What do you think?
Rate this book
Reformed Dogmatics #3
Reformed Dogmatics Volume 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ
In partnership with the Dutch Reformed Translation Society, Baker Academic is proud to offer in English for the very first time the third volume of Herman Bavinck's complete Reformed Dogmatics. This masterwork will appeal not only to scholars, students, pastors, and laity interested in Reformed theology but also to research and theological libraries.
"Bavinck was a man of giant mind, vast learning, ageless wisdom, and great expository skill. Solid but lucid, demanding but satisfying, broad and deep and sharp and stabilizing, Bavinck's magisterial Reformed Dogmatics remains after a century the supreme achievement of its kind."--J. I. Packer, Regent College
"This magisterial work exhibits Bavinck's vast knowledge and appreciation of the Christian tradition. Written from a Reformed perspective, it offers a perceptive critique of modern theology. . . . Recommended."--Library Journal
"Bavinck was a man of giant mind, vast learning, ageless wisdom, and great expository skill. Solid but lucid, demanding but satisfying, broad and deep and sharp and stabilizing, Bavinck's magisterial Reformed Dogmatics remains after a century the supreme achievement of its kind."--J. I. Packer, Regent College
"This magisterial work exhibits Bavinck's vast knowledge and appreciation of the Christian tradition. Written from a Reformed perspective, it offers a perceptive critique of modern theology. . . . Recommended."--Library Journal
688 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 2006
63 people are currently reading
651 people want to read
About the author
Herman Bavinck
112 books194 followersHerman Bavinck (1854-1921) succeeded Abraham Kuyper as professor of systematic theology at the Free University of Amsterdam in 1902.
His nephew was Johan Herman Bavinck.
His nephew was Johan Herman Bavinck.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
December 15, 2015
Fantastic. Excited to dip into Volume 4!
December 27, 2022
A joyful task to read through this with a bunch of other guys!
April 5, 2021
Bavinck, Herman, John Bolt, and John Vriend. Reformed Dogmatics: sin and salvation in Christ. Vol. 3. Baker Academic, 2003.
Bavinck continues his theme that “grace restores nature.” He addresses all of the loci of theology following anthropology, which he dealt with in his previous volume. This volume is not as philosophically heavy as the first two, so it might be easier to read for some.
Origin of Sin
As is the case with most 20th century Dutch writers, Bavinck was quite attuned to the reality of spiritual warfare. “Then we learn that involved in the struggle of evil on earth there is also a contest of spirits and that humanity and the world are the spoils for which the war between God and Satan, between heaven and hell, is waged (Bavinck 35).
Sinful Flesh
He gives a careful discussion on the contrast between “spirit” and flesh.” For Rome Adam’s transgression resulted in the loss of the superadded gift (43). In this case fallen nature is identical with uncorrupted nature. This is one of the reasons that Thomas Aquinas, while perhaps knowing better, gave the appearance of reducing flesh to the physical. Bavinck writes, “In this sense flesh is contrasted with spirit, though not with the human pneuma, which, after all, is also sinful and needs sanctification….but with the Holy Spirit, which renews the human spirit….and also consecrates the body and puts it at the disposal of righteousness” (54).
The Spread of Sin
The Reformation stressed that original sin is not just the loss of something but simultaneously a total corruption of human nature (98).
Good take on free will: Humans have lost “the free inclination of the will towards good” (121).
The Nature of Sin
Sin is not a “substance” or a thing, but an “energeia” (137).
Bavinck has a good section on “The Kingdom of Evil” (146ff). He notes the numerous subordinate spirits, which have their own subdivisions. He explores the connection between “devils” (a most inaccurate word) and the spirits of dead persons (he rejects this identity; it’s just interesting that he explored it).
The Covenant of Grace
Bavinck’s discussion of the pactum salutis is fairly standard, but in it he makes some comments which appear to give the Son an eternally subordinate role.
This doctrine of the pact of salvation… is rooted in a scriptural idea. For as Mediator, the Son is subordinate to the Father, calls him God…, is his servant… who has been assigned a task… and who receives a reward… for the obedience accomplished… Still, this relation between Father and Son, though most clearly manifest during Christ’s sojourn on earth, was not first initiated at the time of the incarnation, for the incarnation itself is already included in the execution of the work assigned to this the Son, but occurs in eternity and therefore also existed already during the time of the Old Testament… Scripture also clearly… sees Christ functioning officially already in the days of the Old Testament (214)
The language of subordination is clearly there. There is no denying it. Several other things are going on, though. Bavinck says the Son is subordinate as a mediator, and this mediation preceded time (in one sense). That’s all Bavinck is saying. He isn’t trying to drive an ideology with it. Moreover, in one sense Christ gives up his kingdom to the Father at the end, which would seem that his subordination is tied to that giving up the kingdom. Finally, in the previous volume Bavinck affirms the single divine will and the inseparability of operations, something no advocate of ESS can accept.
Later, Bavinck says that Christ’s mediatorial work is finished when he delivers the kingdom to His Father (481).
Covenant of grace: “The essential character of the covenant of grace, accordingly, consists in the fact that it proceeds from God’s special grace and has for its content nothing other than grace” (225).
Covenant and Election
“The covenant of grace is the channel by which the stream of election flows towards eternity” (229). Bavinck doesn’t make a strict identity between election and the covenant of grace, but for all practical purposes he does identify them.
The Person of Christ
Bavinck sees the Christological history as “East — unity of person,” West — distinction between natures” (255).
Rome and the East see a communication of divine gifts, but not attributes to the hypostasis. Lutherans see it to the attributes.
