THE HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES, Louis-Berkhof. Published by Baker Book House. 285 pages, Price: $4.95. Re.viewed by Dr. William. H. Rutgers.

This book is one of the Baker’s Twin Brook Series of reprints of important books by various scholars, in paperback edition. We heartily commend the Baker Book House for undertaking this project, thus reserving a precious religious heritage for future generations. On the back cover of this present book we find this statement which fairly well describes it: “The History of Christian Doctrines is a major, widely respected work on the definition, transformation, development and preservation of basic Christian doctrines throughout the history of the Church.”

It is basically a textbook for theological students preparatory for their course in Systematic Theology. Berkhof observes that without such acquaintance with the historical background of doctrinal truth, we would be left with a “truncated” theology.

This book presents the ripe and seasoned fruit of an erudite Christian scholar who takes his stance in the Reformed, Calvinistic tradition. This scholar was thoroughly committed to a belief in the infallibility and absolute reliability of the Scriptures as written, the one and sole ground for our faith and practice. Moreover, he was no less unreservedly committed to the Reformed articulation of that faith as expressed in our Creeds. It is in that frame of reference that he assessed and evaluated the doctrines and dogmas of the Church.

While doctrine and dogma are often used interchangeably, as synonyms, yet in a more academic sense, these terms must be distinguished. A doctrine is an implicit truth taught in Scripture; a dogma is the considered and scholarly reflection of that truth scattered throughout Scripture; a reflection no less by the community of the faithful, the Church membership. Usually, after such careful consideration and reflection, some of the scholars of the Church who are best able to make proper distinctions and forget lucid statements, give articulation to that particular truth. Thus dogma is a sharper-edged definition of a doctrine. Dogma receives its status and binding quality on the membership of the Church when it is officially set forth by the Church.

In the historical development of dogmas, a few matters must be remembered. The articulation often “bears the earmarks of past struggles”; “they are not infallible, yet have a high degree of stability”; “they are authoritative not merely because they arc proposed by the Church, but formally as defined by the Church, and materially as based on the Word of God.” In its clear and sharp articulation it has benefited obliquely by the criticism and challenge of those who did not take their stance in the normative and authoritative significance of the Word.

Thus the formation of this body of dogma is a long, cumbersome, tedious, prayerful, and scholarly process. In the historical process these dogmas were challenged, tried, refined, and restated. As Protestants we do not believe that dogmas are infallible; they are subject to change, and refinement and rearticulation. TIle one aim ever is to arrive at an articulation that most nearly approximates the truth as revealed in the Word of God. To the Church, which is the pillar and the ground of the truth, God gave this promise, that He would lead her into all the truth, and history richly and abundantly verifies this promise. The Church was compelled to clearly articulate what it believed concerning: God, Man, Christ, the Application of Salvation, the Church, and Eschatology. These matters presented problem areas demanding careful distinctions and finely honored definitions. Thus she sought to state her faith and to ward off errors. Indeed, it is a fascinating story and development.

The Protestant view of the his tory of dogma differs radically from the Roman Catholic persuasion. For the Roman Catholic, once a doctrine is defined and given endorsement by the Pope, it is reckoned to be infallible, on a par with Scripture. Thus, really, there is no history of dogma. Our view differs radically also from that espoused by Liberals and Modems for in their view of the matter reason and experience are the determining factor, rather than the Word of God.

Professor Berkhof points out that a study of the history of doctrines is of Supreme importance to a correct understanding of them and a sound evaluation of the truth confessed by the church. A thorough acquaintance with this field of information will demonstrate that many of the hcresies flaunted as new discoveries are but the dressing up of old heresit’s in a different frame of reference and with ncw phraseology; heresies that have long ago been driven from the field and proven false by the great apologetcs of the church. Moreover there is another significant and controlling fact to be remembered about dogmas, and that is their organic development. Truth is one. One doctrine involves another; the whole grand structure and body of troth confessed by the church is one organism. Denying of altering one dogma affects many others as well. This sadly is often forgotten.

Our creedal confessions are not an open forum for dialogue and debate. They represent truth settled and binding for the membership of a certain communion of believers. Its defense has already been made. If any member does not agree with any dogma there is a royal way to seek to change or delete that time. We should never allow ourselves to be put on the defensive in maintaining faith once professed and articulated in our dogmas The royal way to seek to change or delete such a dogma is to write a gravaman, present it to the church and then be manly enough to take the consequences of such action, should the church officially determine that the position stated in the gravamen is not in accordance with Scripture and the whole body of truth officially confessed in our creeds.

We are most happy that his book appears anew. Thus his precious legacy is preserved for our generation and the nextl The History of Doctrines covers a wide field and involves many pages and volumes of scholarly research and evaluation. Berkhof literally crawled through these volumes. He had the rare ability to condense. summarize, crystallize and set forth in a single sentence many pages of involved material. Scan if you will the long list of collateral material for the backdrop of this study! This book was born from years of careful analysis and study and evaluation of the voluminous material in this field of endeavor. This is a work of major importance. It is a rich source book, stimulating for one to continue a study and careful investigation of this matter. It is a work not of a novice, but of a seasoned, erudite, diligent, careful scholar. Berkhofs calculus for judgment of this vast material was a deep, unreserved commitment to the Reformed, Calvinistic persuasion.

There are those who seemingly take some delight in taking a swipe at Berkhof’s theological view; but let me say frankly that they are about as ineffective, and insignificant as a lad who would seek to demolish Gibraltar with a small lead pellet shot from an old-fashioned air rifle. Professor Berkhof is the one man who more than any other individual has influenced the theological thinking of the Christian Reformed denomination in America and gave to it firm and clear direction. None more influential has appeared on the scene up to this time. Truly, he was a precious gem that God gave to the Christian Reformed denomination.

We heartily commend Baker Book House for including a reprint of this work of Berkhof in its “Twin Brook Series.”

Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Vol. 1. Edited by Johannes Botterweek and Helmer Ringgren. Trans. John T. Willis. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Mich. 1974. 479 pp. $18.50. Reviewed by Rev. Henry B. Vanden Heuvel.

The Theological Dicticnary of the Old Testament is a companion set to the Theological Dictionary at the New Testament, edited by Kittel, and well–known for many years in both the original German edition as well as the English translation. This first volume covers the words in the Hebrew alphabet from abh (father) to badhadh (to separate). Included in this firs t volume are the words for God as el and elohim. Therefore this first volume is an important one in that it deals with some of the basic Hebrew words in the Old Testament.

In commenting on this first volume of the TDOT, the first thing that ought to be said is that the editors and contributors to this dictionary come to their work with particular stance or basis or presupposition. This is true, of course, of all literary endeavors, but in such a dictionary as this, this is not only a fact, but it has tremendously important implications which ought to be noted by the person who seeks to use this work. One of the presuppositions that stands at the base of this work is that the “Documentary Hypothesis” is true. This can be seen by ever so many statements made on page after page of this dictionary.

The Documentary Hypothesis holds that Moses did not write the first five books of the Old Testament, but rather that these were compiled many years after Moses, sometime during tlle period after the Babylonian captivity, in the days of Ezra. Various scribes, it is held, wrote up the history and the laws concerning Israel, and compiled these together into what is now the first five books of the Bible.

Further, this theory holds that these various editors had different emphases which can be seen by the Names for God which are found in the various passages of the Old Testament. The Documentary Hypothesis claims to be able to tell which part of the first five books come from which “editor” by the various Names for God found in that passage. Now in this Theological Dictionary at the Old Testament, one finds on almost every page reference to Jehovah) or E (Elohim) or P (priestly) and D (Deuteronomy), all of which refers to the Documentary Hypothesis. Because this first volume deals so much with the Names for God this emphasis ought to be recognized. It is a prominent aspect in the entire volume, and not only in those articles dealing with the Names of God. We ought to he aware of this position that underlies the TDOT right from the start.

This does not mean, however, that nothing these contributors say is therefore of any value. Quite the contrary. They are men who have devoted their lives to the study of the Old Testament, and therefore are able to give a great many valuable insights into the words and figures of Scripture. One such insight is found in connection with one word for God Elohim. The author speaks of the distinctions that are made between the Names for God, particularly the Name “Elohim” and the Name Yaweh or Jehovah. The author suggests that it is possible to find in the Old Testament that the Name Elohim is used primarily when God is spoken of as Creator, and as the Lord of the whole earth; whereas the Name Yahweh, Jehovah, is often restricted to use in connection with the people of God, the children of Israel. This is a very helpful contribution, and although the author fully admits that this distinction cannot be found in every last reference to these names, nonetheless, it docs give the expositor of Scripture a helpful hint in the interpretation of the Bible.

Besides holding the general assumption that the Documentary Hypothesis is the correct way of interpreting the Old Testament, some of the contributors are very bold to suggest that the religion of Israel came down to them by a sort of evolutionary process, beginning with the Canaanites who lived in Canaan before the Israelites arrived. This suggestion is seen, for example, when the author of the article dealing with the Name El Shaddai suggests that this Name for God is a combination of the Amorite and the Canaanite names for God. It appears that some of the contributors simply cannot accept the unique relationship that God had with His people in the way of the Covenant, and therefore have to resort to this kind of evolutionary treatment to explain Israel‘s relationship to God.

This dictionary is clearly a tool for the advanced scholar, the minister, student, or professor who have the ability to handle the original languages of the Bible. The Hebrew words are transliterated into English spelling which facilitates the use of this work. When one uses this dictionary, he must be on his guard constantly because of the particular bias which I have suggested is present. But if one can read and study with discernment, this is a very valuable tool.

MONKEY OFF MY BACK, by Jack Brown. Published by Zondervan. Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Mich., 150 pages. Price $1.95. Reviewed by Rev. Fred Van Houten, pastor of the Christian Reformed Church of Sully, Iowa.

“Here is a hook that can be read with much profit by every legislator, physician, social worker, educator, minister, teenager, and parent in our nation.” This is a sentence that appears in the Foreword, and no truer words could be written about this book.

This is a true story in which an ex-convict and drug addict relates his ultimate discovery of personal freedom through Jesus Christ. The title serves as an apt description of one who, by the grace of God, overcame the terribly enslaving power of the drug habit after thirty years of horrible living, many heartbreaking experiences, and seventeen years in several of our nation’s prisons. One has to read this book in order to gain a healthy and wholesome attitude toward law enforcement. It offers a real challenge to all officials and to all citizens to help in the positive process of rehabilitation of those who commit crime. Most of all, it demonstrates the power of prayer in bringing a sinner to genuine conversion, and gives all glory to God for His amazing grace. Everyone who reads the book will pay tribute to Mrs. Jack Brown for her loving fidelity, truly a modem Monica.

The one burning desire of Jack Brown is to tell his story to the young people of America so that they will avoid this pitiful pitfall. He is motivated by the fervent desire to see our you’ll accept Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. In his own words, “I know that one baldheaded old ex–con is not going to convert the world, but I humbly thank God that it is the kind of world where one man can make a big contribution–that I can be a part of molding plastic, young life. I couldn’t, I wouldn‘t ask for more.”