What do you think?
Rate this book
288 pages, Paperback
Published October 18, 2016
One adjective seems custom-made to describe the unintended consequence of the Reformation. It is a word that I never come across except in the descriptions or criticisms of Protestantism: “fissiparous”—“inclined to cause or undergo division into separate parts of groups,” from the Latin fissus, past participle of findere (to split; cf . “fissure” ).In much of the introduction, he seems to buy into the conventional wisdom/stereotypes of Protestantism/what Protestantism teaches -- including a weird reading of the Ann Hutchison case -- using too many scattered quotations out of context from various authorities to build the case.
will be arguing not for the superiority of [his] own Reformed tribe but for “mere Protestant Christianity.” This refers neither to a lost “golden age” nor to a particular cultural instantiation of Protestantism, but rather to a set of seminal insights —- encapsulated by the five solas -- that represent a standing challenge, and encouragement, to the church.While I have some concerns of the "Mere Christianity" and "Mere Orthodoxy" approaches that are gaining popularity in some circles, I can't fault this. Sure, he'd be able to make a stronger case if he did argue for the superiority of Reformed thinking (if you ask me), but given the arguments he's responding to it makes sense to adopt this approach.