Systematic Theology by Robert Letham

Crossway, 2019, 1072pp.

For many years Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof was the standard text in the field of Reformed systematics. More recent publications were conspicuous by their absence. That is no longer the case. A welcome fruit of the resurgence of the Reformed faith in the mid 20th century has been the production of a number of fresh works of systematic theology in recent years. Among them are Robert L. Reymond's A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith and Michael Horton's The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way. Herman Bavinck's magisterial four volume Reformed Dogmatics  has also been published in English translation, but, as the title suggests they are works of dogmatic, rather than systematic theology. 

The traditional approach of systematic theology as exemplified by Charles Hodge and Louis Berkhof has been called into question by Kevin J. Vanhoozer. In his The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology, Vanhoozer argued that doctrine should be reconfigured in terms of the great drama of redeeming grace. The purpose of doctrine is to enable the people of God to play their roles in the theodrama. Michael Horton takes this into account in his The Christian Faith, but Letham adopts a more traditional approach to systematic theology. While he acknowledges the insights to be had from speech-act theory 'theodrama' isn't the organising principle here. 

Systematic theology is an attempt at setting out the key doctrines of the Christian faith in logical order as an interconnected whole. Logically speaking the doctrine of God is the most important of all, which is where Letham beings, rather than with the doctrine of Scripture. After discussing the Revelation of God, Letham devotes three chapters to the Trinity before giving attention to the divine attributes. The work as a whole is thoroughgoingly trinitarian. It is the one God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit whose sovereign will is done in creation, providence and redemption.

Perhaps surprisingly the writer does not engage at length with the controversy over the eternal submission of the Son to the Father. He none the less makes it clear that while there is an order of persons in the Trinity, the divine will is a property of God’s being shared equally by the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Talk of the Son eternally submitting his own will to the Father’s is therefore misplaced. Letham takes issue with the ‘Covenant of Redemption’ which he sees as having subordinationist overtones, preferring to speak of the Divine Counsel of the Trinity.

In line with his sovereign plan God created the material world and declared it very good. Letham helpfully underlines the value of value of the material realm throughout his work. This is affirmed in that the Son of God took human nature into union with his divine person at the incarnation. As the God-Man, Jesus came not just to save our souls, but to rescue the created order from sin and its effects. The believer looks forward to partaking of the divine nature at resurrection of the body, and the life of the world to come. The chapters on the incarnation are  models of biblical insight, compressed historical study and critical interaction with contemporary trends in Christology. 

This is a work of covenant theology. The writer points out that God has always and under every covenant administration dealt with human beings in the basis of grace regulated by law. The Adamic covenant did not offer life on the basis of strict merit, but a 'voluntary condescension on God's part in terms of a covenant'. The Mosiac covenant was not a republication of the Adamic covenant of works, but a further continuation of the Abrahamic covenant. The author sees the Abrahamic/Moasic/Davidic covenants as administrations of the overarching covenant of grace. Reformed Baptists would counter that the old covenant dispensations were not in fact administrations of the covenant of grace, but shadowy anticipations of the covenant of grace what was enacted by Jesus, the Mediator of a new and better covenant. A distinction needs to be maintained between covenant of grace promised in the Old Testament period and promulgated in the New, Ephesians 2:12, Hebrews 9:15-22. 

The work of Christ is discussed under the headings of his ministry as prophet, priest and king, although his prophetic work receives scant attention. The theologian gives full coverage to the different aspects of Christ's atoning work as our great high priest. Penal substitution and definite atonement are defended ably and biblically. Jesus' ascension into heaven and reign are discussed as attention is given to our Lord's kingly role. In common with many systematic theologies the resurrection of Jesus from the dead is not given the place it deserves in treating the saving work of Christ. As Richard B. Gaffin Jr argues in his Resurrection and Redemption: A Sudy in Paul's Soteriology, P&R, the resurrection of Jesus is central to the basic structure of Paul's doctrine of salvation. Although. to be fair, Letham's chapters on eschatology towards the end of the book make up for the lacuna here. 

Over and against the individualistic tendencies of the West, the author discusses the application of salvation and the Christian life under the heading, ‘The Spirit of God and the People of God’, with a strong emphasis on the church. The various features of salvation are rooted in the believer’s union with Christ. The value of the Lord's Supper and Baptism are underlined. Having said that, Reformed Baptists will not find themselves in agreement with some aspects of the theologian’s treatment of baptism and church membership. Baptist understandings are sometimes airily dismissed rather than given due consideration as a legitimate line of thought within the Reformed tradition. 

The chapters in Part 8, 'The Ultimate Purposes of God' offer a magnificent vision of the Christian hope. Letham understands Romans 9-11 to teach that there will be a widespread turning to Christ on the part of Jewish people before the Lord returns. That will give a massive stimulus to world mission. A great multitude that no man can number will be saved from every tribe, tongue and nation. There is a sobering chapter Hell as a Place of Eternal Conscious Punishment, but the hope of the believer in terms of resurrection of the body and everlasting life in the new creation are to the fore. 

