What do you think?
Rate this book
Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures
An investigation of the New Testament canon and how it fits into redemptive history.
104 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
13 people are currently reading
164 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
February 7, 2022
There is a lot to unpack in this short book. It’s one to read through a couple times, I believe. Central to his argument is the intimate and inseparable connection between the history of redemption and the history of revelation. With the unapologetic claim that the Word is self-attesting in its truthfulness, this cuts against the grain of modern scholarship.
March 8, 2016
In this book, Ridderbos explained the canon of the New Testament (i.e. why these particular writings?) in terms of redemptive history and apostolic witness. Basically, rather than finding some external principle by which to select true New Testament writings (which end up in exalting human subjective judgements over Scripture), he places the New Testament in its historical context as the written apostolic revelation of Christ which laid the foundation for the church. "The essence of the canon, not only qualitatively but quantitatively, is not an ecclesiastical product but one of the presuppositions of the church. In that sense, it must be said, the church did not create the canon, but the canon created the church" (p. 40).
Ridderbos realizes the arguments of critical scholarship and does an effective job in arguing his case. He first takes apart the sufficiency of other views to adequately explain the canon before he carefully sets forth his own perspective.
While I am hesitant concerning Ridderbos' statements about the cultural assumptions of the Bible (p. 73), he nevertheless establishes the trustworthiness of Scripture, the importance of the history it proclaims and in which it originates, and the authority of its claims.
Ridderbos realizes the arguments of critical scholarship and does an effective job in arguing his case. He first takes apart the sufficiency of other views to adequately explain the canon before he carefully sets forth his own perspective.
While I am hesitant concerning Ridderbos' statements about the cultural assumptions of the Bible (p. 73), he nevertheless establishes the trustworthiness of Scripture, the importance of the history it proclaims and in which it originates, and the authority of its claims.
February 20, 2024
Canon and it's formulation belong to the realm of redemptive history, not just church history! Good insights.
February 20, 2024
Are you looking for books that contribute to the discussion of the canonicity of the Bible? This is a book on the New Testament canon from a theological approach that takes it seriously what the Bible has to say about itself such as God’s Word being its own authority, etc., as well as seeing the importance for the place for scientific and historical investigation. The author was a famous New Testament scholar and Dutch Reformed theologian who taught and wrote on the Bible for decades. This particular work was originally written in Dutch in 1955 and translated into English and revised two different times.
There is two chapters in to this book. The first one is titled “The Canon of the New Testament” and the second “The Authority of the New Testament.” In chapter one there’s three main section with the first on the question of principle, the second on Canon and redemptive history and the third on the recognition of the canon. The second chapter largely consist of looking at the authority of the New Testament through three main dimensions of what the Scripture is, namely the New Testament is proclamation what in Greek is called Kerygma, secondly the New Testament as witness and thirdly the New Testament as teaching.
Last year I finished reading some Dutch Reformed authors and when I finished this book I thought about how Dutch guys write in a particular way where they are interacting with many scholars that they are disputing and their writing style is different than American theologians in that often when I read Dutch guys I don’t know who these people are that the Dutch guys are referencing yet as I read along there’s some great nuggets of insights that powerfully transcends the academic interaction with others in the writer’s moment of time. Those insightful sentences in the book are what I highlight and deem worth quoting for later and it impacts how I teach theology. This book’s impact on me is thinking about grounding the New Testament canonical development in the context of redemptive history and not just assume it in the context of Church history; for some reason I never explicitly and consciously thought about the Redemptive Historical dimensions before. Like Dutch theologians Bavinck and Van Til, here this insight is paradigm shifting.
There’s many insights I got throughout the book. I really benefited from the discussion about the New Testament and tradition, it really was good and insightful of the times the New Testament talk about tradition in a positive way. This discussion can be found on pages 22-24. Also I appreciated the book careful and exacting nuanced point and reading this made me attempt to be more careful for articulating about the Bible’s canonicity such as the basis of the canon. The books for New Testament canoncity is based upon the self-evidencing character of Scripture as the Word of God, but we should not think of that as something subjective (the Spirit’s illumination of the Scripture) but objective in the characteristics within the contents of the books in the Bible. Yet when we say that we should be careful that we don’t think there’s a canon within a canon, or where only certain parts of the writings that is inspired, etc.
Good work, I do recommend it and it gave me some perspective of the historical conversation within academia before some of the more recent works on canonicity. I do think for readers new to this topic it is worth starting with other authors first and one I highly recommend is Michael Kruger.
