Engaging With 1689 (1)

Recently I had opportunity to engage in a friendly dialogue with some Baptist academics over the merits of the project proposed in Recovering the Reformed Confession. That project is, as they say, wending through the publication process. Because of space limitations I was unable to do a couple of things, namely, to engage more fully with some of the texts and approaches to Baptist covenant theology (as distinct from Reformed covenant theology). Continue reading →

New In Print: Rollock’s Questions And Answers On The Covenant And Sacraments

Too often the story of the development of Reformed theology covers a few major figures in the early to mid-16th century before leapfrogging into the 17th century. With this excellent translation and these judicious selections, Aaron Denlinger has done us all a . . . Continue reading →

Zwingli On Sacramentarians And Infant Baptism (1529)

Others, like the sacramentarians, (those are justly called sacramentarians, who attribute to the sacraments what they do not contain, and by high-sounding but false and made-up promises, lead men away from simple trust in the one God to belief in the power . . . Continue reading →

Three Things Dispensational Apologists Should Stop Saying (1)

There are varieties of Dispensationalism, e.g., classic (Darby, Scofield), modified (Chafer, Ryrie), and progressive (Bock, Blaising). To be sure there are varieties of covenant theology, e.g., classic e.g., that taught in the classical period that taught the covenant of redemption (pactum salutis), . . . Continue reading →

Nicole: What Happened To Amyraldianism?

France. As may be gathered from the above account, the influence of Amyraut was constantly on the increase between 1637 and 1659. At first, only a few provinces and the Church of Paris supported him, and there was resolute opposition in many . . . Continue reading →

Nicole On Phase 3: The Revenge Of The Amyraldians

In 1655 two works appeared in print in Amsterdam from the pen of Parisian pastors who had supported Amyraut from the start: David Blondel (1590–1655) produced a very partisan account of the course of events in the controversy, with supporting documents subjoined, . . . Continue reading →

Nicole On Phase Two: Opposition To Amyraut Builds

In 1641, Amyraut took the pen to defend Calvin’s view of reprobation, which had been severely criticized in an anonymous work. In this volume, titled Doctrinae J. Calvini de Absoluto Reprobationis Decreto Defensio, Amyraut took occasion to reassert covertly his main positions . . . Continue reading →

Bavinck: Amyraldianism A Species Of Rationalism

In Calvin, these two perspectives are still connected with each other, but in Reformed theology they soon split apart, and both developed in a one-sided direction. Under the influence of Socinianism and Remonstrantism, Cartesianism and Amyraldism, there sprang up the neonomian view . . . Continue reading →