Anyone know of Mp3 lecture's by Dr Kline?

[New wine skin]

I really enjoy reading his books, does anyone know where I can locate lectures online or Cd?

Thanks
Scott

 

[blhowes]

Originally posted by New wine skin
I really enjoy reading his books, does anyone know where I can locate lectures online or Cd?

Thanks
Scott

No luck here. Searched, but found nothing.

He sure did write a lot though, didn't he.

 

[New wine skin]

Thanks for looking. I have searched high and low for the last 6 mos and found nothing. I hoped someone might have recorded a course or knew of a cd archive at WSC etc... (wishful thinking)

 

[R. Scott Clark]

I checked our library catalogue and did not see anything.

I don't think his courses were recorded. If they were, they haven't been catalogued.

There might be some other materials at the sem, but I don't. If I find anything I'll let you know.

rsc

Originally posted by New wine skin
Thanks for looking. I have searched high and low for the last 6 mos and found nothing. I hoped someone might have recorded a course or knew of a cd archive at WSC etc... (wishful thinking)

 

[blhowes]

Thought I had found something here, but this page has mp3s about his teachings - close, but no cigar.

 

[ChristopherPaul]

Originally posted by blhowes

Originally posted by New wine skin
I really enjoy reading his books, does anyone know where I can locate lectures online or Cd?

Thanks
Scott

No luck here. Searched, but found nothing.

He sure did write a lot though, didn't he.

He is still alive right?

 

[blhowes]

Originally posted by ChristopherPaul
He is still alive right?

Yes.

Maybe I should have said - He sure is a prolific writer, isn't he?

[Edited on 8-9-2006 by blhowes]

 

[New wine skin]

Many thanks to all for responding!

 

[R. Scott Clark]

He is still alive right?

Yes, he is. He's been battling cancer but the last report is that the treatments were effective and he is doing a little better.

I know Meredith generates strong feelings, but I wish his critics would recognize that he spent 50+ years defending the inerrancy and coherence of the Word of God, preaching Christ and his gospel, and defended the same.

If you benefit from the ministries of Bob Godfrey and Mike Horton (to name just two), thank Meredith Kline. They were both his students and have spent much of their careers elaborating on things they learned from Meredith. Bob defended the gospel against moralism (with Meredith) and the faith against the incursions of broad evangelicalism in the CRC and later in the URC. Mike has done the same and capitalized on Meredith's covenant theology in three books at least.

Meredith was defending the "two kingdoms" in the early 1960's when Darryl Hart was in short pants and I was in diapers.

In the 20th century, Meredith's covenant theology was, beside G. Vos' (and mostly L. Berkhof's) perhaps the ONLY one to uphold consistently the main lines of classic covenant theology without significant revision. He taught (implicitly and explicitly) the three covenant scheme (cov of works, cov of grace; without confusing the two!; and the covenant of redemption).

The theological function of his use of the (Hittite - please remember that many scholars once didn't even accept the existence of Hittites!) Suzerain treaty pattern was to preserve the notion of the covenant of works in exegetical theology.

Ironically, as it turns out, today Jewish scholars, Roman Catholic scholars (even Benedict XVI!), and mainline Protestant scholars agree, on one level or another, that there are two kinds of covenants in the OT: legal/suzerainty covenants and gracious/royal grant treaties. See Mike Horton's vol on covenant theology on this. His forthcoming vol 3 of the more academic series documents this even more thoroughly. Thus it is ironic that, Horton must appeal to these sorts of writers against allegedly Reformed covenantal revisionists to defend the substance of the theology of the Reformed tradition!

Meredith has always defended the early date of the Exodus and his appeal to the Suzerain-vassal pattern helped anchor that conviction.

Because I'm only summarizing a few highlights of his career thus far, I'm probably not doing him justice. Meredith didn't just stake out orthodox positions and then find evidence to defend them. He worked through the difficult issues, sifted the evidence, and found that Machen was right. We need not fear good scholarship. Like Machen, Meredith has found that good scholarship supports the reliability of God's Word. Always a Van Tillian, Meredith recognizes that there is no such thing as neutrality, no brute facts, that evidence must be interpreted, nevertheless, he never uses that conviction as an excuse to take intellectual short-cuts.

Even in his exegesis of Gen 1-2 his appeal to the Framework interpretation functions to support the inerrancy and infallibility and coherence of God's self-disclosure. He earned scorn from his peers in the Society of Biblical Literature and in the mainline/secular academy, but he has never relented from his insistence on the historicity of the creation account, of Adam and Eve, the fall, his opposition to and subversion of Barth and also the higher critical establishment.

Meredith is a remarkable scholar and a faithful minister. We all owe him a debt of gratitude.

rsc

 

[bookslover]

Originally posted by R. Scott Clark

He is still alive right?

Yes, he is. He's been battling cancer but the last report is that the treatments were effective and he is doing a little better.

I know Meredith generates strong feelings, but I wish his critics would recognize that he spent 50+ years defending the inerrancy and coherence of the Word of God, preaching Christ and his gospel, and defended the same.

If you benefit from the ministries of Bob Godfrey and Mike Horton (to name just two), thank Meredith Kline. They were both his students and have spent much of their careers elaborating on things they learned from Meredith. Bob defended the gospel against moralism (with Meredith) and the faith against the incursions of broad evangelicalism in the CRC and later in the URC. Mike has done the same and capitalized on Meredith's covenant theology in three books at least.

Meredith was defending the "two kingdoms" in the early 1960's when Darryl Hart was in short pants and I was in diapers.

In the 20th century, Meredith's covenant theology was, beside G. Vos' (and mostly L. Berkhof's) perhaps the ONLY one to uphold consistently the main lines of classic covenant theology without significant revision. He taught (implicitly and explicitly) the three covenant scheme (cov of works, cov of grace; without confusing the two!; and the covenant of redemption).

The theological function of his use of the (Hittite - please remember that many scholars once didn't even accept the existence of Hittites!) Suzerain treaty pattern was to preserve the notion of the covenant of works in exegetical theology.

Ironically, as it turns out, today Jewish scholars, Roman Catholic scholars (even Benedict XVI!), and mainline Protestant scholars agree, on one level or another, that there are two kinds of covenants in the OT: legal/suzerainty covenants and gracious/royal grant treaties. See Mike Horton's vol on covenant theology on this. His forthcoming vol 3 of the more academic series documents this even more thoroughly. Thus it is ironic that, Horton must appeal to these sorts of writers against allegedly Reformed covenantal revisionists to defend the substance of the theology of the Reformed tradition!

Meredith has always defended the early date of the Exodus and his appeal to the Suzerain-vassal pattern helped anchor that conviction.

Because I'm only summarizing a few highlights of his career thus far, I'm probably not doing him justice. Meredith didn't just stake out orthodox positions and then find evidence to defend them. He worked through the difficult issues, sifted the evidence, and found that Machen was right. We need not fear good scholarship. Like Machen, Meredith has found that good scholarship supports the reliability of God's Word. Always a Van Tillian, Meredith recognizes that there is no such thing as neutrality, no brute facts, that evidence must be interpreted, nevertheless, he never uses that conviction as an excuse to take intellectual short-cuts.

Even in his exegesis of Gen 1-2 his appeal to the Framework interpretation functions to support the inerrancy and infallibility and coherence of God's self-disclosure. He earned scorn from his peers in the Society of Biblical Literature and in the mainline/secular academy, but he has never relented from his insistence on the historicity of the creation account, of Adam and Eve, the fall, his opposition to and subversion of Barth and also the higher critical establishment.

Meredith is a remarkable scholar and a faithful minister. We all owe him a debt of gratitude.

rsc

I'm glad he seems to be successfully fighting his cancer. At almost 84 (this December 15th), I'm sure the fight takes a lot out of him.

I must say, though, that I'm also glad that my Presbytery, the Presbytery of Southern California (OPC), came out strongly against the Framework Hypothesis regarding the interpretation of Genesis 1-2.

 

[InwooJLee]

Oh Kline audios! for a second there I thought someone found them. thanks for pulling my chain.

 

[VanVos]

Merdeith Kline rocks! Sorry Kline fan here. His work in Covenant Theology has been so helpful in my studies of the covenants. It's amazing that there are no audio teachings available of him, although that does make him more intriguing.

VanVos