Someone is Reading Muller!

One of the great scandals of the contemporary confessional Reformed movement is that the work of Richard Muller is more talked about than read. The FV boys shun his work the way Dracula shuns garlic. The evangelicals and (most) Barthians loathe his research because it disturbs their convenient story about how Beza corrupted all that is good. At WSC we don’t take that attitude. At WSC we like Muller’s work and we encourage our students to read it extensively for themselves and one of our grads, Shane Lems is doing just that.

Subscribe to the Heidelblog today!


  1. I found Muller quite helpful in my methodological section for my dissertation, especially as I argued for how to do theological exegesis within in the Protestant tradition in a responsible manner while rejecting the historical-critical method’s methodological doubt. Such that Scripture becomes the ground of knowing and God becomes the ground of being. Excellent stuff. I look forward to working through it more comprehensively later.


  2. My wonderful family gave it to me as a 30th birthday gift last month; it was great to have for my MA statement of faith here at Bethel, and am looking forward to reading it in the time off this summer.

  3. Thanks for this post. How do you recommend studying Muller? I am guilty of talking about it, but not getting into it. What is a strategy to get Muller into the student? What’s the best way to be good stewards of this great resource?

  4. Christ and the Decree is an entry point, or you could read After Calvin, and there’s his inaugural address from c. ’95. You can always just start reading PRRD. Start in vol 1 and read a few pages a day. Buy PRRD now because I think it’s out of print.

  5. Well since according to one website I’ve been FV since 1986! I will fully admit I have greatly enjoyed tasting and consuming Muller. I’ve read _The Unaccomodated Calvin_, _After Calvin_, PRRD v1, and had begun v2. Very thought provoking. A useful, detailed, description and corrective to German Historians of Dogmatics. He does for that field what NT Wright has sought to do in NT scholarship of the German critical school, imo.

    FV people find Muller useful but not authoritative in a presuppositional or basic axion for thought. Scholars do disagree with one another even when sharing many similar ideas. You treat Lillback’s work as garlic to your views and obviously Muller and the FV ‘boys’ don’t.

  6. Dr. Clark,

    Thank you for your recommendation for getting into Muller.

    Last night I sat down and starting reading the first page in the first volume and could not put it down. I look forward to another sitting with Muller tonight.


Comments are closed.