Top Ten Theologians of All Time

Here's my opinion of the top 10 most influential post-apostolic theologians of all time:

  1. Athanasius – Defended the church from the most serious heresy it faced: Arianism.
  2. Martin Luther – Champion of justification by faith and sola scriptura.
  3. Augustine – Defended the church from the Manichean and Pelagian heresies, even if he took predestination too far.
  4. Basil – Defender of the doctrine of the Trinity.
  5. Thomas Aquinas – Reconciled faith and reason.
  6. John Calvin – His historical/grammatical approach to scripture paved the way for most of us, even if he took predestination way too far.
  7. James Arminius – Athanasius understood God, Augustine understood man, and Arminius understood the relationship between God and man.
  8. Anselm – His satisfaction of justice theory of the atonement is almost universally held among evangelicals.
  9. Jonathan Edwards – One of the founding revivalists of the first great awakenings and influential American philosopher.
  10. Jerome – His translation of the scripture into Latin both provided and preserved the scriptures.

Comments

Kevin Davis said…
I'm always interested when people do these lists. I think you pretty much got the list right. I probably would not have included Jerome, but since the list is "most influential," his placement is appropriate. I would have put Karl Barth at number 10, but it is perhaps still too early to tell how influential he will be in, say, 100 or 200 years. But I'm pretty confident that we will be reckoning with Barth, like we do with Augustine and Thomas, until Our Lord's return.
October 1, 2008 at 12:53 AM
Godismyjudge said…
Hi Kevin,

Thanks for commenting. Of course, I meant no slight to Barth (or anyone else for that matter). Jerome was a tough pick; I wavered between him and Erasmus. But I did want one linguist represented. Seems to me that during times of rapid change, there's usually the combination of a leader and a linguist. Zerubbabel /Ezra, Augustine/Jerome, and Luther/Erasmus.

God be with you,
Dan
October 1, 2008 at 8:14 PM
Silouan said…
Athanasius is maybe less influential than he might seem. Thanks to him, the Trinity is a given today; but if you read his On the Incarnation, you'll notice that Athanasius' actual argument -- which convinced the Council the divine incarnation is a necessary part of the Gospel -- hasn't remained a significant part of Western theology.

(Then again his "Life of St. Antony" was a huge part of the development of Gaulish and Irish monasticism, so he did have some significant influence after all...)
July 17, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Godismyjudge said…
Hi Silouan,

Interesting. Thanks for the link. I will check it out, but clearly Athanasius was influential if, thanks to him, the Trinity is a given today.

God be with you,
Dan
July 20, 2009 at 7:26 PM
D. R. L. said…
An interesting list, and fascinating you included no Baptist.
December 15, 2013 at 10:55 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Responsibility - Evaluation of Arminian Grounds for LFW

Outline of Edwards Arguments in part V.I Arminians say if something causally predetermines our choices, we are not responsible. But responsibility is not the cause of choices, it’s in the nature of choices If responsibility is in the cause of choices, we search through an infinite regression of causes, and nothing is ever responsible. My Response Point 1 is close, but not quite accurate. While our actions can be predetermined, our choices cannot be. Choice cannot be predetermined, else it’s not choice. Predeterminism leave us with only one possible action, but choice requires alternatives (i.e. more than one). A “predetermined choice” is self-contradictory, implying we can choose something we can’t choose. So we think Calvinists are inconsistent for saying we can choose. Also, Arminians agree that we are responsible for our choices. Even though we deny we are responsible for things we are causally predetermined to do, we are not saying responsibility lies in the cause of choices,
Read more

Hodge on Ephesians 1:17-19

Hodge argues for effectual calling based on Ephesians 1:17-19. He claims that the passage teaches the regeneration is monergistic , so it proves God's call is effectual. Here's the passage: Ephesians 1:17-19 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, 18 the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power. Hodge has several problems. First, the passage teaches sanctification, not regeneration. It's dealing with living the Christian life and growing in grace, not conversion. Second, even if the passage were teaching that regeneration is monergistic , this wouldn't prove that God's call is effectual. I agree regeneration, strictly defi
Read more

Calvinism’s problems with Total Depravity

This post will be an attempt to add some detail to earlier comments about problems reconciling Calvinism and total depravity, using John Hendryx post as an example ( here ). To my knowledge, it’s a new argument against Calvinism. Most Arminians are quick to agree with Calvinists on total depravity to avoid being called semi-Pelagian. However, this in my opinion is a mistake, not because Arminians disagree with total depravity, but because Calvinists have some definitional and consistency problems with affirming total depravity. Here's the basic argument: Premise 1: Per Calvinists, total depravity is a problem with man’s desires, it is a moral and spiritual problem. However, the depraved person is not physically or mentally handicapped or under coercion. The depraved still choose, they just always choose wrong when it comes to faith in Christ and pleasing God. Premise 2: Calvinists are compatible determinists. God’s decrees determines all things but we remain free in some sens
Read more