Did Flynn see this?

One Response to Did Flynn see this?

1. David says:

   January 28, 2008 at 11:22 am

   Moore’s scholarship on some of this is very very problematic. I will probably get into trouble with this, but if you read what he says Kimedoncius and Vermigli believed (pp67-68), and what they actually did believe you can see that he very much misses the point.

   See excerpts:
   Peter Martyr Vermigli

   and

   Jacob Kimedoncius

   These two men held to the very opposite to what Moore claims. I am amazed that he came to the conclusion that Kimedoncius and Vermigli would have been on the other side of the discussion table to Davenant. Kimedoncius’ book is about denying the charge made against him and the others (eg Ursinus and Paraeus, et al) that they believed that Christ only died for the elect.

   From what I have read of Perkins it looked like he held to a limited sin-bearing. It’s the sin-bearing that is critical in his: who’s sin did Christ bear and suffer for? The universality is probably only “nominal” (ie conceptual), a “special universality.” Perkins is on my list to work through as time permits. I might bump Perkins up the list.

   Thanks for the heads up.

   Btw, I have just now posted all the relevant material on Luther than I can find.

   Thanks,
   David

   Reply