What do you think?
Rate this book
The Formation of Christian Doctrine
The Formation of Christian Doctrine is a high-level academic study of the
history of Christian doctrinal development. The book distinguishes at length
between the scholarly term “inventio” (making explicit what is implicit in the
biblical revelation) and the idea of “invention” (presenting a novelty as Christian
teaching that conflicts with the biblical revelation). Specifically, The Formation of Christian Doctrine identifies biblical inerrancy as
an inventio but sees the “priesthood of believers” concept as a license to believe
“whatever teaching seems right to me.” Sure to be of interest in academic circles, even to those who might disagree with
the author, this book will appeal to three major Evangelicals in relation
to the twentieth-century development of a detailed doctrine of biblical inerrancy,
Baptists in light of both biblical inerrancy and the seventeenth-century development
of believer’s baptism, and Roman Catholics because of their respect for
tradition and interest in such a challenging conservative Protestant perspective as
is found here.
history of Christian doctrinal development. The book distinguishes at length
between the scholarly term “inventio” (making explicit what is implicit in the
biblical revelation) and the idea of “invention” (presenting a novelty as Christian
teaching that conflicts with the biblical revelation). Specifically, The Formation of Christian Doctrine identifies biblical inerrancy as
an inventio but sees the “priesthood of believers” concept as a license to believe
“whatever teaching seems right to me.” Sure to be of interest in academic circles, even to those who might disagree with
the author, this book will appeal to three major Evangelicals in relation
to the twentieth-century development of a detailed doctrine of biblical inerrancy,
Baptists in light of both biblical inerrancy and the seventeenth-century development
of believer’s baptism, and Roman Catholics because of their respect for
tradition and interest in such a challenging conservative Protestant perspective as
is found here.
218 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 2007
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
January 11, 2023
great book that is just a touch unfair to Calvinists
This is a wonderful overview of theological method that rightly praises Baptist (free church) theology. It is at times a little obtuse in its analysis of reformed traditions, but the book is good as a whole.
This is a wonderful overview of theological method that rightly praises Baptist (free church) theology. It is at times a little obtuse in its analysis of reformed traditions, but the book is good as a whole.
March 17, 2017
Yarnell preaches on the free church movement. At first he comes off as non confessional but throughout the book he simply avoids the question. As he deals with the different facets of Church Doctrine, he does a good job of describing it from several perspectives. Although I did not enjoy the emphasis on the free church movement, I did enjoy that he offers a thorough study on doctrine.
August 21, 2015
Yarnell discusses foundation and development of doctrine.
He takes on many interlocutors from all major ecclesial traditions, though his engagement with the Eastern Church is sparse. Concerning the foundation of doctrine, he argues for sola Scriptura. That sounds unremarkable, but he helpfully shows how Ratzinger, Wiles, Bavinck, etc. have elevated other principles to the same level as Scripure (for Ratzinger it's tradition, for Wiles it's modern canons of reason, for Bavinck it's philosophy), thereby calling into question the sufficiency of Scripture. Yarnell also argues that theology can be done well only when undertaken as a faithful disciple of Jesus Christ.
Perhaps his most helpful sections were those where he contended for a "biblical order" to theology. The evangelical / Reformed tradition (he contrasts "evangelical" with "free-church," which includes Anabaptists, Baptists of various stripes, Methodists, etc.) has tended to make, e.g., election its foundational doctrine. In his section on Bavinck, e.g., he accuses the Dutchman of demoting faith to a position of no importance. This, Yarnell contends, stands in stark contrast with Scripture itself, which everywhere enjoins faith. This is only one example of Yarnell's contention that Scripture itself must determine the content and shape of our theology. As a foil to the three interlocutors mentioned above, Yarnell makes frequent use of the Anabaptist churchman Pilgram Marpeck. The major foci within a free-church theology are personal salvation, baptism and the commemorative Lord's Supper, and the practice of church discipline (together with communal reading and interpretation of Scripture).
In his discussion of the development of doctrine, he interacts with John Henry Newman quite a bit, and also with Harnack. His position, again, presents Scripture as the test of all proposed doctrinal development. He follows the early baptists, Andrew Fuller in particular, in advocating proper doctrinal development as "further light" from Scripture. In his concluding chapter, he suggests the Great Commission in Matthew as a helpful summary and test of the church's theology. Themes found there are Trinitarian revelation, personal salvation, and covenantal freedom.
In some places Yarnell's work seemed weak. In his discussion of Bavinck, e.g., I got the sense that he's not as familiar with Bavinck's work as he should be. Having read Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics, much of Yarnell's description of him came across as caricature, which resulted in some straw-man arguments against him. His chapters on the development of doctrine seemed much weaker than his chapters on the foundation of doctrine. Yarnell acknowledges that he wants, someday, to write a full-scale free-church response to Newman's book on the development of doctrine, but that he hasn't done so in this particular book; "this book is a first step in that direction but is still not an adequate answer," he says (116). Much of these chapters seem like writing he did for proposed-but-never-published articles. For example, he spends 5-10% of the book discussing Herbert Butterfield's philosophy of history, but it was not clear to me--and I don't think it was clear to Yarnell--how exactly this contributed to his argument.
Anyway, all that said, I still think this is a book worth reading both for free-church folk and for those who malign the free churches as lacking theological sophistication.
He takes on many interlocutors from all major ecclesial traditions, though his engagement with the Eastern Church is sparse. Concerning the foundation of doctrine, he argues for sola Scriptura. That sounds unremarkable, but he helpfully shows how Ratzinger, Wiles, Bavinck, etc. have elevated other principles to the same level as Scripure (for Ratzinger it's tradition, for Wiles it's modern canons of reason, for Bavinck it's philosophy), thereby calling into question the sufficiency of Scripture. Yarnell also argues that theology can be done well only when undertaken as a faithful disciple of Jesus Christ.
Perhaps his most helpful sections were those where he contended for a "biblical order" to theology. The evangelical / Reformed tradition (he contrasts "evangelical" with "free-church," which includes Anabaptists, Baptists of various stripes, Methodists, etc.) has tended to make, e.g., election its foundational doctrine. In his section on Bavinck, e.g., he accuses the Dutchman of demoting faith to a position of no importance. This, Yarnell contends, stands in stark contrast with Scripture itself, which everywhere enjoins faith. This is only one example of Yarnell's contention that Scripture itself must determine the content and shape of our theology. As a foil to the three interlocutors mentioned above, Yarnell makes frequent use of the Anabaptist churchman Pilgram Marpeck. The major foci within a free-church theology are personal salvation, baptism and the commemorative Lord's Supper, and the practice of church discipline (together with communal reading and interpretation of Scripture).
In his discussion of the development of doctrine, he interacts with John Henry Newman quite a bit, and also with Harnack. His position, again, presents Scripture as the test of all proposed doctrinal development. He follows the early baptists, Andrew Fuller in particular, in advocating proper doctrinal development as "further light" from Scripture. In his concluding chapter, he suggests the Great Commission in Matthew as a helpful summary and test of the church's theology. Themes found there are Trinitarian revelation, personal salvation, and covenantal freedom.
In some places Yarnell's work seemed weak. In his discussion of Bavinck, e.g., I got the sense that he's not as familiar with Bavinck's work as he should be. Having read Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics, much of Yarnell's description of him came across as caricature, which resulted in some straw-man arguments against him. His chapters on the development of doctrine seemed much weaker than his chapters on the foundation of doctrine. Yarnell acknowledges that he wants, someday, to write a full-scale free-church response to Newman's book on the development of doctrine, but that he hasn't done so in this particular book; "this book is a first step in that direction but is still not an adequate answer," he says (116). Much of these chapters seem like writing he did for proposed-but-never-published articles. For example, he spends 5-10% of the book discussing Herbert Butterfield's philosophy of history, but it was not clear to me--and I don't think it was clear to Yarnell--how exactly this contributed to his argument.
Anyway, all that said, I still think this is a book worth reading both for free-church folk and for those who malign the free churches as lacking theological sophistication.
April 17, 2015
Yarnell makes a case for a free-church foundation for the formulation of Christian doctrine passionately, albeit not very persuasively. What is most annoying is not that he rejects other ecclesiologies, but in writing his historiography, he seems to press that the "free church/believers church" rooted in Anabaptistic theology and ecclesiology is the "only correct" methodology with which one can work from. Moreover, some of his claims are simply too phenomenal: "wherever earnest Christians have returned to God's Word and prayed and prayed for the Spirit's guidance...there have appeared congregationss that have had Baptist characteristics" (Pg. 7).
The way that he characterizes the foundation of "free-churches" is through sweeping claims like saying free-churches are characterized by a commitment to Scripture, etc. Well no duh, so are all Christians, at least de jure, the problem is in doing so, Yarnell's believers church proposal presupposes the inherent "mingling" and "impurity" of all other ecclesiologies and church polities. His critique of Bavinck is simply misguided, but nevertheless, at least Yarnell is consistent. I guess it is safe to say I learned a lot from this book: (1) Constantine brought the downfall to true Christianity, (2) The ecumenical councils were misguided in trying to explain the Trinity and Incarnation, (3) philosophy is evil since it is not biblical exegesis free from pagan influence, (4) Roman Catholics are doing it wrong, and the Reformers did it wrong too, basically everyone is doing it wrong unless you a part of a true believers free church 100% made up of pure regenerate Christians who all have a thorough command of the Scriptures themselves, and hence any structure of authority is also evil.
Not worth your time.
The way that he characterizes the foundation of "free-churches" is through sweeping claims like saying free-churches are characterized by a commitment to Scripture, etc. Well no duh, so are all Christians, at least de jure, the problem is in doing so, Yarnell's believers church proposal presupposes the inherent "mingling" and "impurity" of all other ecclesiologies and church polities. His critique of Bavinck is simply misguided, but nevertheless, at least Yarnell is consistent. I guess it is safe to say I learned a lot from this book: (1) Constantine brought the downfall to true Christianity, (2) The ecumenical councils were misguided in trying to explain the Trinity and Incarnation, (3) philosophy is evil since it is not biblical exegesis free from pagan influence, (4) Roman Catholics are doing it wrong, and the Reformers did it wrong too, basically everyone is doing it wrong unless you a part of a true believers free church 100% made up of pure regenerate Christians who all have a thorough command of the Scriptures themselves, and hence any structure of authority is also evil.
Not worth your time.
February 11, 2014
This is an interesting attempt to create a conversation surrounding the development of a Baptist understanding of the history of the development of doctrine. The author interacts with a number of great theologians and historians, including Ratzinger, Wiles, Cullmann, and many others. Book review to come on my blog.
September 30, 2012
Insightful.
November 10, 2015
Very scholarly
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews