Culver: Christology

While pounding out over 80 pages of Culver’s Christology, I realized out that my reading merely scratched the surface of his 200+ page discourse. Culver’s presentation is quite thorough and at times excessively prolix, but overall his stuff is solid. Due to the size and amount of data, I did not cover a lot of his Christology. So the part which I got through I did not have any concerns. My comments will be brief and mostly positive.

In Appendix II (457) Culver states his “principles for writing about Christology.” His intent in his systematic is to present a thorough examination of orthodox teaching rather than an apologetic. Therefore, he does not continually present opposing views, and if he does mention them rarely will he comprehensively “advertise” their arguments. He simply presents their views/errors that are pertinent to the discussion and moves on.

Not surprisingly, Culver (like Shedd) argues that Christ coupled and united with a new human nature and not a new person (472), thus denouncing any Nestorian tendencies. He (like Warfield, unlike Grenz) views the Virgin Birth as “indispensable” and therefore vital for doing Christology. His eight points on the “practical importance and values of the VB” were helpful although I felt his first three (especially his third) points were weak if not unnecessary. I understand the arguments of those who want to “drop” the VB as essential to Christology, I just do not see the benefits.