Institutes of Elenctic Theology by Francis Turretin review by Tony Reinke (4/9/07) We’ve all seen the creative Apple computer. “The larger availability in English of Turretin’s complete Institutes is a welcome Francis Turretin (–87) has been called “the best expounder of the doctrine. STEPHEN NICHOLS: We’re in Dr. Sproul’s library again, and this time we’ve pulled Francis Turretin’s three-volume Institutes of Elenctic.
|Published (Last):||22 January 2005|
|PDF File Size:||14.13 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.80 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Refresh and try again.
Open Preview See a Problem? Thanks for telling us about the problem.
Return to Book Page. This is Francis Turretin’s magnum opus, a massive work of Reformed scholasticism. Written originally in Latin with sentences frequently lasting nearly a half a page, Turretin’s Institutes are at once familiar, profound, erudite, thorough ibstitutes precise, detailed, comprehensive, historically significant, and truly Reformed, etc. Turretin organized his Tueretin into 20 topics This is Francis Turretin’s magnum opus, a massive work of Reformed scholasticism.
Turretin organized his Institutes into 20 topics loci that range from “Prolegomena” that is, very necessary introductory considerations to “The Last Things. The work is Elenctic polemic or argumentitivefor a large chunk of this work is written against the Roman Catholics, Arminians, Socinians, Anabaptists, Molinists and others. Topics Topic I: Sin in General and in Particular Topic X: Hardcoverpages.
Institutes of Elenctic Theology 1. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Institutes of Elenctic Theologyplease sign up. Where can I borrow a copy? See 1 question about Institutes of Elenctic Theology…. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Jul 15, Daniel rated franciis it was amazing Shelves: I have now finished my second reading of the first volume of Francis Turretin’s Institutes. I had initially planned to read it more quickly perhaps pages per daybut Turretin is not that type of author.
While he is not difficult to read, he tends to pack a lot of information into a very small space. Thus, you will miss a lot if you try to read him too quickly. Basically, you read Turretin’s Institutes in the same way that you would eat an elephant – slowly and in small chunks. Generally s I have now finished my second reading of the first volume of Francis Turretin’s Institutes.
Generally speaking, pages per day is what you should aim to read and 25 is really pushing it. In terms of content, Turretin is the most judicious Reformed dogmatician that I have ever read. His view of the thrretin question infralapsarian and a few other minor points will not be universally welcomed, but Turretin generally gives you a nuanced defence of Reformed orthodoxy on virtually every major theological topic. Every serious reader of Reformed theology should make an effort to read his Institutes at least once.
After reading another systematic theology by a different author, I look forward to re-reading volume two. Sep 03, Jacob Aitken rated it it was amazing Shelves: Introduction Recent that is, pre A.
Some things that should not have been forgotten were lost.
This allows him to accept and acknowledge points of agreement with his opponents,rather drancis simply seeing Introduction Recent that is, pre A. Turretin understood that there were other issues, too: The English translation of Turretin fills a woeful lacuna.
Unlike the irrationalists Anabaptists, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodoxreason can function as a principia in theology. It is not the fundamental principia upon which all theology rests that is the principium essendi ; rather, it is an instrumental principle I: Reason is of particular instrumental use in terms of inference and middle premises. As to the ubiquity of the body of Christ, we reject this doctrine both philosophically and theologically, because it is absurd and contradicts the first principles of theology and philosophy.
The Lutheran and EO view of the communicatio extends it ubiquitously in space. Therefore, such view is wrong.
Turretin meets this challenge head-on and notes, given what everyone accepts about principia, proves that the Protestant position is the only feasible one. That the church was instrumental in delivering aspects of a canon I still dispute that the church gave a neat canon no one denies.
That is precisely the point: Only the Protestant doctrine of magisterial and ministerial authority can make sense of this point. As Turretin clarifies, Whether besides the natural knowledge of God which is only of things possible there is in God a middle knowledge of men and angels where he knows what they may without a special decree preceding I: Now, conditional future things are not true apart from the determination of the divine will; for example, the Sidonians would have repented if the powers had been supplied to them, for they would have been indifferently disposed in their nature to repend or not repent, those powers being given.
No effect can be understood as future without the divine decree, so no future conditional can be knowable before the decree. Again, knowledge either makes the event certain or foresees it as certain… A thing may be contingent in two ways: Turretin is speaking of these contingents. A future contingent implies both certainty of event and mode of production. As future it is certain, but as contingent in its mode of production. It has the former from the decree of the First Cause, the latter from the constitution of the second cause.
The mode of production is clarified by the Westminster Confession of Faith V. It identifies God as the First Cause, corresponding with the first point made by Turretin, but notes that the First Cause orders the events to happen in three modes: An event can be both infallibly certain yet contingent. Thus, all things take place by the necessity of consequence, not the necessity of the consequent.
Free Will Turretin, I: God does not compel rational creatures to act by a physical necessity, he only effects this—that they act both consistently with themselves and with their own natures This necessity is one of consequence—it secures the action and result of a cause.
It is necessary according to the eternal premotion of God, but it is spontaneous according to the mode of acting The premotion does not take away the mode proper to the nature of things. For example, the harp player is the cause of music, but not of the dissonance plucked from the strings. Relating the concourse of God and the free will of man 1. The concourse of providence and the human will is not of collateral and equal causes, but of unequal and subordinate God moves secondary causes according to their nature and mode.
Thus, it is necessary according to the source as coming from the First Causebut free as to the mode. Absolute liberty belongs to God; dependent liberty belongs to the creature. Here Turretin examines the Scholastic problem of the priority between intellect and will. Viewed in different lights either one can work.
Institutes of Elenctic Theology
Practically speaking, people do not separate these two in their actings so we can speak of them together. Only the Reformed position does justice to both necessity and liberty. We deny indifference of will but affirm rational spontaneity God gives second causes the strength and faculty to act 2. God keeps and sustains them in being and vigor.
He excites and applies second causes to acting 4. He determines them to acting 5. Anthropology and Sin Original Sin: Those who deny original sin have to explain why death is prevalent even among infants and imbeciles.
Romans says the wages of sin is death.
If the curse of death is universal, it necessarily follows that turetin wages of sin is universal. Yet, how can they be held accountable for sin before the giving of the law Romans 5: Only something like the Covenant of Works can really answer this question. Yes, the curse of death is imputed to us as our Eastern friends tell us. Yes, death is the enemy. But as Paul makes clear, how can there be death franciw the wages of sin?
Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Three Volume Set
Rome places concupiscence before the fall; Protestants place it after the fall. Protestants do believe in concupiscence, though. We see it as an inclination to sin after the fall. Still, we reject a positive principal of sin in the human nature. This rejection, plain and simple, precludes any possibility of a so-called Manicheanism. If Reformed seminaries are not teaching through this book, then their students will not be prepared to face challenges from Rome and neo-Socinians.
May 28, Tsun Turrtin rated it liked it. Turretin may be better understood against the historical background of post-reformation history in Dutch Reformed franciis.