What Is Saving Faith?

by Gordon H. Clark

This is the combined edition of two of Dr. Clark's seminal books: Faith and Saving Faith and The Johannine Logos. Both books deal with the crucial issue of justification by faith alone in a new fashion: by deriving a definition of faith (belief) from the Greek New Testament rather than from Latin theologians. It is both ironic and telling that most Protestants, when asked to define the word "faith," sound like they are exegeting the Vulgate. No one before Dr. Clark has examined, collated, and systematized the wealth of Scriptural material relevant to the definition of faith. The result is a refreshing and exhilarating defense of the doctrine of justification through belief alone.

Contents:
Faith and Saving Faith: Foreword, Preface, Introduction, Generic Faith: Brand Blanshard, Generic and Secular Belief: H.H. Price, Roman Catholic Views, Biblical Data, John Calvin, Thomas Manton, John Owen, Charles Hodge, Interlude on the Head and the Heart, B.B. Warfield, Minor Men: John Anderson and J. H. Bavinck, John Theodore Mueller, The End of History, The Necessity of Faith, The Language, Person or Proposition?, The Object, A Conclusion

The Johannine Logos: Introduction, The Prologue, Logos and Rheemata, Truth, Saving Faith, Conclusion

Scripture Index, Index, The Crisis of Our Time, Intellectual Ammunition

Genres: Theology, Philosophy

179 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Gordon Haddon Clark was an American philosopher and Calvinist theologian. He was a primary advocate for the idea of presuppositional apologetics and was chairman of the Philosophy Department at Butler University for 28 years. He was an expert in pre-Socratic and ancient philosophy and was noted for his rigor in defending propositional revelation against all forms of empiricism and rationalism, in arguing that all truth is propositional and in applying the laws of logic. His system of philosophy is sometimes called Scripturalism.

The Trinty Foundation continues to publish his writings.

Reviews

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have read several books by Gordon Clark prior to this one, but this book was unfortunately disappointing in the way the arguments were presented, and the misrepresentation and lack of thorough research by the author. I have read both Clark and Van Til, and while they both say some profitable things, I don't side with either one since they both departed from Confessionalism since neither affirmed full subscription in the totality of their views.

I appreciated the intention of Clark to define faith as an assent, and specifically discuss the importance of the object of faith, Christ, in contrast to neonomian views that add works to faith, which is a denial of justification sola fide. Another strong point of Clark's analysis is his discussion of biblical anthropology and specifically how the Bible uses heart and mind. He is correct that the Bible's use of heart refers to the mind for the majority of its uses and not to the heart and emotions, which is a common psychological paradigm imposed on scripture.

Unfortunately in arriving to his conclusion on fatih, Clark quickly dismisses authors without thorough analysis e.g. Clark claims to refute John Owen's view of faith in only 3 pages (discussion on pg. 47-50 of his book), and continues on to challenge the teachings of many reformed authors without very thorough analysis.

Clark's faulty epistomology also weakens his arguments on faith, and his interpretation of the logos in John. Clark assumes that man's knowledge of God is univocal, "Since man is God's image, man's language is God's language, and we think God's thoughts after him- not some different analogial thoughts, but God's thoughts themselves" (pg.32).

Without the affirmation of a distinction between man's knowledge and God's knowledge, Clark is forced to deny Divine Impassibility, and with it the classical doctrine of God. Later Clark affirms that God has no emotions, "They cannot be emotions because the immutable God is impassible and no more has emotional ups and downs than he has arms and eyes" (pg. 57). Clark's previous epistomology statements contradict his assertion here to affirm impassibility. Clark cannot deny analogous predication and still affirm Divine impassibility, so Clark can't have his cake and eat it too.

Clark's analysis of the logos takes him to the following conclusion for how to translate John 1:1,

"Now, in summary, the ordinary meaning of the Greek term, i.e. the list in the lexicon, can fairly well be combined into the idea of thinking, or the expression of thought. The English cognate is logic, the science of valid reasoning. As a Greek philosophical term, Logos indicates a supreme intelligence controlling the universe. To be sure, this was pantheistically conceived by Heraclitus and the Stoics, but in more orthodox fashion by Philo. And, tautologically, the Old Testament gives the Biblical meaning. Therefore, if one hesitates to translate the first verse as, "In the beginning was the divine logic," at least one can say, "In the beginning was Wisdom." This translation is accurate enough; it preserves the connotations; and it conveys a satisfactory meaning to the average mind" (pg. 101).

There are several problems with Clark's methodology to arrive at this conclusion. First, Clark's analysis of the Greek word for Logos is primarily drawn from classical Greek literature, rather than from the LXX to see how it was used in the OT. Second, he barely even mentions the Hebrew word for logos in the OT, only making a comment about three sentences long at the bottom of page 100. Third, Clark completely ignores the evidence of the Jewish Targums in the intertestimental period between the close of the OT canon and the New Testament epoch. Various reformed authors (e.g. John Owen, Henry Ainsworth, etc.) throughout the past have studied this connection and are aware of the frequent use of the phrase "memra YVY" in the Jewish Aramaic translation of the OT, the Targums. This phrase refers to a divine person, "the word of YVY," which is clearly what John is alluding to in John 1:1 for any Jewish reader. Clark's analysis is more focused on classical Greek literature and philosophical texts rather than the Biblical texts, and he unfortunately demonstrates very shallow exegesis.

[Eli · Rating 4 out of 5]

Two books in one. Lots here to think about. Clark is a much needed voice of reason in Church that thinks about faith with confusion.

[Simon Samuel · Rating 4 out of 5]

one of the complete rationals on the