What do you think?
Rate this book
Philosophy of Revelation: A New Annotated Edition
This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the original. Due to its age, it may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions that are true to the original work.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1908
61 people are currently reading
351 people want to read
About the author
Herman Bavinck
112 books195 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 32 reviews
April 14, 2019
Esta é provavelmente a quinta vez que leio esta obra. E continuo dizendo a qualquer um: leiam! Está-se perante um daqueles eventos que de fato alteram nossas prioridades, percepções e ideais. Desde a primeira página, Bavinck cobre-nos com uma prosa oceânica, repleta de citações, associações, concessões e assertivas, uma escrita límpida, vigorosa e pletórica. Mas sempre se faz presente ali, mostrando que há uma unidade: a celebração jubilosa da revelação -- a mesma revelação que coere o mundo, que liga todos os eventos, indivíduos e intuições numa relação inteligível porque pessoal e ética. Bavinck dialoga com todos os grandes pensadores, filósofos, artistas e cientistas de sua época, e dialoga na acepção mais profunda do termo: ele transita de um pensamento a outro, exalta o que há de verdadeiro e belo, mas interpõe sempre a singularidade do cristianismo. Daí mostra-nos como a autoconsciência, a história, a natureza, a experiência religiosa, a cultura e o futuro estão fundamentados na revelação -- e como ela é não somente o meio, mas a realidade derradeira pela qual todo homem anseia. Combatendo poderosamente o afã reducionista que já se insurgia em sua época, especialmente no movimento do monismo evolucionista de Haeckel, Herman Bavinck celebra, acima de tudo, a diversidade da criação, reflexo das ricas manifestações da revelação, e produto da multiforme graça do Criador.
February 11, 2019
Summary: A new annotated edition of Dutch Reformed theologian Herman Bavinck's 1908 Stone Lectures at Princeton, arguing that revelation is a warranted basic belief.
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) was a Dutch Reformed theologian, writing mostly in Dutch, from the late nineteenth, early twentieth century. With the translation of his Reformed Dogmatics in 2003, studies of Bavinck's work has flourished. This work represents an expanded version of Bavinck's Stone Lectures at Princeton, first translated in 1908 by Geerhardus Vos. Two contemporary Bavinck scholars recognized the importance of this work to discussions of Reformed epistemology, and have given us this new annotated edition of the work. The annotations to the work are found in the footnotes and address everything from alternate translations of the text to explanations and context for Bavinck's arguments, a tremendous asset to any modern scholar-theologian studying Bavinck. This is particularly important because Bavinck is engaging philosophers, scientists, and historians of his day, who are often not a part of contemporary academic and theological discourse.
Bavinck's basic argument, anticipating the work of Alvin Plantinga, is that revelation is a warranted basic belief. The lectures argue this inductively from the disciplines of philosophy, natural science, history, religion and religious experience, culture, the Christian faith, and our teleology, our understanding of the future. Revelation in its general form (the things we can't not know), and particularly around religious experience and Christian faith, special revelation, are shown to be basic to human experience and actually foundational to science, history, and philosophy.
Bavinck writes in a period where modernism had theology on its heels. Scientific research exalted the materialistic, rational explanation of all. What I was most intrigued with in the work was how Bavinck anticipated much of the developments of the last one hundred years in the movement from materialism to various forms of pantheistic monism in shaping our view of reality. Bavinck is one of the first I have observed to address the questions of the one and the many and how revelation, and the Christian faith offers the only satisfying explanation about connections between material and spiritual reality, and the sources both of oneness and true diversity. He is also prescient, in his discussion of revelation and the future, in anticipating the eugenics movement, and more recent efforts in genetic modification or even trans-humanism, human efforts to control our future.
The strength of this work is the basic argument Bavinck is making, and its connection to later thinkers from Van Til to Plantinga and Wolterstorff. An important aspect of this philosophy of revelation is the argument for how revelation serves as the basis of the coherence of all intellectual inquiry. This is desperately needed good news for our modern, fragment university world, as well as our fragmented modern lives, and even sense of self.
Sometimes, Bavinck's engagement with scholars of his day makes it harder for those of us unfamiliar with them to keep track of his argument. The annotations are quite helpful in this regard. While it may have felt like meddling in the text, some form of subheadings or marginal summaries would have been helpful to this reader in keeping track of the thread of his argument. In some cases, such as critiquing Darwin, it felt that he might have been relying on apologetic arguments of his day that are less helpful with the advances of biological science. I realize that such a criticism simply reflects the problem of engaging any scholarly work from one hundred years ago.
None of this takes away from the compelling case he makes for a warranted basic belief in revelation, addressing both the philosophy of revelation, and the philosophy of revelation. We continue to live and move and work in an incoherent culture that divorces reason and revelation. Bavinck offers a significant extended argument for reconciling these, summarized well in one of his concluding statements:
"Revelation in nature and revelation in Scripture form, in alliance (verband) with each other, a harmonious unity which satisfies the requirements of the intellect and the needs of the heart alike." (p. 242)
[By the way, don't overlook the editors explanation, in their introductory essay (pp. xxxii-xxxiii), of the use of Piet Mondrian's work on the cover of this work!]
_____________________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) was a Dutch Reformed theologian, writing mostly in Dutch, from the late nineteenth, early twentieth century. With the translation of his Reformed Dogmatics in 2003, studies of Bavinck's work has flourished. This work represents an expanded version of Bavinck's Stone Lectures at Princeton, first translated in 1908 by Geerhardus Vos. Two contemporary Bavinck scholars recognized the importance of this work to discussions of Reformed epistemology, and have given us this new annotated edition of the work. The annotations to the work are found in the footnotes and address everything from alternate translations of the text to explanations and context for Bavinck's arguments, a tremendous asset to any modern scholar-theologian studying Bavinck. This is particularly important because Bavinck is engaging philosophers, scientists, and historians of his day, who are often not a part of contemporary academic and theological discourse.
Bavinck's basic argument, anticipating the work of Alvin Plantinga, is that revelation is a warranted basic belief. The lectures argue this inductively from the disciplines of philosophy, natural science, history, religion and religious experience, culture, the Christian faith, and our teleology, our understanding of the future. Revelation in its general form (the things we can't not know), and particularly around religious experience and Christian faith, special revelation, are shown to be basic to human experience and actually foundational to science, history, and philosophy.
Bavinck writes in a period where modernism had theology on its heels. Scientific research exalted the materialistic, rational explanation of all. What I was most intrigued with in the work was how Bavinck anticipated much of the developments of the last one hundred years in the movement from materialism to various forms of pantheistic monism in shaping our view of reality. Bavinck is one of the first I have observed to address the questions of the one and the many and how revelation, and the Christian faith offers the only satisfying explanation about connections between material and spiritual reality, and the sources both of oneness and true diversity. He is also prescient, in his discussion of revelation and the future, in anticipating the eugenics movement, and more recent efforts in genetic modification or even trans-humanism, human efforts to control our future.
The strength of this work is the basic argument Bavinck is making, and its connection to later thinkers from Van Til to Plantinga and Wolterstorff. An important aspect of this philosophy of revelation is the argument for how revelation serves as the basis of the coherence of all intellectual inquiry. This is desperately needed good news for our modern, fragment university world, as well as our fragmented modern lives, and even sense of self.
Sometimes, Bavinck's engagement with scholars of his day makes it harder for those of us unfamiliar with them to keep track of his argument. The annotations are quite helpful in this regard. While it may have felt like meddling in the text, some form of subheadings or marginal summaries would have been helpful to this reader in keeping track of the thread of his argument. In some cases, such as critiquing Darwin, it felt that he might have been relying on apologetic arguments of his day that are less helpful with the advances of biological science. I realize that such a criticism simply reflects the problem of engaging any scholarly work from one hundred years ago.
None of this takes away from the compelling case he makes for a warranted basic belief in revelation, addressing both the philosophy of revelation, and the philosophy of revelation. We continue to live and move and work in an incoherent culture that divorces reason and revelation. Bavinck offers a significant extended argument for reconciling these, summarized well in one of his concluding statements:
"Revelation in nature and revelation in Scripture form, in alliance (verband) with each other, a harmonious unity which satisfies the requirements of the intellect and the needs of the heart alike." (p. 242)
[By the way, don't overlook the editors explanation, in their introductory essay (pp. xxxii-xxxiii), of the use of Piet Mondrian's work on the cover of this work!]
_____________________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.
May 20, 2020
A Filosofia da Revelação
A presente obra reúne as Palestras Stone do teólogo reformacional Bavinck, ministradas no Seminário Teológico de Princenton, entre 1908 e 1909. Seu objetivo é desenvolver uma filosofia global que relacione a criação com Deus em resposta ao primeiro ato revelacional divino.
O livro conta com um prefácio à edição brasileira e um apêndice do contexto em que as palestras foram ministradas que devem ser o ponto de partida dos leitores. Nesses dois textos, é possível perceber a proximidade de Bavinck com o pensamento de Kuyper e com o pensamento modernista à época que rejeitava o monismo evolucionista do século XIX.
São dez capítulos. O primeiro faz uma ampla leitura histórica a partir da Reforma Protestante. O autor trata da concepção de filosofia da revelação que se desenvolveu a partir desse momento. E diz que a abertura da Reforma para o posterior Iluminismo deriva do pensamento humanista de Erasmo de Roterdã. O Iluminismo adotará uma perspectiva sobre a realidade permeada pelos ideais racionalista e evolucionista. O liberalismo teológico tentará mesclar a revelação bíblica com a noção iluminista de entendimento da realidade. Bavinck diz que é preciso para todo ser humano adotar em suas pressuposições uma noção de revelação para a compreensão da realidade. Disso ele desenvolverá que o cristianismo é o mais sólido dos fundamentos.
No segundo capítulo, o autor dirá que há três tipos de filosofia: a teísta, a naturalista, e a humanista. E argumentará que o naturalismo tende a se tornar materialista. Este, por sua vez, torna-se monista. O pensamento pragmatista reage ao monismo. Essa reação pragmatista tem o mérito de criticar o abstracionismo monista e chamar à prática. Porém, o pragmatismo também é pobre por não considerar a complexidade da realidade criada.
Em sequência, Bavinck trata da revelação e natureza. O autor sustenta que a ciência tem sua esfera de estudo da causalidade, mas que ela precisa de uma filosofia para compreender e interpretar suas investigações. O monismo é insuficiente para tal. No quinto capítulo, o escritor argumenta, na relação entre revelação e história, que a crença evolutiva da história não explica sua complexidade. Os fatos históricos precisam de explicação filosófica. E sustenta que o teísmo cristão é superior ao monismo nessa explicação.
Sobre a relação entre revelação e religião, Bavinck diz que a ciência tem buscado entender o fundamento religioso do homem, mas não chega a uma conclusão final. A explicação disso é que toda religião se origina em revelação. Ainda assim, mesmo que as religiões tenham vários aspectos em comum, só a fé judaico-cristã é singular devido ao conteúdo de sua revelação.
No capítulo oito, o autor trata de revelação e experiência religiosa. Para ele, se a experiência religiosa for a base da religião, tem-se psicologia da religião (análise de experiências subjetivas). Bavinck diz que muitas ciências querem criticar a teologia, mas para isso é preciso uma crítica da razão religiosa, isto é, antes de se criticar a teologia é preciso uma crítica à própria razão que critica (projeto desenvolvido por Dooyeweerd). O mais adequado para o autor é considerar que a revelação é objetiva e a experiência religiosa é psicologicamente mediada. Uma não anula a outra.
Nos últimos capítulos, o autor trata da revelação e cultura e da revelação e o futuro. Para Bavinck, o cristianismo é indissociável da cultura. É sua ética fundamental. A cultura precisa de um fundamento transcendente, isto é, precisa de revelação. E por fim, o autor diz que a fé humanista na evolução da humanidade torna o progresso uma crença metafísica. Porém, só o cristianismo equilibra todas as coisas. Essa é uma obra grandiosa e incontornável no que toca à relação filosofia e religião.
A presente obra reúne as Palestras Stone do teólogo reformacional Bavinck, ministradas no Seminário Teológico de Princenton, entre 1908 e 1909. Seu objetivo é desenvolver uma filosofia global que relacione a criação com Deus em resposta ao primeiro ato revelacional divino.
O livro conta com um prefácio à edição brasileira e um apêndice do contexto em que as palestras foram ministradas que devem ser o ponto de partida dos leitores. Nesses dois textos, é possível perceber a proximidade de Bavinck com o pensamento de Kuyper e com o pensamento modernista à época que rejeitava o monismo evolucionista do século XIX.
São dez capítulos. O primeiro faz uma ampla leitura histórica a partir da Reforma Protestante. O autor trata da concepção de filosofia da revelação que se desenvolveu a partir desse momento. E diz que a abertura da Reforma para o posterior Iluminismo deriva do pensamento humanista de Erasmo de Roterdã. O Iluminismo adotará uma perspectiva sobre a realidade permeada pelos ideais racionalista e evolucionista. O liberalismo teológico tentará mesclar a revelação bíblica com a noção iluminista de entendimento da realidade. Bavinck diz que é preciso para todo ser humano adotar em suas pressuposições uma noção de revelação para a compreensão da realidade. Disso ele desenvolverá que o cristianismo é o mais sólido dos fundamentos.
No segundo capítulo, o autor dirá que há três tipos de filosofia: a teísta, a naturalista, e a humanista. E argumentará que o naturalismo tende a se tornar materialista. Este, por sua vez, torna-se monista. O pensamento pragmatista reage ao monismo. Essa reação pragmatista tem o mérito de criticar o abstracionismo monista e chamar à prática. Porém, o pragmatismo também é pobre por não considerar a complexidade da realidade criada.
Em sequência, Bavinck trata da revelação e natureza. O autor sustenta que a ciência tem sua esfera de estudo da causalidade, mas que ela precisa de uma filosofia para compreender e interpretar suas investigações. O monismo é insuficiente para tal. No quinto capítulo, o escritor argumenta, na relação entre revelação e história, que a crença evolutiva da história não explica sua complexidade. Os fatos históricos precisam de explicação filosófica. E sustenta que o teísmo cristão é superior ao monismo nessa explicação.
Sobre a relação entre revelação e religião, Bavinck diz que a ciência tem buscado entender o fundamento religioso do homem, mas não chega a uma conclusão final. A explicação disso é que toda religião se origina em revelação. Ainda assim, mesmo que as religiões tenham vários aspectos em comum, só a fé judaico-cristã é singular devido ao conteúdo de sua revelação.
No capítulo oito, o autor trata de revelação e experiência religiosa. Para ele, se a experiência religiosa for a base da religião, tem-se psicologia da religião (análise de experiências subjetivas). Bavinck diz que muitas ciências querem criticar a teologia, mas para isso é preciso uma crítica da razão religiosa, isto é, antes de se criticar a teologia é preciso uma crítica à própria razão que critica (projeto desenvolvido por Dooyeweerd). O mais adequado para o autor é considerar que a revelação é objetiva e a experiência religiosa é psicologicamente mediada. Uma não anula a outra.
Nos últimos capítulos, o autor trata da revelação e cultura e da revelação e o futuro. Para Bavinck, o cristianismo é indissociável da cultura. É sua ética fundamental. A cultura precisa de um fundamento transcendente, isto é, precisa de revelação. E por fim, o autor diz que a fé humanista na evolução da humanidade torna o progresso uma crença metafísica. Porém, só o cristianismo equilibra todas as coisas. Essa é uma obra grandiosa e incontornável no que toca à relação filosofia e religião.
August 19, 2020
Tropecei nesse livro enquanto refletia sobre o que, de fato, podemos chamar de Revelação Especial de Deus.
Deixe-me explicar, antes que as pedras voem.
A Bíblia é a revelação especial de Deus. Lida, adequadamente interpretada, e animada pelo Espírito Santo, é a principal (única?) forma de comunicação de Deus com seu povo hoje. A Bíblia é o livro pelo qual todas as atitudes, pensamentos, e conhecimentos humanos devem ser avaliados.
Isto não quer dizer, contudo, que a Bíblia é um manual (cuidado com as metáforas anacrônicas!) e que o verdadeiro super-poder de Jesus é o seu bom-senso. Digo isto porque fico muito incomodado com interpretações e aplicações do texto onde basta ter bom-senso chegar à mesma conclusão.
Para exemplificar, pegue o envio de 2 em 2 dos discípulos em Marcos 6:6-12.
Desse texto, muitos chegam à conclusão que Jesus era um exímio gestor de RH porque ele sabia que indo de 2 em 2 os discípulos dariam encorajamento mútuo. E ainda cita "Um ao outro encorajou e disse, seja forte!" (Is 41:6) sem perceber que o primoroso insight relatado por Isaías é tido por escultores de ídolos. E assim, na cabeça dessas pessoas, fica demonstrado que a Bíblia é um manual prático de aplicaçao rápida e rasteira para todos aqueles que costumam sair por aí de 2 em 2, sejam os escoteiros, as testemunhas de Jeová, ou os fiscais da prefeitura.
E nessa aplicação rasa do envio dos discípulos, perde-se toda a dimensão da seriedade do testemunho dos discípulos, que foram convocados a um testemunho duplo: (i) a respeito de Jesus perante as cidades, e (ii) a respeito das cidades perante Jesus, com a subsequente declaração de condenação sobre as localidades onde eles (ou seja, a sua mensagem de boas novas) não fossem recebidos.
A minha principal preocupação com isso é que leitores mais atentos rapidamente percebem que não é necessário ser cristão para ter o bom-senso de encorajar companheirismo entre os 12 apóstolos, e que, se essa é a moral da história, os discípulos eram apenas vendedores porta-a-porta. Para essas pessoas, a Bíblia se torna apenas um compêndio de boas dicas e platitudes e Jesus, o maior CEO de todos os tempos.
Não.
Com isto em mente, o livro do Bavinck foi bastante produtivo. Em linhas gerais, a ideia defendida é que a revelação é a única forma de se conhecer a Deus. Tendo em vista que levei 8 meses (!) para finalizar a obra, obviamente não me recordo claramente das nuânces do argumento. Mas posso dizer que, para aqueles que desejam uma análise lenta e completa do pensamento vigente na virada do Século XX e a apresentação de um contraponto bíblico robusto, este livro é essencial.
Contudo, embora a esperança nos projetos humanos (analisada mais especificamente no último capítulo) esteja bastante viva nos dias de hoje, os fundamentos dessa esperança parecem ter ganhado outras matizes desde que Bavinck escreveu esta obra (baseada em palestras ministradas entre 1908 e 1909).
Isto não quer dizer que o livro é equivocado e as conclusões ultrapassadas, mas é possível que algum leitor mais entusiasmado pense que as respostas de Bavinck aplicam-se ipsis literis para o nosso tempo e não perceba que as perguntas é que mudaram.
Quanto ao mais, vale a leitura.
Deixe-me explicar, antes que as pedras voem.
A Bíblia é a revelação especial de Deus. Lida, adequadamente interpretada, e animada pelo Espírito Santo, é a principal (única?) forma de comunicação de Deus com seu povo hoje. A Bíblia é o livro pelo qual todas as atitudes, pensamentos, e conhecimentos humanos devem ser avaliados.
Isto não quer dizer, contudo, que a Bíblia é um manual (cuidado com as metáforas anacrônicas!) e que o verdadeiro super-poder de Jesus é o seu bom-senso. Digo isto porque fico muito incomodado com interpretações e aplicações do texto onde basta ter bom-senso chegar à mesma conclusão.
Para exemplificar, pegue o envio de 2 em 2 dos discípulos em Marcos 6:6-12.
Desse texto, muitos chegam à conclusão que Jesus era um exímio gestor de RH porque ele sabia que indo de 2 em 2 os discípulos dariam encorajamento mútuo. E ainda cita "Um ao outro encorajou e disse, seja forte!" (Is 41:6) sem perceber que o primoroso insight relatado por Isaías é tido por escultores de ídolos. E assim, na cabeça dessas pessoas, fica demonstrado que a Bíblia é um manual prático de aplicaçao rápida e rasteira para todos aqueles que costumam sair por aí de 2 em 2, sejam os escoteiros, as testemunhas de Jeová, ou os fiscais da prefeitura.
E nessa aplicação rasa do envio dos discípulos, perde-se toda a dimensão da seriedade do testemunho dos discípulos, que foram convocados a um testemunho duplo: (i) a respeito de Jesus perante as cidades, e (ii) a respeito das cidades perante Jesus, com a subsequente declaração de condenação sobre as localidades onde eles (ou seja, a sua mensagem de boas novas) não fossem recebidos.
A minha principal preocupação com isso é que leitores mais atentos rapidamente percebem que não é necessário ser cristão para ter o bom-senso de encorajar companheirismo entre os 12 apóstolos, e que, se essa é a moral da história, os discípulos eram apenas vendedores porta-a-porta. Para essas pessoas, a Bíblia se torna apenas um compêndio de boas dicas e platitudes e Jesus, o maior CEO de todos os tempos.
Não.
Com isto em mente, o livro do Bavinck foi bastante produtivo. Em linhas gerais, a ideia defendida é que a revelação é a única forma de se conhecer a Deus. Tendo em vista que levei 8 meses (!) para finalizar a obra, obviamente não me recordo claramente das nuânces do argumento. Mas posso dizer que, para aqueles que desejam uma análise lenta e completa do pensamento vigente na virada do Século XX e a apresentação de um contraponto bíblico robusto, este livro é essencial.
Contudo, embora a esperança nos projetos humanos (analisada mais especificamente no último capítulo) esteja bastante viva nos dias de hoje, os fundamentos dessa esperança parecem ter ganhado outras matizes desde que Bavinck escreveu esta obra (baseada em palestras ministradas entre 1908 e 1909).
Isto não quer dizer que o livro é equivocado e as conclusões ultrapassadas, mas é possível que algum leitor mais entusiasmado pense que as respostas de Bavinck aplicam-se ipsis literis para o nosso tempo e não perceba que as perguntas é que mudaram.
Quanto ao mais, vale a leitura.
November 11, 2025
The last two chapters on Culture and the Future are fantastic. Dense going to get there though.
March 18, 2018
Sinto-me, ao ler Filosofia da Revelação, como citado no prefácio da obra o aforismos de Bernardo de Chartres, um anão nos ombros de gigantes. Bavinck guia de maneira magistral a argumentação da natureza e necessidade da revelação por várias escolas filosóficas e religiões concorrentes. Soli Deo Gloria!
May 17, 2019
Fantastic. This is more an apologetics book than doctrine. Bavinck's primary target is "monism" (the idea that behind everything there exists some a unifying principle). He convincingly demonstrates how coherent explanations of philosophy, nature, history, religion and religious experience, culture, and the future are *all* dependent on revelation - i.e. the will of God, made known to us is nature and in Scripture. Though he interacts most with his contemporary thinkers, his criticisms are still significant (perhaps moreso?) for the 21st century.
April 30, 2024
This is like the Boston Marathon of Bavinck. Work your way up to, get blasted by the challenging sections, and want to return every year.
December 30, 2018
Released just a few weeks ago in a new edition, it's hard to believe these lectures on revelation are not more well-known. Thank God for people who study Dutch so that they can translate Bavinck.
The revelation of God is the quintessential reality behind the rich and diverse life of the world. Without it, there can be no science, no truth, no understanding of the self or of nature, no meaning to history nor any intelligible reason to study it. Revelation is the only foundation for human culture and the only source of real hope for the world. Even redemption is subservient to revelation.
The revelation of God is the quintessential reality behind the rich and diverse life of the world. Without it, there can be no science, no truth, no understanding of the self or of nature, no meaning to history nor any intelligible reason to study it. Revelation is the only foundation for human culture and the only source of real hope for the world. Even redemption is subservient to revelation.
January 31, 2023
In summary, I found this book to be an extended exploration and defense of a claim in the Reformed Dogmatics Volume 1 : Prolegomena that "The Christian worldview alone, is one that fits the reality of the world and of life." This book is certainly not an introductory philosophy text and reading it with some amount of comprehension was definitely a stretch for me. That said, I did glean much from the book. I was encouraged by it and following some of his categories of thought, I was better able to track in conversations with other more philosophically inclined friends.
In this book, Herman Bavinck locates revelation (God’s revealing himself to his creation) as the “starting point and foundation stone of Christian theology.” Expanding on the content of this revelation, he adds that "revelation, while having its center in the Person of Christ, in its periphery extends to the uttermost ends of creation." With this expansive view of revelation and how it forms Christianity, Bavinck sets out to explain how Christianity is better equipped to make sense of reality than the other philosophical systems available. All through the book, he is in constant conversation with contemporary scholars, but many of the points he makes in support of Christianity transcend his immediate context.
"Reality does not arrange itself to fit our system, but our system must form itself in accordance with reality." Throughout the volume, Bavinck measures the success of any given system by how it aligns with reality. "Actuality presents a different appearance from theory. Life - full, rich life - is always first; the abstractions of our thinking come only later." He criticizes other systems that fall short of appreciating the multiformity of reality. "The world is richer than materialistic or pantheistic evolution wishes it to appear."
Reading this book, there were sections where I was really tracking with Bavinck and other sections where my ignorance of the ongoing conversation left me aloof. I look forward to revisiting this book in a few years after I’ve gained a little more exposure to different streams of philosophical thought. The book covers a lot more ground than I’ve indicated, since I’ve focused pretty narrowly on a single thread that stood out the most to me (and that I feel somewhat able to put into words). I found this theme – that Christianity does more justice to reality than the other systems he mentions – to be both compelling and encouraging. I especially appreciated seeing what I take to be theological concepts expressed with multifaceted importance in terms of the philosophical questions he engages in the book.
In closing, I’ll give the last word to Bavinck in this extended quote from the final chapter that nicely summarizes the theme I’ve been tracing. "By the magic formulas of monism and evolution, men make the world to be and to become in the past, present, and even in the future everything they please. But reality scoffs at these fantasies; it places before us the sorrowful facts that the power of evil raises itself against good, that sin does not annihilate man but hardens him spiritually, and that virtue and happiness, sin and punishment, are not in proportion to each other here upon earth as all hearts and consciences require. And yet since this is what really exists, it must in some way be in accordance with the holiness and goodness of God. The gospel is suited to this reality and is quite in agreement with it; it takes and acknowledges the world exactly as it is shown to our unbiased view; it does not fashion it after a prescribed pattern but accepts it without prejudice, with all its diversities and contrasts, with all its problems and enigmas."
In this book, Herman Bavinck locates revelation (God’s revealing himself to his creation) as the “starting point and foundation stone of Christian theology.” Expanding on the content of this revelation, he adds that "revelation, while having its center in the Person of Christ, in its periphery extends to the uttermost ends of creation." With this expansive view of revelation and how it forms Christianity, Bavinck sets out to explain how Christianity is better equipped to make sense of reality than the other philosophical systems available. All through the book, he is in constant conversation with contemporary scholars, but many of the points he makes in support of Christianity transcend his immediate context.
"Reality does not arrange itself to fit our system, but our system must form itself in accordance with reality." Throughout the volume, Bavinck measures the success of any given system by how it aligns with reality. "Actuality presents a different appearance from theory. Life - full, rich life - is always first; the abstractions of our thinking come only later." He criticizes other systems that fall short of appreciating the multiformity of reality. "The world is richer than materialistic or pantheistic evolution wishes it to appear."
Reading this book, there were sections where I was really tracking with Bavinck and other sections where my ignorance of the ongoing conversation left me aloof. I look forward to revisiting this book in a few years after I’ve gained a little more exposure to different streams of philosophical thought. The book covers a lot more ground than I’ve indicated, since I’ve focused pretty narrowly on a single thread that stood out the most to me (and that I feel somewhat able to put into words). I found this theme – that Christianity does more justice to reality than the other systems he mentions – to be both compelling and encouraging. I especially appreciated seeing what I take to be theological concepts expressed with multifaceted importance in terms of the philosophical questions he engages in the book.
In closing, I’ll give the last word to Bavinck in this extended quote from the final chapter that nicely summarizes the theme I’ve been tracing. "By the magic formulas of monism and evolution, men make the world to be and to become in the past, present, and even in the future everything they please. But reality scoffs at these fantasies; it places before us the sorrowful facts that the power of evil raises itself against good, that sin does not annihilate man but hardens him spiritually, and that virtue and happiness, sin and punishment, are not in proportion to each other here upon earth as all hearts and consciences require. And yet since this is what really exists, it must in some way be in accordance with the holiness and goodness of God. The gospel is suited to this reality and is quite in agreement with it; it takes and acknowledges the world exactly as it is shown to our unbiased view; it does not fashion it after a prescribed pattern but accepts it without prejudice, with all its diversities and contrasts, with all its problems and enigmas."
May 31, 2024
THE REFORMED THEOLOGIAN EXPLAINS THE PHILOSOPHY OF CHRISTIANITY AND REVELATION
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) was a Dutch Reformed theologian and churchman. He wrote in the Preface, “The following lectures were prepared in response to an invitation from the faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary to deliver the L.P. Stone Lectures for the academic year of 1908 and 1909. Only six of them were actually delivered, however, at Princeton. These are represented by the first seven lectures as here printed… Some of the lectures have been delivered also at Grand Rapids and Hollland, Mich.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to a 349-page edition.]
He states in the first lecture, “Humanity as a whole has been at all times supranaturalistic to the core. Neither in thought nor in life have men been able to satisfy themselves with the things of this world; they have always assumed a heaven above the earth, and behind what is visible a higher and holier order of invisible powers and blessings. This means that God and the world … have… stood in the closest connection; religion and civilization have not appeared as contradictory and opposing principles, but religion has been the source of all civilization, the basis of all orderly life in the family, the state, and society… The ancient view of the world was thoroughly religions… Christianity introduced no change in this respect.” (Pg. 1-2)
He says, “The true religion which shall satisfy our mind and heart, our conscience and our will, must be one that does not shut us up in, but lifts us up high above, the world; in the midst of time fi must impart to us eternity; in the midst of death give us life; in the midst of the stream of change place us on the immovable rock of salvation. This is the reason why transcendence, supranaturalism, revelation, are essential to all religion.” (Pg. 17)
He asserts, “With the reality of revelation, therefore, Christianity stands or falls. But our insight into the mode and content of revelation admits of being clarified; and, in consequence, our conception of this act of divine grace is capable of being modified. As a matter of fact, this has taken place in modern theology… Through the extraordinary advance of science our world-view has undergone a great change. The world has become immeasurably large for us… If God’s dwelling lies somewhere far away, outside the world, and his transcendence is to be understood in the sense that he has withdrawn from creation and now stands outside of the actuality of this world, then we lose him and are unable to maintain communication with him. His existence cannot become truly real to us unless we are permitted to conceive of him as not only above the world, but in his very self in the world, and thus as indwelling in all his works.” (Pg. 20-21)
He argues, “If God does not exist, or if he has not revealed himself, and hence is unknowable, then all religion is an illusion and all theology a phantasm. But, built on the basis of revelation, theology undertakes a glorious task---the unfolding of the science of the revelation of God and of our knowledge concerning him… But side by side … there is room also for a PHILOSOPHY OF REVELATION which will trace the idea of revelation, both in its form and in its content, and correlate it with the rest of our knowledge and life.” (Pg. 24)
He outlines, “The philosophy of revelation … must take its start from its object, from revelation. There is but one alternative: either there is no revelation, and then all speculation is idle; or else there comes to us out of history such a revelation, shining by its own light; and then it tells us, not only what its content is, but also how it comes into existence…. No philosophy of revelation … shall ever be able to exhaust its subject, or thoroughly to master its material. All knowledge here on earth remains partial; it walks by faith and attains not to sight. But nevertheless it lives and works in the assurance that the ground of all things is not blind will or incalculable accident, but mind, intelligence, wisdom. In the next place the philosophy of revelation seeks to correlate the wisdom which it finds in revelation with that which is furnished by the world at large.” (Pg. 26)
He notes, “[Man] does not invent the idea of God nor produce it; it is given to him and he receives it. Atheism is not proper to man by nature, but develops at a later stage of life, on the ground of philosophic reflection… By nature… every man believes in God. And this is due… to the fact that God… has not left himself without witness, but through all nature, both that of man himself and that of the outside world, speaks to him. Not evolution, but revelation alone accounts for this impressive and incontrovertible fact of the worship of God. In self-consciousness God makes known to us man, the world, and himself. Hence this revelation is of the utmost importance, not only for religion, but also for philosophy, and particularly for epistemology.” (Pg. 79)
He asserts, “Faith… maintains its demand that natural science shall retain consciousness of its limitations and that it shall not form a conception… in which no room is left for the soul and immortality, for intelligence and design in the world, for the existence and providence of God, for religion and Christianity. Natural science remains, therefore, perfectly free in its sphere; but it is not the only science, and must therefore cease striving to construe religious and ethical phenomena after the same physico-chemical and mathematico-mechanical fashion as is warranted and required in the case of numberless natural phenomena... what faith demands is that science shall itself maintain its ethical character, and shall not put itself at the service of the evil inclination of the human heart to endeavor to explain the world without God and to erect itself into a self-supporting and self-sufficient divinity.” (Pg. 86)
He states, “The Christian view of nature is gradually giving place to that of the heathen peoples; and the widely spread movements of theosophy and spiritism, of telepathy and astrology, assist in this degradation of man under nature. The un-deification of nature turns into deification of nature, the royal liberty of man into fatalistic subjection. Man can attain to a true, free relation to nature only when he stands in his true relation to God. And this we owe to Christianity alone.” (Pg. 105-106)
He points out, “There are a multitude of ideas, a whole complex of views regarding the chief concerns of life which men have in common. They concern the idea of God… the unity and harmony of creation… the struggle between good and evil, the memory of a golden age and a subsequent decay, the wrath of the gods and the hope of reconciliation… the immortality of the soul and the expectation of … reward and punishment in the hereafter. All these fundamental ideas form the beginning and the foundation of history, the principle starting-point of all religion, mortality, and law… All these fundamentals … point back to a divine origin… Knowledge in this sense flows from revelation. To this original revelation is joined on that revelation which according to the Old Testament was bestowed upon Israel.” (Pg. 187-188)
He notes, “Christianity is the absolutely spiritual religion, because it is the only religion which sets religion in relation to God alone; there is nothing else but religion; the idea of religion is completely fulfilled in it. For if religion is a reality, then necessarily it must consist in this---that man… shall rightly acknowledge the one true God… Now, this is completely fulfilled in Christianity… Christianity is .. the pure religion, the full and complete, indissoluble and eternal, fellowship of God and man.” (Pg. 222) Later, he adds, “The Christian religion cannot abandon this supernaturalism without annihilating itself. There is even no religion thinkable or possible without belief in a supernatural power.” (Pg. 254)
He concludes, “Thus it appears that neither science nor philosophy, neither ethics nor culture, can give that security with regard to the future which we have need of, not only for our thought, but also for our whole life and action.” (Pg. 305)
This book will be of great interest to those (particularly from a Calvinist/Reformed background) interested in the development of Christian philosophy.
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) was a Dutch Reformed theologian and churchman. He wrote in the Preface, “The following lectures were prepared in response to an invitation from the faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary to deliver the L.P. Stone Lectures for the academic year of 1908 and 1909. Only six of them were actually delivered, however, at Princeton. These are represented by the first seven lectures as here printed… Some of the lectures have been delivered also at Grand Rapids and Hollland, Mich.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to a 349-page edition.]
He states in the first lecture, “Humanity as a whole has been at all times supranaturalistic to the core. Neither in thought nor in life have men been able to satisfy themselves with the things of this world; they have always assumed a heaven above the earth, and behind what is visible a higher and holier order of invisible powers and blessings. This means that God and the world … have… stood in the closest connection; religion and civilization have not appeared as contradictory and opposing principles, but religion has been the source of all civilization, the basis of all orderly life in the family, the state, and society… The ancient view of the world was thoroughly religions… Christianity introduced no change in this respect.” (Pg. 1-2)
He says, “The true religion which shall satisfy our mind and heart, our conscience and our will, must be one that does not shut us up in, but lifts us up high above, the world; in the midst of time fi must impart to us eternity; in the midst of death give us life; in the midst of the stream of change place us on the immovable rock of salvation. This is the reason why transcendence, supranaturalism, revelation, are essential to all religion.” (Pg. 17)
He asserts, “With the reality of revelation, therefore, Christianity stands or falls. But our insight into the mode and content of revelation admits of being clarified; and, in consequence, our conception of this act of divine grace is capable of being modified. As a matter of fact, this has taken place in modern theology… Through the extraordinary advance of science our world-view has undergone a great change. The world has become immeasurably large for us… If God’s dwelling lies somewhere far away, outside the world, and his transcendence is to be understood in the sense that he has withdrawn from creation and now stands outside of the actuality of this world, then we lose him and are unable to maintain communication with him. His existence cannot become truly real to us unless we are permitted to conceive of him as not only above the world, but in his very self in the world, and thus as indwelling in all his works.” (Pg. 20-21)
He argues, “If God does not exist, or if he has not revealed himself, and hence is unknowable, then all religion is an illusion and all theology a phantasm. But, built on the basis of revelation, theology undertakes a glorious task---the unfolding of the science of the revelation of God and of our knowledge concerning him… But side by side … there is room also for a PHILOSOPHY OF REVELATION which will trace the idea of revelation, both in its form and in its content, and correlate it with the rest of our knowledge and life.” (Pg. 24)
He outlines, “The philosophy of revelation … must take its start from its object, from revelation. There is but one alternative: either there is no revelation, and then all speculation is idle; or else there comes to us out of history such a revelation, shining by its own light; and then it tells us, not only what its content is, but also how it comes into existence…. No philosophy of revelation … shall ever be able to exhaust its subject, or thoroughly to master its material. All knowledge here on earth remains partial; it walks by faith and attains not to sight. But nevertheless it lives and works in the assurance that the ground of all things is not blind will or incalculable accident, but mind, intelligence, wisdom. In the next place the philosophy of revelation seeks to correlate the wisdom which it finds in revelation with that which is furnished by the world at large.” (Pg. 26)
He notes, “[Man] does not invent the idea of God nor produce it; it is given to him and he receives it. Atheism is not proper to man by nature, but develops at a later stage of life, on the ground of philosophic reflection… By nature… every man believes in God. And this is due… to the fact that God… has not left himself without witness, but through all nature, both that of man himself and that of the outside world, speaks to him. Not evolution, but revelation alone accounts for this impressive and incontrovertible fact of the worship of God. In self-consciousness God makes known to us man, the world, and himself. Hence this revelation is of the utmost importance, not only for religion, but also for philosophy, and particularly for epistemology.” (Pg. 79)
He asserts, “Faith… maintains its demand that natural science shall retain consciousness of its limitations and that it shall not form a conception… in which no room is left for the soul and immortality, for intelligence and design in the world, for the existence and providence of God, for religion and Christianity. Natural science remains, therefore, perfectly free in its sphere; but it is not the only science, and must therefore cease striving to construe religious and ethical phenomena after the same physico-chemical and mathematico-mechanical fashion as is warranted and required in the case of numberless natural phenomena... what faith demands is that science shall itself maintain its ethical character, and shall not put itself at the service of the evil inclination of the human heart to endeavor to explain the world without God and to erect itself into a self-supporting and self-sufficient divinity.” (Pg. 86)
He states, “The Christian view of nature is gradually giving place to that of the heathen peoples; and the widely spread movements of theosophy and spiritism, of telepathy and astrology, assist in this degradation of man under nature. The un-deification of nature turns into deification of nature, the royal liberty of man into fatalistic subjection. Man can attain to a true, free relation to nature only when he stands in his true relation to God. And this we owe to Christianity alone.” (Pg. 105-106)
He points out, “There are a multitude of ideas, a whole complex of views regarding the chief concerns of life which men have in common. They concern the idea of God… the unity and harmony of creation… the struggle between good and evil, the memory of a golden age and a subsequent decay, the wrath of the gods and the hope of reconciliation… the immortality of the soul and the expectation of … reward and punishment in the hereafter. All these fundamental ideas form the beginning and the foundation of history, the principle starting-point of all religion, mortality, and law… All these fundamentals … point back to a divine origin… Knowledge in this sense flows from revelation. To this original revelation is joined on that revelation which according to the Old Testament was bestowed upon Israel.” (Pg. 187-188)
He notes, “Christianity is the absolutely spiritual religion, because it is the only religion which sets religion in relation to God alone; there is nothing else but religion; the idea of religion is completely fulfilled in it. For if religion is a reality, then necessarily it must consist in this---that man… shall rightly acknowledge the one true God… Now, this is completely fulfilled in Christianity… Christianity is .. the pure religion, the full and complete, indissoluble and eternal, fellowship of God and man.” (Pg. 222) Later, he adds, “The Christian religion cannot abandon this supernaturalism without annihilating itself. There is even no religion thinkable or possible without belief in a supernatural power.” (Pg. 254)
He concludes, “Thus it appears that neither science nor philosophy, neither ethics nor culture, can give that security with regard to the future which we have need of, not only for our thought, but also for our whole life and action.” (Pg. 305)
This book will be of great interest to those (particularly from a Calvinist/Reformed background) interested in the development of Christian philosophy.
September 30, 2025
Much like Kuyper, it is hard to read Bavinck without being ever conscious of his time and place. There is much in this work that speaks to us today, but a lot of his commentary is also directed at the particular views of his time. For that reason, it became interesting to reflect on how his ideas have aged over the last century. How do his views on "evolution" (the broad, philosophical idea) interact with the advances in Darwinian evolutionary biology? Does the emphasis on monism still speak to us, and if so, how? Admittedly, this requires a clear sense of his thesis, and it took me some time to be able to articulate that. When Bavinck discusses revelation, what he means is not just Scripture, or redemptive history, but rather the idea that what exists and matters for us must have a source, must be given to us, cannot have been built from nothing. Man, truth, religion, culture, knowledge, history, science, morality, hope for the future -- there is no principle by which these things can build themselves.
Overall, I think it is a worthwhile read. He does occasionally show his age, and he is not very systematic, but you can clearly see his place in the development of the reformational philosophy. He is not arguing for Kuyperian sphere sovereignty, but his emphasis on the diversity of reality and on the utter dependence of its meaning on its origin in God's will are good and worthwhile reflections.
Overall, I think it is a worthwhile read. He does occasionally show his age, and he is not very systematic, but you can clearly see his place in the development of the reformational philosophy. He is not arguing for Kuyperian sphere sovereignty, but his emphasis on the diversity of reality and on the utter dependence of its meaning on its origin in God's will are good and worthwhile reflections.
May 10, 2023
As someone who regards Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics among the best of all dogmatics written to date, I count it no small thing to say that his Philosophy of Revelation may be his most important writing. Surveying the history of thought, philosophy, the “sciences,” Bavinck shines a spotlight upon human longing as it seeks for security, peace, and unity within myriad human systems of thought. As he does this, he takes the reader in each chapter to the way in which the gospel of Christ found in the true revelation of God in the Scriptures is the only satisfaction.
The presence of this universal longing fractured into so many human ideas does not itself save the masses. The mere fact of the longing and a searching for its satisfaction is not enough. Only Christ is the revelation of the true salvation, of the true satisfaction. But the longing provides a backdrop for understanding, for conversation, for apologetic, for missions to the longing world. To be able to recognize the hidden longing in the various world and life views, and even the great worldviews, is meant to provide a great opportunity to offer Christ as he is offered in the gospel.
Bavinck offers help in this recognition.
The presence of this universal longing fractured into so many human ideas does not itself save the masses. The mere fact of the longing and a searching for its satisfaction is not enough. Only Christ is the revelation of the true salvation, of the true satisfaction. But the longing provides a backdrop for understanding, for conversation, for apologetic, for missions to the longing world. To be able to recognize the hidden longing in the various world and life views, and even the great worldviews, is meant to provide a great opportunity to offer Christ as he is offered in the gospel.
Bavinck offers help in this recognition.
November 2, 2025
This is a collection of Lectures given at Princeton Seminary and Michigan over 100 years ago. In some sense Bavinck is giving a thorough literature review in different fields and argue for the necessity and validity of Christian revelation.
The first three lectures are very informative for me. But I’d say some of the arguments especially related to Natural science are now outdated even though I agree with his conclusions in the end. Some parts of the book should be updated, so not like Smith endorsed that “it’s as timely as ever”.
The annotations provided in the second edition are more quotation in original languages and reference citations for academic purposes and less on explaining the context which is far from modern day readers. In that sense you probably do not need a new edition you already owned one.
Honestly if the author is not Herman Bavinck, I won’t finish the book. But I should learn to appreciate his theological stance as it paved the way for others that I’ve benefited a lot from.
But what remains striking to me is the broad-mindedness of Bavinck when he engages with other philosophers, I admire that.
The first three lectures are very informative for me. But I’d say some of the arguments especially related to Natural science are now outdated even though I agree with his conclusions in the end. Some parts of the book should be updated, so not like Smith endorsed that “it’s as timely as ever”.
The annotations provided in the second edition are more quotation in original languages and reference citations for academic purposes and less on explaining the context which is far from modern day readers. In that sense you probably do not need a new edition you already owned one.
Honestly if the author is not Herman Bavinck, I won’t finish the book. But I should learn to appreciate his theological stance as it paved the way for others that I’ve benefited a lot from.
But what remains striking to me is the broad-mindedness of Bavinck when he engages with other philosophers, I admire that.
February 22, 2018
Though it can be difficult to muscle through because of its thorough and concentrated coverage of relevant content, it's well worth the journey. Bavinck propounds a firm presuppositional worldview that demands that inquiry begin where it all began: the one, true personal God revealed in the man Jesus as taught by Christianity. While some of the ideas he critiques are more or less outdated, the philosophical structures and excuses these ideas appealed to are still alive and well, and this aging work feels fresh and relevant even today. A good, slow, challenging read.
August 23, 2021
This book is an excellent apologetic concerning God’s special and general revelation in relation to the scientific domains of the day. Bavinck offers a different lens through which to understand the variety of scientific domains: unity in diversity rooted in God’s revelation. This book gives unifying answers to anyone struggling to connect Christianity with religion, history, philosophy, nature and the future without forsaking intrinsic and organic diversity.
October 24, 2024
An absolute treasure. Accessible, encouraging, thought provoking, realistic, logical, biblical. Great footnotes for referenced works and particular translation updates compared to the first edition. What is the necessity of revelation?
“In the knowledge of the truth lies the end of its revelation; reality is an instrument to enable us to find the truth, … the truth obtains an independent value of its own. Its standard does not lie in its usefulness for life… Christ sacrificed his life for it.” 68
“The representation is therefore wrong that faith in the existence and providence of God finds its home exclusively in the chasms of our knowledge, so that as our investigations proceed, we must be continually filled with anxiety and steadily lose the territory of our faith in proportion as more and more problems are solved. For the world itself is grounded in God; witness its law and order.” 72
“Man does not produce truth by thought (denkende) in any dominion, and certainly not in religion, but by inquiry and study he learns to know the truth, which exists independently of and before him.” 189
“In the knowledge of the truth lies the end of its revelation; reality is an instrument to enable us to find the truth, … the truth obtains an independent value of its own. Its standard does not lie in its usefulness for life… Christ sacrificed his life for it.” 68
“The representation is therefore wrong that faith in the existence and providence of God finds its home exclusively in the chasms of our knowledge, so that as our investigations proceed, we must be continually filled with anxiety and steadily lose the territory of our faith in proportion as more and more problems are solved. For the world itself is grounded in God; witness its law and order.” 72
“Man does not produce truth by thought (denkende) in any dominion, and certainly not in religion, but by inquiry and study he learns to know the truth, which exists independently of and before him.” 189
September 18, 2017
This is a thoroughly enjoyable read, and surprisingly applicable. While it is aimed at answering many of the demands of modern critical philosophy, it even applies to postmodern critical philosophy.
September 5, 2019
Shockingly relevant even though it is a century old. There is no neutrality in the matter of philosophy and revelation.
Read
December 27, 2020Must read for the thinking Christian
Possibly the best Christian book ever on Christian truth, worldview and future.
Devastating and unsurpassed analysis of anti Christian thought.
Possibly the best Christian book ever on Christian truth, worldview and future.
Devastating and unsurpassed analysis of anti Christian thought.
June 4, 2021
Very good, indeed. Some lectures were a little flat, but on the whole it was learned and insightful. The lecture on history was outstanding.
June 21, 2024
Very difficult to understand. A lot of information fly past my head. Lots of background knowledge is needed to understand this work properly.
Want to read
July 11, 2025Similar to his foundations of psychology, I got lost in his engagement with authors from his own timeframe.
September 25, 2023
"Just because something looks ugly doesn't mean it's morally wrong." — Greta Gerwig
On the category of sure victories and trifling things.
Authors of this kind of apologetics are already a little ridiculous, piling up big institutional titles, and must do something to justify themselves. The only situations in which we can afford to run up the score like this are the certain victory, the game, and when anything but abundant success is already defeat. We are getting far away from Kierkegaard, who is willing to make any concession to win the smallest victory i.e. "the possibility of a possibility." So, much more appears to be at stake here, though actually much less. (Hard to imagine (actually quite easy) that the pre-war Calvinist already imagined himself to be at the end of the history of philosophy. (To have lived before Foucault is the same problem as to have lived (and died) before the Incarnation, which is one of eschatological significance. 'How is it possible to live (to die) without having known this?" the reality is that it is not different than otherwise...))
A matter of course, motivational theology commences humble enough, though, in one of the coincidences of genre, often finds itself concluding with the goose step and roman salute. I had long wondered how modern (reactionary) exegetes sequestered away the ethical burden of Faith. I refer, below, to the curious reasoning by which we exalt Christ, condemn imitation of Christ-like behavior as mutilating "asceticism," declare the gospel of Christ "already-fulfilled," disdain the "pragmatism" of Good Works personally, uphold the "Institutions and Accomplishments" of Christianity writ-large, and thank the Lord for providing the "standard and guide" to judge what we may or may not be doing by continuing voting Republican down-ticket; a reasoning which, for my own archival purposes, unfortunately, I must quote in long form:
"Christ, who as the Word created all things, and bore the cross as the Servant of the Lord, is the same who rose again and ascended into heaven, and will return as Judge of the living and the dead. In his exaltation he regains what he denied himself in his humiliation; but now it is freed from guilt, purified from stain, reborn and renewed by the Spirit. [...] Christ himself took again the body in which he bore on the cross the sin of the world; he has received all power in heaven and earth, and is exalted by God himself to his right hand as Lord and Christ. The demand that we return from the Pauline and Johannine Christ to the so-called historical Jesus, the gospel of the Synoptics, the sermon on the mount and the parables, is not only impracticable, because in the whole New Testament the same dead and risen Christ meets us, but mutilates the gospel, leads to asceticism, and creates an irreconcilable dissension between creation and re-creation, the Old and New Testaments, nature and grace, the Creator of the world and the Father of Christ.
Such a dissension may be proper to Gnosticism and Manichaeism, and also to the Buddhism admired by so many, but it is in direct contradiction to Christianity. The truth and value of Christianity do not depend on the fruits which it has borne for civilization and culture: it has its own independent value; it is the realization of the kingdom of God on earth; and it does not make its truth depend, after a utilitarian or pragmatic fashion, on what men here have accomplished with the talents entrusted to them. The gospel of Christ promises righteousness and peace and joy, and has fulfilled its promise if it gives these things. [...] The gospel gives us a standard by which we can judge phenomena and events; it is an absolute measure which enables us to determine the value of the present life; it is a guide to show us the way in the labyrinth of the present world; it raises us above time, and teaches us to view all things from the standpoint of eternity. Where could we find such a standard and guide if the everlasting gospel did not supply it? It is opposed to nothing that is pure and good and lovely. It condemns sin always and everywhere; but it cherishes marriage and the family, society and the state, nature and history, science and art. In spite of the many faults of its confessors, it has been in the course of the ages a rich benediction for all these institutions and accomplishments.
May 29, 2015
Bavinck argues that a monistic account of the world cannot ground unity or diversity. By contrast, the Christian revelation can account for a unity and a diversity that is not located within the phenomenal realm. Bavinck traces the idea of revelation in its form and content and how it correlates with the rest of life (Bavinck 18). Accordingly, and perhaps truistically, philosophy of revelation takes its starting point from its object: revelation.
Bavinck then gives a tour-de-force of modern philosophy. While he firmly rejects these philosophies, he doesn't give hysterical reductions of everything to Pantheism, Hegelianism, Darwinism, Insert-Bad-Guy-ism. He sees clear advances they make against other secular alternatives.
idealism: correct in that reality is mediated by consciousness. False when it infers from that the object of perception is within the mind itself (36). Idealism confounds act with content.
self-consciousness: the unity of real and ideal being. We know it immediately. Here Bavinck anticipates later Reformed Epistemology: self-consciousness is a properly basic belief. We do not know it by reasoning from prior beliefs.
Christian revelation imparts a new kind of certainty (40). This certainty is a confidence in God’s promises.
Augustine’s claim on knowing God and the self:
a. Augustine descended beyond thought alone: life precedes thought; faith, knowledge
b. the essence of the soul is not simply thought alone. He found ideas, norms, laws of certainty, truth.
c. Memoria, intellectus, voluntas.
Echoing later neo-Calvinist themes, Bavinck sees that each branch of knowledge (science, theology) has a barrier around it, not a boundary. Each branch must respect its own object of knowledge and character. Kant unwittingly showed that when science tries to peer into the “essence” of things, it creates antinomies (57).
The only way unity can preserve true differentiation is when it includes and enfolds the entire world seen as the product of divine wisdom (57-58).
Evaluation:
Bavinck, like Van Til after him, was incapable of giving a precision strike against a target. Sometimes the chapters seemed to go on and on. On the other hand, Bavinck, like Van Til, was able to carpet bomb and thoroughly cover an entire area.
Some pages were simply beautiful. Bavinck has a magnificently stirring section contrasting the Bible with Babylonian magick (112ff). He writes, "The Bible did not come from Babylon, but in its fundamental thought is in diametrical opposition to Babylon, and made an end to Babylon's spiritual dominion over the peoples." That last clause is crucial: Babylon was never merely a political oppressor, but brought to bear her demonic, albeit immaterial personalities to its politics.
While brief, this book is not particularly easy reading. Bavinck assumes that you are relatively familiar with continental philosophy in the 18th and 19th centuries. Further, most of his footnotes are in German, Dutch, or Latin. Finally, my edition (AlevBooks) has larger pages and more words on a page than you would normally expect.
Bavinck then gives a tour-de-force of modern philosophy. While he firmly rejects these philosophies, he doesn't give hysterical reductions of everything to Pantheism, Hegelianism, Darwinism, Insert-Bad-Guy-ism. He sees clear advances they make against other secular alternatives.
idealism: correct in that reality is mediated by consciousness. False when it infers from that the object of perception is within the mind itself (36). Idealism confounds act with content.
self-consciousness: the unity of real and ideal being. We know it immediately. Here Bavinck anticipates later Reformed Epistemology: self-consciousness is a properly basic belief. We do not know it by reasoning from prior beliefs.
Christian revelation imparts a new kind of certainty (40). This certainty is a confidence in God’s promises.
Augustine’s claim on knowing God and the self:
a. Augustine descended beyond thought alone: life precedes thought; faith, knowledge
b. the essence of the soul is not simply thought alone. He found ideas, norms, laws of certainty, truth.
c. Memoria, intellectus, voluntas.
Echoing later neo-Calvinist themes, Bavinck sees that each branch of knowledge (science, theology) has a barrier around it, not a boundary. Each branch must respect its own object of knowledge and character. Kant unwittingly showed that when science tries to peer into the “essence” of things, it creates antinomies (57).
The only way unity can preserve true differentiation is when it includes and enfolds the entire world seen as the product of divine wisdom (57-58).
Evaluation:
Bavinck, like Van Til after him, was incapable of giving a precision strike against a target. Sometimes the chapters seemed to go on and on. On the other hand, Bavinck, like Van Til, was able to carpet bomb and thoroughly cover an entire area.
Some pages were simply beautiful. Bavinck has a magnificently stirring section contrasting the Bible with Babylonian magick (112ff). He writes, "The Bible did not come from Babylon, but in its fundamental thought is in diametrical opposition to Babylon, and made an end to Babylon's spiritual dominion over the peoples." That last clause is crucial: Babylon was never merely a political oppressor, but brought to bear her demonic, albeit immaterial personalities to its politics.
While brief, this book is not particularly easy reading. Bavinck assumes that you are relatively familiar with continental philosophy in the 18th and 19th centuries. Further, most of his footnotes are in German, Dutch, or Latin. Finally, my edition (AlevBooks) has larger pages and more words on a page than you would normally expect.
December 19, 2022
Bavinck’s 1908 Stone Lectures at Princeton Seminary. He argues, inductively, that divine revelation rests behind every area of study. Not my favourite work of Bavinck's.
November 5, 2020
Revelation underlies and explains reality. That's the core idea of this work of Bavinck's. The insights are of inestimable worth to apologetics.
This may not be the greatest example, however, of Bavinck's writing. Most of these essays are excellent, but a few of them are difficult to follow due to meandering organization and a lack of clear thesis statements.
The book also has a steep price of admission in terms of the prerequisite understanding of philosophy and the hard sciences at the turn of the century. With out a doubt, a significant amount of this book went over my head. I'm a bit used to that with Bavinck, though.
On the whole, this is a book well worth reading, and will reward anyone who puts in the effort.
This may not be the greatest example, however, of Bavinck's writing. Most of these essays are excellent, but a few of them are difficult to follow due to meandering organization and a lack of clear thesis statements.
The book also has a steep price of admission in terms of the prerequisite understanding of philosophy and the hard sciences at the turn of the century. With out a doubt, a significant amount of this book went over my head. I'm a bit used to that with Bavinck, though.
On the whole, this is a book well worth reading, and will reward anyone who puts in the effort.
May 21, 2012
Herman Bavinck visited the Old Princeton Theological Seminary and delivered this series of philosophy of revelation in the Stone Lectures 1908-1909 per the invitation of Geerhardus Vos and B. B. Warfield. This work is a magnificent summary of the Reformed critique and the rationalism since the Enlightenment. It grounded Van Til's elaboration of presuppositionalism; and most significantly, it provided an epistemological support for Vos's biblical-theological methodology that centered revelation as the guiding principle of organizing biblical data.
October 10, 2012
Really good, even if a little dated in terms of interaction with contemporary theologicans and philosophers- these were given at Princeton in the very early 20th century. Learned, weighty, biblical and theological, purveying a warmth and devotion, at the same time.
July 15, 2011
Absolutely magnificent. Bavinck is a master historical, systematic, exegetical, and philosophical theologian.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews