Journal: Westminster Theological Journal Volume: WTJ 40:2 (Spring 1978) Article: Geerhardus Vos (1862-1949): A Biographical Sketch

Author: Ransom Lewis Webster

Geerhardus Vos (1862-1949): A Biographical Sketch
Ransom Lewis Webster

Formative Years
On March 14, 1862 there was born in Heerenveen in the Netherlands one who was destined to become a devoted servant of the kingdom of God and a defender of historic Christianity, Geerhardus Vos. He was born into a sphere of intense Christian activity, for his father was a pastor in the Christian Reformed Church (De Christelijke Gereformeerde Kerk ). This denomination had come into being in 1834, as the result of a break with the old state church (De Nederlandsch Hervormde Kerk ), which dated back to Reformation times. The division was in protest against the prevailing rationalism and liberalism of the state church. In contrast, the new church held firmly to the position of the famous Synod of Dort (1619). Both of Vos’ parents were committed to the historic Christian faith. They were born in Graafschap, Germany, and were descendants of French Huguenots, named Vosse, who had fled from France to Germany to escape severe persecution. Although we know nothing concerning the details of Vos’ childhood, we may justly assume that his parents faithfully instructed him in the tenets of Christianity and in the Confessions. Vos’ early years served as a prelude to the remainder of his life. The period in which he grew up was filled with theological controversy. Liberalism view for the supremacy over orthodoxy, the same situation Vos was to encounter in his later life. It was during Vos’ youth that Abraham Kuyper led the battle against the forces of liberalism. In 1880 Dr. Kuyper founded the Free University of Amsterdam, an institution designed to provide education in the Christian tradition. Besides a love for the faith, Vos was gifted with great scholarly ability. He attended the gymnasiums of Schiedam and Amsterdam, graduating from the latter with honors in 1881.
WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. 305

In the spring of that same year his father received and accepted a call to a Christian Reformed pastorate in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Thus the family, including Geerhardus, moved to America. He began his own studies for the ministry at the Theological School of the Holland Christian Reformed Church, Grand Rapids. He remained there for two years, until 1883. During the second year, he served as a student instructor. Vos continued his studies at Princeton Theological Seminary, where he won the Hebrew Fellowship for a thesis on “The Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuchal Codes.” After completing his work at Princeton in 1885, Vos spent three years of study in Europe, one at the University of Berlin and the others at the University of Strasbourg. In 1888, at the age of 26, he received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from Strasbourg. Understandably, Vos’ scholarly gifts began to attract attention. While still in Europe, he was offered the first professorship in Old Testament at the Free University of Amsterdam. He was unable to consider this position, however, because he had already accepted a call to teach at the Theological School of Grand Rapids. Thus, in the same year that he received his doctor’s degree, he returned to the United States and became Professor of Systematic and Exegetical Theology at the latter school, serving there for five years, until 1893. Because of his outstanding service to the cause of theological studies, Lafayette College conferred upon him the honorary degree of Doctor of Divinity in 1893. After having received two separate invitations, Vos accepted the call to occupy the newly established Chair