Letham writes with clarity, precision and occasionally, humour. His handling of biblical materials is insightful. He traces the historical development of key doctrines in such a way as to cast fresh light on the Word of God. While irenic in tone and catholic spirited, Letham does not shy away from controversy, engaging amongst others with Karl Barth, proponents of feminist thought, and New Covenant Theologians. 

The work is shot through with a spirit of devotion and doxology as the author directs the thoughts of his readers to our glorious triune God, his sovereign decrees and mighty acts. His Systematic Theology deserves to be the 'new Berkhof', but better. All we need now is a full work of contemporary systematic theology written from a Reformed Baptist standpoint. 'Who will go for us?' 

* Reviewed for the Banner of Truth Magazine. A shorter version of this review can be found in the November edition. 

The Westminster Assembly: Reading its theology in historical context, by Robert Letham

The Westminster Assembly: Reading its theology in historical context,

Robert Letham, P&R, 2009, 399pp

This book does exactly what it says on the cover, which is read the theology of the Westminster Assembly (1643-52) in its historical context. That is a necessary task as the Assembly was occasioned by certain historical circumstances and consideration of this fact is an indispensable aid to understanding its work. The writer draws upon Chad Van Dixhoorn's research into the minutes of Westminster debates to help piece together the historical background and get a handle on the nuances of theological discussion that took place in the Assembly sessions.

At the outset of the Civil War the Assembly was tasked by Parliament with vindicating and revising 39 Articles of the Church of England. This aspect of the Assembly's work has not always been given due recognition, but Letham demonstrates that the Westminster documents drew heavily on the 39 Articles. Other influential sources for Westminster Assembly's confessional theology include the Irish Articles, the writings of the continental Reformers and the historic creeds of the early church. The Westminster Confession and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms are a distillation of Reformed Catholic theology. Yes, the Assembly went out of its way to refute the errors of Roman Catholicism, but that does not mean that its outlook was sectarian, paying little regard to the theological heritage of the church. The Assembly's teaching on the Trinity is informed by the Council of Nicaea and its treatment of the Person of Christ bears the hallmarks of Chalcedonian orthodoxy. However, unlike 39 Articles, which in article 8 affirm the the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed, the Westminster Assembly fails to explicitly endorse the creedal tradition of the Church. Letham sees this as a weakness on the Assembly's part that was out of kilter with the general attitude of the continental Reformed Churches.

Some have been critical of the work of the Westminster Assembly, regarding its documents as a betrayal of the earlier theology of the Reformers. Amongst others, Karl Barth, the Torrance brothers and R.T. Kendall have charged the Assembly with scholastic regression, over and against the more purely biblical approach of Calvin. However, as Letham points out, this scenario has been comprehensively refuted by the work of Richard Muller, Paul Helm and others. Calvin was steeped in the medieval scholastic tradition and those who followed in his wake (including the Westminster divines) continued to utilise the resources of scholastic thought. But contrary to what some critics have claimed, the Assembly was not guilty of trying to draw up an elaborate system of doctrine based on logical deduction from basic theological axioms such as predestination or the covenant of grace. While the material in the Assembly's documents is presented in logical order, its main preoccupation was with biblical exegesis rather than abstract theological reasoning.

Letham is a sympathetic interpreter of the productions of the Westminster Assembly, and is careful to guard against an anachronistic understanding of its theology. Developments in later Reformed thought on matters such as covenant theology, the imputation of Adam's sin and the imputation of Christ's active righteousness in justification should not be read back into the Assembly's work. Several detailed excursus are devoted to tracing lines of doctrinal development in these areas. Interestingly, the issue of whether Christ's active obedience is imputed to the believer was a subject of some hot debate in the Assembly sessions.

In his exposition of the theology of the Assembly, Letham devotes attention not simply to the Westminster Confession, but also to the Larger and Shorter Catechisms. The Assembly's work needs to be seen as a whole, as one document may provide a corrective to the emphasis of another. Some have complained that the Confession does not give sufficient attention to the believer's union with Christ in its treatment of salvation, preferring to focus on the ordo salutis. But this lacunae is offset by the Larger Catechism, in which salvation is discussed very much in terms of union with Christ. While Letham is generally supportive of the theological stance of the Assembly, he is not afraid to be critical, singling out the failure of both Catechisms to mention the love of God. He also takes exception to Wesminster's treatment of assurance, which,  he believes, in making full assurance seem so difficult to attain, fails to reflect the confident note of the New Testament.

I'm a Reformed Baptist, rather than a Presbyterian. I believe that the Independents were right to revise the Assembly's doctrine of the Church in their Savoy Declaration (1658) and that Particular Baptists were correct in further amending Westminster's teaching on baptism in the Second London Baptist Confession (1689). Indeed, Letham's discussion of the convoluted debates over paedobaptism in the Assembly sessions only serve to confirm the difficulty of finding a biblical basis for the baptism of infants. Nevertheless, I am grateful for the work of the Westminster Assembly, which provided a  solid Reformed Catholic basis upon which Particular Baptists could build in drawing up their own confession of faith. Robert Letham has given us an excellent introduction to the Assembly, placing its work in the proper historical setting. His exposition of Westminster's theology from Holy Scripture to Death, Resurrection and Judgement is thoughtful and thorough, appreciative without being naively uncritical. No one will come away from his reading of the Assembly's literature without their understanding of its Confession and Catechisms being deepened and enriched. Highly recommended.

Bread and grape juice?

Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom." (Matthew 26:26-28).

In discussing the Westminster Confession's teaching on the Lord's Supper, Robert Letham adds this footnote, which calls into question the practice of many Evangelical churches,

we note that the elements appointed by the Lord Jesus are "bread and wine" and that the right to determine these rests with him alone, and not with the temperance movement  of the nineteenth century. While Jesus changed the water into wine, the temperance movement changed wine into grape juice concentrate [or Ribena]. No one has any right to change the elements of the Lord's Supper, any more than water may be replaced in baptism by orange juice. To do this is to usurp the authority of Christ. (The Westminster Assembly: Reading its theology in historical context, P&R, 2009, p. 351, n. 76).

Robert Letham on the 39 Articles, the Westminster Assembly and fish & chips

It is often assumed that the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England had little impact on the work of the Westminster Assembly. According to B. B. Warfield only "minute" traces of the Articles may be found in the Westminster Confession and its attendant catechetical literature. However, in his recent book, The Westminster Assembly: Reading its theology in historical context (P&R, 2009), Robert Letham challenges that view, detailing where the Westminster Confession was dependent upon material drawn from the Articles. His surprising conclusion is this,

The Thirty-Nine were a major source for the Assembly, if not the major source. The Assembly is solidly in line with the English Reformed tradition. If the Assembly documents are like a sumptuous cheesecake, the solid, crunchy crust is Cranmer. If we were to suppose them to be a succulent piece of deep-fried plaice, the chips, salt, and vinegar come from the earlier English Reformed tradition. (P. 81).

I think that is what is meant by 'food for thought'.

Through Western Eyes by Robert Letham

Through Western Eyes, Eastern Orthodoxy: A Reformed Perspective,
by Robert Letham, Mentor/Christian Focus, 2007, 320pp

Eastern Orthodoxy looks a somewhat strange version of the Christianity faith when viewed through the eyes of Reformed Evangelicals. I mean, all those hairy priests wafting plumes incense all over the place in buildings resplendent with dazzling icons. What's all that about? Robert Letham helps to shock us out of our prejudice by first of all narrating the rich history of Eastern Orthodoxy. Many of the great heroes of orthodox Trinitarian Christianity were from the East. Athanasius was a redoubtable defender of the deity of Christ in the face of the Arian heresy. He also emphasised that Christ became Man in order that human beings might participate in the divine nature, making deification a key aspect of Orthodox soteriology. The Cappadocians, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory Nazianzen helped to give welcome clarity to the church's doctrine of the Trinity. The teaching of the somewhat cantankerous Cyril of Alexandria on the relationship between the divine and human natures in the Person of Christ was highly influential at the Council of Chalcedon. Easter Orthodoxy is profoundly conscious of this valuable theological heritage. In so much as Orthodoxy has a doctrinal basis, it is the creedal statements produced by the seven ecumenical councils. The great Reformed confessions such as the Westminster Confession of faith (and its variants, the Savoy Declaration and the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession) draw on the language of the the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. In keeping with historic orthodoxy, the Reformed gladly confess that the Son is of the same nature (homoousion) with the Father and that the Trinity is a union of three persons (hypostasis) in the one being (ousia) of God. We have cause to be profoundly grateful to the Fathers of the Eastern Church.

It was news to me that Cyril Lucaris, who was to become Patriarch of Constantinople embraced Calvinism while serving in Poland during the Reformation. He published a Calvinistic confession of faith in 1629. Sadly, Lucaris was murdered by Turkish emissaries and his body dumped in the Bosporus. But as Letham points out, while there has never been a Calvinistic pope, Orthodoxy can boast at least one Reformed patriarch.

So much for the history. In the next part of the book, Letham turns his gaze upon Eastern theology. Immediately one is struck with the otherness of Orthodoxy as the writer introduces us to a typical Eastern church service replete with icons, arcane priestly ceremonies, and prayers to the dead. The use of icons in worship was once the cause of serious controversy in the Orthodox Church with the iconoclasts insisting that the use of images is idolatrous and contrary to the second commandment. The iconodules, led by John of Damascus responded that icons are not there to be worshipped. They simply act as a window into the unseen spiritual world and so are aids to salvation. Icons of Christ are permitted because in his humanity he is the image of the invisible God. The iconodules won the day and their position was ratified at Nicaea II, the only ecumenical council not usually accepted by Protestants. The argument that visible representations of Christ are permitted because he took a true human nature is suspect. We cannot divorce his humanity from the divine Person of the Son. That way lies Nestorianism. When it comes to prayers to the dead, Letham rightly says that there is nothing wrong in asking other believers to intercede with God on our behalf. The problem is asking dead Christians to do so. There is no biblical evidence that the dead in Christ are able to respond to our requests for prayer, so there is no point in trying to enlist their help.

For the Orthodox, Scripture is part of the living tradition of the Church along with the declarations of the ecumenical councils and later Church teachings. This robs Scripture of its critical authority over the traditions of the Church. Tradition is valuable, but even the most ancient traditions of the Church are subject to the scrutiny of the Bible. That said, Orthodoxy is right to stress that Scripture was given to the Church and that the Church and Scripture are mutually dependent. Orthodox worship is full of Bible readings, with huge chunks of Scripture being read to the congregation. This is a challenge to some of our Reformed churches, where the Minister will simply read the few verses that will form the basis for his sermon rather than whole chapters from the Word of God.

Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, Orthodoxy does not have a hierarchical structure of authority. It is a family of self-governing churches. The Eastern Church resists the claims to papal primacy (based supposedly on Matthew 16:18), holding that the church is led collectively by the bishops. Like Rome, the Orthodox teach that there are seven sacraments rather than simply baptism and the Lord's Supper as found in Scripture. But the Eastern Church is is not as dogmatic as Rome about the number seven. Baptism and the Lord's Supper are esteemed as pre-eminent among the mysteries. Baptism brings the candidate into union with Christ and actually confers forgiveness of sin. At the Lord's Supper, the consecrated bead and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ, but Orthodoxy makes no attempt to explain the mystery, unlike the Roman dogma of transubstantiation. In the East, the Eucharist is seen as a propitiatory sacrifice on behalf of the living and the dead. The Reformed (at least Reformed Baptists!) teach that baptism is a symbol of grace already received by faith. The Lord's Supper is no trip down memory lane, it is an act of communion with the risen Christ who is present at the Table by the Spirit as the faithful eat bread and drink wine together. But there is no change in the substance of the elements and the Lord's Supper is not to be understood in sacrificial terms. There is little room for preaching in Orthodox services, with greatest attention being given to highly visible icons and ceremonies. The Reformers recovered the New Testament's emphasis on the preaching and hearing of the Word of God. We encounter the living God as he addresses us through the Christ-centred Word, preached in the power of the Spirit. We cannot see God, but we can hear him.

Letham devotes a chapter to the divergent understandings of the Trinity in the Western and Eastern traditions of the Church. The West, following Augustine has tended to approach the Trinity starting with the one divine essence. This can lead to difficulties in appreciating how the three relate to the one. Augustine famously spoke of the Trinity in terms of the Father as lover, the Son as loved and the Holy Spirit as the union of love between the Father and Son. Needless to say this perspective leaves in doubt the full deity and personality of the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the Trinity has often been neglected in Western theology, piety and worship. In the East however, the Trinity is central to the Church's theology, worship and life, with due emphasis being given to the three Persons. But the Eastern doctrine of God is complicated by a distinction between the divine essence, which is unknowable, and the divine energies through which he reveals himself to us. This view, first formulated by Gregory Palamas, leaves us in doubt as to what God is really like. A basic principle of Christian theology is that God's self-revelation is a true depiction of his inner life. The imminent Trinity is revealed in the acts of the economic Trinity. The differences between Eastern and Western Trinitarian theology come to the fore in the filioque controversy. The West added to the Niceno-Contantinopolitan creed the phrase, the Holy Spirit 'proceeds from the Father and the Son'. Letham discusses at length the arguments for and against filioque. He attempts to resolve the age-old differences over the doctrine of the Trinity in East and West by asserting with Gregory of Nazianzen that the one and the three are equally ultimate in God.

But what of the Eastern view of salvation? The East tends not to take the plight of man in sin quite so seriously as the Western Augustinian tradition. The Reformed argue biblically (Ephesians 2:1-4) that since the fall, man is dead in trespasses and sin and therefore is unable to move towards God. In the East it is held that man is able to respond to God's offer of grace. Salvation is viewed synergistically rather than monergistically. However, many Eastern Orthodox theologians have taught a doctrine of justification by faith alone that is comparable to the classic Reformed position. But where the West tends to view salvation forensically, the East focuses on deification, that the Son of God became man to enable us to partake in the divine nature. As Letham points out, the forensic and participative aspects of salvation are both rooted in the believer's union with Christ. Orthodoxy dislikes the Reformed doctrine of predestination, which it confuses with arbitrary fatalism. Protestant converts to Eastern Orthodoxy are required to renounce a version of predestination that bears no resemblance to the historic Calvinistic teaching. The Reformed doctrine of predestination asserts both the absolute sovereignty of God and the responsibility of human beings.

In a helpful chapter, Areas of Agreement, Misunderstanding and Disagreement, Letham pulls the threads of this study together. He welcomes positive aspects of Eastern theology such as the centrality of the doctrine of the Trinity, strong emphasis on union with Christ, and the unity of theology and piety. But he does not ignore areas of substantive disagreement like the tendency in the East to downplay the preaching of the Word of God, the veneration of Mary and the saints, and a synergistic understanding of salvation. If dialogue between the East and Reformed Christians is to make progress, we need to remove misunderstandings and yet be clear where real differences remain. At the very least Letham has enabled Reformed believers to have a more unblinkered and sympathetic understanding of Eastern Orthodoxy. The theologian has no time for the kind of ecumenism that simply papers over the cracks, yet he longs for the visible unity of the church of in answer to Jesus' prayer in John 17.

