Carl Henry is a theologian of great character and insight.
This series is his opus.

A few clarifications: Dr. Henry is an Evangelical theologian not a Fundamentalist (he broke with them in the 40s), a term which is particular to Protestantism from 20th Century America; but which was redefined by a religious studies project at the University of Chicago to defame any conservative religious viewpoint which may effect public values. Also, he isn't a literalist, as some would coin, but holds that God has communicated with clarity in the text - a similar notion to that of John Wycliff. His view is universal not just American.

It is long. Look through the Indices to see what subject you want to study.

Unfortunately, Dr. Henry is pilloried by many academics and contermporary "evangelicals" who want to shed his influence for post-modern presuppositions or post-Bartian notions.

Dr. Henry understands the Lord as above a singular history and greater than one's words, but one who seeks to communicate liberty to those who want to hear.

This magnum opus of Dr. Henry's theology is simply the most thoughtful, incisive, and relevant work in modern theology, evangelical or otherwise.

Henry's basic propositions are at once both simple and profound - that revealed truth must be communicable in propositional form, that is, in complete sentences, with subject, verbs, and objects. Truth is not a commodity for the intellectually or spiritually elite. In other words, if you cannot tell me in plain language what the truth is, then I must question whether or not what you are considering is really the truth. Furthermore, God has set this example by personally revealing Himself in this manner in our own objective, external history - the same history of which we are all now a part. This is not to say that there are truths in the universe that are not communicable verbally, only that the Truth that has been revealed by God must be, and has been, communicated in that manner.

Henry's antagonists are those theologians (Barth, Bultmann and company)who propose that history is of two kinds - the day-to-day, external, objective history with which we are all familiar, and a special, internal "geschichte" history where God reveals himself internally to individuals within gaps in the causal uniformity of external history, and the less extreme theologians (Moltmann, Pannenberg, and company) who propose that there is one, encompassing salvation-history ("heilsgeschichte") within which there is no distinction to be made between the natural and supernatural and hence, no need to distinguish between two different kinds of history.

Although some find the concepts of geschichte and heilsgeschichte intellectually appealing in that the altogether-other God is revealing himself in an altogether-other history that is suitable to His nature, it falls short of the biblical concept of salvation, in which God has revealed Himself personally and powerfully within our own, external day-to-day history, where we live, die, marry, raise children, and work out our lives. The logical conclusion of geschichte seems to be that, if our salvation has been wrought in a different kind of history that stands apart from our own familiar day-to-day history, then so must our Christian life be wrought in a similar fashion. Heilsgechichte hold up slightly better under scrutiny, but still falls short by de-mystifying the supernatural into the realm of the ordinary. Henry demonstrates that these concepts are neither biblical nor Christian.

Once, he told us a story about a press conference he attended with Karl Barth. During the question and answer period, Dr. Barth was engaged in several lively discussions on his theme of geschichte. When it came Dr. Henry's turn to pose a question, he asked, "Herr Barth, what would the newspapers have read on the morning following the resurrection?" The visibly disturbed Barth responded, "Did you say you were the editor of Christianity Yesterday, or was it Christianity Today?" Henry calmly responded, "That would be Christianity yesterday, today, and forever."

I am aware that his detractors use the tired, old, "just another [biased] *evangelical* perspective" argument, as if the mere use of the term dispatches Henry's contribution to the growing body of truly irrelevant theology. I sometimes wonder if these detractors have taken the time to make an honest appraisal of Henry in the same manner as they request the rest of us to do with Pannenberg, Moltmann, Barth, Bultmann, and company? Or even worse, does geschichte and helsgeschichte captivate their attention because they allow salvation to be considered separately from the course of daily life?

I am afraid, however, that you must read Henry for yourself and decide, as I, the student, am not greater than his Master.

This is not "A" book. This is a collection of Henry's writtings from over his whole life. It is organized into 5 separate softback books. Don't pay attention to that last guy. He hasn't even seen these books.