B. B. Warfield, on the inspiration and authority of Scripture
B. B. Warfield, professor of didactic and polemic theology at Princeton, 1887–1921
Precise, immensely learned, and entirely unbothered that the writers left their fingerprints all over it.
Every stat is a checkable fact about the actual book, not a designer's mood. Bars are drawn against the highest value any book reaches.
B. B. Warfield taught at Princeton for thirty-four years and wrote more on Scripture than any American before him. He did not claim the Bible fell from the sky. The human authors show everywhere, in their words, their sources and their situations. Yet the same words are God’s words. He argued this patiently against the critics of his day.
By levelling up. A book that develops keeps what it knew and learns the rest on its new schedule.
| Lv | Move | Type | Cat. | Pwr | Acc | PP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Chapter… | Bible | Scripture | — | — | 12 |
| 1 | Random Verse | Bible | Argument | 10 | 100% | 30 |
| 46 | Affirm | — | Status | — | — | 1 |
| 46 | General and Special Revelation | Biblical Theology | Argument | 88 | 100% | 15 |
| 50 | The Words of Men, the Words of God | Biblical Theology | Argument | 90 | 100% | 10 |
How to read these. In Scholar’s Dream, books argue with each other. Each thing a book can do in a debate is a move, and most moves carry a real quotation — the words the book puts on the table when it uses that move.
Strong against lists the opposing books and arguments a move was written to answer. Used against one of them, it hits much harder than usual: ×2 means twice the normal force, ×4 four times. It is the game’s way of saying: this is the sentence that answers that argument. Open an entry to read why.
“For in him we live, and move, and have our being. As some of your own poets have said.”
Acts 17:28 (WEB) — Paul at the Areopagus, quoting the Athenians’ own poets back to them.
In the gamePick the part of the opponent’s case that is true and affirm it. That point can no longer be used against you, and the opponent’s Defend falls sharply. It deals no damage. Affirm something false and you have only agreed with an error.
“The distinction between what has come to be called general and special revelation does not begin until the call of Abraham.”
Herman Bavinck, The Philosophy of Revelation (1908–09 Stone Lectures), public domain.public domain
In the gameBavinck’s answer to where religion starts: not a faculty found by looking inward, but God making himself known. He speaks first through creation and conscience, to everyone, and then through his word, beginning with the call of Abraham.
Bavinck agrees with Barth that God has to speak, and then says something Barth would not. God shows himself in creation first, to everyone, and then speaks particular words. Barth is right that nothing replaces the word. He is wrong that the world says nothing.
Kant clears room and then fills it himself, out of practical reason. Bavinck asks the question Kant never asks first: what if the room was already filled, from outside, by a word?
Kant clears room and then fills it himself, out of practical reason. Bavinck asks the question Kant never asks first: what if the room was already filled, from outside, by a word?
Bavinck: reason works on what God has already shown. A mind that cuts itself off from revelation cuts itself off from its own ground.
Reason, then feeling, now the unconscious. Three faculties, one move — and Bavinck asks the same thing every time: did anybody check whether God had come down?
Bavinck answers that religion begins with God speaking, not with a feeling. God shows himself to everyone in creation, and then speaks particular words, beginning with his call to Abraham.
Bavinck answers that religion begins with God speaking, not with a feeling. God shows himself to everyone in creation, and then speaks particular words, beginning with his call to Abraham.