Review: Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics by Richard A. Muller (Monergism)

At the risk of oversimplification and after hearing Richard Muller's lecture on Jonathan Edwards' doctrine of philosophical necessity, it seems to me that the four volumes and over 2,100 pages of Muller's work is aimed at undermining the doctrine of absolute predestination. While Edwards may have employed philosophical terms of his day, Edward's is obviously drawing from the theology of Scripture. I'll have to get back to this later since Firefox locked up and I lost the previous link and a lengthy comment I made there. However, at a glance it seems to me that Muller is doing what he falsely accuses Edwards of doing: reading back into the oldline Reformed orthodoxy what is not there.

Muller wants to say that Edwards treatise on the Freedom of Will is an innovation. It seems more likely that Muller is trying to read his own biases back into the Canons of Dort and many other Reformed confessions, all of which directly contradict his thesis that Arminians and Calvinists did not "really" differ on free will at all. Right! When it smells like a skunk somewhere nearby there usually IS a skunk nearby. Perhaps Muller is another N.T. Wright who "claims" to be "Reformed" but is actually sneaking a Trojan Horse in the back door?

I need to look further into this issue. It seems a bit odd not to see any of the guys at Westminster California picking up on Muller's departure from the Three Forms of Unity on the issue of absolute predestination.

Review: Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics by Richard A. Muller (Monergism)