Customer Reviews

A New Systematic Theology Of The Christian Faith 2nd Edition - Revised And Updated

5 star:		(19)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Anyone interested in learning about conservative Presbyterian & Reformed (from now on P & R) theology should consult this book. Coming from a Calvinistic Baptist background there are certainly a number of things that I would disagree with in the book. However, Reymond has done a very good job presenting P & R theology in a clear but scholarly fashion. Though many will complain that the book is not balanced and treats some subjects superficially, Reymond's objective was to articulate what the P & R tradition teaches rather than giving us a comprehensive systematic theology (try Erickson's instead). Some P & R people will find that Reymond is too logical rather than biblical and that he relies on Gordon Clark too heavily for his view on revelation, God's nature, the atonement, election, and theodicy. For example, Reymond is unapologetically supralapsarian in his view of the decrees (pp. 488-502) and insists that whatever comes to pass is good because it is willed by God (see section on theodicy on pp. 376-8). Also, his view of Christ's eternality is also controversial departing from the standard Nicene view (a view which I disagree with Reymond). However, you have to give him good marks for trying to defend his particular position. Besides these questionable positions, Reymond does an excellent job defending a very high-view of the inspiration of Scripture (liberal "Christians" perhaps should read up on this section). He also does a good job defending the typical Calvinist understanding of fallen man (that fallen man is totally depraved and unable to save himself). Another aspect of this book I like is the way he presents the orthodox Reformed understanding of the covenants of the Bible. He follows the traditional Westminsterian scheme of a dual covenant of works/covenant of grace structure (covenant of works=meritorious salvation; covenant of grace=salvation by faith in Christ alone). Though I do not agree with this structure, Reymond has given us a good treatment of the topic from a historic Reformed perspective. His section on soteriology is very well done (following the traditional Reformed schema) and his section on ecclesiology is very informative (expousing the Presbyterian and paedobaptist perspective). His section on eschatology could have been better. He writes from an amillennial perspective, but gives lots of Scripture passages to defend his viewpoint (however, many will find his sections on the divergent views of eschatology very informative [pp. 981-6 and 1067-93]). The appendices are also useful--even giving us a brief treatment on the Calvinistic TULIP (pp. 1125-6). Finally, the bibliography section on other systematic theologies is very handy for theology students (pp. 1133-42). One final note before I close. Someone below was disappointed because Reymond didn't really interact with the so-called New Perspective on Paul. Reymond does this in his book on Paul's theology. This book was not a place for Reymond to interact heavily with this growing movement. However, the New Perspective is a new movement that is trying to influence (I should say infiltrate) the P & R tradition. Reymond defends the orthodox Protestant view of justification (pp. 739-56); the New Perspective is trying to destroy the teachings of the past 500 years. Reymond does briefly discuss Daniel Fuller's and E. P. Sanders' views on pp. 431-3 and p. 1116 (footnote), respectively. Reymond does a convincing job telling the readers that the view of justification and law promoted by these two authors (faith+works = justification) is a departure from Reformed (and Protestant) orthodoxy. Reymond is not trying to put-down "biblical theology" here, but trying to defend the correct view of justification by faith alone (sola fide). Those who have a problem with Reymond on this issue are those people who are trying to legitimize their stay within the Protestant tradition while denying a major tenent of the tradition (perhaps they should find a different home to expouse their works-salvation gospel). Only one perspective is right--both cannot be. This book is a must read for all who are interested in P & R theology.

Having read the longer reviews on this site, I have to agree that there are some serious flaws in this book concerning Dr. Reymond's rejection of Nicene trinitarianism. However, those who can recognize these errors can benefit greatly from this volume.
For instance, his presentation of presuppositional apologetics is one of the clearest in print. Part three--"Our 'So Great Salvation'" is worth the price of the book, especially the section on the unity of the covenant of grace. And his defense of Calvinism, particularly limited atonement, is without peer. While I can't recommend this book without reservation, I can tell you that if you read it with discernment, you won't be sorry you bought it.

Robert Reymond has produced a magnificent account of Christian theology from a Reformed point of view. His book is easy to read, and mainly concentrates on central issues of the faith.

I especially appreciate his work on the atonement, and all the multi-faceted aspects of Christ's death and the chapters on the trinity. I think he gives an excellent explanation of the trinity, and I found his comparison of Nicaea versus Calvin's views interesting and well thought-out.

My review is based on the first edition, and I eagerly look forward to being able to read his revision of chaper 9 [on The Trinity and the Creeds] in the recently released 2nd edition.

As a so-called "Credobaptist" and sympathiser with New Covenant Theology, I am not advocating his covenant theology or teachings on infant baptism. For those topics, see Wayne Grudem's excellent volume.

But I do heartily recommend study of this book which is a result of his 40 years teaching Christian theology.

I find myself using Dr. Reymond's book probably more than any other theological text (other than the Bible) that I own. The writing is more clear than many more "popular-level" books on the subject, and he does a wonderful job of laying out a Calvinistic, presbyterian, covenant, supralapsarian theology of Scripture.

You may not agree with all of his conclusions (the supralapsarian view being, in particular, a distinct minority view even among the Reformed), but there is no disputing the fact that he gives extensive support and exegesis for every single meticulous argument in his book.

Particularly valuable is the section dealing with each (and I mean EVERY one) of the Scriptures that supposedly point to a universal atonement, and his passionate defense of particular redemption. Also, the book contains a strong critique of dispensational theology along with a solid argument for the covenant view. Again, you may disagree with the conclusions, but he presents strong arguments.

All in all, I have not seen a better recent work on Reformed systematic theology anywhere, and I cannot recommend this book highly enough, especially to someone who is just beginning an investigation into Reformed theology. You'll want the classics as well, but this book is destined to become one, and is essential for dealing with the current theological issues facing the Reformed Christian.

I have to say that I was excited when I first heard that Dr. Reymond was producing this new systematic theology text. Since Louis Berkhof, there have been very few systematic theology texts written from a consistently Reformed viewpoint (Morton Smith's 2 vol. set is in print but difficult to obtain). It was with great anticipation, then, that I began reading Reymond's textbook. Having read some of his past work, I knew the book would be thoroughly exegetical and strongly Reformed.

My enthusiasm for the book was dampened almost immediately when, in the introduction, I read Dr. Reymond calling for Reformed Christians to abandon Nicene trinitarianism in favor of what he thinks is "Reformed" trinitarianism. Immediately, I skipped ahead and read the relevant chapters on "The Trinity and the Creeds." Whatever valuable contributions Reymond makes in other areas of the book (and there are some) are fatally compromised by his abandonment of orthodox Christian trinitarianism in this section of the book.

Not only does he reject orthodox Christian trinitarianism, he does so on shoddy scholarly grounds. First he claims that Nicene trinitarianism is inherently subordinationist, yet even a cursory examination of the relevant primary sources will show this to be patently false. He shows a horrible grasp of what the Nicene fathers actually taught. (This may be due in part to the fact that there is little evidence he read any primary sources from the early church on the subject of the Trinity). Secondly, he claims Calvin for his position when this can also easily be proven to be false. His only support for his claim that Calvin shares his rejection of orthodox trinitarianism is a citation from one paragraph out of a 95 page essay written by B.B. Warfield entitled "Calvin and the Trinity." The problem is that Reymond not only misreads Calvin, he badly misreads Warfield on Calvin. One has only to read Warfield's entire paper, and he will see immediately that Warfield - not once - but numerous times demonstrates Calvin's strong adherence to Nicene trinitarianism. By taking one paragrpah from Warfield out of its context, Reymond has not only badly slandered Calvin, he has badly slandered Warfield. Neither of these Reformed giants would have advocated adopting Reymond's trinitarian heresy.

I would strongly recommend that any student of theology who is interested in this volume find a copy of the Fall 2000 issue of the Westminster Theological Journal and carefully read the book review of Reymond's text found therein.

In calling Reformed believers to abandon Nicene trinitarianism, Robert Reymond is doing the same thing as the Arians of the fourth century and the Jehovah's Witnesses of today do - he is advocating the abandonment of the Chriatian faith. He is not advocating abandoning the same parts of Nicene trinitarianism as the Arians did, but that does not make his abandonment of other vital parts of this essential doctrine any less serious.

I find it very sad and disturbing that so many people here have given this book such glowing reviews. It indicates a terrible ignorance of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity on the part of those who have recommended it. The same people who would notice the slightest deviation from the traditional Calvinist doctrine of election do not even seem to notice a major deviation from a doctrine that is far more fundamental to the Christian faith.

I have been reading through systematic theology books for over
thirty years. Many from past generations and from some of the
titans of the Reformed faith. Robert Reymond's work has been the
most helpful and informative of them all. He has answered many of my questions and cleared away some of my misunderstandings.
Much of his good work is an exposition of our Westminister
Confession of Faith. That God would help us all to understand
better and be more obedient to His Word!

A New Systematic Theology of Christian Faith;
by Robert L. Reymond

Beautifully written, Reymond's A New Systematic Theology of Christian Faith needs to be highly appreciated and admired for his contribution to the Christian Church. His biblical exposition in almost all the major arguments and strong confessional stand is excellent. Being a Reformed scholar, he never neglects Westminster Confession of Faith, and biblical references.
As mentioned in his Preface, because of his many years of study and teaching in systematic theology, this book is a classic contribution to Reformed theology. As the writer has mentioned, "though written from Reformed perspective, I have not slavishly followed the established pattern of "Orthodox" or "Reformed" thought when it did not commend itself to me because of its failure to conform in some way to what I perceive to be the teaching of Holy Scripture." And yet this certainly is a sound doctrinal book for any Christian and should be a required reading for every church leader. I will not say that all arguments are perfect and strong. There are possibilities of short falls in some sections, but on the whole, this is a good one volume systematic theology that needs much appreciation.
As stated in the cover, this book "is saturated with Scripture" and biblical exegesis, and the author is "always encouraging the reader to measure the theological assertions by the ultimate standard of Scripture itself." True to his word, Reymond did exactly what he said by supporting his statements with biblical references. Secondly he is very strong in his Confessional stand. In almost all themes he started with the Westminster Confessional statement, which as a Reformed theologian he did just right. I would also agree with W. Gary Crampton when he says, "Reymond has given the church a comprehensive and contemporary statement of Reformed Theology" in his review of the same book. Reymaond is a strong adherent to the Westminster Standards following the outline of the Westminster Confession of Faith.
The first part of the book deals with the Scripture, part two deals with the Doctrines of God and man. Part three deals with the Covenant of Grace, the doctrine of the person and work of Christ, and Salvation. Part four deals with the Church and part five the Last Things. In all the sections he interacts with the various alleged orthodox and non-orthodox opinions of scholars.
Reymond's approach to Scripture is excellent. He maintains that there is no proof higher than God's infallible, inerrant Word. He says that "When God gave his Word to us, he gave us much more than simply basic information about himself. He gave us the pou sto, or base that justifies both our knowledge claims and our claims to personal significance."
Few comments can be made on his arguments on the doctrine of Trinity. He has so well discussed about the Deity of the Son, Jesus Christ, and the many titles attributed to him. The Father's Eternal Generation of the Son is also well dealt at length. He argues against the traditional view of subordinationism of the Son. He argues that "John Calvin contended against the subordinationism implicit in the Nicene language." However, he did not explain enough of the Holy Spirit, of his generation and place in the Trinitarian fold. His understanding of Trinitarian as "three distinct self-conscious selves"(318) is difficult to understand.
Reymond's explanation on "Biblical Theodicy" is well explained. He writes, "The ultimate end which God decreed he regarded as great enough and glorious enough that it justified to himself both the divine plan itself and the ordained incidental evil arising along the foreordained path to his plan's great and glorious end." This section, "The Eternal Decree of God" is, to me, one of the strongest and well argued sections in the book. His arguments against Pinnock's proposal and Arminianism are excellent from Reformed perspective.
Part Three, "Our `So Great Salvation'" is one section which I cannot completely understand and digest among all his writings. He has argued in favor of a supralapsarion view where God logically decree to elect and reprobate prior to his decree to bring about the fall of man. According to him, God "has a single eternal purpose or plan at the center of which is Jesus Christ and his church." His conclusion, as I understand, that the sole purpose of creation was for the redemption, is single sided. God did not create the world so that his son might have the reason to come to this world, suffer and die, rather he sent his son to save the created world.
Reymond has beautifully defended Presbyterian form of church government with biblical support beginning from Old Testament and its development in the New Testament church. His argument that church is a `means of grace' is also strongly argued.
Coming to Eschatology, he explores all five views that have surfaced over the last one hundred and fifty years. He concludes after defending his position and said, "With such eschatological confusion running rampant today in scholarly circles, never has the need greater to return to Scripture and to see what God's Word says concerning this vital, all-important, capstoning locus of theology."
In conclusion, I am so thankful to Dr. Reymond for this book. His extensive quotations from the Bible, commentaries and Westminster Confessional statements are much appreciated and admired, though some would comment it as "sometimes overdone". This is a great contribution for the Christian church, and especially for the Reformed churches. After reading this book I am so delighted to have learnt so many new theological ideas and stands. It should be a treasure for all church leaders to have a copy of this book.

"A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith" by Dr. Robert L. Reymond is a theological masterwork for the ages. Dr. Reymond combines a rare level of religious fervor and passion for his subject matter with an even rarer level of intellectual acuity and scholarly analysis. The result is a book which repeatedly draws the reader into new depths of devotion and worship as well as new depths of self-examination and humility while exploring a wondrous panorama of profound biblical exegesis and theological reasoning. Dr. Reymond is passionately Calvinistic; but in his presentation of Calvinism it is always substantial theological issues of the Christian faith which are examined with such religious passion and intellectual depth that any studious Christian of any theological persuasion will be edified, nurtured, trained, challenged, enriched, and transformed. Dr. Reymond is a Calvinist, because he finds that Calvinism offers a truly God-centered understanding of the Bible and the Christian faith rather then the man-centered distortions of Christian thought and practice which are so prevalent today. This book is no garden variety T-U-L-I-P. It's a resplendent bouquet of astonishing flowers that were grown and gathered to the glory of God.

"A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith" by Dr. Robert L. Reymond is a theological masterwork for the ages. Dr. Reymond combines a rare level of religious fervor and passion for his subject matter with an even rarer level of intellectual acuity and scholarly analysis the result is a book which repeatedly draws the reader into new depths of devotion and worship as well as new depths of self-examination and humility while exploring a wondrous panorama of profound biblical exegesis and theological reasoning. Dr. Reymond is passionately Calvinistic; but in his presentation of Calvinism it is always substantial theological issues of the Christian faith which are examined with such religious passion and intellectual depth that any studious Christian of any theological persuasion will be edified, nurtured, trained, challenged, enriched, and transformed. Dr. Reymond is a Calvinist, because he finds that Calvinism offers a truly God-centered understanding of the Bible and the Christian faith rather then the man-centered distortions of Christian thought and practice which are so prevalent today. This book is no garden variety T-U-L-I-P. It's a resplendent bouquet of astonishing flowers that were grown and gathered to the glory of God.

Submitted by Jubilee BartlettEND

In some ways it is the standard reformed systematic theology, following the same outlines of doctrine. There is one twist: Reymond outlines his doctrine according to the outlines given in the Westminster Confession of Faith. While perhaps unimaginative at times, this allows Reymond to masterfully organize the doctrinal content.

Some unique parts:
1) Reymond got into trouble with his peculiar Christology. While I am not comfortable with his questioning the eternal generation of the Son,

2) Reymond's defense of supralapsarianism borders on extreme overkill. But to his credit he does present the doctrine in the clearest of terms. All I can say in response is that Reymond's supralapsarianism makes creation an ancillary doctrine.

Some comments and criticisms:
1) His take on eschatology was quite good and in line with recent Reformed and Evangelical discussions on the kingdom, already-not yet, etc. Unfortunately, his discussion of millennial positions is quite weak. He assumes amillennialism from the outset and attacks other positions along the lines of "Well, the rest of the NT is amillennial."

2) He rebuts theonomy by an appeal to Robert Lewis Dabney. Granted, the section of Dabney does seem to rebut theonomy, but Dabney is an odd man to whom one could appeal, is he not? Dabney used the same arguments as theonomists in order that Dabney could justify slavery (although to his credit Dabney critiqued the unbiblical form of slavery present).

Reymond says that theonomists are wrong for wanting to execute groups x,y, and z. Perhaps they are. He should have *argued* WHY they were wrong. His appeal to Dabney is flawed, for on pages 869-870, Dabney appeals to Old Testament case laws for the opposite conclusion of Reymond! So which is it, Dr Reymond, do we appeal to Dabney or do we not appeal to Dabney?

3) After giving a masterful defense of justification by faith alone, Reymond then brazenly suggests that most of the Church before Luther is probably in hell. I can only hope he wasn't serious. At this point he moved from justification by faith alone to justification by faith in faith alone.

There is something else to note in that last point, and it requires reading between the lines. I would caution Calvinists to carefully interact with Reymond here. When Reymond says that most of the Church throughout history is in hell because they didn't believe in sola fide via the imputation of Christ alone, what he is actually admitting is that NO ONE taught this in the early church (okay, assuming past the apostles--and even then in New Testament scholarship that is by no means a granted point). On one hand Christ promises the gates of hell will never prevail over the church, yet on the other hand we see the entire church from India to Ireland simultaneously abandoning the faith on the "article by which the church stands or falls." Reymond is enaging in very dangerous (but in a way, honest) reading of history.

Conclusion:
Reymond interacts with the latest scholarship and offers insightful approaches to old discussions. While aware of its quirks, this volume will surely aid the theological student.