directly with the extent to which each of them were able to free themselves of scholastic influence. A. Kuyper, H. Bavinck and G. C. Berkouwer Berkouwer frequently cites both Kuyper a...

Insisting that ‘serious dialogue (is) not a dialogue of phoney tolerance’, G C Berkouwer cites the words of the Marxist writer, M. Machovec, who said ‘that if there was to be dialogue he wanted an opponent who would really try to convert him’ (A Half Century of Theology, p. 188, emphasis and brackets mine). Berkouwer is calling Christians to take seriously what the critics are saying. He is also insisting that they must not allow their Christian position to collapse like a pack of cards the moment it is challenged by unbelieving objections. He is emphasizing that there are certain non-negotiables in our presentation of the Gospel, beyond which interpretation becomes denial. In the work of apologetics, where emphasis is placed on the clear presentation of an argument, it should be recognized that the Christian’s ultimate goal is not the winning of an argument but the winning of people to faith in Jesus Christ.

The doctrine of common grace is important for the discussion of the relationship between the church and the world. where common grace is ignored, a radical dualism develops between the church and the world. Where the idea of common grace is dispensed with for the sake of accentuating the saving character of grace, there tends to be a failure to do justice to the biblical call to faith. the concept of common grace is a difficult idea which requires to be interpreted sensitively if theology is to avoid moving in the direction of either dualism or universalism. Neither dualism nor universalism does justice to the complex relationship between the church and the world. Dualism fails to appreciate the value of the world as created humanity. Universalism fails to appreciate the distinctiveness of the church as redeemed humanity. While the doctrine of common grace can be misused, its main thrust is commendable in that it seeks to preserve two important emphases - the church has a distinctiv...

Berkouwer makes a clear distinction between natural theology and general revelation. He emphasizes that knowledge of revelation is arrived at not through natural theology but through experience of the salvation of God “that opens doors and windows towards God’s handiwork” ("General Revelation", p. 131). While this places the emphasis on the priority of divine revelation, it doesn't mean that we should opt out of the apologetic task of presenting a reasonable faith to a sceptical and unbelieving world. The emphasis on the experience of the salvation of God is important. It reminds us that there is a difference between the living God and an idea of God. The living God calls for our attention. He speaks to us about our sin. This is something that we can't get away from. He speaks to us about His salvation. This is our greatest need. The idea of God, reached as the result of an intellectual argument, is something about which many people are inclined to say, "That...

In speaking of the connection between Christian faith and Christian living, Berkouwer emphasizes the importance of a proper understanding of divine grace. He stresses that, through divine revelation and reconciliation, we become aware that we are dependent on divine grace without being destroyed by divine power. In adopting this approach, Berkouwer seeks to construct a theology which does full justice to the true objectivity of the Christian faith and the necessity for that faith to be a subjectively-experienced faith. Emphasizing that God and man are not to be viewed as competitors, he rejects both the idea that God should compel us to obey Him and the notion that man can ever find true fulfilment apart from willing and glad submission to the God of salvation. As we affirm our faith in God, we must also emphasize the importance of a life-transforming experience of His grace. God is not merely the object of study for the academic discipline we call theology. He is the One who changes...

The distinction between observation and faith is important for theological reflection concerning divine providence if theology is to avoid reaching misguided conclusions. Warning against "the danger of going outside the sphere of faith into the area of observation", Berkouwer disputes "the legitimacy of interpreting the ways of Providence on the basis of facts" (The Providence of God (PG) , pp. 164-165). He aims to guard against the possibility that "everyone according to his own prejudice and subjective whim (can) canonize a certain event or national rise as a special act of God in which He reveals and demonstrates His favour" (PG , p. 164). Acutely aware that "the interpretation of an historical event as a special revelation of Providence too easily becomes a piously disguised form of self-justification" ( PG, p. 166), Berkouwer insists that "no event speaks so clearly that we may conclude from it a certain disposition of God - as ...

Berkouwer approaches social concern from a Biblical and Reformed perspective. In Ephesians 2:8-10 , the emphases ‘by grace’ and ‘through faith’ lead directly on to the emphasis ‘for good works’. Berkouwer underscores this connection between ‘Sola Fide and Sanctification’ (Chapter II, pp. 17-44). He emphasizes that the true nature of good works cannot be understood apart from Christ who is our ’sanctification’ ( 1 Corinthians 1:30 ) (p. 21). Sanctification is not ‘the humanly operated successor to the divinely worked justification (p. 78). ‘Genuine sanctification’ has a ‘continued orientation toward justification’ (p. 78). Berkouwer emphasizes the ‘by grace … through faith’ context in which the ‘for good works’ character of sanctification expresses itself. He draws attention to the nature of the Spirit’s work in sanctification: ‘The Spirit alone could perform the miracle of making man walk on the road of sanctity without a sense of his own worth’ (p. 78). The life of sanctification has...

Berkouwer refuses to separate personal faith and social concern. He provides a perspective through which Christian theology can avoid the twin dangers of (a) a preoccupation with social concern which implicitly conceives of personal faith as a flight into illusion; and (b) a preoccupation with individualistic and 'other-worldly' religion which fails to provide any significant expression of social concern. In his introduction to the symposium, At the Edge of Hope, Christian Laity in Paradox, H Butt insists that 'transcendent hope ... immanent hope ... must cohere ... in order to intersect and overcome despair - the loss of expectation for God's eternal Kingdom and expectation for the improvement of this world ... transcendent expectation and ... immanent expectation form one complete Christian hope. The first says, turn to God because the human prospect is so bleak; the second says, the human prospect can be changed because of God' (pp.6-7). Butt continues, 'Eve...