Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 65:2 (Fall 2003)
Article: Inaugural Lectures Biblical Theology And The Westminster Standards
Author: Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.

WTJ 65:2 (Fall 2003) p. 165

Inaugural Lectures
Biblical Theology And The Westminster Standards

Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.

[Richard Gaffin is the Charles Krahe Professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary. This article is a slight re-working of his inaugural lecture given at the seminary on 16 October 2002 and of a chapter in P. A. Lillback, ed., The Practical Calvinist: An Introduction to the Presbyterian & Reformed Heritage. In Honor of Dr. D. Clair Davis (Fearn, Ross-shire: Christian Focus [Mentor], 2002), 425–41.]

If it is fair to view Geerhardus Vos as the father of Reformed biblical theology, then we are now at a point several generations later where we can begin assessing something of the lasting impact of that theology, particularly within Reformed churches.1 The following reflections, no more than partial, are an effort at such an assessment.

Among pastors, teachers, and others more or less conversant with the biblical-theological work of Vos, my perception is that a fairly sharp difference of opinion presently exists. On the one side are those enthusiastic about biblical theology (or redemptive-historical interpretation of Scripture) and who see themselves in their own work as building on the insights of Vos and others, such as Meredith Kline and Herman Ridderbos. Others, however, question the value of biblical theology, if they have not already concluded that it has introduced novelties detrimental to the well-being of the church. Still others are at various points in between these clashing outlooks, often wondering what to think.

While I would certainly include myself among the first group just mentioned, the “enthusiasts,” some of the reservations voiced by the second deserve to be taken seriously. One among these is the concern that biblical theology, despite its avowed intention to serve systematic theology, is in fact undermining doctrinal stability by diminishing interest and confidence in the formulations of classic Reformed theology. This is seen to have the further deleterious effect of weakening cordial commitment to the Reformed confessions and so, inevitably, of impairing their proper functioning, so necessary for the church’s well-being.

This concern, if substantiated, would certainly be cause for alarm. In my view, however, it is largely misplaced. In fact, as I hope to help show here, a deep compatibility exists between the Westminster Standards and biblical theology.

WTJ 65:2 (Fall 2003) p. 166

While my comments have these Standards primarily in view, they are largely applicable as well, I take it, to other Reformed confessions, like the Three Forms of Unity,...