Great Is the Lord: Theology for the Praise of God

Written by Ron Highfield Reviewed By David H. Wenkel

Ron Highfield’s volume Great Is the Lord: Theology for the Praise of God is a systematic theology work that focuses on the doctrine of God. It is divided into three major sections: knowing God, the divine attributes, and ethics. Highfield is a professor at Pepperdine University and was a founder of the Restoration Theological Research Fellowship. Like the Stone-Campbell movement from which he hails, he reflects ecumenical values by developing an eclectic doctrine of God. Traditions he interacts with include Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Reformed, Classical Liberals, and Early Church Fathers, but it is Reformed thought and Karl Barth that predominate. This volume will most likely appeal to seminary- and graduate-level students in systematic theology. His approach will appeal to conservative Protestants and those interested in contemporary Karl Barth-influenced theology.

Highfield states his goal for this work in both positive and negative terms. Positively, he seeks to “clarify the faith of the church community” (p. 57). Negatively, he is not interested in an apologetic for the doctrine of God that is focused on convincing outsiders. His ecclesiastical focus is laudable, and his statements about the state of theological studies in the academy are bold and courageous (p. 68). He is aware of the dangers inherent in Greek natural philosophy and philosophical theology (p. 272). The shortest section of the book is entitled “ethics” and provides foundational connections between theology proper and the ethics of “all human action” (p. 404). Here he expands on three basic ethical commands that derive from theology proper: seek God, imitate God, and praise God (p. 401).

The unique contribution of this systematic theology volume is its interest in doxology and the relationship between doctrine and the affections. Highfield laments the “cold” style that infects many books about God—a style, he claims that is not appropriate for the subject (p. xvi). Not only does Highfield frame the whole book in terms of “praise,” but he actually examines the relationship between the doctrine of God and the emotions in several places (pp. 10, 18, 46, 52). This interest in emotive doxology is consistently located in reference to God as the Trinity.

With regard to the problem of God’s sovereignty and human freedom, Highfield takes sides against open theism and process theology. He finds that middle knowledge offers valuable insights but “sympathizes” with the Augustine-Calvin-Barth tradition (p. 331). According to Highfield, the Arminian tradition is “unsuccessful” at reconciling their model with the biblical data (p. 330). It would have been helpful to have some exposition of biblical passages that possibly support middle knowledge. He adheres to a type of compatibilism but is careful to avoid certain debates (p. 355). Overall, the discussion is charitable and will provide a good introduction to the intersection of Christian theism and soteriology. At one point I wrote in the margins, “This preaches!”

In spite of Highfield’s stated goal to bring “clarity” to the doctrine of God, there is one gray area in a vital matter. If one privileges the preparatory statements that frame the whole book, it is denied that Scripture can provide “proof” for any doctrine, only “plausibility” or “warrant” (pp. xvii, 157). He explains that he is grounding the truth of his doctrine in the “long term and widely held teaching of the church” (p. xvii). Perhaps one could say that this concept of “plausibility” provides doctrine with an epistemological web rather than a foundation in Scripture alone. But if one privileges repetition or clarifying statements provided later on, then Highfield is clear that Scripture is the “norm of all other norms” (pp. 28, 59, 62, 350). The relationship of doctrine to Scripture remains difficult because of the difficulty of “proof-texting” in systematic theology. While he denies he is proof-texting (he is plausibility-texting?), he supports the legitimacy of it as found in the work of others (p. 157). It simply isn’t clear how certainty about the truth of Scripture plays a role in his epistemology and theology of scriptural revelation.

Highfield’s hermeneutical convictions are conservative, and he maintains at least the “plain meaning” of interpretation (p. 28). This hermeneutic of looking “on the surface” may explain his reluctance to speak about scriptural “proof” for doctrine (p. 157). He holds to the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture (p. 26). He clearly states that teachers in the church should “expect to have their theology judged by Scripture” (p. 26). And he holds to a Protestant perspective on the church’s role in “recognizing” what books belonged in the canon (p. 25). In addition to the erudition evident throughout, the text remains free from excessive footnotes. The back matter includes a bibliography, scripture index, and name and subject index.


David H. Wenkel

David H. Wenkel
God’s People Church
Deerfield, Illinois, USA

Other Articles in this Issue

Most of us, I suspect, develop fairly standard ways, one might even say repetitive ways, to appeal to the motivations of our hearers when we preach the gospel...

I want to thank Themelios for the unusual opportunity to interact with two reviewers of my book Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology...

When I came to Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia as a young student in the 1960s, two things struck me...

In 2006 on Christianity Today’s leadership blog, Pastor Brian McLaren urged evangelical leaders to find a “Pastoral Response” to their parishioners on the issue of homosexuality...

We cannot overstate how important knowing the context is for understanding the significance of any communication, whether that is a simple word, sentence, paragraph, larger text, sign, photograph, or cultural cue...