# Exegetical Intensity/Rigor of Yesteryear?



## ChristianTrader (Aug 6, 2005)

I was reading a blog here: 

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2005/08/post-calvinism-2.html

And was struck by a comment made in response to a "former" Calvinist who "now sees the light". 

_Before getting into the exegetical details, I will venture one comment about his personal pilgrimage. He says was became convinced of Reformed theology when reading Owen (practical writings), Spurgeon (his autobiography), Bunyan (Pilgrim´s Progress), and Calvin (Institutes) as a high school student.

He then says that he become unconvinced of Reformed theology by reading Marshall (Kept by the Power of God), and studying under Grant Osborne as a seminarian.

At the risk of stating the obvious, it comes as no great surprise that his Calvinism fell like a house of cards. For his original acceptance of Calvinism had precious little exegetical foundation.

Even Owen and Calvin don´t do exegesis with the rigor we´ve come to expect of Reformed exegetes like Carson, Schreiner, Silva, and Beale.

Indeed, no one was doing that quality of exegesis back then. Certainly not Wesley or Finney or Miley. This, rather, is the result of modern German (e.g., Meyer, Zahn) and British (e.g., Bruce, Lightfoot) scholarship._

Has exegesis really changed that much over the years?


----------



## Puritanhead (Aug 6, 2005)

Oh well-- kind of sad! It seems people that repudiate sovereign grace-- were probably never reflective theologians anyway. I could never see myself repudiating it ever--- it was like an ephinany when I became Reformed, and by God's grace, and I did so before reading any Reformed thinkers, just the Bible. I sought out Reformed books afterwards to buoy my apologetical skills and strengthen my doctrinal beliefs in soteriology.


----------



## sola_gratia (Aug 6, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> Oh well-- kind of sad! It seems people that repudiate sovereign grace-- were probably never reflective theologians anyway. I could never see myself repudiating it ever--- it was like an ephinany when I became Reformed, and by God's grace, and I did so before reading any Reformed thinkers, just the Bible. I sought out Reformed books afterwards to buoy my apologetical skills and strengthen my doctrinal beliefs in soteriology.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 6, 2005)

We are morons compared to Calvin and Owen. Calvin knew Greek, Hebrew, and Latin better than most of us know English. They had mastered almost all of classical literature. Granted, in some ways time has given us exegetical insights, but let's never confuse this with talent and ability.


----------



## Puritanhead (Aug 6, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> We are morons compared to Calvin and Owen. Calvin knew Greek, Hebrew, and Latin better than most of us know English. They had mastered almost all of classical literature. Granted, in some ways time has given us exegetical insights, but let's never confuse this with talent and ability.




And they're the Reformed thinkers that buoyed my confidence in sovereign grace.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 6, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> ...



We are dwarves standing on the shoulders of giants.


----------



## BrianBowman (Aug 6, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> Oh well-- kind of sad! It seems people that repudiate sovereign grace-- were probably never reflective theologians anyway. I could never see myself repudiating it ever--- it was like an ephinany when I became Reformed, and by God's grace, and I did so before reading any Reformed thinkers, just the Bible. I sought out Reformed books afterwards to buoy my apologetical skills and strengthen my doctrinal beliefs in soteriology.



AMEN!  My testimony almost exactly. While studying for ordination in a "dispensational sect" that was anything but sovereign grace in their soteriology, I simply could not get past Eph 1-2, 1 Peter 1:2, Romans 8-11, John 3,6,10,17:1-3, Ezek 36:26/Heb. 8, and on and on. The attempts of fundamentalist-dispensationalists to "explain away" these texts in light of "what God intends for natural Israel" vs. His "heavenly Church" or to assign divine foreknowledge to a human decison and/or obedience simply did not jive.

I'll take ridicule and persecution from the "religious humanists" any day over giving up the doctrines of Grace.

Galatians 6:14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which* the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 6, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ChristianTrader_
> I was reading a blog here:
> 
> http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2005/08/post-calvinism-2.html
> ...



Hermonta,

If you can get it, read John Currid's article, _Calvin the Hebraist_. Currid points out how well Calvin knew Hebrew, and how thorough his exegesis was. To see how thorough Owen was, anyone can peruse this 7 volumes on Hebrews.


----------



## BrianBowman (Aug 6, 2005)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by ChristianTrader_
> ...



Exactly  The biggest problem that I've encoutered with those who attack, repudiate, malign, or dismiss Calvinism is their limits in scholarship, especially when it comes to original languages. The testimony of the Doctrines of Grace in Scripture is simply undeniable. The original languages amplify this even more.

From my (albeit limited) reading of Dallas Seminary's Bibliotheca Sacra Journal from the early 1930's through the 80's the greater their advance in original language scholarship, the closer many of their scholars got to Calvinism or even "stepped on in". S. Lewis Johnson, probably the greatest Hebrew/Greek Scholar DTS ever produced, was reputed to be a "full on" Calvinist (... and I understand his employment with DTS was ultimately terminated over this).

[Edited on 8-7-2005 by BrianBowman]


----------

