Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments

by Geerhardus Vos

The aim of this book is no less than to provide an account of the unfolding of the mind of God in history, through the successive agents of his special revelation. Vos handles this under three main the Mosaic epoch of revelation, the prophetic epoch of revelation, and the New Testament. Such an historical approach is not meant to supplant the work of the systematic theologian; nevertheless, the Christian gospel is inextricably bound up with history, and the biblical theologian thus seeks to highlight uniqueness of each biblical document in that succession. The rich variety of Scripture is discovered anew as the progressive development of biblical themes is explicated. To read these pages--the fruit of Vos' 39 years of teaching biblical theology at Princeton - is to appreciate the late John Murray's suggestion that Geerhardus Vos was the most incisive exegete in the English-speaking world of the twentieth century.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Biblical Studies, Christianity, Nonfiction, Reference, Religion

436 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1948

About the author

Geerhardus Johannes Vos was an American Calvinist theologian and one of the most distinguished representatives of the Princeton Theology. He is sometimes called the father of Reformed Biblical Theology.

Vos was born to a Dutch Reformed pastor in Heerenveen in Friesland in the Netherlands. In 1881, when Geerhardus was 19 years old, his father accepted a call to be the pastor of the Christian Reformed Church congregation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Geerhardus Vos began his education at the Christian Reformed Church's Calvin Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids, before moving to Princeton Theological Seminary. He completed his studies in Germany, receiving his doctorate in Arabic Studies from the Philosophy Faculty of Strassburg University in 1888.

Herman Bavinck and Abraham Kuyper tried to convince Vos to become professor of Old Testament Theology at the Free University in Amsterdam, but Vos chose to return to America. Thus, in the Fall of 1888, Vos took up a position on the Calvin Theological Seminary faculty. In 1892, Vos moved and joined the faculty of the Princeton Theological Seminary, where he became its first Professor of Biblical Theology.

In 1894 he was ordained as a minister in the Presbyterian Church in the USA.

At Princeton, he taught alongside J. Gresham Machen and Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield and authored his most famous works, including: Pauline Eschatology (1930) and Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments (1948). Despite his opposition to the growing modernist influence at Princeton in the late 1920s, he decided to remain at Princeton Seminary after the formation of Westminster Theological Seminary by Machen, as he was close to retirement. Vos did indeed retire to California in 1932, three years after the formation of Westminster.

Vos's wife, Catherine, authored the well-known Child's Story Bible. She died in 1937, after 43 years of marriage. They had three sons and one daughter, and their son J. G. Vos studied at Princeton Theological Seminary and also became a minister.

Reviews

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 5 out of 5]

Vos is the godfather of soul in the Biblical Theology movement among evangelical/Reformed Bible students. This is Clowney on steroids. Vos' method: God's revelation interprets redemption in history. If for nothing else, read the book for this point. Say it plainly: redemption only has meaning in God's context. There is no redemption apart from the plan of God. Vos was the dominant influence on Van Til and John Murray. As the blurb suggests, "The aim of this book is to provide an account of the unfolding of the mind of God in history, through the successive agents of his special revelation." Fair enough. Unlike other reviewers, I am not going to pick apart or praise Vos' exegesis of specific texts; the reader can do that on his/her own time. I will focus on Vos' method applied to the authority and nature of scripture.

A few warnings, though: Vos's redemptive-historical hermeneutics, while showing us wonderful gems in Scripture, can limit the focus or scope of God's work among his whole creation. I am not saying that Vos did this, per se, but many of his maniacal followers have done this. To prove that I am not bashing Vos, I keep Vos or some other Biblical Theology text on my desk as I study the Bible. Vos' greatest weakness is his greatest strength: dense sentences. His philosophy: Why say it in three pages direct when you can say it in thirty pages indirectly? However, there are a multitude of sentences that are over-packed with theological meaning. They are thoughts that can be dwelled upon for hours. Do not start at Vos. He is tedious, to be honest. Go read Clowney or Goldsworthy first.

[Mitchell Dixon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Geerhardus Vos is a master exegete. He expounds the overarching narrative of the Bible using the idea of revelations' form and content. Very helpful and illuminating.

[Charlie · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the classic statements of Reformed biblical theology. Rarely does a theologian produce a biblical theology so in tune with his systematic theology yet clearly distinct from it. Of course it is dated now, but for some purposes it has aged gracefully.

[Grant Carter]

Not for the faint of heart but probably the best book I've read for seminary so far. I really love Vos's approach to biblical theology. Specifically, his exposition of the temptation of Christ in Matthew 4 is brilliant.

[Richard Lawrence · Rating 4 out of 5]

A seminal work in modern Biblical Theology, I'm not qualified to review this but here are a few thoughts.

What is this book?
An overview of the history of special revelation - How has God spoken at different times? What has God said at different times?

A rebuke to critical scholars who have attempted to dismember various biblical books alleging that they are derived from disparate sources - this book argues back presenting scripture as a whole and each part of it as coherent and divine in origin.

What this book is not
- This book is not a systematic theology - the structure is based on phases in biblical history not doctrinal topics
- This book is not accessible:
i) Vos's prose is an unusual style and takes getting used to.
ii) Vos assumes that his reader has a very high level of Biblical knowledge allowing him to speak very concisely - the same material written for a "popular audience" would be double the length.
iii) Vos frequently does not always spell out his conclusions - he does the leg work and leaves his reader to connect the dots.

Concluding thoughts
I have just finished this and the question is how soon to read it again, it's that good BUT it's also that dense. I cannot reccomend it widely due to the accessibility issues BUT for anyone looking for a strong presentation on the structure of scripture and its coherence this is excellent (If you're willing to work very hard at reading it.)

[Darren Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

To be perfectly honest, this book is not easy to read and requires quite a considerate sheer will to grind through. There was one review from Jacob regarding this book that resonated deeply with me, in Jacob’s words - “Why say it in three pages directly when you can say it in thirty pages indirectly?” Personally I think there is some exaggeration in this statement, but Vos definitely could explain with shorter and more straight to the point sentences.

In this review, I will begin with giving my critiques first and then proceed to commend the positive aspects of this book. Although this book was named Biblical Theology and lays out the correct methodology and definition of Biblical Theology, yet strangely the contents of this book does not seem to tie in well with Biblical Theology.

Here is what I meant, firstly, to my rough estimation, almost one third to half of the book are spent on engaging with Wellhausen and other speculations from critical scholars. Personally, I preferred Vos to engage more with premillennialism (which was touched on too briefly) and covenant theology.

Another critique I have for this book is that this book was a compilation of Vos’ lecture notes. Therefore there are some aspects of the book I wished he explained a lot more, but he didn't, which I presumed that he elaborated on them with more detail verbally during his lectures. There are many things in the book he didn’t cover, such as the timeline of Joseph, Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings, Psalms and the Wisdom literatures. After Moses, he briefly touches on the kingdom revealed in Israel’s history and then examines in detail the kingdom revealed in prophecy. As for the New Testament part, only the gospels were covered and he didn’t touch upon the epistles and book of Revelation.

Thirdly, the book seems to trace particular topical themes in the OT & gospels and overall the flow of the book seems quite scattered and disjointed. I would expect this book to cover a lot more on how each theme is fulfilled in Jesus whether literally or typologically, but this was done minimally. Perhaps it’s right to say Vos is the father of Reformed Biblical Theology, which implies that he is probably one of the first from the Reformed denomination to systematized BT, and being the first usually implies that it would not be as mature and developed as the writings of our contemporary authors today. Therefore, I dare to say, for those who are interested in learning Biblical Theology, honestly they wouldn’t learn much here as this book looks at isolated puzzle pieces without a complete picture. It is better to read Goldsworthy’s book - According to Plan and Gospel & Kingdom first to see the big picture of Biblical Theology.

Nevertheless there are some gems worth mining in this book which makes this book still worthwhile to read. Below are the list of gems that made up the positive aspects of the book, however please note that I may miss out some of the highlights.

1. Word studies! Vos spent lots of time explaining Hebrew and Greek terminologies which can be worth consulting! But this may be a hit or miss for some people. If there is only one word study I can only recommend to read, it would be on the word - covenant, berith and diatheke.

2. Chapter 3 is the bomb, regarding Adam’s probation at Eden.

3. The treatise on Cainites and Sethites which deals with nephilim. I think Vos presented a strong argument here against modern scholars who like to dabble with 1 Enoch and fallen angelic beings taking the daughters of men as their wives.

4. The reformed unconditional election predestination doctrine shown in the OT can be a highlight, if you are particularly interested in soteriology debates between Calvinism and Arminianism.

5. The treatment of theophany events i.e. Angel of YHWH, where Vos explains how these are the manifestation of Christ pre-incarnate appearances. This is a stance most reformed or evangelical scholars today hesitate to take.

6. The treatment of John the Baptist, probation of Jesus and Jesus’ teaching of the kingdom of God are worth reading.

In closing, I would recommend reading Goldsworthy's According to Plan book first. Is this book a must read in my opinion? Probably not. Sometimes I wish I should have skipped this book in the first place and read G. K. Beale's A New Testament Biblical Theology book instead. Sometimes I don't regret reading this book because it does contain good gems which are worth the grind.

[Lu Tsun · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first two chapters are most illuminating in laying out the principles of biblical theology as a distinctive department in theology: biblical theology specializes in the “history of special revelation” which is both “progressively developing” and “organically unified” in character, in which God both “acts” and “speaks” to interpret His acts, as it is verbally revealed to us in Scripture.

As a Calvinist theologian and a defender of the Covenant Theology, Vos takes a fresher approach—he sets the program of divine covenants under the category of revelation into three divisions: the Mosaic epoch of revelation, the prophetic epoch of revelation, and the New Testament.

The commitment to the organic nature of revelation compels Vos to trace “the unfolding of what was germinally contained in the beginning of revelation,” each stage pointing forward to the next stage of growth, until the ultimate self-disclosure of Jesus the incarnated Son of God as the promised Messiah.

Critiques:

G. Vos is my hero of faith so I am very unwilling to critique him. This book is a compilation of the lecture notes of Geerhardus Vos by the son of Vos after his father ceased writing; sadly it does not extend the discussion to the Pauline epistles and the rest of the NT, and most regretfully, not including the Apocalypse.

On the other hand, as a theological descendant of Vos, I have realized that we need to move forward to address some unresolved issues in his biblical-theological program.

Vos's endeavor in presenting the biblical revelation progressively unfolded itself in the redemptive history has perennial value, however the "seamless" vision that he creates for the redemptive history in the biblical revelation can be somewhat overly intentional, still too subtly aided by his knowledge of the NT in interpreting the OT.

There is nothing wrong to interpret the OT in light of the NT, but if a person is committed to Vos's principle of biblical theology, an "innocent" reading of the OT is required to justify his demonstration of the continuity from the OT to the NT.

The organic growth within the OT may also be more diverse and complicated as Vos has presented. Instead of each stage pointing toward the next stage, the actual picture may have multiple starting points, each pointing toward something else, not necessarily to the next stage. Christ sums up all the hopes in the OT. Linear development is not the only option in constructing a unified biblical theology.

[Cody Justice · Rating 2 out of 5]

Mostly sound, with some real nuggets here or there, but also quite encumbered by (1) historical references that make the book too idiosyncratic in relation to our own day, (2) no small amount of technical jargon and abstractions, which is exacerbated further by (3) somewhat stilted prose, and (4) more modern theological methodology. A book can have some of 1, 2, and 4, and still be packed with profit, e.g. Fairbairn's Typology of Scripture, where Fairbairn does reference various historical developments here or there, and where his sentences are many times longer than Vos's; yet, because Fairbairn's prose is so good (3) and because he explains himself so well, there is much profit to gain, contrary to my time in Vos. Sadly, this book was more of a chore than a pleasure.

Vos also seems overly interested in the "eschatological," and I notice that some of his disciples are as well. This emphasis seems to muddy the waters on classical ethics. It is all too cognoscenti for me and can easily be a tool in the hands of sophists to evade the demands of duty. Reading Witsius on The Economy of the Covenants at the same time proves how paltry modern Theologians are compared to our Reformation and Post-Reformation fathers. Witsius packs more into one paragraph than Vos does in a single chapter, and yet Witsius is far more clear, and thus far easier to read and follow. I will say, Vos's principles concerning symbols and types are crucial to understand, and probably the one thing I would reference again in the future. Then again, if you pay attention to Fairbairn, you will get the same from him and much more.

[Laurent Dv · Rating 4 out of 5]

The greatest classic on (reformed) biblical theology of the ancestor of all the reformed giants : Meredith Kline, G. K. Beale, William Dumbrell... An overview of history from the preredemptive epoch (before the Fall) to the inauguration of the Kingodm by Jesus (the Gospels). Don't deal with Paul and the letters but you can find this part in his Pauline's eschatology. Not each developpment (Beale or Kline's insights for example) is clearly in Vos, but most are already in.

If you are not interested in liberal exegesis, a lot of Vos comments will bore you.

[Peter Krol · Rating 3 out of 5]

As far as depth of insight and weightiness of the subject matter, I give it 5 stars. As far as clarity of writing and comprehensibility, I give it 1 star. So I balanced the two with 3 stars.

I'm glad I read this classic text on biblical theology (twice in my life)! But I have no doubt there are more useful and readable treatments of the topic elsewhere.

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

My first crack at Vos. obscure at the beginning. Phrasing is odd, meaning is at times vague. Much clearer when discussing special revelation under Moses (largest section of book). an ancillary and very brief discussion of the Trinity under the heading "Angel of the Lord" was excellent!

[Stephen Drew]

For Personal Reference:

“Given the popularity of resources like The Bible Project and Sally Lloyd Jones’s The Jesus Storybook Bible, it’s hard to remember that biblical theology wasn’t always such a common approach to Scripture among evangelicals. We owe biblical theology’s popularity, in part, to the work of Geerhardus Vos (1862–1949), who’s often referred to as the father of Reformed biblical theology. As distinguished professor of biblical theology at Princeton Theological Seminary, Vos culminated his career by systematically articulating his understanding of biblical theology as a distinct discipline.

Vos’s endeavor to promote biblical theology drew on years of teaching and preaching the Bible. His magnum opus was published in 1948 as Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments. Though dated in some ways, this work and the approach established by Vos in it have unmistakably influenced contemporary evangelical biblical theology. This book is a classic that deserves rediscovery by every generation.” - Gospel Coalition

[Simon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really good. It is largely hard going, dense and requires lots of concentration. The section on the Mosaic law was tremendous, particularly the section on the Decalogue and the role of the law in redemption. It took me until the section on John the Baptist to realise how good this book is. Once I was into that, I realised that Vos is treating the entire scriptural witness as equally important and weighty in God's condescension and redemption. The division between the OT and NT dissipated. It was a good moment and the book was a good book.

[Nathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

re-read just the NT part, some overlap w his “teaching of jesus concerning the kingdom of God”

THE DEEPER PROTESTANT CONCEPTION!! (worth reading w reformed forum “vos group” as a conversation partner)

[Parker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent.

