The Biblical Doctrine of Man

Several years ago I was introduced to some of the writings of Gordon H. Clark (1902-85), an American philosopher and Christian theologian whom Carl F.H. Henry refers to as "one of the profoundest evangelical Protestant philosophers of our time" and whom Ronald Nash calls "one of the major Christian thinkers of our century." These are impressive statements from notable Christian thinkers about a man who, ironically enough, is virtually unknown among Christian evangelicals today. Yet Clark deserves to be acknowledged. He writes well for a philosopher and his thinking is exceptional. Reading Clark is an excellent opportunity to be exposed to rigorous thinking from a Christian perspective. Although a Calvinist, the reader should not automatically conclude that Clark tows the party line. For example, in his book, What is Saving Faith? (an amalgam of two books in fact), Clark does not hold to the standard, three layers model of saving faith (notitia, assensus, and fiducia) as agreed upon by many Reformed theologians. Other examples could be given, but this would take us too far afield from the task at hand, which is to provide a brief review of another of Clark's books, The Biblical Doctrine of Man (BDM). The book's title and subject matter are similar to a book by John Laidlaw, The Bible Doctrine of Man, published in a revised edition in 1895. Clark notes that his book cannot match Laidlaw's work but does address some 20th century developments on the subject matter. BDM is small (95 pages including the appendix) but densely packed. As the title suggests, Clark deals with the Bible's teaching on the nature of man. The first eight chapters deal with the basic nature of man prior to the Fall. From chapter nine onward, Clark treats of man's nature after the fall. Clark argues that the soul, spirit, or mind (all words denoting the same thing) is the essence of man (p. 88). He references biblical passages such as 2 Corinthians 5.1 and Philippians 1.21 to support his thesis that the person can exist apart from the body, thus demonstrating that the "body is not the person; it is a place in which the soul dwells." (p. 10) The soul has two primary faculties: the intellect and will (p. 80). Contrary to many theologians, Clark resists the inclusion of emotions as a primary faculty of the soul. Clark understands the image (and likeness which he believes refers to the same thing) of God to be the most important thing about the nature of man. Through a brief survey of Scripture, he concludes that rationality is what makes man God's image bearer (p. 16). And, of course, rationality has subdivisions within it including knowledge and morality that belong to the definition of what it means to be the image of God (p. 16, 55). It is Clark's wont to deconstruct secular views of man and he doesn't disappoint in BDM. He examines behaviorism and empiricism, for example, and highlights their inability to adequately understand or speak to the nature of man. Clark not on

Wasn't sure whether to give this four or five stars, but since roughly half of the monograph is filled with indispensible material hardly touched by other authors, i went with five. Briefly, of the 95 pages, the best portions are those dealing with philisophical ideas and rightly so since Clark was a professional philosopher. And you can definitely notice that he is not as good in theology as in philosophy since the flow slows down when he moves from one to the other subject. There just seems to be a lack of originality in the portions of the books dealing with theology, he relies on (mainly reformed) theologians such as Hodge, Shedd, Pieper (Lutheran), H.B. Smith and A.H. Strong. A note: if he does not rely on these authors, he spends too much time on what they say and spends little time defending or recommending his own. So for an adequate treatise on the theological issues, go to other sources. But this is indispensible if you have an interest in philisophical theology. The highlights: 1. The philisophic appendix (although no answer is given to how non-spatial, non-extended souls affect spatial, extended bodies). 2. The arguments against behaviorism in that section are concise and complete (and I have yet to read better arguments against behaviorism). This section of the book alone makes up for the price. 3. The section entitled apriorism is also exellent. 4. Clark, from beginning to end, defends the idea that the image of God is man's intellect. The message is consistent.

Clark's tidy volume on the philosophy of man is great for those interested in one biblical option. Clark asserts that the image of God is what distinguishes man from the rest of creation and that said image consists in man's rationality. Beyond the obvious critique that the severely mentally retarded must have less of the image of God than must other, more intelligent persons and therefore must not be as worthwhile as other humans, Clark fails to account for, or even comment on the existence of, competing views, leaving the casual reader with a philosophical position that will make him wish to become a rigid ascetic, seeing as how his body does not carry the image of God and is therefore about as important as your average gnat. This, of course, also fails to allow for the legitimacy of the study of medicine, a development I certainly would prefer to avoid. On the plus side, Clark has a concise style that doesn't waste the readers' time, and he has wit and humor that keep even the driest of subjects from becoming monotonous.