I apologize for the delay. A combination of illness, pressing church matters, and technological difficulties has kept me from the blog in the last few weeks. Thank you for your patience. The next installment in the series of posts reviewing Fesko's book, Beyond Calvin, is coming soon, d.v.
In this post we complete our review of this first essay in Fesko's Beyond Calvin by looking at the Conclusion (pp. 50-52). For the most part, I will take each of the sentences or points of the Conclusion under consideration seriatim, assessing each with a view to the question whether or not the author has demonstrated what he
On p. 46 of this essay, Fesko arrives at his main thesis which, as I have noted repeatedly, has the unfortunate distinction of demonstrating the equivalent of "there is a lot of water in the Pacific Ocean." I submit that Fesko's thesis that both Reformed and Lutheran theologians employed the language of causation is without
After Zanchi, Fesko turns to brief remarks on Trelcatius (d. 1607), Bucanus (d. 1603), Alsted (d. 1638), the Leiden Synopsis, Ames (d. 1633), Wollebius (d. 1629), Junius (d. 1602), and Polyander (d. 1646). (Before going any further, do read these authors if you ever have the opportunity. It's part of a sound and substantial education
Fesko turns next to Zanchi as the first representative of the period of "Early Orthodoxy" (41-44). Fesko notes some helpful studies on Zanchi in a footnote and appropriately mentions his often overlooked but real importance as a window into a period of transition. However, we detect more of the author's characteristic over-reaction when he blames
On pp. 39-40, Fesko summarizes Peter Martyr Vermigli along the lines of the essay's thesis. Noting appropriately that Calvin was "not alone in the work of reform" (39), Fesko mentions Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, Farel, Bullinger and then introduces Vermigli as Calvin's "co-laborer." Even though he is apparently aiming again at the somewhat - though not
We press forward in our review of this opening essay of the book by noting Fesko's transition from the section on Calvin to a section titled "Other Reformed Witnesses." Our reading of the essay has been painfully slow because of the need to clear the table of errors at just about every turn in order
As an addendum to my last post, in which I pointed to Fesko's transformation of Calvin's text, I point now to a similar phenomenon in an earlier publication but in a very similar context. I do so in order to accent the programmatic nature of this way of handling texts, and to illustrate the real
With all the talk of the (predictable) return of antinomianism (on which, don't miss the helpful study by Mark Jones, Antinomianism), even to Reformed circles, I expect today's post will be of particular interest. One might even title this entry as "One Reason Why Calvin Wouldn't Be Invited to Your Local Reformed Conference on Salvation
In this post I will focus attention on what the author identifies as the objective of his essay. Throughout the book Fesko tries to make clear what he hopes to achieve in his essays, and arguably the greatest service a discerning reader can render to him is to evaluate his success over against his stated