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good book that needs to be read and reread.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Vos was born around 1850 and pretty much started the discipline of BT with this 1948 book. Because of that, he is often called the Father or BT. He worked as a professor at Princeton University. His primary contribution was to evaluate the progress of salvation ("salvation history") in terms of epochs of time, bounded by the various covenants in scripture (Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New). His other contribution was to write helpful definitions and distinctions between BT and other theologies, including Historical, Pastoral, and Systematic.

His actual BT is not as good as his definitions and framework, and he spends little time connecting the dots between OT and NT, while spending an inordinate amount of time on the functions of the prophets, as well as responding to the challenges of higher criticism, the main intellectual challenge to Christianity at that time.

[Eddie Mercado · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow, what an incredible book! Is it the most engaging? No. Is it easy to read? Not by a long shot; but my rating is based on the fact that this is a work that gave modern RH BT a firm foundation that was built upon by theologians like Kline, Gaffin, et al. I greatly appreciate Vos' work, and will certainly go over it again in the future.

[Anita · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book as I was just learning what it really meant to be reformed and loved it. It brought me back to some of what I grew up learning, seeing Christ throughout the Bible. It is all about God and his purpose in redemption.

[John Yelverton · Rating 1 out of 5]

An absolutely miserable read of controversies that were out of date when the book was written, and what was still relevant was muted by the author's arrogance of his knowledge of Hebrew and the value of his own opinion. I only recommend this book if you are looking for a cure for insomnia.

[Mark Gring · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wonderful foundational reading. His older, denser style is not something to just breeze through but it worth the work.

[Christopher Hall · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great work going through the Bible showing how it holds together. The text is dense, and requires work to understand Vos' meaning in several places, but the effort is well rewarded.

[John Ellis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dense at points, but well worth the effort.

[Charles Johnson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is only of the most popular, hyped up books of the modern Reformed world.
Vos's Biblical Theology is the culmination of his 30+ years at Princeton Seminary teaching biblical theology. In the work, he explains the motifs of Scripture from Genesis to the gospels.
My honest assessment of it is that Vos has some helpful exegetical observations, combined with a strong emphasis of the development of doctrine that at times appears over-emphasized, like when he appears to contrast Jesus's and Paul's doctrine.
Those helpful exegetical observations are mixed into a whole that is primarily aimed at refuting the ideas of many little-known 19th century German liberals, and which therefore adopts their language to a large degree, and tries to refute them from within their own framework, by pointing out its inconsistencies.
At this it is quite successful, but at a cost of being far poorer at explaining the whole of the Scripture and its teaching than a book that dedicates itself to doing just that, if nothing else because involving many extraneous ideas makes following the thread of Vos's thought quite difficult at times. Many sections need to be re-read various times to extract the whole of Vos's meaning.
For understanding the science of biblical theology as it exists in Reformed seminaries from the 20th century to the present, Vos's work is indispensible.
For understanding the teaching of Scripture, their is more to be gained, both for the academic and the layman, from a careful study of covenant theology (see Witsius, Roberts, Gomarus, Thomas Blake, John Ball, J. H. Heidegger, etc) and from solid commentaries (Matthew Henry, Matthew Poole, Piscator, Paraeus, Lavater, Vitringa, Zanchi, Rollock, Junius, Jameson Fausset Brown, etc).

[Kevin · Rating 5 out of 5]

So much could be said about this foundational volume. Vos’ work in this book serves as a worthy introduction to Biblical Theology and remains an important piece of the Reformed tradition. Vos shows that the key to understanding the Bible lies in seeing it as the inscripturation of revelation in history, structured in various epochs starting with Moses and ending with the New Testament epoch of revelation.

I much appreciated the way Vos consistently deals with the Historical Critical view on many issues, presenting the Reformed view as the Protestant alternative that remains true to sola scriptura and confessional orthodoxy.

Finally, it is clear that Vos wrote this book as a resource for the church, for the good of the church. His view of the Kingdom recognizes that the Church is part and parcel of the Kingdom of God and was as such dear to his heart.