There is two chapters in to this book. The first one is titled “The Canon of the New Testament” and the second “The Authority of the New Testament.” In chapter one there’s three main section with the first on the question of principle, the second on Canon and redemptive history and the third on the recognition of the canon. The second chapter largely consist of looking at the authority of the New Testament through three main dimensions of what the Scripture is, namely the New Testament is proclamation what in Greek is called Kerygma, secondly the New Testament as witness and thirdly the New Testament as teaching.
Last year I finished reading some Dutch Reformed authors and when I finished this book I thought about how Dutch guys write in a particular way where they are interacting with many scholars that they are disputing and their writing style is different than American theologians in that often when I read Dutch guys I don’t know who these people are that the Dutch guys are referencing yet as I read along there’s some great nuggets of insights that powerfully transcends the academic interaction with others in the writer’s moment of time. Those insightful sentences in the book are what I highlight and deem worth quoting for later and it impacts how I teach theology. This book’s impact on me is thinking about grounding the New Testament canonical development in the context of redemptive history and not just assume it in the context of Church history; for some reason I never explicitly and consciously thought about the Redemptive Historical dimensions before. Like Dutch theologians Bavinck and Van Til, here this insight is paradigm shifting.
There’s many insights I got throughout the book. I really benefited from the discussion about the New Testament and tradition, it really was good and insightful of the times the New Testament talk about tradition in a positive way. This discussion can be found on pages 22-24. Also I appreciated the book careful and exacting nuanced point and reading this made me attempt to be more careful for articulating about the Bible’s canonicity such as the basis of the canon. The books for New Testament canoncity is based upon the self-evidencing character of Scripture as the Word of God, but we should not think of that as something subjective (the Spirit’s illumination of the Scripture) but objective in the characteristics within the contents of the books in the Bible. Yet when we say that we should be careful that we don’t think there’s a canon within a canon, or where only certain parts of the writings that is inspired, etc.
Good work, I do recommend it and it gave me some perspective of the historical conversation within academia before some of the more recent works on canonicity. I do think for readers new to this topic it is worth starting with other authors first and one I highly recommend is Michael Kruger.
November 26, 2023
Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures by Herman Ridderbos is one of the great book on the topic of the Canon and the authority of Scripture from a Reformed perspective. That I thoroughly appreciated reading every page would be an understatement.
The book is not very long but the content is very heavy as it is quite academic. Though, one does not need prior knowledge to understand the content.
In part 1, Ridderbos engages with concurrent views on the Canon within the christian tradition of his time (protestant views - lutheran and liberals - as well as the roman catholic view) and then defends a reformed position that places the objective authority of Scriptures (and its Canon) in the hands of Jesus, and not in the statement of church, councils, or individual people... he says that the church did not create the canon, but instead that the canon created the church.
In part 2, he delves into the meaning of kerygma, marturia and didache to explain the nature of this authority. Special emphasis is laid on the those categories described as redemptive-historical . A key takeaway here and a major argument for his position would be that those categories (the proclamation of the gospel, the witness and the teaching found in the NT) should not be taken as revealing the redemptive history only, but as part of the redemptive history itself. A concrete example following from that would be the belief that the apostles did not simply give a human testimony of the events, but instead their proclamation of the kerygma, their being given authority by God in Christ, and their being directed by God the Spirit to give their God approved account was redemptive history itself, God working in his Church with His people.
Skeptics' attacks on the authority of Scriptures today or wrong-headed views of authority by other christian traditions will remain, and so will the arguments given in this book.
The book is not very long but the content is very heavy as it is quite academic. Though, one does not need prior knowledge to understand the content.
In part 1, Ridderbos engages with concurrent views on the Canon within the christian tradition of his time (protestant views - lutheran and liberals - as well as the roman catholic view) and then defends a reformed position that places the objective authority of Scriptures (and its Canon) in the hands of Jesus, and not in the statement of church, councils, or individual people... he says that the church did not create the canon, but instead that the canon created the church.
In part 2, he delves into the meaning of kerygma, marturia and didache to explain the nature of this authority. Special emphasis is laid on the those categories described as redemptive-historical . A key takeaway here and a major argument for his position would be that those categories (the proclamation of the gospel, the witness and the teaching found in the NT) should not be taken as revealing the redemptive history only, but as part of the redemptive history itself. A concrete example following from that would be the belief that the apostles did not simply give a human testimony of the events, but instead their proclamation of the kerygma, their being given authority by God in Christ, and their being directed by God the Spirit to give their God approved account was redemptive history itself, God working in his Church with His people.