The Reformed say the person of the Son was immediately united with the human nature, and the divine nature was mediately united with it (276, citing Zanchi).
Nature and Person
Hegel said nature and person are related as essence and appearance (306). This, obviously, will not do. Rather, nature is the substratum, the “principle by which” a thing is. “Person” is the owner of the nature. He acts through the nature.
We Reformed say that Christ had an infused knowledge, but that knowledge was only gradually completed. “He did not yet share in the beatific knowledge here on earth” (312).
The Work of Christ
Christ’s Humiliation
Survey of relevant passages dealing with redemption, sacrifice, etc.
“Christ is the mediator of both creation and re-creation” (363). Christ is a mediator in both natures.
Christ’s Exaltation
Regarding the atonement, Bavinck points out that intercession and sacrifice have the same range. If the former is particular, so is the latter (466).
Salvation in Christ
Old Testament righteousness: it was not a personal quality of theirs but the case they represented (494).
Rome: Baptized children receive justification/infused grace. They receive “sufficient grace” later on (515). This illumines the intellect.
Reformed: regeneration, faith, and conversion are not preparations that a person has to meet, but they are fruits which flow from “the covenant of grace, the mystical union, the granting of Christ’s person” (525).
The Reformation captured the idea of grace much better. There was no opposition between natural and supernatural, but of sin and grace. “The Reformation rejected this Neoplatonic mysticism” (577).
It is not a substance, but “a restoration of the form of the creation originally imprinted on humans and creature in general” (578).
This is required reading for all interested in the history of dogmatics.
Bavinck continues his theme that “grace restores nature.” He addresses all of the loci of theology following anthropology, which he dealt with in his previous volume. This volume is not as philosophically heavy as the first two, so it might be easier to read for some.
Origin of Sin
As is the case with most 20th century Dutch writers, Bavinck was quite attuned to the reality of spiritual warfare. “Then we learn that involved in the struggle of evil on earth there is also a contest of spirits and that humanity and the world are the spoils for which the war between God and Satan, between heaven and hell, is waged (Bavinck 35).
Sinful Flesh
He gives a careful discussion on the contrast between “spirit” and flesh.” For Rome Adam’s transgression resulted in the loss of the superadded gift (43). In this case fallen nature is identical with uncorrupted nature. This is one of the reasons that Thomas Aquinas, while perhaps knowing better, gave the appearance of reducing flesh to the physical. Bavinck writes, “In this sense flesh is contrasted with spirit, though not with the human pneuma, which, after all, is also sinful and needs sanctification….but with the Holy Spirit, which renews the human spirit….and also consecrates the body and puts it at the disposal of righteousness” (54).
The Spread of Sin
The Reformation stressed that original sin is not just the loss of something but simultaneously a total corruption of human nature (98).
Good take on free will: Humans have lost “the free inclination of the will towards good” (121).
The Nature of Sin
Sin is not a “substance” or a thing, but an “energeia” (137).
Bavinck has a good section on “The Kingdom of Evil” (146ff). He notes the numerous subordinate spirits, which have their own subdivisions. He explores the connection between “devils” (a most inaccurate word) and the spirits of dead persons (he rejects this identity; it’s just interesting that he explored it).
The Covenant of Grace
Bavinck’s discussion of the pactum salutis is fairly standard, but in it he makes some comments which appear to give the Son an eternally subordinate role.
This doctrine of the pact of salvation… is rooted in a scriptural idea. For as Mediator, the Son is subordinate to the Father, calls him God…, is his servant… who has been assigned a task… and who receives a reward… for the obedience accomplished… Still, this relation between Father and Son, though most clearly manifest during Christ’s sojourn on earth, was not first initiated at the time of the incarnation, for the incarnation itself is already included in the execution of the work assigned to this the Son, but occurs in eternity and therefore also existed already during the time of the Old Testament… Scripture also clearly… sees Christ functioning officially already in the days of the Old Testament (214)
The language of subordination is clearly there. There is no denying it. Several other things are going on, though. Bavinck says the Son is subordinate as a mediator, and this mediation preceded time (in one sense). That’s all Bavinck is saying. He isn’t trying to drive an ideology with it. Moreover, in one sense Christ gives up his kingdom to the Father at the end, which would seem that his subordination is tied to that giving up the kingdom. Finally, in the previous volume Bavinck affirms the single divine will and the inseparability of operations, something no advocate of ESS can accept.
Later, Bavinck says that Christ’s mediatorial work is finished when he delivers the kingdom to His Father (481).
Covenant of grace: “The essential character of the covenant of grace, accordingly, consists in the fact that it proceeds from God’s special grace and has for its content nothing other than grace” (225).
Covenant and Election
“The covenant of grace is the channel by which the stream of election flows towards eternity” (229). Bavinck doesn’t make a strict identity between election and the covenant of grace, but for all practical purposes he does identify them.
The Person of Christ
Bavinck sees the Christological history as “East — unity of person,” West — distinction between natures” (255).
Rome and the East see a communication of divine gifts, but not attributes to the hypostasis. Lutherans see it to the attributes.
The Reformed say the person of the Son was immediately united with the human nature, and the divine nature was mediately united with it (276, citing Zanchi).
Nature and Person
Hegel said nature and person are related as essence and appearance (306). This, obviously, will not do. Rather, nature is the substratum, the “principle by which” a thing is. “Person” is the owner of the nature. He acts through the nature.
We Reformed say that Christ had an infused knowledge, but that knowledge was only gradually completed. “He did not yet share in the beatific knowledge here on earth” (312).
The Work of Christ
Christ’s Humiliation
Survey of relevant passages dealing with redemption, sacrifice, etc.
