Robert Culver’s Systematic Theology

[josiahrussell]

I’ll be getting my copy of Robert Culver’s Systematic Theology in the mail soon and wondering who has already read it and what your opinions are of him and his work


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

A worthwhile addition to anyone's library.

https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/robert-duncan-culver-1916-2015.85901/#post-1069457

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-old-man-and-his-big-book

His traducianism notwithstanding, I found this tome to be a treat to read and study. I especially liked his take on the categorization of the attributes of God. Few authors give the reader insight to their thinking process as they write. Culver regularly informed the reader why he was going in the direction he was going. Whether one agrees or disagrees with what he had to say, it will be edifying.

Get ready for a massive reading experience.

 

[josiahrussell]

I’ve definitely heard it’s a massive read!

Would he be more on side with John MacArthur? Or different again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Well, Culver is a credo-baptist and pre-mill, but does not affirm a pre-Trib rapture, rather considering it a possibility.

Compare the eschatological view of Culver to that of MacArthur:

We teach the personal, bodily return of our Lord Jesus Christ before the seven-year tribulation (1 Thessalonians 4:16; Titus 2:13) to translate His church from this earth (John 14:1-3; 1 Corinthians 15:51-53; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:11) and, between this event and His glorious return with His saints, to reward believers according to their works (1 Corinthians 3:11-15; 2 Corinthians 5:10).​

 

[Dachaser]

Well, Culver is a credo-baptist and pre-mill, but does not affirm a pre-Trib rapture, rather considering it a possibility.

Compare the eschatological view of Culver to that of MacArthur:

We teach the personal, bodily return of our Lord Jesus Christ before the seven-year tribulation (1 Thessalonians 4:16; Titus 2:13) to translate His church from this earth (John 14:1-3; 1 Corinthians 15:51-53; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:11) and, between this event and His glorious return with His saints, to reward believers according to their works (1 Corinthians 3:11-15; 2 Corinthians 5:10).​

His book has been very well received in Baptist circles, as he is very thorough, and yet also is appreciative of other held positions.

 

[lynnie]

I loved it. I read many sections of it about 5 years ago during one of the worst times of my life. I read the whole section on Christology one summer with part of that rereads, and it helped keep me stable during months of trial. There is nothing quite like good Christology.

I first read him when a friend of ours xeroxed the chapter on impassibility for me. It was so helpful.

I like STs, I am reading around in Berkhof now, not in chapter order. I found Bavinck to be a hard slog with too many digressions. I read parts of Frame and enjoy his thought process on some subjects but the tri perspective bit gets annoying. I used to recommend Grudem for folks who don't read much since it is geared to that crowd, but after the ESS debate I am jittery about Grudem to some degree.

Culver pulls in a lot of history. Since I never went to Seminary and didn't formally study church history, I loved the way he does that. He does more than just present a subject- you see the subject slowly developed in history. Berkhof is doing that too in the parts I am reading, but Culver is more majestic and sweeter....just my subjective emotional reaction.

Enjoy. I think you may like it the best of all the STs, even if parts are more Lutheran than you are.

 

[Dachaser]

I loved it. I read many sections of it about 5 years ago during one of the worst times of my life. I read the whole section on Christology one summer with part of that rereads, and it helped keep me stable during months of trial. There is nothing quite like good Christology.

I first read him when a friend of ours xeroxed the chapter on impassibility for me. It was so helpful.

I like STs, I am reading around in Berkhof now, not in chapter order. I found Bavinck to be a hard slog with too many digressions. I read parts of Frame and enjoy his thought process on some subjects but the tri perspective bit gets annoying. I used to recommend Grudem for folks who don't read much since it is geared to that crowd, but after the ESS debate I am jittery about Grudem to some degree.

Culver pulls in a lot of history. Since I never went to Seminary and didn't formally study church history, I loved the way he does that. He does more than just present a subject- you see the subject slowly developed in history. Berkhof is doing that too in the parts I am reading, but Culver is more majestic and sweeter....just my subjective emotional reaction.

Enjoy. I think you may like it the best of all the STs, even if parts are more Lutheran than you are.

How does he view Covenant theology then?