Dogmatic Theology

by William Greenough Thayer Shedd, Alan W. Gomes (Editor)

This is a reproduction of a book published before 1923. This book may have occasional imperfections such as missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. that were either part of the original artifact, or were introduced by the scanning process. We believe this work is culturally important, and despite the imperfections, have elected to bring it back into print as part of our continuing commitment to the preservation of printed works worldwide. We appreciate your understanding of the imperfections in the preservation process, and hope you enjoy this valuable book.

Genres: Theology, Reference, Philosophy, Religion, Nonfiction

992 pages, Hardcover

Published October 20, 2003

About the author

William Greenough Thayer Shedd, son of the Reverend Marshall Shedd and Eliza Thayer, was an American Presbyterian theologian born in Acton, Massachusetts.

In 1835, Shedd enrolled at the University of Vermont, and became a protégé of UVM president James Marsh. Under the influence of his mentor, Shedd was deeply affected by the thought of Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Transcendentalism. He graduated from UVM in 1839 and taught school for one year, during which time he began to attend the Presbyterian church. Being called to the ministry, Shedd entered Andover Theological Seminary in 1840 and studied under theologian Leonard Woods. He graduated in 1843.

Reviews

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 5 out of 5]

While there are some gaps in Shedd, he is strong precisely where the modern church is weak (if I may borrow a phrase from Packer). This updated edition by Gomes is a masterpiece. It is magnificently bound, has accessible foonotes, but yet handles nicely.

True, Shedd does have his hobbyhorses and they sometimes keep him from addressing other issues (e.g., church government) but he brings undiscussed material to the table from a perspective of one long schooled in the Christian tradition. I will focus on several key themes: traducianism, the human will. soteriology, and endless punishment.

*Traducianism*

Shedd's Traducianisim applies the idea of species to body and soul (431). The key question: when God created Adam and Eve, did he create in and with them the invisible substance of all the succeeding generations of men? And by this “invisible substance” Shedd simply means the “principle of life itself” (434). Key argument: the whole female was produced out of the male (439).

Traducianism refuses to separate punishment from culpability. On semipelagian views, we are punished (death) for that which we aren’t culpable (Adam’s sin). But does this ruin the Adam/Christ parallel? No. Shedd says it is a fallacy to think that if penal suffering can be imputed, so must sin (462). Righteousness can be imputed two ways: meritoriously and unmeritoriously. Sin can’t. Righteousness is a gift. Sin is wages.

Shedd has a good explanation of Romans 5. Infants sinned in Adam, but not after the likeness of Adam. They only sinned in the probationary sense, not in Adam’s postlapsarian sins (479).

*Human Willing*

Shedd makes the distinction between "voluntary" and "volitional." If man’s will is in a state of indifference with no inclination whatsoever, it could never begin self-motion. Freedom of the will, on a biblical view, is primarily self-determination to a single end, not a choice between two yet unchosen contraries (503). Pelagian psychology defines freedom as indifference (suppl. 4.2.6). Scriptural psychology sees it as the spontaneous inclining of the will to what God commands and aversion of what he forbids. The Pelagian view is wholly in volitions.

Therefore, for Shedd, inclination is not volition. The first activity of the will is inclination, not volition (504). Man is biased in his will before he chooses. Inclination terminates on the soul. Volition on the body. Inclination is the central action of the will; volition is the superficial action (519). The action of the will is best termed voluntary. The superficial action is volitionary.
All volitionary acts of choice are performed to satisfy the prevailing inclination of the wil (520).
Volitions are means.

*Endless Punishment*

The doctrine of endless punishment is associated with the denial of those tenets which are logically and closely connected with it: original sin, vicarious atonement, and regeneration (885). But before we get to his conclusion, we must look at Shedd's logical (but brutal) refutation of conditional immortality:

1. Annihilationism is false for the following reasons:
1.1 Death is the opposite of birth and birth does not mean the creation of substance.
1.2 The spiritually dead are described in scripture as conscious.
1.3 The extinction of consciousness is not the nature of punishment. The essence of punishment is suffering, and suffering implies consciousness.
1.4 According to this theory, brutes are punished
1.5 The advocate of conditional immortality, in teaching the extinction of consciousness as eternal death, implies that the continuance of consciousness is eternal life. But mere consciousness is not happiness. Judas was conscious, certainly, when he hung himself, but he was not happy (899)

Rational argument: endless punishment, outside of its scriptural defense, needs three points: a just God, man has free agency, and that sin is a voluntary action (911). The objection that endless punishment is overkill for a temporary sin/crime fails to understand the nature of punishment. You aren’t ever punished for the duration of the crime committed. You are punished, for example, for murdering someone (which usually takes just an instant), not on how long the stabbing took.

The continuous nature of guilt necessitates the endlessness of retribution. Sinners in hell are hardened in their sin. In the very act of transgressing the law of God, there is a reflex action of the human will upon itself, whereby it becomes unable to perfectly keep that law” (923). And the endless suffering of a finite being isn’t exactly “infinite.” The being is finite, since he has a beginning.

*Conclusion*

As Gomes noted in his introduction, this book is a literary feast. While Shedd leaves many topics undiscussed, he is unsurpassed in his own way. Hodge might have been the better organizer and Dabney the most penetrating thinker, but Shedd is the best writer and probably the most powerful thinker.

[Brian Park · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a mixed bag. It is very good introductory material for graduate level systematic theology and has lots of interesting insights, but I detect far too many logical slips in much of Shedd's argumentation. It is deeper but more questionable than Grudem's systematic theology. However, it is no question that Shedd is well-read given the sheer wealth of quotes from a wide variety of theologians.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A 19TH CENT. PRESBYTERIAN/REFORMED SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY

William Greenough Thayer Shedd (1820-1894) was an American Presbyterian theologian who served at a pastor several times, was professor of church history at Andover Theological Seminary (1854–1862), and of systematic theology (1874–1890) at Union Theological Seminary.

He wrote in the Preface to this 1888 book, “The general type of doctrine is the Augustino-Calvinistic. Upon a few points, the elder Calvinism has been followed in preference to the later. This, probably is the principal difference between this treatise and contemporary one of the Calvinistic class. Upon the subject of Adam’s sin and its imputation… In adopting the traducian theory of the origin of the soul… [the author] believes that he has the support of some of the most careful students of Scripture… It will be objected by some that this dogmatic system … has been too much influenced by the patristic, medieval, and reformation periods, and too little by the so-called ‘progress’ of modern theology… The author has no disposition to repel the charge… In drawing from these earlier sources, the writer believes that systematic theology will be made both more truthful and more vital… That this treatise may contribute to strengthen the believer’s confidence in this revelation, and to incline the unbeliever to exercise faith in it, is the prayer of the author.”

He states, “General or unwritten revelation, though trustworthy, is not INFALLIBLE. This differentiates it from the special or written revelation… In the first place, the ethical and religious teaching of God through the structure of the human mind is vitiated more or less by human depravity… Secondly, infallibility cannot be attributed to the unwritten revelation, because of the limitations of the finite mind.” (Pg. 66)

He adds, “The primary and the secondary, the doctrinal and the historical elements of Scripture stand and fall together… It is impossible that God would reveal a fact of doctrine to the human mind, and do nothing towards securing an accurate statement of it. This is particularly the case, when the doctrine is one of the mysteries of religion. Such profound truths as the trinity, the incarnation, vicarious atonement, etc., require the superintendence and guidance of an infallible Spirit to secure an enunciation that shall not be misleading.” (Pg. 75-76)

He acknowledges, “Had the Gospels been forged, there would not have been even seeming discrepancies, because pains would have been taken to avoid them… Luke’s order differs in some particulars from that of Matthew, but this does not prove that there is historical error in either of them. A biographer may know the actual and true order, and yet alter it for logical or rhetorical reasons. He may, for such reasons, throw together in one group a series of parables or miracles which were spoken or wrought at different times, and still his account of the parables and miracles cannot be charged with mistake, because the grouping is apparent on the face of his narrative.” (Pg. 94-95)

He asserts, “The moral character produced by New Testament Christianity is higher than that produced by other religions. The Vedas, the Koran, and the still better writings of Plato and Aristotle, do not transform human nature as do the Scriptures.” (Pg. 115)

He suggests, “one of the few benefits … that have been wrought by modern pantheism, that it has brought into view the ABSOLUTENESS of the Deity; his transcendent perfection of being. It is true that … In identifying man and the universe with God, it obliterates the distinction between the finite and Infinite… But setting aside this self-contradiction… and considering simply the energy with which a pantheist like Hegel… insists upon the unconditioned nature of the Absolute spirit, we perceive that even fatal error may have an element of truth in it.” (Pg. 157-158) Later, he adds,
“That the idea of unextended spiritual substance is a rational idea, is proved by the fact that the human intellect naturally adopts it. Plato and Aristotle argues in defense of it, in opposition to the atheistic schools of their time…” (Pg. 167)

He states, “While … God as a most pure spirit has no passions, he has feelings and emotions. He is not passively wrought upon by the objective universe, so that he experiences physical impressions and organic appetites, as the creature does, but he is self-moved in all his feelings.” (Pg. 178)

He asserts, “The imbruted condition or the idolatrous world does not disprove the existence of the innate idea of the deity. A fundamental idea in the human constitution may be greatly undeveloped, or vitiated, and still be a reality.” (Pg. 207)

He acknowledges, “The doctrine of the Trinity is revealed in the Old Testament, in the same degree that the other truths of Christianity are; not with the clearness and fulness of the New Testament, yet really and plainly. God is trinal in the Old Testament; but with more vagueness than in the New.” (Pg. 262) Later, he adds, “The great mystery of the Trinitty is, that one and the very same substance, can subsist as an undivided whole in three persons SIMULTANEOUSLY… that a substance without any division, or distribution, can at the same instant constitute three distinct persons, baffles the human understanding. In the sphere of matter, this would not only be incomprehensible, but absurd… But spirit is not subject to the conditions of matter… It is no contradiction …to say that the one numerical Divine essence is indivisibly and wholly present at a million points of space at the same time, without making it a million of essences.” (Pg. 297-298) He continues, “While there is this absolute equality among the Divine persons in respect to the grade of being to which they belong… there is at the same time a kind of subordination among them. It is trinitarian, or filial subordination… in respect to order and relationship. As a relation, sonship is subordinate to fatherhood.” (Pg. 301)

He says, “The happiness of this creature cannot be the final end of God’s action. There would be no wisdom in this case, because the superior would be subordinated to the inferior… happiness from its very nature cannot be an ultimate end, because to seek it is to fail of getting it… Hence the command is, ‘Be ye holy,’ not ‘Be ye happy.’” (Pg. 357-358)

He states, “No one of the Divine attributes is supported by more or stronger evidences, than retributive justice… The testimony from Scripture is abundant… retributive justice is retrospective in its primary aim. It looks back at what has been done in the past. Its first object is requital… It is true that moral improvement may be the consequence of the infliction of the penalty. But the consequence must not be confounded with the purpose…” (Pg. 380-381)

He argues, “Respecting the alleged contradiction between the Divine decree and human freedom, the following particulars are to be noticed… The inspired writers are not conscious of a contradiction, because they do not … make any attempt to harmonize the two things… There is no contradiction between the Divine decree and human liberty, provided the difference between an Infinite and a finite being is steadily kept in mind… [God] asserts that an act of human will is free for both the Divine and the human mind, but certain for the former and uncertain for the latter… God, while knowing that the human will is free in every act, knows the whole series of its free acts in ONE intuition… God not only knows all events, but he decrees them. He makes them certain by an exercise of power.” (G> 401-403)

He observes, “How the permissive decree can make the origin of sin a certainty, is an inscrutable mystery. God is not the author of sin, and hence, if its origination is a certainty for him, it must be by a method that does not involve his CAUSATION. There are several attempts at explanation, but they are inadequate…” (Pg. 411) He continues, “To predestinate voluntary action is, to MAKE IT CERTAIN. If it meant, as it is sometimes asserted, to FORCE voluntary action, it would be a self-contradiction.” (Pg. 413) He also notes, “The fall of the angels is the very first beginning of sin, and presents a difficulty not found in the subsequent fall of man; namely, a fall without an external tempter.” (Pg. 419)

He explains, “Reprobation is the antithesis to election, and necessarily follows from it. If God does not elect a person, he rejects him. If God decides not to convert a sinner into a saint, he decides to let him remain a sinner. If God decides not to work in a man to will and to do according to God’s will, he decides to leave the man to will and to do according to his own will. If God purposes not to influence a particular human will to good, he purposes not to allow that will to have its own way… Consequently, whoever holds the doctrine of election, must hold the antithetic doctrine of reprobation.” (Pg. 429-430)

He states, “That the Holy Spirit saves some of the unevangelized heathen by the regeneration of the soul, and the production of the penitent and believing habit or disposition, is favored by Scripture…the Divine Spirit sometimes operates in an extraordinary manner, and goes before the preacher of the word.” (Pg. 438-439) Later, he adds, “The doctrine of election and irresistible grace is more encouraging to the preacher of the word, than the opposite theory. It is more probable that an individual sinned will believe and repent, if faith and repentance depend wholly upon the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, than if they depend partly upon the energy of the sinner’s will.” (Pg. 461)

One class of Scripture texts teaches that the benevolent desire of God is, that all men should turn from sin. Another class teaches that for reasons unknown to man, but sufficient for God, God determines in some instances not to gratify his own desire. There is nothing self-contradictory in this…” (Pg. 453)

Of the creation of man, he says, “Respecting the tie when man was created, and his antiquity, the narrative in Genesis teaches that he is the last in the series of creations, and that the Creator rested from creatio ex nihilo after the origination of the human species. While minerals, vegetables, and irrational animals, according to Genesis, may be referred back to a long duration in the first five days, man cannot be referred to any but the sixth day, and to the ‘morning’ or last part of that. From six to eight thousand years is the period during which the human species has existed.” (Pg. 515-516)

This entire series will be of great interest to those studying Reformed theology.

[G Walker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good, practical, pastoral... I take issue with Shedd in several areas, his understanding of creation (sorry, I am still a six day guy), his view of original sin (which is still worth engaging over against other reformed understandings), his version of postmillennialism (I am a covenantal not a classical postmillennialist). But overall, this really is a good text for a reformed systematic. Much more biblical, accessible, sensible and practical than say Berkhof, Hodge or any number of others. Also, I prefer the Thomas Nelson version over against the P&R version... perhaps because I like the binding better, or maybe the idea of having three small manageable books instead of one massive (ridiculously over-sized) one... Also, I like the idea of reading it, as the original author presented it - and this does matter! That said, for the newer generation, Alan Gomes has done a great service in editing and reformatting Shedd's work. I got rid of my P&R version... I didn't need a duplicate copy of the same work, but either way you go, this set is worth having AND it is worth the time of engaging and studying.

[Armando Maese Jr. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent. There's probably not a review that I could write that would do justice to this book. I can only comment that Shedd's thought has, I believe, shaped my thinking for the better. I thought that the section on Anthropology was the most well developed. Aside from a few minor reservations, I can now say that I embrace the traducian position on the origin of the soul and union with Adam. I will undoubtedly be returning to this book often.

[Nick Katenkamp · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic and very readable theology from the reformed tradition. Shedd doesn't dumb anything down, but the way he writes is easy to understand even for someone with just moderate familiarity. Additionally, it is clear Shedd was extremely well read and his citations of contemporary writers and those of antiquity add much interest to his writing and give the reader a good understanding of what skeptics and theologians have thought throughout the ages.

[Patrick Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whether you are a Calvinist or not (which I am not), it's a good dose of philosophical theology.

[Renee Fisher · Rating 4 out of 5]

I finished this book as part of my Theology I class at Trinity Seminary. I found it extremely helpful.

[Doug Adamson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Although I do not always agree with Shedd's conclusions (He was Presbyterian, I am Baptist), I always benefit greatly from reading him. This particular edition (edited by Alan Gomes) is a great improvement over earlier editions of Shedd's theology. Gomes takes the supplemental material from volume three of Shedd's original and places them where they belong in his theology. Gomes also adds a helpful introduction and two glossaries (of terms, of authors).

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

This volume is the first in the 2-volume set published by T & T Clark. Stylistically, it is one of the best systematic theologies that you can read. There are a couple of minor points that I disagree with here and there, but it is a great read.

[Stephen Holland · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why no index page?

Shedd was a great theologian and writer. It will repay dividends to the one who reads and studies Shedd's work.

The one disappointment is that there are no chapter headings provided on the ebook.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yes, I know the sublte differences between 'dogmatic' and 'systematic' theologies. But that doesn't matter for my shelving purposes here.

This is another great systematic theology that should be included in your library. Shedd operates out of the Reformed tradition. Some have said his arguments regarding the extent of the atonement provide evidence for Amyraldianism, but this is fasle--as you will see if you read the book!

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

I got this due to its superb discussion of the Trinity. The theology otherwise is a tad bit too Reformed for me, but a good theology to have on hand. Highly recommended as a second theology behind a less Reformed systematic theology like Erickson's.

[Andre · Rating 5 out of 5]

Shedd is the best speculative theologian I've ever read He had an insight into the nature of God that reminds one of Augustine and Anselm.