“Christ is the mediator of both creation and re-creation” (363). Christ is a mediator in both natures.
Christ’s Exaltation
Regarding the atonement, Bavinck points out that intercession and sacrifice have the same range. If the former is particular, so is the latter (466).
Salvation in Christ
Old Testament righteousness: it was not a personal quality of theirs but the case they represented (494).
Rome: Baptized children receive justification/infused grace. They receive “sufficient grace” later on (515). This illumines the intellect.
Reformed: regeneration, faith, and conversion are not preparations that a person has to meet, but they are fruits which flow from “the covenant of grace, the mystical union, the granting of Christ’s person” (525).
The Reformation captured the idea of grace much better. There was no opposition between natural and supernatural, but of sin and grace. “The Reformation rejected this Neoplatonic mysticism” (577).
It is not a substance, but “a restoration of the form of the creation originally imprinted on humans and creature in general” (578).
This is required reading for all interested in the history of dogmatics.
December 22, 2022
An excellent treatment of the loci of sin and salvation and their relation to union with Christ.
This is a highly technical work, so if you are looking for a rich perspective on hamartiology and soteriology from a magisterial Reformed perspective, I recommend this volume.
This is a highly technical work, so if you are looking for a rich perspective on hamartiology and soteriology from a magisterial Reformed perspective, I recommend this volume.
July 4, 2023
Insightful as always. This volume wasn't, in my view, as well organized as the preceding one. And, especially in the beginning, it was a bit redundant at times. But these are minor complaints in view of all that can be positively said.
Second read-through: I don't understand what problem I had with the organization before.
Second read-through: I don't understand what problem I had with the organization before.
September 21, 2024
Excellent.
December 22, 2022
Three volumes down, one more to go! As always, Bavinck shares his expansive knowledge while being neither stodgy nor hoity-toity. After reading three volumes I really feel like I know the guy.
January 21, 2023
Clearly translated and edifying! I loved thinking more deeply about the humiliation of Christ, in particular, and how that enriches my understanding of my sin and the cost of its forgiveness
November 8, 2021
What a book. Biblical, Worshipful and so so practical.
The chapters on the Covenant of Grace, Christ's Exultation, and The Nature of Sin should be required reading for any and every lover of theology.
I wish I could give him a kiss on his little Dutch head.
The chapters on the Covenant of Grace, Christ's Exultation, and The Nature of Sin should be required reading for any and every lover of theology.
I wish I could give him a kiss on his little Dutch head.
December 1, 2020
Magisterial.
October 23, 2023
Just fantastic, careful, historically grounded, textual, doxological work.
The main advantage from his condensed work (Wonderful Works of God) is that he traces a history of each head of doctrine. He works hard to represent other views well (repeatedly, if I wasn't paying close attention, I'd have to go back to figure out if he was owning a particular opinion, or reporting what someone else thought, because he would state it so persuasively).
A real gift to the church. Recommend to pastors, those who want to not only grow in devotion and understanding, but also understand better other Christian traditions.
The main advantage from his condensed work (Wonderful Works of God) is that he traces a history of each head of doctrine. He works hard to represent other views well (repeatedly, if I wasn't paying close attention, I'd have to go back to figure out if he was owning a particular opinion, or reporting what someone else thought, because he would state it so persuasively).
A real gift to the church. Recommend to pastors, those who want to not only grow in devotion and understanding, but also understand better other Christian traditions.
March 5, 2021
Biblical and sound! Although I do not agree entirely with his view on covenant theology this is one of the best books I have ever read on original sin and salvation. This book should be in every pastors r library. If you don't have time to read or wish to purchase the entire 4 volume set I would at least recommend his 1 volume condensed version. Volume three is also the best of any his works that I have read. Looking forward to volume 4.
July 30, 2020
I had not read this cover to cover previously and I had not read it in small chunks either. It is worth reading at a leisurely pace rather than at "seminary pace." A few short pages each morning was great.
February 22, 2025
Another wonderful book by Bavinck. His content on sin, as well as the person of Christ was simply magnificent. As I leave this book, I am reminded of an all important truth: one cannot participate in Christ’s benefits without communing with His person!
December 8, 2022
Three volumes down, and I think this is my second favorite. Bavinck is more caught than taught. You learn to read his writing and grasp his thought with time. He forever rejects the problems of deism and pantheism and applies it to all the classic doctrines of sin, and Christ.
One comment: I wonder if Bavinck is a wise early read for the aspiring theologian. He regularly assumes the reader is well acquainted with the debates that divide Christ's church. Rather than teaching, he comments on the commonly held knowledge. He assumes his reader is well acquainted with the early church heresies concerning the person of Christ, the theories of the atonement, and the like. As a result, if you are not well-versed in these topics, Bavinck leaves you a bit confused. The parts I did understand well made me more in the parts where I felt in the dark.
One comment: I wonder if Bavinck is a wise early read for the aspiring theologian. He regularly assumes the reader is well acquainted with the debates that divide Christ's church. Rather than teaching, he comments on the commonly held knowledge. He assumes his reader is well acquainted with the early church heresies concerning the person of Christ, the theories of the atonement, and the like. As a result, if you are not well-versed in these topics, Bavinck leaves you a bit confused. The parts I did understand well made me more in the parts where I felt in the dark.
June 10, 2022
I, too, like Jesus.
June 29, 2024
THE THIRD VOLUME OF THE DUTCH THEOLOGIAN’S SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) was a Dutch Reformed theologian who was Professor of Dogmatics at Kampen Theological Seminary, and then later was Professor of Theology at the Free University in Amsterdam; and in 1908 he visited the United States and gave the Stone Lectures at Princeton Theological Seminary. He wrote other books, such as Doctrine of God,Saved By Grace: The Holy Spirit's Work in Calling and Regeneration,Essays on Religion, Science, and Society,The Philosophy of Revelation,Selected Shorter Works,Our Reasonable Faith,The Sacrifice of Praise: Meditations Before and After Receiving Access to the Table of the Lord, etc.
The other volumes in this series are Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 1: Prolegomena,Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 2: God and Creation, and Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 4 - Holy Spirit, Church, and New Creation.
He observes, “However strongly this theory of evolution claims a factual basis for itself, one should bear in mind the following: (1) While investigations into prehistoric humanity have brought to light that it lived in very primitive conditions, there is no evidence that it gradually evolved from the animal world and still caught up in a period of transition… (2) …. the most ancient inhabitants… were not a savage, coarse, semibestial race but enjoyed a high level of civilization… (3) The UR-history, which is contained in Genesis 1-10, has received powerful support as a result… (4) Modern science, although believing in evolution, still as a rule assumes the unity of the human race.” (Pg. 39)
He asserts, “The universality of sin is a fact that also semi-Pelagians acknowledge… Now then, how must we explain that appalling phenomenon? How can it be squared with God’s justice that, aside now from the covenant of grace, he permits all humans to be born in such a state… that, in any case, for children dying in infancy entails death and exclusion from his fellowship, and for all others eternal ruin? The semi-Pelagian theory fails totally to enter into the problem and contents itself with a superficial and inconsequential doctrine of free will.” (Pg. 93)
He states, “Original sin… is not a substance that inheres in the body and can be transmitted by procreation. On the contrary, it is a moral quality of the person who lacks the communion with God that one should and does possess by virtue of one’s original nature. Adam’s depravity began the moment he… tore himself away from God. In the same way, moral depravity starts in his descendants from the first moment of their existence… Every human person, in virtue of the physical and ethical relation in which he or she stands to Adam, is born culpable and stained.” (Pg. 116-117)
He notes, “Schliermacher. Ritschl, and others correctly stressed that sin only comes to its most appalling manifestation vis-à-vis the gospel of the grace of God in Christ and hence within the boundaries of Christianity. Scripture itself testifies to this… However, from this it does not follow that all sins committed before or outside the knowledge of the gospel are only sins of ignorance and weakness, nor that not the law but the gospel is the source of our knowledge of sin. Christian faith is needed to rightly know sin, but faith also looks back toward the law, discovers its spiritual character, and thus receives insight into the true nature of sin.” (Pg. 141)
He says, “Certainly it is presumptuous to say that fallen angels are irredeemable even by God’s omnipotence; and it is better at this point to rest in God’s good pleasure. Still, it is sufficiently clear that ‘good pleasure’ is not identical with arbitrariness. Even among us humans here on earth there is a sin that cannot be forgiven: the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. With death… the forgiveness of the sins of all human beings ends. In the case of the angels, however, the nature of sin rules out the way of salvation. Added to this is the fact that the angels are not constituted as a single race. Humans could and did fall in one person; and they can be and are saved in one person. But the devils did not fall ‘in’ another, but everyone fell by himself individually. Among them was no covenant of works, and so there is no room for a covenant of grace either.” (Pg. 148)
He suggests, “the sin against the Holy Spirit has to consist in a conscious, deliberate, intentional blasphemy of the---clearly recognized yet hatefully misattributed to the devil---revelation of God’s grace in Christ by the Holy Spirit. The blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, therefore, does not simply consist in unbelief, nor in resisting and grieving the Holy Spirit in general, nor in denying the personality and deity of the Holy Spirit, nor in sinning against better knowledge and to the very end without qualification. Nor is it a sin solely against the law, but also a sin specifically against the gospel, and that against the gospel in its clearest manifestation.” (Pg. 155-156)
He points out, “In the sinful life of the individual… and humanity as a whole throughout the ages, there is a deliberate methodical opposition to God and all that is his. And the leadership of this opposition is in the hands of him who is called in Scripture ‘the prince of this world’ and the ‘god of this age.’ In that capacity he already made his appearance immediately in the temptation and fall of the first human being. In paganism he organized a power that stands opposed against all true religion, morality, and civilization. When Christ appeared on earth, this ‘prince’ concentrated his power against him… also by surrounding him on all sides with demonic forces in order to thus break down and resist this work… The demon-possessed in the New Testament were not ordinary sick folk… further, that such cases of possession still occur today… Satan mimics everything: God reveals himself in theophany (incarnation), prophecy, and miracle; the demonic caricature of these three, accordingly is obsession, mantic, and magic.” (Pg. 189-190)
He asks, “to what does the Christ figure in the New Testament writings owe its existence?... All these [nontraditional] attempts are most unsatisfactory if for no other reason than that they eliminate the personality and replace it with the creative fantasy of the church. In addition, however, they had led to a horrifying conclusion. For if the features of the Christ figure---divine sonship, his supernatural birth, messiahship, the resurrection, and so on—are the products of the church’s fantasy… then, though one can for a while construe them symbolically and so smooth them over, the reality is that they were basically false notions and pernicious errors. The moment one has taken this position, reverence for the person of Jesus is lost.” (Pg. 271)