One big issue that Letham avoids facing is that Orthodoxy, which heroically resisted atheistic Communism in the 20th century, is often intolerant of other manifestations of the Christian faith, especially Evangelicalism. Evangelicals in Russia and some former Soviet countries are feeling the pinch at the moment. It is another sad case in church history of the persecuted turning persecutor once the pressure is off (witness also the Puritans, who fled from persecution in England only to persecute Quakers in the New World). Eastern Orthodoxy needs to address this matter urgently.

Through Western Eyes can be viewed as a companion piece to Letham's The Holy Trinity In Scripture, History, Theology and Worship, P&R, 2004. Those who are tantalised by his proposal on resolving the filioque controversy are referred to this volume (which you can see reviewed here). But this is a work of ecumenical theology in its own right that helps us look at Eastern Orthodoxy from a Reformed Perspective with appreciation, integrity and honesty.

Creation the Bible and Science Conference: Day One

Interpreting Genesis 1 & 2
Dr. John Currid

The conference kicked off appropriately enough with a consideration of Genesis 1 & 2. In his opening remarks, John Currid, Professor of Old Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary, Virginia made mention of alarm in the UK media concerning "noisy American creationists". Currid is certainly a creationist, but is not of the strident, shouty variety that seem to do so much damage to the cause. Currid pointed out that the Reformers rejected the allegorising tendencies of the medieval church in favour of sober biblical interpretation. The main point of Reformed interpretation of Scripture is to discover the authorial meaning of the text rather than read hidden meanings into Scripture. Essential to responsible exegesis is the identification of the literary genre of a particular biblical text. This is especially important when approaching Genesis 1 & 2. It is often said that the opening chapters of Genesis are "poetry". But Currid sees no evidence of this in the text. The two key features of Hebrew poetry are absent namely: Line parallelisms e.g. Psalm 19:1 and figures of speech e.g. Psalm 42:1. Moreover a device invariably present in Hebrew narrative prose writing - "vav consecutive plus imperfect" is used again and again in Genesis 1 & 2. Passages of the Old Testament that make reference to these chapters seem to accept them as historical narrative rather than poetry, e.g. Exodus 20:8-11 and Psalm 104. Currid rejected the "framework hypothesis", which tries to accommodate Genesis 1 & 2 with theistic accounts of evolution. This view, associated with Meredith Kline amongst others tries to read our chapters as poetry. But what we have in fact is a highly structured, exalted prose narrative that is suited to the unique event of God's original creation.

In expounding the text itself, Currid drew attention to God's activity in the six creation days. The earth was originally "without form and empty" (Genesis 1:2). In days 1-3, God ordered the earth by three acts of division. In days 4-6, he filled the creation with stars, marine creatures, birds and animal life. Then, after the creation of man, God rested from his creative activity (Genesis 2:1-3). This pattern of ordering and filling followed by rest is replicated by human beings as God's unique image bearers, Genesis 1:26-28. Man orders creation by subduing the earth (Genesis 1:28) and naming the animals (Genesis 2:19-20). He is called to fill the earth (Genesis 1:28 again). God's rest is the pattern from human rest, (Exodus 20:8-11). This rest day on the completion of creation anticipates the eschatological rest that the creation will receive in Christ.

This well-argued and cogent exegetical paper laid the ground for what was to come in the conference. In the discussion that followed, questions of genre, historicity and the length of the creation days amongst other issues were aired.

Genesis 1 & 2 - History of Interpretation
Dr. Robert Letham

It fell to Bob Letham of WEST to summarise the church's pre-Copernican understanding of Genesis 1 & 2. The church rejected Maronite and Gnostic accounts of creation, which tended to view matter as evil. Early theologians rightly insisted that God created the world ex nihilo. Irenaeus suggested that God used his two "hands", the Son and the Spirit when he created all things. This did not imply subordination of the Son and Spirit to the Father as both were regarded as one with God in the work of creation. Irenaeus understood creation Christologically. Christ is the image of God in whose image we are made. Redemption is an act of recapitulation with the second Adam undoing the work of the fist Adam. Origen could make little sense of Genesis 1 & 2 when understood literally. He was opposed to the idea of six 24 hour creation days. His platonic leanings and allegorical bent drove him to try and find secret meanings behind the "flesh" of the biblical text. Basil the Great understood the creation account more literally. He saw God acting purposefully in creating the world from nothing, which he then ordered in the creation days. Augustine taught instantaneous creation. God made the world and time. He taught that the creation days were stages in our knowledge of creation. The One Day was replicated in the other days, with number six representing perfection. Augustine's view seemed to hold sway from his own day right up to the Reformation. Robert Gristeste [not sure of spelling!] taught that the firmament of Genesis 1:7 was some kind of crystallised water, in accordance with the best science of his day. (A warning for us not to follow current scientific trends too slavishly). Aquinas saw a three-fold division of God's creative work in Genesis 1 & 2, creation and division on Days 1-3 and adornment in Days 4-6. With the Reformation, we see a greater concentration on the actual text of Scripture, with a more literal reading of the creation account. Luther held that the world was 6,000 years old. He rejected allegorical interpretations. While Calvin noted that divine revelation is accommodated to our capacity, he taught that God created the world in six 24 hour days, rejecting the view of Augustine. Letham insisted our understanding of the creation days should not be given confessional status. The Westminster Standards take little interest in the matter. The plethora of views on Genesis 1 & 2 should make us cautious in our pronouncements. Copernican science forced Bible scholars to read Scripture differently. We should be open to similar correction. The question of Job 38, "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?", should give us pause for thought.