Skeptics' attacks on the authority of Scriptures today or wrong-headed views of authority by other christian traditions will remain, and so will the arguments given in this book.
March 21, 2025
A helpful, concise study about the relationship between redemptive history and the canon of the New Testament. Ridderbos reminds the reader that the context in which the NT canon was written is the history of redemption. Rather than establishing the authority of the NT canon by criteria that often comes from critical methods, Ridderbos seeks to show that the apostolic character of the NT comes from the tradition received by preaching, yet preserved in writing, which "is the form in which the (future) church would be bound to the apostolic word" (22). Since the criteria for the NT canon finds its foundation in redemptive history, it "cannot be vindicated by historical investigation" (33). That is not to say that historical methods do not help the reader come to an appreciation or give evidence for the NT canon. However, such methods alone cannot take the NT canon on its own terms. Lastly, Ridderbos gives a helpful argument for the kerygma of Scripture having its foundation in the historical. That is, the kerygma "can retain its absolute significance only when it is based on the factuality of the histoircal event of redemption that it proclaims" (57). Apart from historical revelation, which is the source of the saving proclamation of the Gospel, the kerygma of the NT is formless and void.
May 22, 2019
A pastor/friend shared this with us my husband asked him about New Testament canonization. I probably comprehended 2/3s of it (definitely rounding up), so take my review with a grain of salt. It really was helpful in understanding how and why we give authority to the particular books of the NT, and it did help me to feel like I have a basic foundation. Getting through it was grueling despite it's short length and the 2nd section was mostly lost on me. I'd recommend it to someone with similar questions bc it helped, but it'd be worth asking/researching for other more readable options.
June 17, 2017
This was excellent. My first taste of Ridderbos, and it was a stirring introduction. He demonstrates that the New Testament cannot be separated from the person and work of Jesus Christ. New Testament authority is the authority of the apostolic tradition given by Christ himself. The New Testament is not merely a human record of God's revelation in history: it is revelation, because it is the word that accompanies God's saving acts in Jesus Christ.
March 20, 2021
I thought this was an easy read. It's a little dated but could serve as a helpful supplement to modern conservative scholarship on the canon. I appreciated the last 4 sections of the book the most.
January 12, 2023
There's a lot packed into this little book. Very solid foundational considerations regarding the canon of the New Testament and its authority in light of redemptive history.
November 30, 2012
REVIEW AND CRITIQUE Ridderbos, Herman N. Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures. Translated by H. De Jongste. Revised by Richard B. Gaffin, Jr. Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R, 1988.
The aim of Ridderbos ‘s Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures is to defend the historical Reformed doctrine of Scripture from the structure of redemptive history, as a defense of the authority of the Scripture against the trend of biblical criticism and other innovative theories of the biblical authority. Ridderbos contends that the formation of Scripture consists in proclamation of the apostles who were commissioned by Christ as a part of the redemptive history, and therein receives its authority.
Ridderbos wants to avoid the Catholic position of “the church made the canon” on the one hand, and the Kasemann’s spiritualistic view of “believers’ experiences grant Scripture the authority” on the other. Ridderbos rejects Luther’s concept of “canon within a canon” for it misleads the Church to trust in certain criteria in judging the content of Scripture instead of trusting the Scripture itself. Instead, Ridderbos insists that “the final decision as to what the church deems to be holy and unimpeachable does not reside in the biblical canon itself (7).” That is, the status of canonicity of Scripture is built up something outside of the written documents.
What is that, then, outside of the documents and making Scripture normative to the Church? Ridderbos responds that Christ being the authority, the pronouncements of the apostles who speak with His authority establishes the canon. Christ’s authority thereby necessarily rests upon the written form of the teachings and pronouncements of the apostolate and that, in fact, the apostles themselves understood their writings to be, in this sense, canonical (15, 22). The apostolic “authoritative and exclusive” testimony of God’s redemptive acts in history serves as the “formal authority structure” shown in the form of Scripture. Ridderbos’s position is essentially the same position of Abraham Kuyper and the early Reformed churches.
The remarkable contribution of Ridderbos is to reformulate the Reformed doctrine of Scripture in the biblical-theological fashion. The idea of redemptive history, as Ridderbos acknowledges, is known to us only through the Scripture. The authority of the Scripture is therefore self-authenticating in its character. His approach is profoundly in line with the Reformation maxim sola Scriptura.
The astute question about the canon would be, then, why and on what basis Protestants accept the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as authoritative. Ridderbos insists that in the process of canonization the Church encapsulated those texts that had been operating with authority within the Church from its inception. Ridderbos thinks of the secular approach to history is deficient in that they preclude the possibility of the canon bearing divine authority.
On the other hand, Ridderbos warns the danger of appealing to spiritualistic concept of authority that neglects history. Ridderbos’s own solution is found in the “redemptive-historical categories,” i.e. finding the authority of the Scripture in the history that God reveals to us in Scripture.
Critiques:
Ridderbos's contribution is primarily the articulation of the Reformed doctrine of Scripture in the fresh biblical-theological fashion. His use of "redemptive history" as the central theme of Scripture was in line with Geerhardus Vos. His argument is essential a virtuous circularity that honors the Christian presupposition of Scripture as the Word of God.
The weakness of his argument of the early reception of the majority of the canonical text is backed up historical data. Even for a presuppositional argument the coherence with the perceivable world is important for our protection from the danger of fideism.
Another weakness lies in his dependence on the 'redemptive-history' theme within the Scripture. Redemptive history is very significant, but not the only significant theme of the Scripture. This is the same weakness shared by Vos. The authority of the Scripture, if we wish to be consistent with the self-authenticating character of the Scripture, is above the redemptive-history theme found in Scripture. There is no harm but only benefit, nevertheless, that we learn from Ridderbos how the redemptive history can make a coherent picture with the formation of Scripture as the norming norm to the Church.
The aim of Ridderbos ‘s Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures is to defend the historical Reformed doctrine of Scripture from the structure of redemptive history, as a defense of the authority of the Scripture against the trend of biblical criticism and other innovative theories of the biblical authority. Ridderbos contends that the formation of Scripture consists in proclamation of the apostles who were commissioned by Christ as a part of the redemptive history, and therein receives its authority.
Ridderbos wants to avoid the Catholic position of “the church made the canon” on the one hand, and the Kasemann’s spiritualistic view of “believers’ experiences grant Scripture the authority” on the other. Ridderbos rejects Luther’s concept of “canon within a canon” for it misleads the Church to trust in certain criteria in judging the content of Scripture instead of trusting the Scripture itself. Instead, Ridderbos insists that “the final decision as to what the church deems to be holy and unimpeachable does not reside in the biblical canon itself (7).” That is, the status of canonicity of Scripture is built up something outside of the written documents.
What is that, then, outside of the documents and making Scripture normative to the Church? Ridderbos responds that Christ being the authority, the pronouncements of the apostles who speak with His authority establishes the canon. Christ’s authority thereby necessarily rests upon the written form of the teachings and pronouncements of the apostolate and that, in fact, the apostles themselves understood their writings to be, in this sense, canonical (15, 22). The apostolic “authoritative and exclusive” testimony of God’s redemptive acts in history serves as the “formal authority structure” shown in the form of Scripture. Ridderbos’s position is essentially the same position of Abraham Kuyper and the early Reformed churches.
The remarkable contribution of Ridderbos is to reformulate the Reformed doctrine of Scripture in the biblical-theological fashion. The idea of redemptive history, as Ridderbos acknowledges, is known to us only through the Scripture. The authority of the Scripture is therefore self-authenticating in its character. His approach is profoundly in line with the Reformation maxim sola Scriptura.
The astute question about the canon would be, then, why and on what basis Protestants accept the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as authoritative. Ridderbos insists that in the process of canonization the Church encapsulated those texts that had been operating with authority within the Church from its inception. Ridderbos thinks of the secular approach to history is deficient in that they preclude the possibility of the canon bearing divine authority.
On the other hand, Ridderbos warns the danger of appealing to spiritualistic concept of authority that neglects history. Ridderbos’s own solution is found in the “redemptive-historical categories,” i.e. finding the authority of the Scripture in the history that God reveals to us in Scripture.
Critiques:
Ridderbos's contribution is primarily the articulation of the Reformed doctrine of Scripture in the fresh biblical-theological fashion. His use of "redemptive history" as the central theme of Scripture was in line with Geerhardus Vos. His argument is essential a virtuous circularity that honors the Christian presupposition of Scripture as the Word of God.
The weakness of his argument of the early reception of the majority of the canonical text is backed up historical data. Even for a presuppositional argument the coherence with the perceivable world is important for our protection from the danger of fideism.
Another weakness lies in his dependence on the 'redemptive-history' theme within the Scripture. Redemptive history is very significant, but not the only significant theme of the Scripture. This is the same weakness shared by Vos. The authority of the Scripture, if we wish to be consistent with the self-authenticating character of the Scripture, is above the redemptive-history theme found in Scripture. There is no harm but only benefit, nevertheless, that we learn from Ridderbos how the redemptive history can make a coherent picture with the formation of Scripture as the norming norm to the Church.
December 5, 2014
Every Christian needs to read at least one book in their life about the NT canon. This is as good as any. If you are basing your whole life, more or less, on the Bible, it might be a good idea to investigate how it came to be (and yes, I'm ignoring the OT for a moment; never a good idea, but Ridderbos addresses the NT only).
The point of the book is this: did the NT come about as a response to the redemptive work of Christ, or is the NT part of the redemptive work of Christ? So often we think of it in terms of the former (the church recognized and finalized the canon to preserve the words and actions of and about Christ), but Ridderbos argues for the latter.
That is to say, the selection and commissioning of the apostles, and the sending of the Spirit, was part of the redemptive work of Christ, and part of the apostles' and Spirit's work is the writing, formation, and closing of the canon.
That is the lion's share of Ridderbos' argument. He doesn't get too much into the debate of how we arrived at the 27 books we have, or why others didn't make it, etc., but to him those questions exist in another universe. If the formation of the NT was part of the redemptive work of Christ, then it follows that the NT must be what it is; there's no other possible or potential canon, or canonical entries, out there.
That's not to say we should have good arguments for why the canon is as it is; that's merely beyond the purview of this book.
The remainder of the book addresses the NT as proclamation, witness, and teaching (which is of course an extension of Christ's work). I didn't find it as helpful.
The point of the book is this: did the NT come about as a response to the redemptive work of Christ, or is the NT part of the redemptive work of Christ? So often we think of it in terms of the former (the church recognized and finalized the canon to preserve the words and actions of and about Christ), but Ridderbos argues for the latter.
That is to say, the selection and commissioning of the apostles, and the sending of the Spirit, was part of the redemptive work of Christ, and part of the apostles' and Spirit's work is the writing, formation, and closing of the canon.
That is the lion's share of Ridderbos' argument. He doesn't get too much into the debate of how we arrived at the 27 books we have, or why others didn't make it, etc., but to him those questions exist in another universe. If the formation of the NT was part of the redemptive work of Christ, then it follows that the NT must be what it is; there's no other possible or potential canon, or canonical entries, out there.
That's not to say we should have good arguments for why the canon is as it is; that's merely beyond the purview of this book.
The remainder of the book addresses the NT as proclamation, witness, and teaching (which is of course an extension of Christ's work). I didn't find it as helpful.
June 28, 2013
Ridderbos proposes an understanding of the nature of the New Testament's purpose and authority, centered in its setting forth of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the central event of redemptive history. Many of the concepts and arguments -- especially concerning NT authority through apostolic affiliation and the need for a written text to facilitate a continued transmission of redemptive-historical events and their understandings -- resonated with me and ring true. But I am left a bit unsure of Ridderbos' explanation for the closed canon in its current form, as well as unclear on certain specifics in his understanding of the extent of (or even need for) inerrancy. A dense, intriguing book.
September 10, 2016
Returned to this book after reading it first in New Testament Interpretation (WSC). Great argument for the redemptive-historical necessity of an entirely unique, absolutely authoritative, and closed canon in written form. The arguments are much more accessible than I remember them the first time through. The canon will continue to exist because Jesus through His Spirit has promised to build His Church on the canon. Good stuff.
March 4, 2013
The first half of this book, on the Bible's authority based on its intrinsic character and witness, is brilliantly and systematically argued and deserves a solid 4 star rating; the problem lies in the second part of the book, which seems to slog on in slow and rather unnecessary discussions. The discussion of cannon is really the place of value.
Read
March 28, 2011Excellent defense of the distinctively Reformed view of Scripture, as distinct from Lutheran, liberal, pietist, and neo-orthodox views. Most important to the defense was that it was rooted in the New Testament language and thought itself.
March 4, 2016
This is a great book on cannon formation and has a great section on the witness of the apostles and the authority of the word. I wish this book was a little bit longer so he could spend time on the inspiration of the word and it's internal authority.
June 17, 2012
Mainly an internal defense of the canon of the New Testament. Emphasis given to the New Testament as part of Redemptive history, culminating and completing it. Great stuff.
August 8, 2012
Intended to be an introduction to canonics, Ridderbos presents an excellent defense of the Reformed doctrine of Sola Scriptura.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews