You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
notwithoutwitness 's review for:
Strawman special! Wow...
Fesko is adequate in seeking to show the validity of "the book of nature." Something that CVT didn't not reject. CVT's argumentation was founded in creation and humanity being created in God's image. CVT never denied natural revelation. His concern was over what sinful, rebellious humanity sought to do with that revelation: distort, twist, and suppress it. That's the problem that Fesko barely addresses.
As far as a critique of CVT, Fesko's Reforming Apologetics fails miserably. Yes, CVT isn't the easiest to read, but the amount of misrepresentation, strawmen, and lack of nuance is simply overwhelming. It makes Fesko's work painful to read.
Reformed Apologetics would have been far better served if Fesko actually sought to make some biblical-theological arguments defending his thesis. The majority of his work is focused on proving historical arguments which in the end only prove the history of an idea, not the scriptural veracity of an idea.
There are plenty of other reviews written by others far more capable than myself.
Anderson - https://www.proginosko.com/2019/06/reforming-apologetics-introduction/
Bredenhof - https://yinkahdinay.wordpress.com/2019/07/03/book-review-reforming-apologetics-1/
Waldron - https://founders.org/2019/07/02/j-v-feskos-reforming-apologetics-retrieving-the-classical-reformed-approach-to-defending-the-faith-a-critical-review/
Fesko is adequate in seeking to show the validity of "the book of nature." Something that CVT didn't not reject. CVT's argumentation was founded in creation and humanity being created in God's image. CVT never denied natural revelation. His concern was over what sinful, rebellious humanity sought to do with that revelation: distort, twist, and suppress it. That's the problem that Fesko barely addresses.
As far as a critique of CVT, Fesko's Reforming Apologetics fails miserably. Yes, CVT isn't the easiest to read, but the amount of misrepresentation, strawmen, and lack of nuance is simply overwhelming. It makes Fesko's work painful to read.
Reformed Apologetics would have been far better served if Fesko actually sought to make some biblical-theological arguments defending his thesis. The majority of his work is focused on proving historical arguments which in the end only prove the history of an idea, not the scriptural veracity of an idea.
There are plenty of other reviews written by others far more capable than myself.
Anderson - https://www.proginosko.com/2019/06/reforming-apologetics-introduction/
Bredenhof - https://yinkahdinay.wordpress.com/2019/07/03/book-review-reforming-apologetics-1/
Waldron - https://founders.org/2019/07/02/j-v-feskos-reforming-apologetics-retrieving-the-classical-reformed-approach-to-defending-the-faith-a-critical-review/