Over the past week or so I have had the privilege of reading through Beza’s annotations on Romans (a 1566 Stephanus edition of the Bible with Beze’s annotations & a 1642 Cambridge edition of the Bible). I ran across some of his comments on Romans 5:17 and thought I would translate them and pass them along. (more…)
This is what is said in the text [1 Peter 3:18] that He suffered for sins [and] for the unjust, that is, He had the strength to snatch away from us the penalty, the guilt and stain of sin, and acquiring for us the the favor of God, righteousness, and eternal life. The same thing is what is customarily signified [as] accomplished by Christ through the [terms] satisfaction, merit, redemption, and restoration.
Uses of this doctrine:
Use 1: For consolation towards the faithful against all the guilt of sin, and the terrors of conscience that may arise from that source. For in Christ and His suffering we have the remedy prepared against all those different kinds of death-bringing wounds.
Use 2: For admonition so that we may abhor all sin as from those things which inflicted death to our Savior, and would have brought [death] upon us a thousand times over unless He had turned it away.”
- excerpt from 1635 edition of Catecheseos Christianae Sciagraphia, Dominica XV, Doct. 3.
This afternoon in Muller’s 16th & 17th c. Scripture & Interpretation doctoral course, Carl Trueman from Westminster Theological Seminary will be lecturing on Charnock’s “The Existence and Attributes of God.” Needless to say, I am rather looking forward to it, especially the amicable interaction between Muller and Trueman. Stay tuned … more to follow.
The folks over at Lutheran Legacy have done an outstanding job putting over 40k images online of classic Lutheran theology. As long as you are browsing digital libraries, you might as well check them out. Might I recommend Gerhard’s Adnotationes and Commentarii for a glimpse into 16th century Lutheran thought? Or the Philologia Sacra of Salomon Glass (Glasius) and Johanne Budde (Buddeus) as a window into a typological approach within Lutheran thought? The library is growing, but these are a good starting point in 16th c. Lutheran theology. (Fair warning: the texts are typically in Latin or German …)
For those of you looking to acquire a free 10 volume dictionary of patristic and medieval Latin you might try Du Fresne’s Glossarium. By the way, it is a Latin to French dictionary … but it is a great reference work. It is availabe for download in .pdf format here.
Also, for future reference, Du Fresne’s work has been made available through the Medieval & Modern Thought Text Digitization Project via Stanford University Libraries & Academic Information Resources or SULAIR. There are some other gems available as well, be sure to browse the holdings by subject and then by author.
If the Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology comes anywhere near you, you need to go. For details, see here. I am not able to make it to the first address so I will be heading to the meetings tomorrow and the seminars tomorrow afternoon. There are some good historical theologians involved and I am looking forward to it.
This afternoon, Dr. John L. Thompson from Fuller Theological Seminary presented a thumbnail sketch of his most recent book Reading the Bible With the Dead: what you can learn from the history of exegesis that you can’t learn from exegesis alone (Eerdmans, 2007) by way of a lecture on the exegesis of Augustine, Luther, and Calvin on Psalm 137 and 139. The lecture was entitled: “Anger Management, On Earth as it is in Heaven: What Christians Have Learned About Cursing Over the Years” and should be up in an .mp3 form in the next week or so through the Meeter Center. His lecture on history of exegesis was a fitting complement to round out my afternoon after Dr. R. Muller’s PhD course, 16th & 17th c. Scripture & Interpretation.
This post is a response which is the fruit of Chris Coldwell’s (over at Naphtali Press) comment on the last post. I thought it deserved its own post rather than getting buried in the comments. I also attached a small addendum at the end. Thanks Chris for some great work!
The full title of this post should be …
2 Sources of WLC Q99: Ursinus’ Commentary on the HC, and Calvin’s Institutes: A Case Study in Reformed Hermeneutics and Epistemological foundations for Normative Ethics.
But that was just way too long! (but it does give a better picture of what’s involved in this post before you read too much …)
A minor historical question I have been muddling through as I am working through a doctoral course on the Christian Moral Tradition (Meta-Ethics and Normative Ethics) is “What exactly is the relationship between the WLC and the HC on the interpretation of and application of the Decalogue?” One avenue of approach is (more…)
In Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of the Atonement, Gustaf Aulén sets forth Irenaeus as an early champion of Christ as victor over sin, the death, and the devil as a construction of the doctrine of the atonement devoid of penal substitution. His interpretation of Irenaeus burst upon the continental scene in 1931 and crossed into English-speaking discussion thereafter. To give a hint at his significance for modern approaches to the doctrine of the atonement, between 1969 and 1979 Macmillan Publishing went through 7 editions in trade paperback form. My interest in Aulen’s approach to the atonement rises primarily in his interpretation of Irenaeus that claims to be the proper historical doctrine of the atonement. So did Aulen get Irenaeus right? (more…)
