An Author Interview from Books At a Glance
Coppenger:
Greetings, this is Mark Coppenger, we are kind of changing things around this time. In the past, Fred has interviewed me for author interviews for Books At a Glance. I read his book, The Theology of B.B Warfield: Systematic Summary, and loved it. I wanted to interview him about his book and he acquiesced to that. Today I’m the interviewer and Fred Zaspel, who is the editor for Book At a Glance, is going to answer the questions.
When you come to a book like this you think this is going to be a scholarly slog however this is a page-turner. I was up at my daughters in Washington, DC, and had the fellowship of the family, and I kept slipping aside to read this book.
Fred, let me play the interviewer today and turn the tables a bit. Can you give a brief sketch of his life? Who was B.B Warfield? What can you tell us about his life and career? Why does he remain significant to us? Where did your own interest in him come from?
Zaspel:
I started my interest in Warfield when I worked at a Christian bookstore in college. I had heard the name but wasn’t acquainted with him at all. I started reading him and absolutely loved it. What I loved and continue to love is the combination of skills, talents, and graces that he has in his writing. He is of course massively informed like few other people ever have been. He was a giant even in his own day. Along with all this, he has such a hot heart for Christ and reverence for the Gospel. Even in his most academic writings he just can’t keep it away. That combination of piety and scholarship is a wonderful but sadly rare combination. It just made me love him and I ended up reading all I could about him.
He was born in 1851 and was from Lexington, Kentucky. His dad had a ranch there. He grew up in farming life and had an interest in science. He went to Princeton; at the time it was called the College of New Jersey. He was just shy of 17 when he started at the college there. Afterward, he went to Europe to study for just a bit. While he was in Europe he wrote back home and said he felt he needed to go into the Christian ministry. He came back and went to Princeton Seminary. Eventually, his big moment was his last several decades. He came to be a seminary faculty member at Princeton.
Coppenger:
I grew up hearing all about him. For a young person today, why should they study him?
Zaspel:
Several reasons. For one, he is so massively informed. You will learn a lot from him. You catch his piety and fervency for Christ as you read him. It is not taught it is caught. You will benefit from Warfield on that score. Also, you will benefit just by developing a close exegetical eye. I have often been impressed by some men who can have such a keen theological mind and others who have a keen exegetical eye. There are some who have both, and Warfield is one. You catch that. You benefit not only in terms of information but in method and how to do theological research and study. You will learn better how to read your Bible and with the accompanying fervency for Christ that ought to be there always.
Coppenger:
Did he ever play the role of pastor?
Zaspel:
He did some iterant preaching. And he was an interim pastor in Dayton, Ohio, for about a year.
An interesting story that I brought out that is not well known is that the church in Dayton called him and asked him to stay on permanently. He declined and went back to Europe for more studies. Also, the editor of the Dayton newspaper came to hear him preach and published a piece about Warfield the next day. The editor was not a fan of Warfield or conservative theology. He almost had a condescending tone about Warfield, but then he complimented him and said if you are going to believe this stuff then go with someone who really believes it – and he does. This shows Warfield’s fervency for the truth. That was the tenor of the message that the man heard. And this is what characterized his career from beginning to end.
Later he had a stint as an associate pastor of some kind at a Presbyterian church in Baltimore. Then went to Western Seminary in Alleghany, Pennsylvania. I heard a remark about him that someone said he was rather stayed in his preaching, but after reading his sermons I would have loved to listen to him.
Coppenger:
His wife Annie was an invalid and he cared for her. She sounded remarkable. Can you tell me more about their relationship?
Zaspel:
It is an interesting situation, but it has been overblown in the press. After the book, I did more research regarding the question and found that the rumors are a little more than the reality. Annie was afflicted with some disabilities, but she was not a total invalid like we often hear. We hear that he waited on her constantly and took care of her by himself. I am sure he did a lot, but they had help in the home, and she was not completely bedridden until perhaps the last couple of years. We have records of her serving as hostess at a political event at Princeton with Mrs. Woodrow Wilson. I had one of her calling cards—she used to go out on a carriage ride every day, stop places, and leave her card with people. I still have that calling card. When they were at Western Seminary they would have students in the home, and she would play piano and sing. Something happened in Europe shortly after they were married that was debilitating to her, and over the course of time, it became worse and worse until perhaps she was bedridden very late in life.
Coppenger:
Where would Warfield fit in today in terms of culture? Would he be speaking about public policy and different movements going on today? For example, the trans movement or gender identity.
Zaspel:
I can’t help but think he would not. In his day he got involved with almost nothing culturally. I have even wondered where he was politically except that Woodrow Wilson did not like him, so that might tell us something. However, Warfield was 100 years ahead of his time on the race issue. He wrote strongly against the segregation of the day. This was post-civil war America, and it was very segregated. He made predictions that have come true. He said the situation was breeding resentment and ended up polarizing the two, whites and blacks.
He advocated for full integration in every respect. He faulted the churches for not abiding by what they know that the Bible teaches of our oneness in Christ. He wrote articles on it and was involved in what was known as the “Committee for the Freed Man” in the Presbyterian church. He wrote poems regarding the race issue that were really biting.
He compared the white people to the priest and Levite that went by and ignored the hurt man in the parable of the good Samaritan. He said some really biting things and had some disagreement with Gresham Machen on it. Machen thought he went too far in saying they should admit black people into the dormitory and so on. This seems to be the exception to his extent in cultural issues.
Coppenger:
Did he interact at all with Southern Seminary professors during the day?
Zaspel:
He did some correspondence with John Broadus. This happened when Warfield went from New Testament studies to the theological department at Princeton. It was a shock to a lot of people because he was the rising star of New Testament studies. Broadus wrote to him congratulating him on the position but lamented that Warfield had proven that John Broadus was not a prophet. There was some humor in it. He said “I have told my students that you are going to be one of the leading New Testament scholars of the day, producing commentaries and so on. Now you are making a liar of me.”
The other interaction he had was with William Carver. Carver had written an article on race in Hastings Bible Dictionary. He tried very kindly to argue for what amounted to a permanently segregated America. Warfield took sharp issue with that and faulted him for it.
Coppenger:
Do any examples come to mind of his biting or humorous way of writing?
Zaspel:
He could be really biting particularly in his book reviews, but it was humorous enough to get by with it and not be rude. He would say something like, “this book is not worthy of the series that it is a part of” or “this is an expression of people who have an aversion to clear thinking.” He could make some fun remarks.
Coppenger:
Tell me about the role of him as a strong polemicist. How did he play it and play it well?
Zaspel:
This goes back to his sermon in Dayton, “Let God be true and every man a liar.” He had a passion for that and felt it necessary to speak up where God had spoken. That seems to be what drove him. He was willing and uniquely equipped to stand up to criticisms. He invited criticism but stood up for the truth. He did not mind if it was a polemic situation, he thought that was incumbent on Christians. In fact, he said something to the effect that valuing certain kinds of etiquette more than truth is not a virtue.
Coppenger:
Do you have any favorite stories about Warfield?
Zaspel:
My favorite story is from his college years. He was 17 or 18. During a chapel message, he drew a caricature of one of his fellow students there that was not very flattering. He showed it to him and others, and there was giggling around the chapel. The guy involved was offended, and after chapel, they settled it on the lawn with a fistfight. What is delightful about it is that it is interesting to look back on it and see Warfield as “the pugilist” from the beginning!
Coppenger:
In terms of theology in his denomination and beyond, was he optimistic?
Zaspel:
He was not optimistic. He was optimistic in the long view – he was a postmillennialist and believed we would win and have a Christianized world in the end. In that respect he was optimistic. But in terms of his own denomination, he was very pessimistic. Two stories reflect that. One is a story of when the president of the seminary’s wife bumped into Warfield on campus one day. She told him with the general assembly coming up they must pray there will be peace. He responded that he is praying for a great war. He saw the need for fighting for truth.
Second, very late in his life, Machen remarked to him that he was concerned that at the coming general assembly there would be a split. Warfield remarked that “you can’t split rotten wood.”
Coppenger:
As I read this book I would see references to other books and resources on him. I thought about where I would start beyond your book on Warfield. What would you recommend after this book?
Zaspel:
I always recommend the book, Faith and Life, from Banner of Truth. The book is his brief sermons from chapel. It gives a good picture of his exegetical eye and his pastoral heart. It is a wonderful read. There are many sermons in that book, but they are all very brief. Each can easily be read in one sitting. After that, the two volumes from P&R, The Selected Shorter Writings of B.B Warfield. Because they are shorter most of them were written in popular type settings like magazines and newspapers, so they are more accessible. It’s a range of theological, academic, devotional, and polemic works. It is a great introduction to Warfield.
Coppenger:
What was Warfield’s take on theistic evolution?
Zaspel:
It has been the canonical view of Warfield for too long that he held to theistic evolution. He did express an openness to it. He would say that if evolution could be proven the Bible could accommodate it. Sometimes his language is so open it seems he is approving, so in a sense, it is his fault that people think that of him. But Warfield never acknowledged that it had indeed been proven. He always had problems with it, scientific and philosophical. He would mock the theories of evolution.
He had some exegetical problems with theistic evolution as well. The creation of Eve from Adam, the original righteousness of Adam, and humanity and the fall. All these kinds of factors are incompatible with any kind of theistic evolution. He held to them all. We have his lecture notes. He held to those in his lecture notes all along.
Coppenger:
In the early 90s, there were four or five of us Southern Baptists involved in meeting with Catholic bishops. We would talk about our differences, and how we were misunderstanding each other. In the group were Timothy George, Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and several others. At that time there was a document that Timothy was working on called Evangelicals and Catholics Together. It is not always meeting in the middle with them. What would Warfield say about Catholics? Could they be saved?
Zaspel:
I am sure he thought Catholics could be saved but he would qualify it very carefully. He would say not if they believe catholic theology that touches the gospel. His grandfather, Robert Breckenridge was an outspoken critic of Roman Catholicism. Warfield maintains that, and it was not just from his grandfather. He had biblical convictions regarding the gospel.
I am confident because his opposition was not on the Roman Catholic/Protestant level only. He dealt more with the Presbyterians themselves and evangelicals more broadly. He opposed the association with the southern Presbyterians because of their Arminianism. He opposed the coalitions of the day that gathered around the least possible common denominator of belief. He complained that in these situations we have the person who knows and believes the least setting the doctrinal standards, which can hardly be right. It compromises the gospel. He would not have signed onto Evangelicals and Catholics Together. He would have opposed that quite clearly.
Coppenger:
Did he ever talk about heathens and those who hadn’t heard the Gospel in remote contexts?
Zaspel:
He was a soteriological exclusivist. He did not address this often, but he was clear. Specifically, faith in Christ is the means of salvation. Today some say Christ is necessary for salvation, but then they will say whether they heard the Gospel or not, it is still Christ that saves them. Warfield would not have allowed that.
One article that addresses this is one about divine providence. It is in The Selected Shorter Writings. It is called “God’s Providence is Over All.” He drives the point of God’s meticulous all-inclusive providence over all things. He applies it to various things like the process of inspiration. One of the applications he makes is in this connection. If there is someone who will be saved or who will believe, God is the God of providence and will bring the Gospel to them.
In the book, Faith and Life, he has a sermon on Acts 4:12: “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.” It is a passionate sermon on the exclusiveness of Christ. This is the driving force behind Paul’s mission that if these people do not hear the Gospel they will perish.
Coppenger:
On page 90, you have the quote that’s a popular saying, “we don’t need more religion we need more Jesus.” What would he say to that?
Zaspel:
Warfield would find this incoherent because as soon as you say we need more Jesus you must define what you mean. Who is Jesus? Why is he important? Now we are into theology. Warfield had little tolerance for that kind of argument. He had little tolerance for bad arguments.
Coppenger:
Recall the 2016 debate on the Trinity – where would Warfield fall in this discussion?
Zaspel:
In the aftermath of a debate, I wrote an essay on Warfield and the Trinity that was published in Southern Baptist Journal of Theology. Afterward, Bruce Ware and I had a nice exchange on Warfield’s view.
This is a place I think Warfield deserves a little tweaking. His article on the Trinity is superb. Everyone would profit from it. But he is so zealous for the idea of the equality of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that he even questions the idea of eternal generation. He did not deny it, but he wasn’t terribly comfortable with it. That I think is a miss on his part. But given this, we know where he would fall on the Eternal Functional Subordination” debate of 2016 – he would have opposed it.
Coppenger:
As I said it is a page-turner, and talking to you more makes me more zealous to read on with several of your recommendations.
This is Mark Coppenger in the role of interviewer at Books At a Glance, with Fred Zaspel. He has been writing about Benjamin Breckenridge Warfield. He has two books, The Theology of B. B. Warfield: Systematic Summary, and Warfield on the Christian Life: Living in Light of the Gospel, both from Crossway. I really encourage you to read these books. They are not only full of content, snap, crackle, and pop and gratifying insights – it is just a great read.
Zaspel:
Thank you for offering to do this. I appreciate it a lot.