He himself wrote a number of poems. his alma mater. and O. we must draw the line somewhere. Vos the Defender of the Faith . however. Dr. J. has said that he was the most “many-sided man” he has ever known. T. This devout nature found expression not only in the formal activities of his teaching and writing. Union of New York and McCormick of Chicago attempted to challenge her leadership. Vos would WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. 306 theological position of Princeton Seminary is exactly the same today that it was a hundred years ago. When a student was unable to recite satisfactorily. Johannes. able to hold his temper. equal her eminent scholarship and solid orthodoxy. The title of his inaugural address was “The Idea of Biblical Theology as a Science and as a Theological Discipline. B. W. what is known of Vos during his Princeton years is all too scanty. Robert Dick Wilson. “Please close the door.3 Further insights concerning Vos have been given by Dr. Vos read the Scriptures with vivid running comments for the children. Gresham Machen. and brother of the Hopkins Dr. a person of immense breadth and depth. Yet those who did understand him found him to be a very warm and human person. even during some very disturbing faculty meetings at Princeton having to do with the intrusion of liberalism. President Patton delivered an address. and loved poetry and painting. on the occasion of her centennial celebration. He was an intense and earnest individual.”4 Geerhardus Vos was a man of many facets. 307 frame his questions in such a way as virtually to provide the answers. Hodge. Vos was ordained to the Presbyterian ministry. C.”2 Commenting on Vos. Bernardus.” At this time Princeton was at the height of its reputation. It was preached by Dr. “Guests in the home were invariably guests at family prayers. as Mrs. He was quiet and reserved.” Van Til speaks also of Vos’ kindheartedness. Here. possessed a “wonderful sense of humor. was extremely well-read. remaining at Princeton for the next 39 years. His subject was Christ’s appearance to Mary after the resurrection. Vos. and rather surprised me. Allis. also a student of his and later a fellow faculty member: We had this morning one of the finest expository sermons I ever heard. Four children were eventually born to them. W. he developed and produced that for which he is especially known. the structure of a biblical theology of redemption. in which he reminded his hearers that “the WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. at which Vos commented. standing head and shoulders above sister Presbyterian institutions. Unfortunately. Today he was nothing less than inspiring. Vos the Man Geerhardus Vos became well known for his personal piety and for his devotion to the Bible as the Word of God. composed of such men as B. In 1912. and Geerhardus. He is usually rather too severely theological for Sunday morning. but also in his family life. Vos led in the prayer.” On one occasion the pet dog of a certain student followed him into the classroom. Vos. however. During that same year (1894). Vos differs from some theological professors in having a better-developed bump of reverence. one whom many found difficult to appreciate. Vos. Jr. Vos enjoyed brief walks. he was married to Miss Catherine Francis Smith. One year after assuming his duties at the seminary. He assumed his duties in 1893. Warfield.of Biblical Theology at Princeton Seminary.”1 Vos was part of a distinguished faculty. Dr. Van Til recollects. professor of Biblical Theology in the Seminary. Cornelius Van Til. Princeton stood for the historic Calvinism of the Westminster Standards. a student of his for three years and a colleague for one. Brenton Greene. and Dr. one daughter and three sons. They could not.

the family) comes under the controlling influence of the divine glory. For him the Church is not necessarily the only outward expression of the Kingdom. To be specific. for Jesus. Liberalism had been busy producing a number of interpretations of Jesus from its own point of view. art. using his influence to persuade the George H. A second book by Vos defending the faith. Kerr.”7 It is at this point that Vos comes under criticism. The Tübingen school of theology. It was later rewritten and edited by Vos’ son. for the purpose of presenting the views of our Lord’s life and teaching as held by conservative scholarship. Twentieth-century liberal Protestant theology became. was indeed timely. under the editorship of Dr. The book was composed against a background of the liberal attack on Orthodox Christianity.5 The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom and the Church first appeared in 1903. no state of happiness for man without the prior reigning of God. especially with regard to his own self-estimate and disclosure. It was reprinted by the William B. however. and modern views arose which in general tended to view the Savior as human and fallible. eventually making deep inroads.”6 Vos contends that Jesus was the founder of no new religion. and had led to a reevaluation of the place of Jesus in the redemptive scheme. . with which Machen clashed in his famous book The Origin of Paul’s Religion . Whenever any sphere (e. Doran Company to produce the work. in articles and in such books as The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom and the Church and The Self-Disclosure of Jesus . the Van Dyke case. instead. Such a view places one in the awkward position of setting the Church on the same level as the sphere of science. 308 Publishing Company in 1972. The Rev. The revision was published by Eerdmans in 1954. The attempt is made throughout to reproduce our Lord’s own point of view and keep the discussion in close touch with this. the relationship of the Kingdom of God and the Church is summarized in these words: “The Church is a form which the kingdom assumes in result of the new stage upon which the Messiahship of Jesus enters with His death and resurrection.Even before Vos had become part of the Presbyterian Church. It is. therefore. etc. there the kingdom of God has become manifest. Of all Vos’ works. being the least technical. published by the American Tract Society. The essence of the Kingdom of God consists in the supremacy of God. His point is that there is a historic unity between Jesus’ teaching and the revelation of the Old Testament regarding the Kingdom. J. this is perhaps the most popularly written. The historic conception of Christ was cast aside.. The Self-Disclosure of Jesus . had exerted great influence. Johannes Vos. in the sphere of saving power and in the state of human blessedness. For Vos. Eerdmans Publishing Company in 1951 and by the Presbyterian and Reformed WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. accordingly. he was to bring about the realization of what had previously been presented in ideal form. science. This book. There could be. John H. WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. liberalism was beginning to make itself felt there. 309 however. This insidious movement increased in vigor over the years. the book is an effort to define Jesus’ doctrine of the kingdom as to “its place in the larger field of revelation as well as in the field of Jesus’ teaching historically considered. was first published in 1926. Gresham Machen was partly instrumental in its original publication. with its Hegelian approach to the New Testament. especially on the integrity of the person and work of Christ as traditionally conceived. deeply interested in christology. Vos entered into the defense of the truth mainly through his writings. Such incidents as the Fosdick case. by no means elementary. The work was originally the second in a series of volumes issued on Jesus. one towards whom we are to have respect. In spite of this. Vos succeeded in producing a viable biblical alternative to liberalism’s view of the Kingdom of God. but little more. and the Auburn Affirmation served to bring Presbyterianism and Princeton Seminary into a crisis situation.g.