In the discussion afterwards the matter of doctrinal progress was raised. That was a good point. Letham should have given more emphasis to the positive gains made by the Reformers and the fact that the Reformation gave rise to modern science. We should recognise that the Reformers had a better and more accurate understanding of Genesis (see Currid's paper) than Augustine and the medievals. We must be open to revising our understanding of Scripture as we understand the world better. But the theory of evolution plays havoc with the Bible's basic plot line. Doctrines are often clarified in response to heresy and error. Witness the clarification of Christology at Chalcedon. Perhaps the modern creation/evolution debates will have the same effect upon the doctrine of creation? The fact of interpretive diversity in church history does not mean that it is impossible for us to come to a more accurate understanding of Genesis 1 & 2. To suggest that it is is a councel of despair. It seems to me that the best reading of the opening chapters in the Bible is that of the Reformers, which sees God literally creating, forming and filling the world in six days.

Genesis 1 & 2 - A Scientist's Perspective
Prof. Stuart Burgess

The first too papers had been a little demanding, what with all that exegesis and historical theology. It was perhaps a bit ironic that the most accessible and engaging paper of the day was given by a scientist. Burgess, Professor of Design and Nature in Bristol University argued from Romans 1:20 that God reveals his attributes in the creation of time, space and matter. We can see his power in creating and forming the world by divine fiat. He made the stars with his fingers. God's wisdom is revealed in the skilful work of creation. In Proverbs 8, wisdom, is like a master craftsman working at God's side as he made the world. God's goodness is shown in giving us a day of rest, in creating a world full of beauty, with food that is good to the taste. Psalm 104 celebrates the abundant goodness of God in creation. Burgess appealed to evidence of design in nature, referring to the clockwork motion of the stars and the way that fruit provides us with perfectly packaged fast food. The first law of thermodynamics tells us that nothing can come of nothing, which raises the question of a supernatural creator.

In addressing the age of the Adam, Stuart appealed to the the biblical genealogies and historical evidence to suggest that man has only been around for 6,000 years or so. It is a remarkable fact that as far as we can tell, human technology and culture only began to develop 6,000 years ago. If evolutionary time scales are accepted, it is unbelievable that human life should have existed for so long before the wheel was invented or agriculture developed. On the age of the earth itself, he argued for six 24 hour creation days, suggesting that starlight was supernaturally sped up on day 4, thus enabling light from far distant stars to reach our planet. With his background in engineering, Stuart could understand why God did not create the sun and moon to throw light upon the earth until day 4. An architect would build a stately home and only then design and install lights to illuminate the building. Interestingly Hebrews 3:4 compares God to a builder.

The "young earth" position requires that by day 6, the earth looked artificially mature, with fully grown trees and an adult Adam. But there is no deception here. It was God's purpose to create a planet capable of sustaining and enhancing human life and that is what we have. Engineers have found a way of artificially ageing car engines so they no longer have to be "run in". There is no element of deception in placing a mature looking engine in a brand new car. Stuart closed his paper with some thoughts on extraterrestial life, the existence of which (apart from angels!), he holds to be incompatible with Scripture. A lively discussion followed this presentation. It became clear that professional scientists are under considerable pressure not to question the hegemony of Darwinian evolution. This was confirmed on Tuesday with the announcement that Michael Reiss was forced to resign from his role in the Royal Society after calling for creationism to be taught in science lessons (see story in The Times).

So ends my report of the three main addresses from day one. Reports to follow on Monday evening's Lloyd-Jones Memorial Lecture by Philip Eveson and the three papers delivered on day two. The conference was held under the auspices of the John Owen Centre. CD's of each address and a nifty MP3 CD containing all the addresses can be ordered here.

The incarnate Christ and the identity of God

When God became man in Jesus Christ, he did not become other than himself. The incarnation was an act of self-expression not self-abnegation. The humiliation of the Son was not an artifice for the sake of the economy of redemption. The Son as man discloses the God, who by his very nature stoops to bear the sins of his enemies. We worship no other God than the Father whose Son was born of woman by the Holy Spirit.

"The point is that when we have to do with Jesus Christ we have to do with God. His presence in the world is identical with the existence of the humiliated, obedient, and lowly man, Jesus of Nazareth. Thus, the humiliation, lowliness, and obedience of Christ are essential in our conception of God." (Robert Letham, The Holy Trinity, In Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship, P&R, 2004, p. 397).

Bob Letham on The Trinity & Ministry

Yesterday we had Bob Letham address our Minister's Fraternal on The Trinity and the Work of the Ministry. Bob now teaches systematic theology at WEST. He has many years of experience in the Ministry and has written an excellent book on the Trinity (see my review here). He was able to bring a healthy combination of theological acumen and practical insight to his subject. Here's an outline of what he had to say:

1. What is the doctrine of the Trinity?

The doctrine of the Trinity is latent in the Old Testament, implicit in the New Testament (attention was drawn to triadic patterns in Romans 8 and Ephesians) and was formulated by the early church. In response to questions raised by Arius, the early church set forth its understanding of the Trinity and Nicaea (325 AD) and Constantinople (381 AD).

God is one indivisible being with three eternal, distinct persons. Both the one and the three are equally ultimate. Each person occupies the same infinite divine space. The Son is begotten of the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. The external acts of the Trinity are undivided, but in any divine act one person may be the primary actor. For example the Father sent the Son into the world, who became incarnate by the Holy Spirit. Only the Son is incarnate, but the Father and Spirit were active in his enfleshment. In the Son, God now has a body. The Son's humanity is forever united to his divine person.

2. How significant is the doctrine of the Trinity?

The doctrine Trinity is essential to the identity of the Christian God. Our God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Trinity therefore is a central doctrine, although its importance has not always been recognised in Western Christianity.

We considered the impact of Trinity upon three crucial areas of the church's life and mission:

1) Evangelism

The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. We are brought into saving union with Christ by the Spirit.

2) Initiation

We join the church on being baptised into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19).

3) The Christian life

The Trinity is the circumambient atmosphere of the Christian life. We have access to the Father by the Son through the Spirit, (Eph 2:18). We are called to worship God in Spirit and in Truth (John 4:24). The church worships the trinitarian God and no other. God's new covenant name is Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19)

3. How can we make the Trinity a meaningful reality in our congregations?

Gregory of Nazianzen spoke of "my Trinity", the Trinity was an experiential reality to him. Is this the case in most evangelical churches?

We can help promote trinitarian awareness among our people in several ways:

1) The Ministry of the Word

We must teach the Trinity by calling attention to the doctrine as it arises in biblical texts like Rom 8:10 & 11 and Eph 2:18-22. We do not need to mention the word "Trinity" in every sermon. But the doctrine should inform and enrich our preaching.

2) Sacraments

a. Baptism

We baptise into the triune name. In baptismal services, we can explain what this means.

b. The Lord's Supper

This is not a "trip down memory lane". As we eat the bread and drink the wine, we "spiritually" feed upon Christ. By "spiritually" we mean that we feed on Christ by the Holy Spirit. The Lord's Supper is an enactment of our union with Christ. United to him we are brought into communion with the Father.

3) Prayer

Special attention was drawn to the Minister leading in public prayer. By our prayers in worship services, we can give our people an example of trinitarian praying. Letham suggested using some written prayers alongside extemporary praying and argued that we should think about and plan our expemporary public prayers.

4) Hymnody

We should choose at least some hymns that are explicitly trinitarian. We must be careful to ensure that hymns express the doctrine accurately.

5) The Structure of Worship

Reformed worship is dialogical or conversational - a living interaction between God and his people. The God who is already present in the congregation calls us to worship him. He speaks to us by the reading and preaching of the Word. We respond with prayer, praise and the singing of hymns. The benediction at the conclusion of the service is not a "pious wish", but an announcement that "the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the communion of the Holy Spirit" will be with the people of God as they depart.

Letham suggested that much of our worship is "Pelagian" - too focused upon the human side of worship. He expressed reservations about praying for God to be present in a meeting. God is always present with his people.

The address was followed by times of discussion before, during and after lunch. We pressed Letham on praying for a felt sense of the presence of God. While he is always present in the congregation, he communicates himself to us more fully at some times than at others. We agreed that we should not let our feelings alone be the guide on this matter. Sometimes we may feel that we have preached poorly with little of God's "felt" presence on our ministries. But the people of God are helped. We discussed the eternal generation of the Son. Letham defended the translation "only begotten" over "one and only". Calvin's teaching in the autotheos of the Son was considered. He distanced himself from a speculative, scholastic account of the Son's eternal generation. We cannot fully understand what the Son's begotenness means, apart from the fact that concerning his person he is of the Father and is to be distinguished from the Spirit who proceeds from the Father through the Son. Letham commented on Robert Reymond's construal of Calvin's teaching in the first edition of his New Systematic Theology. In Letham's view, Reymond overemphasised the extent to which Calvin's revised the Nicene formula.

In all this was a very helpful Fraternal meeting. At their best, Fraternals stimulate theological reflection in relation to the work of the Ministry. They should include times of discussion and give an opportunity for pastors to meet, eat and chat in a friendly context. A Fraternal should be just that, a band of brothers, a gathering of men who are passionate about the triune God of the Gospel and who want to serve him yet more faithfully and effectively. Yeterday's meeting amply fulfilled those criteria.

The Holy Trinity by Robert Letham

The Holy Trinity In Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship

by Robert Letham, P&R, 2004, 551pp.