A quote from the last page: “The Church was born in and stands in the sign of consummation and rest as well as motion. She consists not of mere doing, but likewise of fruition, and this fruition pertains not exclusively to the future; it is the most blessed part of the present life. And the best proof for the Church as an end in itself lies in the inclusion of the Church in the eschatological world, for that world is not the world of things aimed at, but of things attained unto.”

[Kelle Craft · Rating 5 out of 5]

Finally finished! Reading Vos is dense work and a challenge at times. Taking one’s time to mine through a volume like this is well worth what will be found in the process. But because English is not his first language, his writing style is difficult to get used to and at times is not as easily enjoyable to read as someone like C. S. Lewis. But one forgets this as one follows Vos as he expounds on the biblical text to give insight and understanding in ways modern interpreters would never be able to formulate.
There are many sections, paragraphs, and sentences that are packed with theological meaning that he doesn’t always unpack. Many times, he will briefly note and lay out various points and then move on, leaving the reader to further draw on the implications and connections. Read this book slowly. Strive to understand what he’s saying. Think about the implications he’s pointing out and alluding to. You won’t be disappointed.

[Benjamin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had not read this in close to thirty years. But, since I will be teaching BT this fall, I thought it worthwhile to read through again. BT, at least as approached in an evangelical framework, has developed in several different directions in the last 70 years. Many of the works on that subject vary greatly from what we see in Vos. The book suffers from the fact that it is essentially his lectures, edited to some extent edited by his son. It also suffers from a certain incompleteness. For example, in the Old Testament section, the poetic literature is almost entirely ignored, as also Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and most of the minor prophets. The historical books as well, outside of Samuel and Kings, get short shrift. In the New Testament section, the focus is almost entirely on the gospels. That being said, there is much of worth in the book, and even given the occasional clumsiness of Vos's English,it is a book well worth studying.

[Christian Cunningham · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very important work in the field of Biblical Theology. In it, he convincingly argues for the importance of Scripture itself establishing the hermeneutical criteria by which we interpret the whole. Special revelation of God authoritatively interprets historical narrative, and there is an organic development to its fulfillment in Christ.

The only issues with the book is it is a bit of a challenging read and some of Vos’s critiques are dated (due to his obliteration of their arguments in this book). He also seems to unnecessarily limit Biblical Theology and does not extensively treat other important portions of Scripture (Proverbs, Psalms, Pauline Epistles, etc.) although I see his logic. His best sections are included in more modern, easier, and more comprehensive works on the discipline.

Overall, very important book in the field and a must read for serious students of Biblical Theology.

[Tim]

This is a massively enriching read. It is NOT easy armchair reading. I would sometimes read an entire chapter at a time and others maybe one or two pages before reflecting, researching and letting the argument sink in.
I came to Vos by way of Van Til (don't sleep on him either) who was one of Vos's students. Vos works out of a biblical/covenantal framework, explaining how the Bible is the bedrock foundation and only way we can interpret and understand the world, sin and salvation. He lets the Bible defend itself and along the way dismantles the "higher criticism" and ancient heresies that have, and continues to some extent infect the church today. The connections he makes from Genisis to Revelation are insightful, enlightening and edifying.
I came away with an even deeper awe for God and His Word.
Read it. The Banner of Truth edition is great (hardback).

[Jon Chin · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was ok.

The English is hard to understand even though it was written in 1975. Honestly, there are some good points but I feel like a lot more developments on Biblical Theology have been made since 1975 and more and more commentaries are incorporating BT (in some sense) to their works. So if you do a study of any particular book of the Bible today, you would pretty much have to do a survey (OT/NT) and always reflect on the BT aspect for a more careful hermeneutics and exegesis.

Nevertheless, I may be ill-equipped to read this book as a 1st-year theological studies student, I will revisit it once I have read other works on this similar theme and time of production. I may change my rating then.