17 of 213 people found the following review helpful
Puritan Formulations vs. The New Covenant,
This review is from: A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (Hardcover)
A Puritan Theology attempts to systematize and formulate the eclectic spectrum of puritan theological formulations into a cohesive homogeny of systematic unity. The strength of this work is that it is a systemization of many systems, a formulation of many formulas. This will be appealing only to those whose allegiance is to maintaining a historical Reformed tradition. The weakness of this work is that it does not attempt to challenge the Reformed status quo by examining the artificial covenantal formulations of the puritans over and against Holy Scripture's own eschatological progression from Old Covenant shadows to New Covenant spiritual realities.
This work leaves many questions unanswered. Such as . . .
What was the Puritan view of the New Covenant administration with respect to it being the eschatological fulfillment of the fleshly Old Covenant types and shadows?
In particular, did the Puritans recognize that the Passover-Exodus-Sinai event was gloriously recapitulated and fulfilled in the death, burrial, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus Christ?
If the Puritans would have recognized the Christological patterns that existed in the Old Covenant shadows, how would this have changed the construct of their covenantal formulations with respect to the New Covenant?
A fuller exploration of these themes can be found at takeacopy.com.
Tracked by 2 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-8 of 8 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Nov 18, 2012 12:40:38 PM PST
Yeah, trash their book and plug your own.
Posted on Nov 23, 2012 8:11:46 AM PST
The Old Testament is thematically driven by covenants delivered by God to His people. To say that the Puritans' covenantal formulations were "artificial" is not helpful or appropriate. Furthermore, the New Covenant was the culmination of the many covenantal promises delivered to the people of God and fulfilled in Christ. As well, the Puritans were characteristically Reformed in their theology/soteriology, though differing on some points (Baptism, local church polity, etc.). The book addresses the contours of Puritan theology and is written, in part, by a man who teaches at a seminary with "Puritan Reformed" in the title. It is not intended to challenge Reformed perspectives and shouldn't be downgraded for not doing what it is not intended to do. Respectfully, sir, I don't think it's fair to supply a review of this book that makes the kind of assertions you do while leading others to think that this work is not a helpful compendium of Puritan theology.
Posted on Nov 23, 2012 8:33:14 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 23, 2012 8:35:35 AM PST
You could have at least be more subtle when plugging your own book. This statement that you've added at the end of your review has rendered everything you've said to something of no value.
One thing an author should have avoid doing is to critically reviewed the work of others against their own work so subjectively.
You are nitpicking topics that are covered in your 60-page long book and put them against this well-researched, well-written book, Really?
Posted on Nov 23, 2012 8:36:31 AM PST
This is a review? As the authors gave their most earnest and diligent attempts to synthesize and highlight Puritan thought, could you not have also engaged with the book just a wee little bit before attempting to redirect prospective readers' attention to your own self-promoted view of the covenants?
Basically all that you did was emphasize something in particular that you were looking for as your own test of its validity and authenticity, and upon not finding it, gave it the lowest of possible rankings. Who are you trying to fool? And who do you believe you are trying to help by this "review", other than yourself?
Posted on Nov 23, 2012 11:53:25 AM PST
Vaughan Smith says:
I agree. This book had little, if any, to say about how Batman became Batman. This is indefensible!
A fuller exploration of these themes can be found here: Batman: Year One
Posted on Nov 26, 2012 8:54:24 PM PST
You don't know anything about Puritan theology. This was an outlet for you to express your own theological frustrations. The New Exodus theology promoted by the likes of N. T. Wright and other New Perspective scholars is a heresy and a return to the Romish doctrine of justification by faith and works.
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 26, 2012 9:52:46 PM PST
What Vaughan Smith said. It's not fair to judge a book for what it isn't trying to do. The goal was to systematize Puritan thought not critique it.
Posted on Dec 21, 2012 1:40:11 PM PST
ric peters says:
I did not know a review site for a book was an open debate forum on someones opinion except on the book mentioned.The contents as read by an individual will draw various comments ,but the book review itself is the subject and the number of stars you give and your review are what is called for, not your personal knowledge of scripture or a discussion on your personal interpretation of scripture ,which i am sure the puritans were far more knowledgeable than anyone posting a comment.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›