The Riddleblog

Warfield on Charles Finney's Gospel -- "A Mere System of Morals"

Toward the end of his illustrious career at Princeton Theological Seminary, B. B. Warfield took up his pen (beginning in 1918) in response to the burgeoning movement known as “Christian perfectionism,” and the closely related “higher-life” teaching. Both were then making a significant impact upon American Christianity. Warfield identified both as theological descendants of the ancient heresy of Pelagianism, now injected into the American evangelical bloodstream by one Charles Grandison Finney (1792-1875) and his many followers of the “Oberlin School” and among the higher-life teachers.

What follows are but a few brief citations from Warfield’s volume Perfectionism, (Volume Two) published posthumously in 1932. In a lengthy essay, Warfield dissects Finney’s theological “system,” exposing it for what is is, a “mere system of morals,” which in Warfield’s estimation would function just as well with God as without him.

Warfield writes of Finney’s theological system . . .

This brings us back to the point of view with which we began—that the real reason of the election of the elect is their salvability, that is, under the system of government [according to Finney] established by God as the wisest. God elects those whom He can save, and leaves un-elected those whom He cannot save, consistently with the system of government which He has determined to establish as the wisest and best (170).
The ultimate reason why the entire action of God in salvation is confined by Finney to persuasion lies in his conviction that nothing more is needed—or, indeed, is possible (172).
It speaks volumes meanwhile for the strength of Finney’s conviction that man is quite able to save himself and in point of fact actually does, in every instance of his salvation, save himself, that he maintained it in the face of such broad facts of experience to the contrary. How can man be affirmed to be fully able and altogether competent to an act never performed by any man whatever, except under an action of the Spirit under which he invariably performs it? (178).

To read the rest, follow the link below

Two Essential Works by B. B. Warfield Are Coming In June!

Many of us first encountered B. B. Warfield through the five “Warfield” volumes first published by P & R from 1948-1958. My Warfield volumes are now thoroughly highlighted and well-worn. I have even purchased duplicate volumes over the years to mark up all over again. All but one of the Warfield volumes have now fallen out of print.

I am thrilled to learn of the re-publication of a new and entirely updated version of this five volume set of which the first two volumes should be ready by June 2023. I’ve seen the new editions and they are beautifully done and edited.

I cannot recommend these volumes highly enough nor sufficiently thank the folks at P & R for bringing the “Warfield set” and its content back into print. May a new generation of readers discover America’s greatest theologian as I once did!

To read the rest, follow the link below

B. B. Warfield on "Antichrist"

One of the most thought provoking discussions of “Antichrist” comes from B. B. Warfield. In one of his last essays written for publication before his death in February of 1921, Warfield addressed the matter of the biblical use of the term “Antichrist” as found in John’s epistles. The Lion of Princeton acknowledges that there is a broader use of the term (the so-called theological use, i.e., “the Antichrist”), which he describes as a composite photograph made up of John’s “antichrist” (found in his epistles), Paul’s “man of lawlessness” (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12), and the beast and false prophet from the Book of Revelation (chapter 13). Warfield finds the evidence for such a composite photograph of an Antichrist far from compelling.

In this essay (re-printed in B. B. Warfield, “Antichrist” in Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. Warfield, Vol. 1, ed John E. Meeter (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1980), Warfield addresses John’s use of the term “Antichrist” in his epistles. Warfield asks and answers the question, “to what does John refer when he speaks of Antichrist?”

Warfield begins with an important qualification—the context for John’s warning about this foe.

We read of Antichrist nowhere in the New Testament except in certain passages of the Epistles of John (1 John ii. 18, 22; iv. 3; 2 John 7). What is taught in these passages constitutes the whole New Testament doctrine of Antichrist. It is common it is true, to connect with this doctrine what is said by our Lord of false christs and false prophets; by Paul of the Man of Sin; by the Apocalypse of the Beasts which come up out of the deep and the sea. The warrant for labeling the composite photograph thus obtained with the name of Antichrist is not very apparent . . . .The name of Antichrist occurs in connection with none of them, except that presented in the passages of the Epistles of John already indicated; and both the name and the figure denoted by it, to all appearance, occur there first in extant literature.[1]

To read the rest, follow the link below: