Quote:
Originally Posted by tcalbrecht  Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie Quote:
Originally Posted by Spear Dane Rushdoony is an idealist. Jordan's commentary cannot simply be dismissed (although I as a premillennialist do take issue with it  ). Jordan does brutalize liberal scholarship and force you to think about the whole Bible. | Though Rush's idealism would not affect how he brings out the socio-political significance of events within the book. Another problem with James Jordan is his multi-perspectivalism (or whatever its called).:2cents: | “Interpretive maximalism” | Right. Let's not knock Perspectivalism (if we are thinking of people like Frame and Bahnsen). It's a valid presuppositional move.
__________________
J. B. Atken
John Knox PCA
Layman, M.A. student at Louisiana College
|