He explains, “Although as the Son of God he was omnipotent, he was nevertheless limited as it concerns the power of his human nature… Scripture and the church made distinction … and view the two natures as being united in such a way that in the one divine-human work each nature does the thing that belongs to it. And for that reason the performance of miracles, the forgiving of sins, the granting of eternal life, and all that belongs to the work of the mediator is attributable not only to his deity but also to his humanity… Only after the resurrection does [Jesus] say that all power in heaven and on earth has been given to him.” (Pg. 315-316)
He asserts, “The mystical and moral interpretation of Jesus’ suffering and death cannot even be maintained if it is not acknowledged beforehand in a legal sense he suffered and died IN OUR PLACE. Now this is what Scripture teaches in the clearest terms, even though it does not use the expression ‘vicarious satisfaction’ any more than the words trinity,’ ‘incarnation,’ ‘God-man,’ and so on… we can construe the interconnection between all these scriptural pronouncements in no other way than that Christ put himself in our place, has borne the punishment of our sin, satisfied God’s justice, and so secured salvation for us.” (Pg. 398)
He argues about the “descent into hell” statement in the Apostles’ Creed, “The Greek (Orthodox) and Roman Catholic explanation of this article, to the effect that Christ went to Hades to conduct the devout of the Old Testament from the limbo of the fathers to heaven, lacks all support in Scripture… the words ‘descended into hell’ … can evidently not describe a step in the state of exaltation but only a step in the state of humiliation… For the same reason the modern idea that Christ descended into hell to preach the gospel to everyone who did not hear it here on earth cannot be viewed as a correct explanation of this article of the faith either… First Peter 3:18-22 at most says… that Christ preached the gospel to Noah’s contemporaries AFTER his resurrection, but there is absolutely no ground in this passage for an expansion of this preaching to all or many of the lost.” (Pg. 416)
He contends, “universalism leads to all sorts of false positions. It introduces separation between the three persons of the Divine Being, for the Father wills the salvation of all, Christ makes satisfaction for all, but the Holy Spirit restricts the gift of faith and of salvation to a few… It gives precedence to the person and work of Christ over election and the covenant, so that Christ is isolated from these contexts and cannot vicariously atone for his people, since there is no fellowship between him and us… It further arrives at the position, in clear conflict with all of Scripture, that the only sine that leads to a person’s being lost is the sin of unbelief. All other sins, after all, have been atoned for, including even those of the ‘man of sin,’ the Antichrist.” (Pg. 469-470)
This entire series will be of great interest to those seriously studying Reformed theology.
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) was a Dutch Reformed theologian who was Professor of Dogmatics at Kampen Theological Seminary, and then later was Professor of Theology at the Free University in Amsterdam; and in 1908 he visited the United States and gave the Stone Lectures at Princeton Theological Seminary. He wrote other books, such as Doctrine of God,Saved By Grace: The Holy Spirit's Work in Calling and Regeneration,Essays on Religion, Science, and Society,The Philosophy of Revelation,Selected Shorter Works,Our Reasonable Faith,The Sacrifice of Praise: Meditations Before and After Receiving Access to the Table of the Lord, etc.
The other volumes in this series are Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 1: Prolegomena,Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 2: God and Creation, and Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 4 - Holy Spirit, Church, and New Creation.
He observes, “However strongly this theory of evolution claims a factual basis for itself, one should bear in mind the following: (1) While investigations into prehistoric humanity have brought to light that it lived in very primitive conditions, there is no evidence that it gradually evolved from the animal world and still caught up in a period of transition… (2) …. the most ancient inhabitants… were not a savage, coarse, semibestial race but enjoyed a high level of civilization… (3) The UR-history, which is contained in Genesis 1-10, has received powerful support as a result… (4) Modern science, although believing in evolution, still as a rule assumes the unity of the human race.” (Pg. 39)
He asserts, “The universality of sin is a fact that also semi-Pelagians acknowledge… Now then, how must we explain that appalling phenomenon? How can it be squared with God’s justice that, aside now from the covenant of grace, he permits all humans to be born in such a state… that, in any case, for children dying in infancy entails death and exclusion from his fellowship, and for all others eternal ruin? The semi-Pelagian theory fails totally to enter into the problem and contents itself with a superficial and inconsequential doctrine of free will.” (Pg. 93)
He states, “Original sin… is not a substance that inheres in the body and can be transmitted by procreation. On the contrary, it is a moral quality of the person who lacks the communion with God that one should and does possess by virtue of one’s original nature. Adam’s depravity began the moment he… tore himself away from God. In the same way, moral depravity starts in his descendants from the first moment of their existence… Every human person, in virtue of the physical and ethical relation in which he or she stands to Adam, is born culpable and stained.” (Pg. 116-117)
He notes, “Schliermacher. Ritschl, and others correctly stressed that sin only comes to its most appalling manifestation vis-à-vis the gospel of the grace of God in Christ and hence within the boundaries of Christianity. Scripture itself testifies to this… However, from this it does not follow that all sins committed before or outside the knowledge of the gospel are only sins of ignorance and weakness, nor that not the law but the gospel is the source of our knowledge of sin. Christian faith is needed to rightly know sin, but faith also looks back toward the law, discovers its spiritual character, and thus receives insight into the true nature of sin.” (Pg. 141)
He says, “Certainly it is presumptuous to say that fallen angels are irredeemable even by God’s omnipotence; and it is better at this point to rest in God’s good pleasure. Still, it is sufficiently clear that ‘good pleasure’ is not identical with arbitrariness. Even among us humans here on earth there is a sin that cannot be forgiven: the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. With death… the forgiveness of the sins of all human beings ends. In the case of the angels, however, the nature of sin rules out the way of salvation. Added to this is the fact that the angels are not constituted as a single race. Humans could and did fall in one person; and they can be and are saved in one person. But the devils did not fall ‘in’ another, but everyone fell by himself individually. Among them was no covenant of works, and so there is no room for a covenant of grace either.” (Pg. 148)