The doctrine of the Trinity is one of the high mysteries of the Christian faith. The Christian God is love because he is one God in three Persons. Nothing could be more important than that we have a clear understanding of the Trinity. If we are in error on this point, we do not know God as he really is. The first centuries of Church history are testimony to the fact that this subject is beset with dangers and pitfalls. The Church struggled to find the right language to express the Biblical revelation of the oneness and threeness of God. The result of the struggle is the creedal legacy of the Church. The relationship between the One and the Three in God was clearly defined to enable the faithful to think clearly about, worship and serve their triune Lord. Dangerous and erroneous speculations such as Arianism and Sabellianism were excluded as sub-Christian.

Letham admits that “When it comes to the doctrine of the Trinity, evangelicals have underachieved.” The doctrine of the Trinity is often neglected in evangelical church life. The writer sets out to redress this lacuna. First he examines the Biblical foundations of the Trinity. He gives a helpful and thorough exposition of the Old Testament background to the doctrine. Then he focuses on the New Testament’s portrayal of the relationship between Jesus and the Father. Having established that the New Testament teaches that Jesus is to be worshipped as God alongside the Father, Letham gives attention to the Holy Spirit and triadic patterns. The Spirit is often placed besides the Father and the Son in New Testament formulae, indicating that he is included in the unity in diversity of the Godhead. He concludes,

“The problem of the trinity was being raised and answered in the New Testament. It arose because of Christian experience, worship and thought. It was based upon the life and ministry of Jesus, and his reception of the Holy Spirit, and then upon his resurrection and subsequent impartation of the Spirit to his church.” (p. 71).

Next, Letham traces the historical development of the doctrine of the Trinity. He begins with Irenaeus and Tertullian and then discusses the Arian controversy. The result of that controversy was the Nicaean Creed, which, using the language of Athanasius confessed that God is one being (ousia) and three persons (hypostasis). Athanasius had found language to express accurately the oneness and threeness of God. Christ was confessed as homoousios - of the same essence as the Father

With great historical and theological acumen, Letham discusses the contribution of the Cappadocians, Augustine and John Calvin to the doctrine of the Trinity. One of his favourite theologians is Gregory of Nazianzen, one of whose orations on the Trinity is quoted or alluded to several times in the book. The writer is critical of Western triniratianism from Augustine onwards for so emphasising the oneness of God that the three Persons become problematic. He appreciates the Eastern focus on the three Persons dwelling perichoretically in the one God. But he suggests that the Eastern attempt to distinguish between the energies and essence of God undermines the reliability of divine self-revelation. Letham attempts to mediate in the dispute between East and West over the filioque controversy. His proposal is that the Spirit proceeds from the Father in the Son. Whether this formula will settle nearly a thousand years of theological argument only time will tell.

Calvin’s doctrine of the Trinity has been the subject of renewed attention in recent years. Writers such as Robert Reymond in his New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith have claimed that the Reformer seriously modified the Nicaean Christology. Letham disputes such claims, arguing that Calvin's differences were not with the fathers, but with speculative Scholastic formulations of the Trinity. Calvin insisted that the Son is autotheos – God in himself, and denounced the idea of the eternal generation of the Son as “an absurd fiction” (Institutes I:XIII:29). This is an advance on some Trinitarian formulations that describe the Father communicating the divine essence to the Son. But, Letham argues, rather than being the revolutionary that some say he was, Calvin simply preserved and developed traditional teaching on the Trinity. The Reformer certainly corrected the subordinationism that has characterised some Western thinking. He also re-emphasised the central importance of the Trinity. Calvin did not approach the doctrine indirectly after having discussed the being and attributes of the one God. For him, the doctrine of the Trinity is the doctrine of God.

Letham devotes several fascinating chapters to charting the course of modern discussion of the Trinity. He gives attention to the contributions of Barth, Rahner, Moltman, Pannernberg in the West and Bulgakov, Losky and Staniloae in the East. Letham deals with each writer’s views fairly, analysing the strengths and weaknesses of their approach. An appreciative, but not uncritical chapter is also devoted to T. F. Torrance’s trinitarianism.

The final part of the book concerns critical issues such as the Trinity and the Incarnation, Worship and Prayer, Creation and Mission and the Trinity and Persons. Letham avoids modalism by arguing that only the Son could have become Man. He movingly reminds us that the heart of God is truly revealed in the humiliation and exaltation of the incarnate Son. Our God is one who stoops to serve and die. When thinking of the Trinity, we should not focus on the oneness of God at the expense of the Persons - modalism, or the Persons at the expense of the oneness – tritheism. Both the one divine essence and the three Persons are equally ultimate.

"No sooner do I conceive of the One than I am illumined by the Splendour of the Three; no sooner do I distinguish Them than I am carried back to the One." (Gregory of Nazianzus, here)

Under the heading of mission, Letham discusses the two great challenges to Christianity in the West: Postmodernism with its fragmentary emphasis on diversity without unity and Islam, exemplifying unity without diversity. Only a robustly Trinitarian faith is able to face these challenges to the gospel.

The whole book is shot through with worship, devotion and practical application. Letham has certainly not underachieved. He has helped to think clearly about our Triune God. He calls us to make the Trinity central to mission, worship and prayer. This book is an important contribition to trinitarian theology from an Evangelical and Reformed perspective.

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,

now and ever, unto the ages of ages, Amen.