I have acquired A New Systematic Theology by Reymond.

[baron]

I have two copies of A New Systematic Theology Of The Christian Faith by Robert L. Reymond. This is the second edition – revised and updated in one volume.

If you want to read this and do not have the funds to buy it I would like to hear from you first, then anyone else please.

If interested and live in USA send me a PM. If there are more than two people who want this, then I will draw the names out of a hat. I will decide on Friday morning. This is free I will pay postage.

Amazon.com: A New Systematic Theology Of The Christian Faith 2nd Edition - Revised And Updated (9780849913174): Robert L. Reymond: Books

 

[discipulo]

I have two copies of A New Systematic Theology Of The Christian Faith by Robert L. Reymond. This is the second edition – revised and updated in one volume.

If you want to read this and do not have the funds to buy it I would like to hear from you first, then anyone else please.

If interested and live in USA send me a PM. If there are more than two people who want this, then I will draw the names out of a hat. I will decide on Friday morning. This is free I will pay postage.

Amazon.com: A New Systematic Theology Of The Christian Faith 2nd Edition - Revised And Updated (9780849913174): Robert L. Reymond: Books

That's very generous of you brother. I already have it but I'm sure it will be a great help to someone here. It's a great Work on Dogmatics and very grounded on the Westminster Standards.

Reymond may be a bit Clarkian a bit rationalistic as showed in his (over?) stretch for a new supralapsarian order on the Decree, but no doubt he is a godly man who loves the Word !

 

[torstar]

Doesn't he try to stick-handle a third path on the last half of Romans 7 ?

Sorry, but it's one of those things that is very important to me, I recall Moo and Reymond doing this, if I'm wrong I'll retract...

 

[discipulo]

Doesn't he try to stick-handle a third path on the last half of Romans 7 ?

Sorry, but it's one of those things that is very important to me, I recall Moo and Reymond doing this, if I'm wrong I'll retract...

Kent, as I am in the U.S. right now and the book is in Holland I am not 100% sure, but I think that Reymond is in line with Moo, Riderbbos, Hoekema, Lloyd-Jones, et al

that read the I in romans 7 as being the unregenerate Saul.

Kent, if you are "fond" of this particular problematic - get Ressurection and Eschatology, essays in honor of Richard B. Gaffin Jr. P&R, great articles, and

Dennis E. Johson starts with an article conerning the I of Romans 7 that is real meat to chew on, I am just struggling with it, as I was more keen to Calvin's view

of the struggle of the Christian with the Law. Anyway, the book is great and P&R has the full table of contents available.

 

[JM]

Reymond may be a bit Clarkian...

That right there makes me want to get a copy.

 

[torstar]

Doesn't he try to stick-handle a third path on the last half of Romans 7 ?

Sorry, but it's one of those things that is very important to me, I recall Moo and Reymond doing this, if I'm wrong I'll retract...

Kent, as I am in the U.S. right now and the book is in Holland I am not 100% sure, but I think that Reymond is in line with Moo, Riderbbos, Hoekema, Lloyd-Jones, et al

that read the I in romans 7 as being the unregenerate Saul.

Kent, if you are "fond" of this particular problematic - get Ressurection and Eschatology, essays in honor of Richard B. Gaffin Jr. P&R, great articles, and

Dennis E. Johson starts with an article conerning the I of Romans 7 that is real meat to chew on, I am just struggling with it, as I was more keen to Calvin's view

of the struggle of the Christian with the Law. Anyway, the book is great and P&R has the full table of contents available.

Thanks Cesar:

You mean they see all it as regenerate Paul in struggle with sin until glorification?

Even if they would see it as unregenerate Paul I wouldn't mind, but wouldn't buy it.

I don't recall my problems being simply that they saw it that way.

Could be wrong but I thought they were arguing a "somewhat pregnant" spin between the 2.