Michael Horton's, The Christian Faith, A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims On the Way

[yeutter]

I have not read it cover to cover; I have only used it to look things up as issues present themselves. I like many things about this brief systematics. It engages many current departures from orthodoxy in the process of setting forth the truth. I wonder why he does not engage the feminist threat to the Christian Faith.

 

[bookslover]

Probably because you can't write about everything in a one-volume systematic theology. Lines, doubtless, had to be drawn to keep it down to one volume.

 

[Zach]

I was given a copy and I have not read it extensively but what I have read I've enjoyed. As someone who has never read any Systematic Theology before it seems like a good place to start because it is written for the 21st Century reader and designed to be just one volume. As was pointed out, you can't fit everything into a single volume.

What I am interested in knowing, from someone who understands the topics more than I do, is how Dr. Horton's Two Kingdoms theology plays out in the context of a systematic theology. I don't know much about the Two Kingdoms perspective and I would like to know what to look for as I read. I'm not sold for it or against it, but want to be cautious with it because from what I understand it's not the historic Reformed position.

 

[Somerset]

I think there are a few threads about this book already - might be worth using the search function.

 

[Jake]

I was given this book as a graduation present by an elder at church and am attempting to read it cover to cover.

I think it does do a great job at addressing threats to our faith at every step of the way. Doubtlessly he cannot touch everything, but it is quite thorough.

 

[Reformed Musings]

I believe that Horton does a good job of interacting with modern theological controversies. He represents the varied views fairly in their own words. The multiple indices in the back are very helpful, especially the confession index. I have used this systematic with great profit.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I was given a copy and I have not read it extensively but what I have read I've enjoyed. As someone who has never read any Systematic Theology before it seems like a good place to start because it is written for the 21st Century reader and designed to be just one volume. As was pointed out, you can't fit everything into a single volume.

What I am interested in knowing, from someone who understands the topics more than I do, is how Dr. Horton's Two Kingdoms theology plays out in the context of a systematic theology. I don't know much about the Two Kingdoms perspective and I would like to know what to look for as I read. I'm not sold for it or against it, but want to be cautious with it because from what I understand it's not the historic Reformed position.

I think what you would notice more (if you are familiar with the background) is the Covenant theology that Dr. Horton teaches. He organizes the Covenants according the Kline's notion of the Royal Grant/Suzerain Treaty where "Gospel" covenants are seen as the Royal Grant form and "Law" covenants in the latter form. In his previous works he has noted that he is organizing Systematic theology according to this covenantal framework. What you'd need to do is to compare some of his conclusions with some of the views of the Covenant that preceded this formulation. Many take issue with the notion that treaties discovered last century written by Hittite kings should be the basis for re-interpreting our understandings of the CoW and CoG or re-working our Systematics accordingly.

 

[Zach]

I was given a copy and I have not read it extensively but what I have read I've enjoyed. As someone who has never read any Systematic Theology before it seems like a good place to start because it is written for the 21st Century reader and designed to be just one volume. As was pointed out, you can't fit everything into a single volume.

What I am interested in knowing, from someone who understands the topics more than I do, is how Dr. Horton's Two Kingdoms theology plays out in the context of a systematic theology. I don't know much about the Two Kingdoms perspective and I would like to know what to look for as I read. I'm not sold for it or against it, but want to be cautious with it because from what I understand it's not the historic Reformed position.

I think what you would notice more (if you are familiar with the background) is the Covenant theology that Dr. Horton teaches. He organizes the Covenants according the Kline's notion of the Royal Grant/Suzerain Treaty where "Gospel" covenants are seen as the Royal Grant form and "Law" covenants in the latter form. In his previous works he has noted that he is organizing Systematic theology according to this covenantal framework. What you'd need to do is to compare some of his conclusions with some of the views of the Covenant that preceded this formulation. Many take issue with the notion that treaties discovered last century written by Hittite kings should be the basis for re-interpreting our understandings of the CoW and CoG or re-working our Systematics accordingly.

Thanks Rich! That was exactly what I was wondering about. It seems like Dr. Horton has a few views that aren't the traditional Reformed interpretation and its worth being aware of while reading his work. My Pastor warned me to be cautious while reading Dr. Horton's "God of Promise" (I eventually opted for O. Palmer Robertson's "Christ of the Covenants" instead) for those reasons. I appreciate your response.

 

[Supersillymanable]

I bought Horton's systematic not long ago. It's enjoyable, though I've got easier ones to find my way around... Robert Reymond is another good one, as well as Grudem, if you're looking for single volume, recent systematics. Berkhof is the classic old-ish one .