# Dr. John Frame Retires



## zsmcd (Mar 17, 2017)

RTS-O has recently announced that Dr. John Frame will be retiring in May.

http://www.rts.edu/orlando/johnframeretires/

Reactions: Informative 1 | Amen 1


----------



## Pergamum (Mar 17, 2017)

Very grateful for much of his writing.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## reaganmarsh (Mar 18, 2017)

Pergamum said:


> Very grateful for much of his writing.



Agreed. Triadic overkill notwithstanding, his _The Doctrine of God_ was water to my soul about 10 years ago.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40 (Mar 18, 2017)

reaganmarsh said:


> Agreed. Triadic overkill notwithstanding, his _The Doctrine of God_ was water to my soul about 10 years ago.



One reason I, as a layman, am hesitate to read much of Frames work. How can this not infect most of his writings and teachings? I have seen this first hand and am dismayed of the fruit it has produced in many areas of what is believed and taught in some reformed seminaries.

Now in saying this I do wish him a productive retirement and hope he pens a retractions like Augustine did. I say this with as little rancor as possible and really wish him a productive retirement.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Dachaser (Mar 18, 2017)

reaganmarsh said:


> Agreed. Triadic overkill notwithstanding, his _The Doctrine of God_ was water to my soul about 10 years ago.


Did you read his systematic theology, and if so, what did you think of it? Have read so far portions of it...


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Mar 18, 2017)

Dachaser said:


> Did you read his systematic theology, and if so, what did you think of it? Have read so far portions of it...


This basically sums it up:
http://theaquilareport.com/an-asses...-theology-an-introduction-to-christian-belief

I do wish his book on Scripture would be released in electronic form someday:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0875522645


----------



## Dachaser (Mar 18, 2017)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> This basically sums it up:
> http://theaquilareport.com/an-asses...-theology-an-introduction-to-christian-belief


I have really enjoyed some of his teachings, but would seem to me to be due to the fact that his approach to theology would seem to be seeking to find out what the scriptures themselves alone affirm in various areas, and then contrast that to the reformed viewpoints, not the other way around? He does not seem to regard the Confessions in same light as many other Reformed do? That just might be that he sees within the Body reformed like churches and Christians who would not be called strictly reformed by many others?


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Mar 18, 2017)

David,

Are you asking questions for responses or just adding (?) to the three statements above to express your own personal wondering about these things?


----------



## reaganmarsh (Mar 18, 2017)

earl40 said:


> One reason I, as a layman, am hesitate to read much of Frames work. How can this not infect most of his writings and teachings? I have seen this first hand and am dismayed of the fruit it has produced in many areas of what is believed and taught in some reformed seminaries.





Dachaser said:


> Did you read his systematic theology, and if so, what did you think of it? Have read so far portions of it...



Hi Earl and David,

Triperspectivalism does certainly show up in various points throughout his writings, though I hasten to add that I've not read his entire corpus. I've read _The Doctrine of God_ and _The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God _(actually, come to think of it, I didn't finish DKG...can't remember why specifically offhand, but it was very dry). My wife asked me to read his _Systematic Theology_ with her, though we're not very far into it yet -- perhaps 100 pages.

On the whole, I'd consider him broadly reformed-minded, though I will not classify him as confessional. He's philosophically insightful, and I've rather enjoyed his work on Theology Proper (what I remember of it, anyway). He's accessible but more robust than Grudem, which I've appreciated.

That being said, the critique linked above is fair. His conception of the "creation covenant" is unconvincing, and I think his treatment of the CoW ultimately undercuts Adamic federal headship. His (_non-_)treatment of historical theology drives me nuts. And I agree with the reviewer that his triperspectivalism does seem to drive his entire system, "making distinctions in everything without distinguishing anything" (to paraphrase the reviewer). His redefining of the RPW makes me wish for Sproul's honesty in _A Taste of Heaven_. And while I'd not consciously made the connection that his bibliology is more Lutheran than Reformed, I agree with that conclusion.

I'll conclude with this: I sincerely appreciate his stated desire to be biblical and to reason from Scripture. However,for him to do so as a Reformed professor, but basically not in conversation with Reformation confessions, is unwise. The confession is there as a guide to our faith and to help us better understand Scripture. Reformulation of its categories, while certainly not sinful (viva semper reformanda!), is always cause for careful, prayerful scrutiny. Theology is not an a-contextual exercise.

If you're well-grounded in confessional, historical theology _and_ biblical reformed dogmatics, go for it. If not, I'd steer clear.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Gforce9 (Mar 19, 2017)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> This basically sums it up:
> http://theaquilareport.com/an-asses...-theology-an-introduction-to-christian-belief
> 
> I do wish his book on Scripture would be released in electronic form someday:
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/0875522645




Patrick,
Thanks for the link to the Aquila Report....most insightful. I recall a former pastor, in the John Piper mold, encouraging me to read _Contemporary Worship Music_ while I was playing guitar in a "Praise Band". It struck me that a confessional guy was promoting non-confessional views. There is wisdom in looking to our forefathers, to be sure.....


----------



## TheOldCourse (Mar 19, 2017)

He is a brother in Christ, but I am glad to see him no longer teaching at a Reformed seminary. It may be reasonably argued that he's a lot better than many of the theologians out there in generic evangelicalism, but, as someone who purports to stand within confessional Reformed thought and teaches many students aspiring to ministry in confessional denominations, he's greatly supported the significant weakening of confessional fidelity in certain sectors of NAPARC. 

Some folks may be able to separate the wheat from the chaff in his works, but there are probably better sources that are more solidly Reformed for most of what he has written.

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Mar 19, 2017)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> This basically sums it up:
> http://theaquilareport.com/an-asses...-theology-an-introduction-to-christian-belief



That review article was most insightful concerning John Frame's theological method, though I need to read the book myself to fully judge the accuracy of the review. Thanks for sharing it.


----------



## TheOldCourse (Mar 19, 2017)

As an aside, I was a bit surprised to see RTS refer to him as "Dr. John Frame." Unless I am mistaken, his doctorate is honorary which doesn't customarily give one the right to take upon himself the Dr. prefix. He also lists "Belhaven College, D.D." in his CV to which he doesn't append the customary "h.c." to indicate that it's honorary. That's a little surprising for someone who is an academic. I expect that sort of thing from fundamentalist pseudo-scholars, but I didn't from Frame.


----------



## Dachaser (Mar 21, 2017)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> David,
> 
> Are you asking questions for responses or just adding (?) to the three statements above to express your own personal wondering about these things?


Those "musings" are how I view his theology, but also wpuld like to see if others feel the same way as was expressed here ?


----------



## reaganmarsh (Mar 21, 2017)

Gforce9 said:


> read _Contemporary Worship Music_ while I was playing guitar in a "Praise Band".



Trying to read anything of substance while playing any instrument (especially with a band) is challenging. 

Just teasing. As you said very well, there is great wisdom in looking to the old paths. And we've noted on past threads that his _CWM_ redefines the RPW so as to make it unrecognizable.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## MW (Mar 21, 2017)

All of the issues mentioned on this thread boil down to his idea of theology-as-application, which means that theology is for the purpose of meeting human needs, and that it changes from age to age. His relativism stems from that point. In contrast, theology reveals God first and foremost, is objective and unchanging in its own nature, and is just as normative for defining human needs as it is for meeting them.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