He suggests, “the sin against the Holy Spirit has to consist in a conscious, deliberate, intentional blasphemy of the---clearly recognized yet hatefully misattributed to the devil---revelation of God’s grace in Christ by the Holy Spirit. The blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, therefore, does not simply consist in unbelief, nor in resisting and grieving the Holy Spirit in general, nor in denying the personality and deity of the Holy Spirit, nor in sinning against better knowledge and to the very end without qualification. Nor is it a sin solely against the law, but also a sin specifically against the gospel, and that against the gospel in its clearest manifestation.” (Pg. 155-156)
He points out, “In the sinful life of the individual… and humanity as a whole throughout the ages, there is a deliberate methodical opposition to God and all that is his. And the leadership of this opposition is in the hands of him who is called in Scripture ‘the prince of this world’ and the ‘god of this age.’ In that capacity he already made his appearance immediately in the temptation and fall of the first human being. In paganism he organized a power that stands opposed against all true religion, morality, and civilization. When Christ appeared on earth, this ‘prince’ concentrated his power against him… also by surrounding him on all sides with demonic forces in order to thus break down and resist this work… The demon-possessed in the New Testament were not ordinary sick folk… further, that such cases of possession still occur today… Satan mimics everything: God reveals himself in theophany (incarnation), prophecy, and miracle; the demonic caricature of these three, accordingly is obsession, mantic, and magic.” (Pg. 189-190)
He asks, “to what does the Christ figure in the New Testament writings owe its existence?... All these [nontraditional] attempts are most unsatisfactory if for no other reason than that they eliminate the personality and replace it with the creative fantasy of the church. In addition, however, they had led to a horrifying conclusion. For if the features of the Christ figure---divine sonship, his supernatural birth, messiahship, the resurrection, and so on—are the products of the church’s fantasy… then, though one can for a while construe them symbolically and so smooth them over, the reality is that they were basically false notions and pernicious errors. The moment one has taken this position, reverence for the person of Jesus is lost.” (Pg. 271)
He explains, “Although as the Son of God he was omnipotent, he was nevertheless limited as it concerns the power of his human nature… Scripture and the church made distinction … and view the two natures as being united in such a way that in the one divine-human work each nature does the thing that belongs to it. And for that reason the performance of miracles, the forgiving of sins, the granting of eternal life, and all that belongs to the work of the mediator is attributable not only to his deity but also to his humanity… Only after the resurrection does [Jesus] say that all power in heaven and on earth has been given to him.” (Pg. 315-316)
He asserts, “The mystical and moral interpretation of Jesus’ suffering and death cannot even be maintained if it is not acknowledged beforehand in a legal sense he suffered and died IN OUR PLACE. Now this is what Scripture teaches in the clearest terms, even though it does not use the expression ‘vicarious satisfaction’ any more than the words trinity,’ ‘incarnation,’ ‘God-man,’ and so on… we can construe the interconnection between all these scriptural pronouncements in no other way than that Christ put himself in our place, has borne the punishment of our sin, satisfied God’s justice, and so secured salvation for us.” (Pg. 398)
He argues about the “descent into hell” statement in the Apostles’ Creed, “The Greek (Orthodox) and Roman Catholic explanation of this article, to the effect that Christ went to Hades to conduct the devout of the Old Testament from the limbo of the fathers to heaven, lacks all support in Scripture… the words ‘descended into hell’ … can evidently not describe a step in the state of exaltation but only a step in the state of humiliation… For the same reason the modern idea that Christ descended into hell to preach the gospel to everyone who did not hear it here on earth cannot be viewed as a correct explanation of this article of the faith either… First Peter 3:18-22 at most says… that Christ preached the gospel to Noah’s contemporaries AFTER his resurrection, but there is absolutely no ground in this passage for an expansion of this preaching to all or many of the lost.” (Pg. 416)
He contends, “universalism leads to all sorts of false positions. It introduces separation between the three persons of the Divine Being, for the Father wills the salvation of all, Christ makes satisfaction for all, but the Holy Spirit restricts the gift of faith and of salvation to a few… It gives precedence to the person and work of Christ over election and the covenant, so that Christ is isolated from these contexts and cannot vicariously atone for his people, since there is no fellowship between him and us… It further arrives at the position, in clear conflict with all of Scripture, that the only sine that leads to a person’s being lost is the sin of unbelief. All other sins, after all, have been atoned for, including even those of the ‘man of sin,’ the Antichrist.” (Pg. 469-470)
This entire series will be of great interest to those seriously studying Reformed theology.
September 22, 2019
This one was much more dense than the other three volumes, and I felt like he got off topic a lot more, focusing on other theologians claims about sin and salvation. Also I think I’m getting tired and ready to be done with these four volumes. Lastly I get the sense that and the third volume he doesn’t seem as personally interested in the topics, maybe it is because he spends a lot of time talking about other singers or it’s because I’m tired and I’ve already read over thousand pages of his work but that is my sense. Hopefully volume 4 is richer then 3.
December 11, 2015
Bavinck is a Dutch Reformed Theologian of the 19th and early 20th century. In every chapter he does a masterful job interacting with various traditions in addition to his own Reformed tradition, including Catholics, and Lutherans, but also modern thought and various philosophical schools stemming from Kant, Richtl, Schleiermacher, etc...Dense, thought provoking, and well worth it.
April 1, 2013
Bavinck is in a class by himself. Excellent.
February 19, 2022
I found volume three much more engaging and compelling than the first two. Just great synthesis of the scriptures.
April 15, 2022
I think in this volume Bavinck's treatment especially on the doctrine of Sin and the doctrine of the Covenant of Grace are excellent. Among all the things he wrote in this volume, being a theological geek there is one thing he said that struck me the most which is the highlight for me. And that is
"Over against all these attempts at real or apparent simplication, it is the calling of the dogmatician to proclaim the full counsel of God and to disclose all the benefits that are included in the one splendid work of salvation. As in the doctrine of the Trinity and the person of Christ, dogmaticians will indeed be compelled to sometimes use words that do not occur in Scripture or to assign to them a broader or narrower meaning that they possess in some places there. BUT THEIR DUTY IS NOT TO REPEAT SCRIPTURE LITERALLY WORD FOR WORD BUT TO DISCOVER THE IDEAS THAT ARE CONCEALED IN THE WORDS OF SCRIPTURE AND TO EXPLICATE THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THEM (emphasis from me)." pg 590.
Christians today need to hear this, because many today think that the only way to do theology is finding out what Scripture says directly and have reservations in using inference. If the bible doesn't have any verses directly stating ordo salutis or lapsarianism or divine simplicity or infant baptism or verses stating that the 5 points of Calvinism applies to the OT believers, then they will assume that there is no ground to justify such doctrines. But this is not true because one needs to discover and infer the relationships within the network of the bible using logic and reasoning with exegesis and biblical theology to do Systematic Theology.
Anyway, speaking of weaknesses, after reading volume 1 and 2, this 3rd volume seems to be finally wearing me down. In my opinion, what wore me down the most is his seemingly endless engagement with the liberal theologies or philosophies such as from Kant, Ritschl, Schleiermacher, Hegel and etc. Maybe they were quite relevant during Bavinck's time, but they were pretty dry and difficult to get through for me. I would appreciate if Bavinck engages more with other denominational views.
Another part that I didn't like about Bavinck's approach is the way how he construct his theological views. Don't get me wrong his proof texts are very helpful in laying out what scripture says when comes to each topic. But what I didn't like about him is that he uses very little exegesis to refute theological views that he disagreed with. Of course it is impossible to refute all disagreements using exegesis due to limited space available and ST books aren't meant to be commentaries, but I would appreciate it if he address some of the topics selectively using exegesis or biblical theology that are more relevant in his time or across all ages. For example, if we look at John Calvin and Wayne Grudem, both of them knew which controversial doctrines to address more in depth to substantiate their view and refute their opponents using exegesis and BT. For Bavinck, it did felt like most of the time he was using human reasoning instead to argue against theological views he disagreed with. Even the way how he substantiates Ordo Salutis using Scripture is just lacking in this volume. Sometimes it did felt like he expects his readers to agree with him by just taking his word for it without much justification.
And also by comparing this volume with the previous 2 volumes, it did felt like this volume was much more disorganized at Part 3 The Work of Christ and especially at Part 4 Salvation in Christ. I'm not sure how true is this but I have a feeling and impression that Bavinck was structuring the outline of his materials based on the cultural issues of his day. This is because it seems much easier to trace the thought of the culture he engages with than to trace the train of thoughts of his theological points.
Overall I felt like, Bavinck is very good with church history, different schools of philosophies and representing other theological views accurately which are things that really set him apart from other ST books. I learned so much about Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism and Wesleyans from him which is something I highly appreciate from him. But in terms of theology, I think he is a little above average compared to the other Reformed ST books available in the market. From time to time he does correct my wrong theologies but I think if someone who primarily wants more solid theological content, Berkhof and Vos would be a better place to look at. I think one can consider reading Calvin's Institutes too, while the Institutes may have a narrower scope in addressing various doctrines and it is somewhat more outdated as compared to Bavinck, but Calvin does employ more exegesis to substantiate his view which is something we won't get much from Bavinck.
"Over against all these attempts at real or apparent simplication, it is the calling of the dogmatician to proclaim the full counsel of God and to disclose all the benefits that are included in the one splendid work of salvation. As in the doctrine of the Trinity and the person of Christ, dogmaticians will indeed be compelled to sometimes use words that do not occur in Scripture or to assign to them a broader or narrower meaning that they possess in some places there. BUT THEIR DUTY IS NOT TO REPEAT SCRIPTURE LITERALLY WORD FOR WORD BUT TO DISCOVER THE IDEAS THAT ARE CONCEALED IN THE WORDS OF SCRIPTURE AND TO EXPLICATE THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THEM (emphasis from me)." pg 590.
Christians today need to hear this, because many today think that the only way to do theology is finding out what Scripture says directly and have reservations in using inference. If the bible doesn't have any verses directly stating ordo salutis or lapsarianism or divine simplicity or infant baptism or verses stating that the 5 points of Calvinism applies to the OT believers, then they will assume that there is no ground to justify such doctrines. But this is not true because one needs to discover and infer the relationships within the network of the bible using logic and reasoning with exegesis and biblical theology to do Systematic Theology.
Anyway, speaking of weaknesses, after reading volume 1 and 2, this 3rd volume seems to be finally wearing me down. In my opinion, what wore me down the most is his seemingly endless engagement with the liberal theologies or philosophies such as from Kant, Ritschl, Schleiermacher, Hegel and etc. Maybe they were quite relevant during Bavinck's time, but they were pretty dry and difficult to get through for me. I would appreciate if Bavinck engages more with other denominational views.
Another part that I didn't like about Bavinck's approach is the way how he construct his theological views. Don't get me wrong his proof texts are very helpful in laying out what scripture says when comes to each topic. But what I didn't like about him is that he uses very little exegesis to refute theological views that he disagreed with. Of course it is impossible to refute all disagreements using exegesis due to limited space available and ST books aren't meant to be commentaries, but I would appreciate it if he address some of the topics selectively using exegesis or biblical theology that are more relevant in his time or across all ages. For example, if we look at John Calvin and Wayne Grudem, both of them knew which controversial doctrines to address more in depth to substantiate their view and refute their opponents using exegesis and BT. For Bavinck, it did felt like most of the time he was using human reasoning instead to argue against theological views he disagreed with. Even the way how he substantiates Ordo Salutis using Scripture is just lacking in this volume. Sometimes it did felt like he expects his readers to agree with him by just taking his word for it without much justification.
And also by comparing this volume with the previous 2 volumes, it did felt like this volume was much more disorganized at Part 3 The Work of Christ and especially at Part 4 Salvation in Christ. I'm not sure how true is this but I have a feeling and impression that Bavinck was structuring the outline of his materials based on the cultural issues of his day. This is because it seems much easier to trace the thought of the culture he engages with than to trace the train of thoughts of his theological points.
Overall I felt like, Bavinck is very good with church history, different schools of philosophies and representing other theological views accurately which are things that really set him apart from other ST books. I learned so much about Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism and Wesleyans from him which is something I highly appreciate from him. But in terms of theology, I think he is a little above average compared to the other Reformed ST books available in the market. From time to time he does correct my wrong theologies but I think if someone who primarily wants more solid theological content, Berkhof and Vos would be a better place to look at. I think one can consider reading Calvin's Institutes too, while the Institutes may have a narrower scope in addressing various doctrines and it is somewhat more outdated as compared to Bavinck, but Calvin does employ more exegesis to substantiate his view which is something we won't get much from Bavinck.
February 17, 2020
Wonderfully rich in depth and insight. Bavinck is a must read for the Church today, as he is a well spring of life and light, drawing from all eras of the church. He is perhaps the best modern example of constructive theology that also interacts well in the historical distortions of the faith that have always plagued the church up through to his own day. Though these volumes are now a century old, they are still most applicable and relevant today.
Often you will see someone who is well-studied and rounded academically, who seem to know a little about everything, but fails because of this to be a specialist of anything. Not so with Bavinck. Throughout his Dogmatics, we see that he is well versed in the latest science and psychology of the early 20th C, as well as other philosophical and related disciplines that might impinge upon theological endeavors. In his treatise, especially in this volume examining sin and salvation & the person and work of Christ, his excellence as a theologian and champion of Christ is shown forth quite well. Easily recommended for pastors and lay and serious theologians. Even if not Reformed, Bavinck must be interacted with for his depth of knowledge and interaction with the depth of the tradition of the church catholic. Any Christian will not regret having read Bavinck, if not only for the clarity of his thought and as a proper example of theology at its best.
Often you will see someone who is well-studied and rounded academically, who seem to know a little about everything, but fails because of this to be a specialist of anything. Not so with Bavinck. Throughout his Dogmatics, we see that he is well versed in the latest science and psychology of the early 20th C, as well as other philosophical and related disciplines that might impinge upon theological endeavors. In his treatise, especially in this volume examining sin and salvation & the person and work of Christ, his excellence as a theologian and champion of Christ is shown forth quite well. Easily recommended for pastors and lay and serious theologians. Even if not Reformed, Bavinck must be interacted with for his depth of knowledge and interaction with the depth of the tradition of the church catholic. Any Christian will not regret having read Bavinck, if not only for the clarity of his thought and as a proper example of theology at its best.
October 5, 2022
A monumental work, although I'm aware a layman like myself is easily overawed. As with the previous two volumes, Bavinck often soars and is always thorough. The only recurring sticking points are the deep dives into the positions of his now-forgotten (but still influential in a cascading way, I'm sure) opponents. But if you know what you want out of Bavinck, e.g. a deep and detailed discourse on orthodox Reformed dogmatics at the cusp of the modern era, then you can skip the long asides on Schleiermacher et al.
Despite the length of these volumes, Bavinck often amazes me with his ability to compact a huge expanse of ideas into a paragraph or two of literate (viz., like literature) prose - at least in translation. My only hope here is that reading Bavinck is subtly shifting my mental model of theology and God. Attempting to retain every detail in of this stuffed ST is absurd.
One more volume. Very interested to compare with Turretin.
Despite the length of these volumes, Bavinck often amazes me with his ability to compact a huge expanse of ideas into a paragraph or two of literate (viz., like literature) prose - at least in translation. My only hope here is that reading Bavinck is subtly shifting my mental model of theology and God. Attempting to retain every detail in of this stuffed ST is absurd.
One more volume. Very interested to compare with Turretin.
August 6, 2020
Much like the first two volumes of his RD, he is deeply immersed in historical and contemporary theology. The wealth of knowledge he possessed is truly remarkable. One unique feature of this volume is that Bavinck's interest in the psychology of religion comes more to the fore, esp in the last chapter on the order of salvation. The reason I have given this 4 stars is because his trenchant discussion of historical and contemporary theology at many pointes muddied his presentation too much for the reader to get at the heart of what he himself is saying. Despite this, this is a must read in the loci of sin and soteriology by an outstanding Reformed theologian.
December 29, 2024
Similar thoughts on this volume to the first two. Unquestionably wise and valuable while I wish that there was more direct and extensive engagement with scripture, as well as more exposition of the doctrines, in place of the historical surveys.
August 11, 2025
Five stars for when Bavinck is speaking about orthodoxy, but three stars for when he is speaking about liberalism, Romanism etc because it is pretty dull to read the lists of how people have twisted scripture and theology.
August 19, 2019
A true gem for Reformed theology.
February 5, 2021
One of my Favorite modern theologians and Systematicians
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews