Introduction to systematic theology

by Louis Berkhof

Introduction to systematic theology (Twin brooks series)

Genres: Theology, Christian

200 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1932

About the author

Louis Berkhof (1873–1957) was a Reformed theologian best known for his Systematic Theology (1932). He taught for almost four decades at Calvin Theological Seminary and served as its president from 1931–1944. In his work on systematic theology Berkhof followed in the line of John Calvin and embraced the development of Reformed theology by the Dutch theologians Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck.

Selected publications:

Systematic Theology. Eerdmans, 1932; New Combined Edition, 1996.

The History of Christian Doctrines. Baker, 1978; Banner of Truth, revised, 1996.

Principles of Biblical Interpretation. Baker Academic, 1981; republished, 1994.

A Summary of Christian Doctrine. Eerdmans, 1939; Banner of Truth, 1960.

Reviews

[Lance · Rating 3 out of 5]

By reading his Intro to Systematic Theology after reading his actual Systematic Theology, I may have done it backwards, but hey, he’s the one who originally published them in that order.

Glad I read it, as I learned a lot about the differences of opinion about the delineations of Dogma, dogmas, and dogmatics. Frankly, it was wild reading a prolegomena published in the 1930’s, where the author argued that theology is indeed a science, which few if any theologians would push for today.

Furthermore, his Bibliology was weak at best. Standard in a lot of ways, but ghastly underwhelming i others.

Overall, between the two volumes, I’m glad I read Berkhof’s theology. I genuinely learned a lot, but at the same time he has glaring deficiencies that it clear why he’s considered more of a 2nd-string theologian in Reformed circles today.

[Ramon de la Cruz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Totally worth it to read!
Introductions Systematic Theology form Louis Berkhof is a heavy and structure work that present to us all the aspect from how to approach in doctrinal ideas from the bible.

I learned a lot reading this book. It will spread your knowledge. The more I study the deeper I get into Jesus philosophy.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A VERY INFLUENTIAL SUMMARY OF REFORMED THEOLOGY IN THE 20TH CENTURY

Louis Berkhof (1873-1957) was a Dutch-American Reformed theologian who taught at Calvin Theological Seminary from 1906 until his retirement in 1944.

He begins this 1932 book (revised in 1938), “Works on dogmatic or systematic theology generally begin with the doctrine of God… There are good reasons for starting with the doctrine of God, if we proceed on the assumption that theology is the systematized knowledge of God, of whom, through whom, and unto whom, are all things… We start the study of theology with two presuppositions, namely (1) that God exists, and (2) that He has revealed Himself in His divine Word… We can turn to His revelation, in order to learn what He has revealed concerning Himself and concerning His relation to His creatures… For us the existence of God is the great presupposition of theology. There is no sense in speaking of the knowledge of God, unless it may be assumed that God exists. The presupposition of Christian theology is … that there is a self-existent, self-conscious, personal Being, which is the origin of all things… but is at the same time immanent in every part of it.” (Part One, I, IA-B, pg. 19-21)

He asks, It the predetermination of things consistent with the free will of man?... Jesuit, Lutheran, and Arminian theologians suggested the so-called ‘scientia media’ … [in which] the free action of the creature as simply foreseen… But this is no solution of the problem at all. It is an attempt to reconcile two things which logically exclude each other, namely, freedom of action in the Pelagian sense and a CERTAIN foreknowledge of that action. Actions that are … wholly dependent on the arbitrary will of man, can hardly be the object of divine foreknowledge… it makes the divine foreknowledge dependent on the choice of man… and thus implicitly denies the omniscience of God.” (VII, B1b, pg. 68)

He states, “The primary purpose of the punishment of sin is the maintenance of right and justice. Of course, it may be incidentally serve, and may even, secondarily, be intended, to reform the sinner and to deter others from sin.” (C3b, pg. 76) He continues, “The decretive and preceptive will of God do not conflict in the sense that … according to the former He does not, and according to the latter He does, will the salvation of every individual with a POSITIVE VOLITION. Even according to the decretive will God takes no pleasure in sin; and even according to the preceptive will He does not will the salvation of every individual with a POSITIVE VOLITION.” (D1d(2), pg. 79)

He acknowledges, “The problem of God’s relation to sin remains a mystery for us, which we are not able to solve. It may be said, however, that His decree to permit sin, while it renders the entrance of sin into the world certain, does not mean that He takes delight in it; but only that He deemed it wise, for the purpose of His self-revelation, to permit moral evil, however abhorrent it may be to His nature.” (1E, pg. 108)

He rejects the Supralapsarian position: “it does not give a solution of the problem of sin. It would do this, if it dared to say that God decreed to bring sin into the world by His own DIRECT efficiency… Now this is no objection to the Supralapsarian in distinction from the Infralapsarian, for neither one of them solves the problem. The only difference is that the former makes greater pretensions in this respect than the latter.” (IIE, pg. 121)

He wonders, “[God] is represented in Scripture as always working… Can we than say that HE passed from a state of inactivity to one of action? Moreover, how is the transition from a non-creative to a creative state to be reconciled with His immutability? And if He had the eternal purpose to create, why did He not carry it out at once? Why did He allow a whole eternity to elapse before His plan was put into execution? Moreover, why did He select that particular moment for His creative work?” (IIIC, pg. 130-131)

He argues that the ‘days’ of Genesis 1 are literal 24-hour days: “In its primary meaning the word ‘yom’ denotes a natural day… by adding in the case of every day the words,’ and there was evening and there was morning’… In Ex 20:9-11 Israel is commanded to labor six days and to rest on the seventh, because Jehovah made heaven and earth in six days… The last three days were certainly ordinary days… While we cannot be absolutely sure that the preceding days did not differ from them at all in length… The question may also be asked, why … a long period should be required… for the separation of light and darkness.” (VB, pg. 154-155)

He admits, “The union of the two natures in one person is a mystery which we cannot grasp, and which for that very reason is often denied. It has sometimes been compared with the union of body and soul in man… Of course, the comparison is defective. It does not illustrate the union of the divine and the human, of the infinite and the finite. It does not even illustrate the unity of two spiritual natures in a single person. In the case of man the body is material and the soul is spiritual. It is a wonderful union but not as wonderful as the union of the two natures in Christ.” (Part Three, IIID, pg. 324-325)

He asserts, “Scripture certainly does not teach a literal descent of Christ into hell. Moreover, there are serious objections to this view… If he really did descend into hell, it can only have been as to His soul, and this would mean that only half of His human nature shared in this stage of His humiliation (or exaltation)… On the whole it seems best to combine two thoughts: (a) that Christ suffered the pangs of hell before His death, in Gethsemane and on the cross; and (b) that He entered the deepest humiliation of the state of death.” (IBV, pg. 342-343)

He observes, “The proofs for the necessity of the atonement are mostly of an inferential character, but are nevertheless of considerable importance… It would seem to be the clear teaching of Scripture that God, in virtue of His divine righteousness and holiness, cannot simply overlook defiance to His infinite majesty, but must need visit sin with punishment… The majesty and absolute immutability of the divine law as inherent in the very nature of God made it necessary for Him to demand satisfaction of the sinner… If sin were merely a moral weakness… it would require no atonement. But according to Scripture… it is … transgression of the law of God, and therefore guilt.” (IIIC, pg. 370-371)

He notes, “The value of these psychological studies of conversion need not be denied… They shed a welcome light on some of the laws that apply in the psychical life of man… They deepen our insight into the different types of conversion, which have always been recognized in Reformed theology… and are quite in agreement with the theological conviction that conversion is rooted in the subconscious life…” (Part Four, VIIE, pg. 489) Later, he adds, “Children also need justification, in order to be saved, and yet it is quite impossible that they should experience justification by faith. But though it is perfectly true that children, who have not yet come to maturity, cannot experience passive justification, they can be actively justified in the tribunal of God and thus be in possession of that which is absolutely essential.” (IXF, pg. 518)

Of the doctrine of perseverance, he comments, “the doctrine is not merely to the effect that the elect will certainly be saved in the end… but teaches very specifically that they who have once been regenerated and effectually called by God to a state of grace, can never completely fall from that state and thus fail to attain to eternal salvation, though they may sometimes be overcome by evil and fall in sin.” (XIB, pg. 546)

He states, “At present there is in the Churches round about us a noticeable tendency to be lax in discipline, to place a one-sided emphasis on the reformation of the sinner through the ministry of the Word and---in some instances---through personal contacts with the sinner, and to steer clear of any such measures as excluding one from the communion of the Church… But it should be remembered that they must be gathered in as saints and have no legitimate place in the Church as long as they do not confess their sin and strive for holiness of life.” (Part Five, IVC, pg. 601)

He contends, “There is no Scriptural ground for the idea that the charism of healing was intended to be continued in the Church of all ages. Evidently, the miracles… were intended as a mark or credential of divine revelation… As such they naturally ceased when the period of special revelation came to an end.” (IVD3, pg. 601)

He acknowledges, “Some Reformed theologians were of the opinion that circumcision originated among Israel, and was derived from this ancient covenant people by other nations. But it is now quite clear that this is an untenable position. From the earliest times the Egyptian priests were circumcised… Only among Israel, however, did it become a sacrament.” (IIIF, pg. 620)

He admits, “Reformed theologians did not all agree in the past, and are not even now all unanimous, in their representation of the ground of infant baptism. Many theologians …took the position … that infants of believers are baptized, because they are in the covenant and are as such heirs of the rich promises of God… Others… stressed the fact that baptism … is not merely the seal of a future good, but also of present possessions… Naturally, only children of believers are the proper subjects of infant baptism.” (IV.F, pg. 639 642)

Of the state of the wicked between death and the resurrection, he comments, “The Bible sheds very little light on this subject. The only passage that can really come into consideration here is the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16, where ‘hades’ denotes hell, the place of eternal torment. The rich man found himself in the place of torment… in addition to this direct proof there is also an inferential proof. If the righteous enter upon their eternal state at once, the presumption is that this s true of the wicked as well. We leave out of consideration here a couple of passages, which are of uncertain interpretation, namely I Pet 3:19, II Pet 2:9.” (Part Six, IV.A, pg. 680)

He argues, “Premillennialists … maintain that there will be a NATIONAL restoration and conversion of Israel, that the Jewish nation will be reestablished in the Holy Land… It is very doubtful, however, whether Scripture warrants the expectation that Israel will finally be re-established as a nation, and will as a nation turn to the Lord. Some Old Testament prophecies seem to predict this, but these should be read in the light of the New Testament.” (I.B, pg. 699)

He asserts that the Church WILL pass through the tribulation: “Jesus certainly mentions the great tribulation as one of the signs of His coming in [Mt 24:30], a coming which according to verse 29 will follow immediately after the tribulation. This tribulation will also affect the elect; they will e in danger of being led astray… In Rev 7:13-14 saints in heaven are said to have come out of the great tribulation, and in Rev 6:9 we find such saints praying for their brethren who were still suffering persecution.” (I.B, pg. 700) He continues, “in the seven years that follow the parousia many other saints die, especially in the great tribulation. They must also be raised up, and their resurrection will occur at the revelation of the day of the Lord.” (III.D., pg. 724)

He states, “Some regard the final judgment as entirely unnecessary, because each man’s destiny is determined at the time of his death… But the certainty of the future judgment does not depend on our conception of its necessity. God clearly teaches us in His Word that there will be a final judgment, land that settles the matter for all those who recognize the Bible as the final standard of faith.” (IV.C, pg. 731)

He also says, “Evidently, there will be degrees in the punishment of the wicked. This follows from such passages as Mt 11:22,24; Lk 12:47-48; Lk 20:17. Their punishment will be commensurate with their sinning against the light which they had received.” (V.A., pg. 736)

This book is a ‘classic’ of 20th century Reformed Theology.

[Darren Lee · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read the entire Berkhof’s Systematic Theology book first before reading the introductory volume and that is because I wanted to get to the exciting bits of theology with the assumption that the introductory volume will be much drier and slow-going. But to my surprise after reading this, I found out that it’s actually very interesting and I enjoyed most of them. Going through Bavinck’s Prolegomena volume was a huge challenge and I’m glad that Berkhof captured pretty much all the things we need to know from Bavinck and this is very helpful to remind me again what I read earlier from Bavinck. If I can go back in time, I will start Berkhof as my first Systematic Theology book, even over Calvin’s Institutes.

Anyway back to this introductory volume, it wouldn’t do this book any justice if one thinks that this volume is optional and not necessary after reading Berkhof’s Systematic Theology. This book is very crucial because it covers the doctrines of revelation, scripture and testimony of the Holy Spirit which was left out in the Systematic Theology volume. Learning these are essential and Berkhof will show you their interactions with apologetics from a presuppositional stance. Moreover, it is important to read these sections because Berkhof will survey through the historical theology of these doctrines which were not covered in his The History of Christian Doctrines book. When it comes to the chapter of Ground of Faith, please do read it together with the chapter of faith in his systematic theology book for more clarity.

The doctrines above were covered in the second half of the volume. For the first half of the book, they were equally exciting as well. Berkhof will give a good overview on what is Systematic Theology with regards to its nature, its importance, its necessity, its methods and historical development of ST across church history. I thoroughly enjoy all of them, especially the arranging methods and historical development. And Berkhof will tell you what are the important theological works to read from for a particular theologian. For instance, if you want to know what Augustine believes in, he will point out to you Augustine's book on Enchiridion Ad Laurentium: faith, hope and love is the first go to place instead of Confession or City of God.

Do note that for this book, the reader needs to have a rough idea on the nature of Biblical Theology because Berkhof will speak about its relation to Systematic Theology, especially under the Biblical method of Beck section. Last but not least, one will be able to better understand the methodology of Roman Catholicism and other liberal theologians Berkhof engaged with after reading this book.

[Adam Nesmith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Two things are true of this book:
1. It is an incredibly insightful analysis of why the reformed view of scripture is superior to the many liberal alternatives. It also has a very helpful extended discussion of the history of dogmatic (systematic) theology and how scripture forms the basis for it
2. Very few Christians I know need to invest time to read this entire book

Do you understand the philosophy of Hegel and Kant? What is your opinion of Schleiermacher and Barth? If you don’t have an answer to these, it’s okay, but you probably will not get as much out of this book as other that are less academic. If you want a more popular level (but excellent) book on the doctrine of scripture, I recommend “Taking God At His Word” by Kevin DeYoung. And if you want a less academic and more spiritually profitable take on Reformed Christianity vs liberal Christianity, pick up “Christianity and Liberalism” by J. Gresham Machen. If you do have access to this book and you want to read the best chapters, I recommend the chapter on revelation and the chapter on inspiration.

All that said, I learned an absolute ton of historical theology from this book and I’m looking forward to working through Berkhofs full systematic theology next. If you want a fairly deep look at scriptures relation to systematic theology and the historical debates surrounding it, take up and read!

[Matt Pelto · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very helpful volume in understanding the foundational matters of theology, ranging from the nature of Dogmatics, to the grounds of our knowledge of God, to the doctrines concerning scripture. Berkhof spends a fair amount of time discussing the differing theologies of Rome, Schleiermacher, Barth, etc. but he does it to show how they contrast with the true and full Christian Theology, namely the Reformed tradition. While some of the work may be difficult to grasp without some background in the various issues he discusses, it would, nevertheless, be a useful volume for anyone pursuing a deeper study in theology and dogmatics.

[Price Profitt · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a good prolegomenon to what’s being discussed in his theology. It was boring, but the information was potent. I need to quit expecting novels out of doctrinal books from the 1800s. It gets 4 because I can’t do 3.8 because there definitely could’ve been more personality sprinkled into this. Either way, the material was good and biblically reinforced. We’ll see how the 750 page systematic theology goes. To God be the glory.

[Tyler Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really helpful introduction to the doctrine of Scripture and the preconditions necessary to do systematic theology. Published in the 1930s, this is still timely. I wish I had a better grasp on the key Western philosophers because that would have been helpful. Random untranslated sections in Dutch were confusing.

[Dori · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this for school. It was good.

[Dennis Erwin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really great short read

[Joseph · Rating 3 out of 5]

A little dry (to say the least), but it's useful for understanding the Reformed paradigm for approaching theology and the Bible. It also gives some insight for how theology is done on a really abstract level. It's kind of like studying the philosophy of what knowledge is. It's not the kind of book I think most believers really need to read, but it's interesting.

[Wyatt Houtz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful short introduction to dogmatics, buy it with the systematic theology.

[Davi Saro · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was not an easy read, but I found it useful, thorough, and necessary to read nonetheless, especially as I continue into Berkhof's Systematic Theology. I recommend this book!