Over sharing hyperdrive
As a continuation of last post, instead of editing these thoughts in I make myself into a hyper oversharer, that must grate on all who see my posts crop up so often and on the most un-hip topics around. Like when will I be getting into politics and the greenhouse gas emissions, and poverty, gardens, and the local wildlife, not to mention being inclusive, keeping an open mind and crowning kitty Kats as the supreme pet, even winning over cute little puppies.
But what I felt to share further upon theology, is that the whole extensive rich history of theological classics are for me an extension of the Bible itself, and also like the kind of discourse there ideally would be with the Bible being the sole topic.
If and when it's the topic, then there is a rich history of literature in this Reformed tradition, and as a admirer of them, not as a follower or fellow believer, but simply admiration over the discourse they had about this topic of ... the Bible.
When the Canon ends, we have a legacy that shaped and informed the belief this is about. When divergences to the most basic concepts came up, corrections were made, and further developed the theological landscape. A goodly portion of the Patristics were kindly looked up on by the Reformed, Athanasius, Tertullian, Augustine, from what I have what follows in a Reformed friendly way are such fellows as St. Anselm, and Thomas Aquinas.
With the Reformation Luther expressed it so well in his diatribe against Erasmus in The Bondage of the Will, that is such a fun book to read, he just tears Erasmus apart there, and uses the Bible like Itchak Perlman works the violin.
Calvin stands out, but so many other reformers he was a 2nd wave reformer along with Bullinger who carried on for the tragic Zwingli's untimely end.
Oh the martyrs had untimely ends eh? In the beginning of Gaddis' The Recognition there's much use of Foxe's Book of Martyrs, and that's a solid Reformed book, but what I focus on is doctrine stuff, however The Puritans were the kinds who put a stresser on practical matters, they are seen in poor light owing to their insane lengths they went for rules of conduct method, but my ultra or hyper niche glue is here in these wascally Puritans, Perkins was the 1st some say, but things get so meltingly good with such Bible drenched soothsayers as Richard Sibbes, and John Flavel, or the twin patron saints of congretionalism with Owen and Goodwin. THEN a complimentary to English Puritanism was the Dutch Further Reformation, what I have from here are a Brakel, Mastricht and some others, those guys who did the Leiden synopsis, it goes by the name of A Synopsis of a Purer Theology, in 2 volumes, and I skipped earlier other early reformers like Zanchi, and Musculus, and Vermigli!
Since the 1700s, not a whole lot from the Reformed besides systematic theology, with such guys as Charles Hodge who fashioned his ST after Turretin, another guy I skipped above. Rats i'm so dumb :(
The heyday of Reformed theology was and will never be the same but some later people helped out, namely people like Herman Bavinck, and his fellow countryman Abraham Kuyper. Cornelius Van Til brings in Presuppositional Apologetics into things, and breeds such folk as John Frame, Francis Schaeffer, and Greg Bahnsen.
But popular and basic Reformed theology has 2 shining lights for the last 20 years, RC Sproul and Joel Beeke, and it is with Beeke's 4 volume ST that I begin my little theological grouping in my readings, it's the best choice, up to date and so basic yet extensive, and with so many quotes from the biggies in Reformed theology, it's like a love-fest of Reformed theologians, haha and that is to be followed by Calvin's Institutes, the most basic and classic of all Reformed ST's. But also the Westminster and Three Forms are even more essential to get inside the mind of what it is all about, this thing all of this is about, which I won't bother being explicit about, for I am sick of hearing it being spoken about unless it's by these Reformed theologians.
But what I felt to share further upon theology, is that the whole extensive rich history of theological classics are for me an extension of the Bible itself, and also like the kind of discourse there ideally would be with the Bible being the sole topic.
If and when it's the topic, then there is a rich history of literature in this Reformed tradition, and as a admirer of them, not as a follower or fellow believer, but simply admiration over the discourse they had about this topic of ... the Bible.
When the Canon ends, we have a legacy that shaped and informed the belief this is about. When divergences to the most basic concepts came up, corrections were made, and further developed the theological landscape. A goodly portion of the Patristics were kindly looked up on by the Reformed, Athanasius, Tertullian, Augustine, from what I have what follows in a Reformed friendly way are such fellows as St. Anselm, and Thomas Aquinas.
With the Reformation Luther expressed it so well in his diatribe against Erasmus in The Bondage of the Will, that is such a fun book to read, he just tears Erasmus apart there, and uses the Bible like Itchak Perlman works the violin.
Calvin stands out, but so many other reformers he was a 2nd wave reformer along with Bullinger who carried on for the tragic Zwingli's untimely end.
Oh the martyrs had untimely ends eh? In the beginning of Gaddis' The Recognition there's much use of Foxe's Book of Martyrs, and that's a solid Reformed book, but what I focus on is doctrine stuff, however The Puritans were the kinds who put a stresser on practical matters, they are seen in poor light owing to their insane lengths they went for rules of conduct method, but my ultra or hyper niche glue is here in these wascally Puritans, Perkins was the 1st some say, but things get so meltingly good with such Bible drenched soothsayers as Richard Sibbes, and John Flavel, or the twin patron saints of congretionalism with Owen and Goodwin. THEN a complimentary to English Puritanism was the Dutch Further Reformation, what I have from here are a Brakel, Mastricht and some others, those guys who did the Leiden synopsis, it goes by the name of A Synopsis of a Purer Theology, in 2 volumes, and I skipped earlier other early reformers like Zanchi, and Musculus, and Vermigli!
Since the 1700s, not a whole lot from the Reformed besides systematic theology, with such guys as Charles Hodge who fashioned his ST after Turretin, another guy I skipped above. Rats i'm so dumb :(
The heyday of Reformed theology was and will never be the same but some later people helped out, namely people like Herman Bavinck, and his fellow countryman Abraham Kuyper. Cornelius Van Til brings in Presuppositional Apologetics into things, and breeds such folk as John Frame, Francis Schaeffer, and Greg Bahnsen.
But popular and basic Reformed theology has 2 shining lights for the last 20 years, RC Sproul and Joel Beeke, and it is with Beeke's 4 volume ST that I begin my little theological grouping in my readings, it's the best choice, up to date and so basic yet extensive, and with so many quotes from the biggies in Reformed theology, it's like a love-fest of Reformed theologians, haha and that is to be followed by Calvin's Institutes, the most basic and classic of all Reformed ST's. But also the Westminster and Three Forms are even more essential to get inside the mind of what it is all about, this thing all of this is about, which I won't bother being explicit about, for I am sick of hearing it being spoken about unless it's by these Reformed theologians.
46-50, M