In doing so. such as the Christ.”8 He states that “no one can take a Savior to his heart in that absolutely unqualified sense which constitutes the glory of religious trust. While yet continuing to deny historic Christianity. Vos the Theologian In addition to his apologetical labors Vos also made major contributions in the field of theological studies. a messianic interpretation of his entire ministry.”9 Vos saw that the seeds of the destruction of Christianity are sown when there is forced upon Jesus a role other than that which he actually sustained. not actually touching on the essence of Jesus’ permanent significance as the center of Christianity. it is seeking now to be creatively positive. Four structural lines are examined by which Vos tests his thesis: the idea of the resurrection. Modern studies. Vos’ method was to take the various titles given to Jesus. for Vos’ great scholarship has enabled him to condense vast stores of knowledge into every paragraph. Wrede attempted to discredit Mark’s Gospel. exegeting them in context and in relationship to the Old Testament. entertained a messianic interpretation of his coming death. who is WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. salvation itself.Vos reacted to these rationalistic attempts to explain away the divine nature and mission of Jesus. the Son of God. which was held to be the earliest gosl)el document. As the author himself states: “to unfold the Apostle’s eschatology means to set forth his theology as a whole. 311 seen as a theologian whose eschatology is his theology. is very much dated. that is to say.” Vos intends something more. He presents a work of sweeping comprehensiveness. An absolute skepticism with respect to the entire Gospel tradition was the outcome of Wrede’s views. bypass this type of argumentation. Vos deals at length with William Wrede’s The Messianic Secret . The “war” is now being waged on a different level. though helpful in presenting a systematic exposition of Jesus as he saw himself. fitting Pauline eschatology into the total biblical picture. The work is a masterly interpretation of the Apostle Paul. indeed. He argued that we can do nothing else than accept and receive him “at the face value of his central selfestimate. In defending the Orthodox position. It is Vos’ thesis that in Paul there is a weaving of the threads of eschatology and soteriology into a whole doctrinal fabric. and printed at the Princeton University Press. and (5) the view that the messiahship was a formal state. (4) WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. It is probably little read at the present time. 310 the hypothesis of a gradually developing consciousness. however. a controversy evoked by outright (lenial of Jesus and his messiahship. It was republished in 1952 by Eerdmans. who followed Mark’s basic outline. Neoorthodoxy perceived the religious vacuum created by negating everything of central significance to the faith. Such passages as 1 Corinthians 15:35–50 and 2 Corinthians 5:1–8 are treated carefully and made to produce a wealth of ideas. This book. the Lord. from the very outset. He set forth. the doctrine of the judgment versus justification. Though the title might lead one to expect a specialized treatment of “last things.”10 This book cannot be read superficially with any hope of gain. (3) the theory of a prospective messiahship. Vos was speaking to a controversy belonging to the “twenties” of this century. Vos lists five views that attempt to deny to Christ a simple itiessianic consciousness: (1) the position of outright denial of such a self-consciousness. (2) the agnostic view. His conclusion was that Jesus. he discredited at the same time Matthew and Luke. and the conception of the Holy . if there persists in the background of his mind the thought that this Savior failed to understand himself. He held. that it contained saving significance. This work was first published in 1930 by the author himself. Perhaps the secret of the strength of the volume lies in its unsurpassed exegesis. One such contribution is his book The Pauline Eschatology . refusing to commit itself.

the work is extremely important and should remain a “standard” in its field for generations to come. W. WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17. “parousia. from 1930–1941. Old and New Testaments . In 1918. an unbeliever in ‘the second coming’.” was produced by the same author for a Bible handbook. F. in which certain elements are seen as implying a gradual and fixed movement toward the goal of the advent: (1) that the time is short. He also examines the three principal terms employed by Paul regarding the second advent. and held to an evolutionary view of biblical religion. an extensive work on Old Testament prophetic revelation entitled Het Godswoord der Profeten (The Revelation of God through the Prophets ). A summary chapter would have been helpful. Reformed theology had devoted very little attention to a method of biblical understanding that focused on the history of special revelation. and (4) that a “falling away” will become more and more evident. orthodox. Biblical Theology. 1 Corinthians 15:51–53.”11 He also examines the four passages which deal with believers found living at the time of the Parousia. through his great work. are you then. Nevertheless. but it comprised only 36 pages.” “revelation. This was followed in 1932 by a book on divine revelation in Genesis. Up until his time. It is equivalent to ‘becoming a new creation’…. but within a framework giving due honor to the Bible as the revealed Word of God and not as the product of man’s religious nature. In a moment of reflection Vos reveals his dismay over the attitude of millennialists towards his amillennialism: “It is not an uncommon experience at the present day for one who expresses dissent from Chiliasm to be met with the question.” and “the day” (with its variations). (3) that the subjugation of the enemies of Christ is being fulfilled. G. 312 Vos devotes a chapter to the question of the millennium. 313 De geschiedenis der Nieuw-Testamentische Godsopenbaring (The History of New Testament Divine Revelation). Vos’ exegesis of these passages brings forth a wealth of helpful material. J. Aalders published a work on the prophets. Concerning the New Testament. Dr. In his treatment of the approach of the last day Vos develops what amounts to a philosophy of the history of the Church. C. In 1935.13 One reason suggested for this neglect on the part of Reformed scholarship (and conservative scholarship in general) was that the “method as initially employed was bonded to rationalistic presuppositions which made it an inevitable and effective instrument for the denial of the divine origin and unity of Scripture. in which Vos restated succinctly his position.”12 Perhaps the greatest difficulty with this work is its style.Spirit. namely. in four volumes. Vos’ greatest contribution to the world of biblical scholarship was his formulation and presentation of a comprehensive. a brief survey. Chapters I-III. Nevertheless. and Philippians 3:20–21. and distinctly Reformed biblical-theological approach to the Holy Scriptures.”14 Biblical theology was developed in liberal circles. “The Old Testament History of Special Revelation. For Vos the bodily resurrection of believers “signifies in fact the most radical and all-inclusive transforming event within the entire range of the believer’s experience of salvation. so life should be lived accordingly. De Goddelijke Openbaring in de eerste drie hoofdstukken van Genesis (Divine Revelation in the First Three Chapters of Genesis) and in 1933 with a work on the restoration of Israel according to the prophets. added a new chapter to the study of . dealing first with the exegetical methods of the premillennialists. (2) that the receiving back of the unbelieving majority of the Jews must be accomplished. and then stating his objections to this view. Ridderbos published. Het herstel van Israël volgens het Oude Testament (The Restoration of Israel according to the Old Testament ). 2 Corinthians 5:1–5. Vos. Dr. Grosheide published in 1918 De eenheid der Nieuw-Testamentische Gods-openbaring (The Unity of the New Testament Divine Revelation) and in 1925 WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. It is “slow going” for any reader. De profeten des Ouden Verbonds (The Prophets of the Old Covenant ). conservative scholarship recognized the necessity of pursuing this discipline.

biblical theology. In this work Geerhardus Vos is at his finest. and that all divinely given interpretations of those events form a whole. the active agent. the Rev. Study had certainy been done on the subject. having access to the private files of his father. historical.”15 Vos denied the concept that the Bible is merely a depository of abstract doctrinal statements. ”17 Vos’ objections to the term “biblical theology. 314 practical. and Moses comprises the remainder of the first section. annotated. to preempt the predicate “biblical” for a single discipline would be presumptuous. and the biblical theology of the New Testament. Vos in the first part deals with general and special revelation. the work was in the form of class notes prepared for his students. His position is that to the prophets was given the task of keeping the kingdom of Israel as a true representative of the Kingdom of Jehovah. Johannes Vos.biblical theology from a conservative and from a Reformed perspective. In other words. and indexed the work for publication.” were: (1) that since all theology. systematic. and this is not true. the Tower of Babel. The work is divided into three parts: the Mosaic epoch of WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. and (3) the usage of “biblical” with its suffix ending “al. He defined biblical theology as “that branch of Exegetical Theology which deals with the process of the self-revelation of God deposited in the Bible. Originally. and then under the régime of sin. and also that historical development implied that former revelations had become obsolete with the giving of later ones. drawing the distinctions between each. Revelation is given as “an organically unfolding process. he used the latter. Even though Vos greatly preferred the name “history of special revelation” to that of biblical theology. for biblical theology. . namely. but nothing approaching the comprehensiveness of this endeavor. Vos held to a unity of biblical revelation. Though the style is rather heavy.18 In 1948 Vos’ book Biblical Theology. Reformed theology had provided no complete history of special revelation. and the New Testament requires the Old Testament as its firmly established factual basis. and WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. but rather is grouped around the central events of redemptive history. as being divided into four departanients: exegetical. revised. but as including. that the arrangement of the material dealt with in biblical theology is not borrowed from systematic theology. the Old Testament is not meaningful apart from the New Testament. in fact. 315 revelation. Noah. Vos saw that God. To the office of prophet can also be attached the principle of continuity of revelation. Vos viewed theology in the usual way. He proceeds to consider both of these prior to and apart from sin. the prophetic epoch of revelation. revealed Himself in biblical events and in the interpretation of those events. in the upholding of the past and the reaching out into the future. plus the thoroughness and intricacy of his arguments render the book a stellar contribution to theological literature. Vos followed the heilsgeschichtliche method. God’s redeeming acts in history constitute the core of revelation. One of the author’s sons.” makes it appear to be a fifth department of theology rather than a subdivision under the first of the usual four departments. the Table of Nations. He held rather that all divinely wrought events form a complete series. Old and New Testaments was published. At a time when other orthodox scholars held to a purely historical method for the presentation of biblical theology. Special revelation in relationship to Adam. He saw exegetical theology as not being confined solely to exegesis. giving as his reason that “it is difficult…to change a name which has the sanction of usage. among other things. As has previously been noted.”16 It is helpful to note at this point. is supposed to be biblical. Consequently. does make the material undergo a transformation. the author’s grasp of the subject. that of reproducing the truth in its original biblical form with subsequent transformation. and often technical. (2) the word “biblical” seems to imply that a peculiar method is used. the Patriarchs. Vos next handles the prophetic epoch of revelation.

Nevertheless. 1949 Vos passed away and was buried beside his wife at Roaring Branch. in terms of its own face value. Many of this new school’s faculty came from Princeton. Vos retired from Princeton and moved to California. Princeton Theological Seminary was reorganized so as to place the school under the control of liberalism. It is a curious thing. knowing where his gifts lay. Vos then moved to Grand Rapids. Part of the reason for this neglect. The situation for faithful conservatives in many ways became extremely difficult. however. rather it appears that the spirit manifested was one of sorrowful resignation. He was a champion of historic Christianity. to remain on the old faculty. Conservative leadership elected to establish a new seminary. Stonehouse writes: “These decisions [of Vos. because of the weightiness of his lectures. Pennsylvania. also alluded to earlier. however. more and more out of step with today’s impatient spirit and shallowness. his numerous monographs provide for us a wide range of sound theological literature. Vos died. at the age of 70. called Westminster Theological Seminary. 317 frequently. In 1929. as previously mentioned. Closing Years Geerhardus Vos spent many happy and productive years at Princeton. Vos considers the nativity of Jesus. He never avoided a confrontation with those opposed. Gresham Machen. but. Among these was Geerhardus Vos. Part of the reason for this neglect. which to him was the Reformed Faith. is because of Vos’ high scholarship. the simple revelation of a sovereign Creator-Redeemer. methodical style of scholarship. Vos held to the highest form of biblical inspiration and inerrancy. On August 13. William Radius. the Epistles. 316 in the peculiar predicament in which they were placed. whose husband was professor of Latin at Calvin College. Vos remains a standard and dependable source of reference. A few who sympathized with them decided. Armstrong. despite the vigorous opposition of men such as J.”19 Regardless of this situation. Enrollment in his courses at seminary often was sparse compared to those of other professors of a more “popular” type. Mrs. he preferred to take his stand in the classroom and at the author’s desk. some of his writings are of such a caliber that they remain beyond the attention span and ability of the average layman. Vos’ convictions remained those of historic Calvinism. Five years later Mrs. is that some of Vos’ work is dated and needs revising so as to make it relevant to today’s theological context. In addition. this work represents a major step forward in conservative biblical studies. it simply needed to be taken as God gave it. The work ends rather abruptly. one who is still quoted WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p.In part three Vos explores the structure of New Testament revelation which centers in Christ himself. and Hodge] are not fully explicable. Vos has been largely a forgotten man and his works have not received the continued attention they deserve. Michigan to live with his daughter. His was a patient. In 1932. that at his funeral there was no official represenation from Princeton Theological Seminary. and finally the public ministry of the Savior. But is time went by the attacks of liberalism came closer and closer to the seminary until it moved from without its walls to within. For him the Bible needed no reinterpretation. John the Baptist. We wish the author had added sections dealing with the Book of Acts.20 Furthermore. but for all his labors and tangible contributions to the advancement and maintenance of the kingdom of God. . Geerhardus Vos was by all standards always the scholar and at the same time always the Christian gentleman. It is also clear that these decisions were not made with enthusiasm. Notwithstanding the above comments. where Vos had faithfully labored for so many years!21 Happily. and Revelation. though Machen had grieved for months over their apparent inevitability and had sympathized with the men WTJ 40:2 (Spr 78) p. About this Dr. It is significant to observe regarding the neglect of Vos.

: published by the author.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.J. 72. 14 Richard Birch Gaffin. One of the continuing glories of the Reformed faith has been that many of its staunchest expositors and defenders have been among the most spiritually and intellectually gifted men with which God has graced the Church of Christ. pp. 1926). 6 Geerhardus Vos. Gresham Machen (Grand Rapids: Wm. Geerhardus Vos was one of these. 5 A complete bibliography of Vos’ writings can be found in the Westminster Theological Journal. 45. during a private interview the author had with him in 1973. May the Church never forget this man of God! Omaha. 227. 85-86. Van Til. cit. XXXVIII (1975–1976). The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom and the Church. N.. 1930). N. 1972). 13 G. 80-81.. Vol. 3. 3 The material in this entire paragraph was contributed by Dr. 8 Geerhardus Vos. review of Geerhardus Vos. there is a resurgence of interest in Vos at Westminster Theological Seminary. Aalders. 3 (Winter. 1955). Resurrection and Redemption (A Study in Pauline Soteriology) (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. 150. 4 Stonehouse. p. 1969). XLIII. no. p.. No. 9 Ibid. November. Let us hope that this interest will gain momentum. 350–367.. 1950.J. 12 Op. Stonehouse. I.” Free University Quarterly. Nebraska 1 Ned B. p. 7 Geerhardus Vos. 15 . The Princeton Theological Review II (1904). “History of Special Revelation. 1950). p. Vol. cit. 2 The Princeton Seminary Bulletin. Westininster Theological Seminary. 61. cit. The Pauline Eschatology (Princeton. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. p. 10 Geerhardus Vos. J. 1.. Jr. pp. Doran Co. The Kingdom of God and the Church (Nutley. 335f. The Self-Disclosure of Jesus (New York: George H. p.. C. p. op.. 14. 11.however. 11 Op.

p. Van Til also recalls that no Christian Reformed clergymen were in attendance. B. 23.. current : 2012-04-07 : uid:1147 (drupal) .. B. p. who preached Vos’ funeral sermon. cit. B. op.. Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids: Wm. op. 19 Stonehouse. Biblical Theology. 18 Ibid.Gaffin. Eerdmans. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1954). cit. 1974) as does Herman Ridderbos in Paul (Grand Rapids: Wm. 3. 20 For example. 21 This comment comes from Dr. cit. Eerdmans. 1975). even though he had rendered great service to that denomination. 16 Gerhardus Vos. 450. 17 Op. p. 13. Van Til.. George Eldon Ladd quotes extensively from Vos in his A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. p.