An Interview with John Frame By Marco Gonzalez
Marco Gonzalez interviewed me on Dec. 2, 2005, for his blog, Reformation Theology, http://www.reformationtheology.com/2005/12/an_interview_with_john_frame_b_1.php#comments. The blog is associated with www.monergism.com. What follows is the interview, with my answers slightly revised. Marco’s Introduction follows.-JF
John
Frame (b. 1939) - Is a Reformed Presbyterian, superb theologian and a theology
professor at Reformed Theological Seminary in
1. Many people are unaware of your
background, could you please give us a short biography of your life?
I was born (1939) and raised in the
suburbs of
I did my undergrad work at
From 1968-1980 I taught at
2. When did you first become introduced
to reformed theology and what difficulties did you have, if any, accepting the
doctrines of grace?
I first became aware of the doctrines of
grace from John Gerstner and his disciples, many of whom ministered in
3. You were very influential in the founding of Westminister Theological
Seminary (CA Campus), Why did you see a need in founding a
Well, there was very little Reformed
Christianity on the west coast at the time. There still isn’t much, compared with
elsewhere. Those of us who went west had a real missionary vision. We wanted to
see planted, not only a seminary, but churches as well. Graduates, students,
and staff at the seminary did in fact plant and nurture a number of churches
there.
I was happy to be invited to participate.
I was single, so I didn’t have to worry about moving a family. Things were
going a little sour in
4. After 30 years of teaching and educating,
why did you decide to leave Westminister and move to Reformed Theological
Seminary?
It would take a lot more hours than I have available to answer this question
adequately. To give a bare summary: between me and WTS/C there were personal
issues and theological ones. The personal issues were basically sins of my own,
which I confessed on a number of occasions and in some cases received
forgiveness. Still, some of these relationships were never put right.
The theological issues as I see them:
Over the 1990s, the seminary became more and more the tool of a faction, rather
than representing the Reformed faith in its fullness. In the view of this
faction, my theology was not “truly Reformed.” In my view, their narrowness
prevented me from recommending the seminary to prospective students. I could
not, of course, teach at a school that I could not honestly recommend, and I
could not teach at a school where my Reformed commitment was not respected.
So I sent out resumés and attracted
interest from a number of schools. But RTS gave me the warmest welcome I had
ever seen. There are seven former students of mine at RTS/Orlando and two more
at the other campuses. There is no factionalism here, either on the faculty or
in the student body. We are laboring together, supporting one another. Nobody
is trying to undermine anyone else. For me, coming to RTS has been a little
like dying and going to heaven.
5. One of your works that has touched me
the most is your short pamphlet "Studying Theology as a Servant of Jesus." Can you share why you wrote this and what are the marks of "Studying theology as a Servant of Jesus "?
Over the years, I’ve accumulated a lot of grandfatherly advice to share with
incoming seminary students. When I came to RTS, they asked me to write
something that could be given to students entering their course of study. The
basic idea of the pamphlet is to get students thinking of seminary study as
part of their spiritual walk with the Lord. Theology itself is a spiritual
task, in which we learn to apply the Word of God to ourselves and others. This
work is not for everyone, but for those who are mature in the faith (1 Tim. 3).
Those who undertake this without a willingness to trust and obey the Lord will
be worse off, rather than better, for the Word can harden those who don’t
receive it in faith (Isa. 6). Theology also demand rigorous thought, mental
discipline.
The pamphlet also contains warnings about
the importance of moral standards, interpersonal relations, partisanship (!),
and relationships with people in the church. It’s all impossible in our own
strength, but God’s grace is sufficient.
6. You have deep convictions concerning
presuppositional apologetics, why are presuppositional apologetics the best
approach when compared to evidential, classical, ect.
Presuppositional apologetics is simply a
matter of putting God first in our apologetics as in the rest of life. For the
Christian, God’s Word is the ultimate criterion of truth. This must be true in
apologetics as in every other part of life. We cannot relinquish our
fundamental criterion simply because the unbeliever refuses to acknowledge it.
So there is a sense in which our apologetic argument is circular: we presuppose
the truth of Scripture even when trying to prove it. But of course the
unbeliever does the same: he presupposes the truth of human reason, or
secularity, or materialism, when he seeks to prove these. Nobody can be
neutral. Either you accept God’s word as your standard, or you reject it in
favor of something else. In either case it is a presupposition.
Nevertheless, it is possible to engage in
fruitful dialogue with non-Christians. In their hearts, they know God’s
revelation is true, though they suppress it (Rom. 1:18ff). We can point to that
knowledge that they have, but suppress, in confidence that the Holy Spirit can
use that to bring them to faith. We can show that their presuppositions cannot
account for meaning and truth.
This is not to say that everything in
evidential or classical apologetics is wrong. Much of the apologetic tradition
does just what it should do: it brings God’s revelation before the unbeliever.
What presuppositional apologetics emphasizes is that in doing so we should not
claim neutrality, but should reason as servants of Jesus.
7. Can you share with us a bit about your
relationship toward Vern Poythress, who was in fact one of your students.
Vern was my student in the early 1970s. He came to
As it turned out, our minds seemed to
mesh. I would think of something that seemed new to me and then discover that
he had already thought up the same thing. In 1987, my first book, Doctrine of
the Knowledge of God was published. In the same year, Vern’s Symphonic Theology
was released. Although we had been on different campuses for seven years, the
two books made many of the same points. So over the years we have tended to
reinforce one another’s ideas. Now we are sharing a web site,
http://www.frame-poythress.org/, that seeks to publish all of our writings.
8. What works can we expect from you in
the future?
I have completed Doctrine of the Christian Life, the third volume of my
Theology of Lordship series. I expect that book to be published in two volumes
by P&R. At least the first volume should be available in 2006. Also in 2006
P&R is planning to publish my Salvation Belongs to the Lord , a
mini-systematic theology. Now I’m working on Doctrine of the Word of God, the
last volume planned for the Lordship series. That will take a lot of time to
research and write. Don’t expect it before maybe three or four years.
9. What are the essentials and
nonessentials of Christian Doctrine?
The question is ... a little ambiguous, so I’ll give you three answers:
If it means “what doctrines must one
believe to be saved?” the answer is, None. I hold the Reformed view that
children in infancy, even before birth, can be regenerated and saved,
presumably before they have any conscious doctrinal beliefs. Of course,
regenerate people, as they mature, naturally respond positively to the truths
of the Scriptures, because of the Spirit’s work in them. Refusal to embrace
these doctrines is evidence that the person is not regenerate.
If it means “what doctrines are essential
to a Christian profession?” or “what beliefs should be required of adults who
wish to join a church?” I would keep it fairly simple. To join a church, a
person should be able to make a credible profession of Christ: “I am a sinner;
Jesus, the Son of God, died on the cross as a sacrifice to absolve me of sin. I
hope only in his grace, not in my own works.” And there should be no evident
contradiction between his profession and his life.
If it means, “what doctrines must be held
by official teachers of the church?” the question is more complicated. I think
a teacher of the church should be able to instruct others in sound doctrine and
to refute heresy. To do this, he must be abreast of the church’s growing
understanding of the Scriptures. So in 200 AD, I think it would not have been
right to expect teachers to hold a doctrine of justification like Luther’s, but
in 1600 I think that should have been a requirement. Today, I think that
teachers in the church should affirm the Nicene Creed, the Chalcedon
Declaration, the “doctrines of grace,” the doctrine of justification by faith
alone apart from works, the five “solas,” and biblical inerrancy. They should
also be free from heresies like liberalism, universalism, extreme feminism,
open theism, etc. Of course, doctrinal orthodoxy is only one of the biblical
requirements for church leaders. They must also lead exemplary lives.
10. What is the largest theological
issuing facing evangelicalism? What dangers should we be aware of and what is
worth fighting for?
The largest theological issue is probably our doctrine of Scripture. We should
beware of dangers stemming from feminist and homosexual desires to revise
biblical norms. We should insist that all of human thought as well as human
life is under the authority of Scripture as God’s word.
11. You have some of the finest arguments
against Libertarian free will theism, could you please share with us the
strongest argument against free will?
Well, the strongest argument is simply that God controls all things (Eph. 1:11)
according to Scripture, and that “all things” includes the decisions of the
human will. God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, he made
12. What advice would you give to those
who are new to the Reformed Faith, especially those who have just accepted the
doctrines of grace?
Accepting the doctrines of grace can be
an exciting experience. We typically want to share our new insights with
others, and that is good. But we need to do that in the right way: not a way that
devalues the integrity and thoughtfulness our opponents, not in a way that
splits churches. Further, there is much more to Scripture, even to Calvinism,
than the “five points.” It’s important to get a full-orbed view of biblical
teaching, which, I think, begins with God’s covenant lordship.
13. What differences do you see in the
presentation of the gospel with monergists and synergists?
Both typically present salvation by grace alone,[1]
and both call upon people to make decisions for Christ. (By the way, there is
nothing in Reformed theology that deprecates the importance of human
decisions.) But synergists sometimes compromise salvation by grace by saying
that human decision is free in the libertarian sense, not controlled by God. If
that is true, then as Vern Poythress has said, my decision for Christ is the
one part of salvation for which I don’t need to give thanks to the Lord.
14. What role does the Holy Spirit take
in conversion?
The Spirit regenerates us, producing faith. Without the Spirit a man cannot see
the
Rev. Frame. Thank you for your time and
for sharing these valauble insights. To read more of Rev. Frame's essays, take
the time to explore his writings at http://www.frame-poythress.org/