A List of Books mentioning Gordon H. Clark.

Here are some of the books I’m using as references in writing my biography. These contain significant biographical/historical information on Gordon Clark:

Clark: Personal Recollections – John Robbins
R.B., A Prophet in the Land – Edward Heerema
The Clark – Van Til Controversy – Herman Hoeksema
The Global Diffusion of Evangelism – Brian Stanley
The Remaking of Evangelical Theology – Gary Dorrien
History of a Pilgrim People – Charles G. Dennison
Pressing Toward the Mark – Dennison and Gable
Fighting the Good Fight – Hart and Muether
Can the Orthodox Presbyterian Church be Saved? – John Robbins
Herman Hoeksema, A Theological Biography – Patrick Baskwell
The Making and Unmaking of an Evangelical Mind – Rudolph Nelson
Confessions of a Theologian – Carl F.H. Henry
Cornelius Van Til – John Muether
The Steel Bonnets – George MacDonald Fraser

There are also many theological books which I’m using (in addition to Clark’s writings, of course):

The Light of the Mind – Ronald H. Nash
Jerusalem and Athens – E.R. Geehan
Cornelius Van Til, An Analysis of his Thought – John Frame
Reformed Thought – Selected writings of William Young
The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God – John Frame
The Justification of Knowledge – Robert Reymond
The Christian View of Man – J. Gresham Machen
Christianity and Liberalism – J. Gresham Machen

Do you have any books on Gordon H. Clark not on my list?

Advertisements

About douglasdouma

I am a graduate of the University of Michigan (BSME), Wake Forest University (MBA), and Sangre de Cristo Seminary (Mdiv). I've learned far more from books than in school. I'm particularly in debt to Martin Luther, Ludwig von Mises, and Gordon H. Clark for any thoughts I have.
This entry was posted in Notes on the thought of Gordon H. Clark. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to A List of Books mentioning Gordon H. Clark.

  1. Thanks for the list!

  2. Thank you for the list

  3. admin says:

    Some mention of Clark’s work can also be found in other Nash’s works:

    1. Worldviews in Conflict
    2. Faith and Reason

    Good luck with the work.

    Ma Kuru

  4. I read Clark’s ‘Religion, Reason, and Revelation’ last year. He made some good points but ultimately he “bites the bullet” and embraces hyper-Calvinism, which is the logical outcome of Calvinism. No matter which way you slice you, the God of hyper-Calvinism is the author of evil. Clark openly embraces this concept. “I wish very frankly and pointedly to assert that if a man gets drunk and shoots his family, it was the will of God that he should do it.” I also did not appreciate what I perceived to be a triumphalist tone in some (but not all) of his writing.

    • douglasdouma says:

      How do you define hyper-calvinism? Clark defines it as essentially those who object to the necessity of preaching the gospel. He rejects this view in multiple places. I’ve got an unpublished paper of his that does so directly.

      That hyper-calvinism is the logical outcome of Calvinism is not logical. Calvin says to preach the gospel, hyper-calvinism says not to. The first denies, not leads to, the second.

      Clark’s 1932 article “Determinism and Responsibility” also address the issue you’ve brought up.

      In his career, particularly at Wheaton College, he repeatedly reject the phrase “God is the author of evil” while maintaining the view of the Westminster Confession of Faith that God is the cause of all things.

      Ultimately, the question is “is God really God.” If God is not the cause of all things there is a power that exists outside of his will. This Clark, and most of the reformers rejected. God is sovereign, he causes all things. But, he is not the author of evil as if he were guilty. He has no one to be guilty to. He gives laws to man and judges them, but he is above the law.

      I appreciate your comment, but I think you should do more research before slinging terms like “hyper-calvinism.” Christian brothers deserve better.

    • Justin, check out these articles by Clark:

      “Determinism and Responsibility”:
      http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=75

      “The Sovereignty of God” (Clark discusses hyper-Calvinism):
      http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=54

  5. It probably isn’t the sort of reference you’re looking for, but I remember Millard Erickson’s “Christian Theology” mentions Clark. Coincidentally, he mentions the exact passage Justin Gabriel cites, with much the same unfavorable reaction. I always remember this reference because it was the first time I was reading a book and found a reference to a book I had previously read.

  6. Forrest Schultz says:

    In re the Christian view of Logic in general, I would recommend Vern Poythress’s book “Logic” published last year by Crossway. This is an important book in re the general principle, being championed by Poythress (with which I agree) is the necessity of treating God as a person. The only way to really know what this means is to read this and other recent books by Poythress such as those on Inerrancy, Language, and Sociology. The bearing on Clark?? Some people think Clark treats God only as thinker, not as a full person.

    • douglasdouma says:

      What is a “full person?” Does Poythress give a definition?

      • Forrest Schultz says:

        In re Poythress, it is more what he does than what he states. You really need to read him to know what I mean.

        In re Clark, it has been alleged (by both Clarkians and anti-Clarkians) that God is ONLY mind. Some Clarkians vehemently oppose this, claiming it misrepresents Clark. In a Clarkian email discussion group I belonged to for a while, one of the members not only believed that God was only mind but that humans were also only minds, and he even tried to talk me into believing that I was only mind — he said, “don’t you feel that you are only mind!!?”. And, other than that he was a pretty reasonable guy!!

        Forrest

      • douglasdouma says:

        What do those who oppose this view, saying it misrepresents Clark, say Clark’s actual position is?

  7. Ryan says:

    Objectivism and the Corruption of Rationality – Scott Ryan
    Testing Christianity’s Truth Claims – Gordon R. Lewis
    Contend Earnestly for the Faith – Phil Fernandes
    Reconsidering Ayn Rand – Michael Yang

    Basically anything by Robbins or Crampton or Nash or Reymond.

    I can’t remember, but I’d wager Sproul’s book against presuppositionalism mentions him, as would Henry’s 6 volume work God, Revelation, and Authority. I checked out those books a long time ago, though. Bahnsen’s book on presuppositionalism mentions him.

    Check googlebooks for more:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=gordon+haddon+clark&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1#q=gordon+haddon+clark&start=40&tbm=bks

  8. Jim Butler says:

    Ryan is right; the anti-presupp book by Sproul, Gerstner, and Lindsely refers to Clark. John Frame in “Apologetics to the Glory of God” says that Clark was strictly a presuppositionalist.

  9. Forrest Schultz says:

    My reply to Doug Douma is this — since you are doing the research on Clark, including what he REALLY believed, I want YOU to tell me what Clark really believed about God. Did he believe that God was ONLY MIND? If not, what did he believe?? I do not want to misrepresent Clark, which I have been accused of doing. I believe that all Clarkians would agree that Clark is a rationalist in epistemology. The question is this — is he a rationalist in ONTOLOGY, i.e. does he claim that God and all of reality is nothing but logic.

    Sincerely,

    Forrest

  10. Hey Doug, this is some pretty exciting work you’re doing. I very much look forward to the final product, and hope the Lord can use your book to help clarify what Clark actually believed and taught. There are still very strong misrepresentations–even slanders–of Clark today, particularly amongst Van Tilians. Here are a few examples from Scott Oliphint, Apologia Radio, and Reformed Forum:
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/CFDD1/permalink/791646060853020/

    http://reformedforum.org/podcasts/ctc163/
    http://www.apologiaradio.com/?p=482

    I also wanted to mention that David L. Smith’s Handbook of Contemporary Theology has an interesting snippet on Clark:

    “In the 1940s, a group of young fundamentalist scholars were emerging who were sharp critics of [fundamentalism’s] performance in many areas. They called themselves evangelicals because they wished to distance themselves from the social and political failures of fundamentalism, but not from its adherence to spiritual and biblical ideals.

    “In 1946, Gordon Clark decried the failure of fundamentalists to do scholarly work in areas such as philosophy, sociology, and politics: ‘fundamentalists have too long neglected their obligation.'[6] Carl Henry, the following year, wrote a scathing polemic entitled The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism in which he condemned his former colleagues, not for being unfaithful to biblical truth, but for their failure to apply that truth ‘effectively to crucial problems confronting the modern mind.’ “[7]

  11. Ronald Nash wrote an article on Clark in Walter A. Elwell and Walter A. Elwell, Handbook of Evangelical Theologians.

  12. speigel says:

    This might be of interest. Not sure if there is any historical information on Clark, as I read this several years ago: Louis McBride, Gordon Clark’s Definition of Person: An Analysis and Critique

    • douglasdouma says:

      Excellent. Thanks. Amazon doesn’t have it. Neither does Worldcat. Where have you found this writing? Is it not published?

      • speigel says:

        I believe this was a dissertation. I think i have a copy of it somewhere but I can’t remember how well it handled Clark’s position.

        I’m a fan of Clark’s and I think this was probably the most misunderstood area surrounding him, even moreso than his epistemology. That being said, based on his incomplete monograph of the book, I actually disagree with Clark on some areas of his view on the incarnation. I would have liked to read more if he was able to finish it. Do you have Clark’s notes on the book/topic? Is there more than what he was able to write?

      • douglasdouma says:

        I’ve got his draft of the incarnation, I think. But it is essentially what was published.

        Most of his hand-written notes are haphazard and difficult to read because of his penmanship. Most of his books have little pieces of paper in them summarizing the book. He was always seeking to understand first. Before any critique.

      • speigel says:

        I’m sad to hear that there weren’t extra notes but thanks for the update on that. I’ll let you know if I can find that dissertation.

        Also, I’m available to be a proofreader for any of the chapters you’re writing. Again, I’m a fan of Clark’s and appreciate his works. I believe I have most, if not all, of his books from TF. Feel free to email me. Thanks.

      • douglasdouma says:

        Hey speigel. Send me a email. douglasdouma@yahoo.com

        I might have some incarnation stuff for you.

        Let me know who you are too. I need to know who you are if I’m going to send any chapters for editing.

        Thanks,

        -Doug

  13. Ben Mullikin says:

    Dr. Nash mentioned him (Gordon Clark) in his book “The Word of God and the Mind of Man” which Dr. Clark help proofread. George Marsden mentioned Dr. Clark in his book “Reforming Fundamentalism”. Kenneth Kantzer discussed Dr. Clark’s Apologetic in his chapter for the book “The Evangelicals: what they believe, who they are, where they are changing” edited by David F Wells and John D Woodbridge (first edition)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s