Systematic Theology: The Complete Three Volumes

Product Information

For each of the three points made by Bavinck, insofar as they implicate Hodge, seem to be off their target. Whether asserting such things 'runs the risk of neglecting the larger canonical context and literary form of the biblical "facts", perhaps the inevitable result of biblical empiricism', as Vanhoozer claims, (p.

His Systematic Theology begins 'In every science there are two factors: facts and ideas; or, facts and the mind. The idea that Hodge plays down or dismisses theories, and allows that anyone can be a systematic theologian simply by assembling the facts of Scripture, without courting the danger of having those facts distorted by false theories, is a major misunderstanding.Under his editorship, it became the leading theological journal of the nineteenth century: Hodge’s personal contributions included articles on biblical studies, spirituality, church history and historical theology, ecclesiological issues, philosophy, politics, slavery, abolition and the Civil War. These traits are said to reveal him as expressing the mentality of the Enlightenment, 'the assumption of modernity', in his pursuit of objectivity, a mentality perhaps fostered by the influence upon him of one of the most notable figures of the Scottish Enlightenment, Thomas Reid, and perhaps by the dreaded 'Reformed Scholasticism'.

So it would be a mistake to think that Hodge believes that the Bible is nothing but sets of facts and that all theological reasoning is ‘bottom up’, as Vanhoozer thinks.Conclusion Unfortunately, Professor Vanhoozer's negative comments about Charles Hodge's systematic theological method are not novel.