Penal Substitutionism, Divine Justice, and the Existence of God

This article is about the justifiability of accepting worse cost effectiveness for orphan drugs, that is, treatments for rare diseases, in a publicly financed health care system. Recently, three arguments have been presented that may be used in favour of exceptionally advantageous economic terms for orphan drugs. These arguments share the common feature of all referring to considerations of justice or fairness: the argument of the irrelevance of group size, the argument from the principle of need, and the argument of identifiability. It is argued that all of these arguments fail to support the conclusion that orphan drugs should be subsidized to a larger extent than treatments for common diseases. The argument of the irrelevance fails to distinguish between directly and indirectly relevant considerations of fairness or justice. The recent attempt to revive the moral relevance of identifiability has provided no novel reasons to think that identifiability is morally relevant in itself or due to considerations of fairness and justice. The argument from the principle of need does not fail due to any inherent flaw in the principle as such. Rather, this principle can be interpreted in different ways, and none of these interpretations support exceptionally advantageous terms economically for treating rare diseases specifically. It is concluded that we are awaiting justice based reasons for the preferential treatment of orphan drugs.

IBN KHALDfUN opens his sketch of the science of the Kalam with a discussion of two topics, the of God and the power of God. His purpose is to show that the belief in the of God is not incompatible with the belief that attributes are real incorporeal beings, eternally subsisting in God, and that the belief in the power of God, that is, in predestination, is not incompatible with divine justice in its holding man responsible for his actions. These were two distinct problems in Muslim religious philosophy. He combines these two problems and tries to solve them by one common argument. The one common argument by which he tries to solve these two problems may be briefly stated. Throughout the history of philosophy, the and power of God were treated as corollaries deducible from the proofs of the existence of God. So Ibn Khalduin says to himself: Let us examine the proofs for the existence of God and see what kind of of God and what kind of power of God are established thereby, and then let us see whether that kind of is compatible with divine attributes and whether that kind of power is compatible with divine justice. Accordiingly, at the very beginning of his discussion of the Kalam, after stating that the unity of God is the core of the articles of faith and after declaring that he was going to prove the of God in a method and manner which is most direct,' he proceeds to prove not the of God but the existence of God. Let us study Ibn Khaldtin's proof of the existence of God. In Arabic philosophy, by the time of Ibn Khalduin (1332-1406), the proofs used for the existence of God were mainly of two types. Both of these types were of the cosmological kind. We may characterize them, with reference to their ultimate philosophical origin, as the Platonic type of argument and the Aristotelian type of argument. The Platonic type of argument starts with the assumption that the world came to be (-yvyvo,yevov) after it had not been,2 or as the Muslim theologians have come to express this view, the world was created (makhliiq). Then, adding the principle that everything created must have a creator, it directly infers that there must be a Creator. The Aristotelian type of argument starts with the assumption that the world is eternal. Then, by an empirical study of the world, it arrives at the conclusion, first, that every form of coming into being within the world is effected by a cause and, second, that since the world is eternal, the series of causes and effects would have to be infinite. Then, adding

Many debates in contemporary theology can be interpreted as revolving around questions concerning the doctrine of God and, with it, the way in which we are to construe God’s relationship to the world, the way in which we are to understand ‘the world’, and the ways in which God may be spoken of faithfully. Anglican liberal theology of the last century—for example, the outstanding work of Maurice Wiles—tended to a relatively parsimonious doctrine of God, generated as it was by the rather minimal affirmations a theologian could make in what was taken to be a philosophically justified way. It was not by accident that something like Deism was often the result. ‘Narrative’ theologies—such as those of Barth, Moltmann, and Jenson—eschew the God of the philosophers and develop their doctrine of God from the Christ-event or, more narrowly, from the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. These approaches are robustly Trinitarian and seek to be guided by what the church receives as orthodoxy, but their ‘dramatic’ structure can obscure the divine unity, and they can be regarded as sometimes blurring the distinction between God and the world. The question which arises is how to uphold the unity and aseity of God whilst allowing proportionate attention to the dramatis personae of salvation history.

Heinrich Emil Brunner’s doctrine of God has received a divergent view from biblical-theological scholars’ perspective. The doctrine of God has played a great significant and influential role throughout the era of Christian history, thus promoting the development and exploration of major theological doctrines in Christianity. The article therefore surveyed the canonical assessment of God’s doctrine in Brunner’s theology. It also sought to unlock Brunner’s hermeneutical method, contributors and opposers of his doctrine, and canonical approach in attaining salvific implications for contemporary Christians. The study employed a methodology of biblical-theological analysis to glean various literature materials. The findings revealed Brunner’s viewpoint that mankind can understand God through self-revelation. He opines that God possesses both communicable and uncommunicable tenets. Again, God is sovereign and supreme above all creatures in this world. In the light of this, God makes Himself known by His name. Thus, God as a Supreme Being, exhibits characteristic features of unknowable, innate, supernatural and He can be identified in His self-communication. God refers to Yahweh which depicts “I am that I am.” Thus, God is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, honest, loving, and holy. Again, the doctrine of God unveils that God is infallible and hence He can assist human beings to live righteous life. The study concluded that the Lord is the creator, protector, and redeemer of humanity. The study unpacks that God’s salvific value could be realized through Jesus Christ. This study will be beneficial to biblical-theological historical students as it provides literature that will help advance and improve their studies. Keywords: Doctrine of God, Theology of Emil Brunner, Canonical, Evaluation.

Previous articleNext article No AccessReviewsReflections on "The Reality of God" The Reality of God. Schubert Ogden Antony FlewAntony Flew Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Religion Volume 48, Number 2Apr., 1968 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/486122 Views: 8Total views on this site Copyright 1968 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

The doctrine of God consists of five main topics, namely theological guidance, the existence of Allah, the attributes of God, the names of God and the works of God. The aim of understanding the doctrine of God is to recognize God from a Christian perspective, as well as the nature and identity of God, understanding the Triune God, and also the attributes of God. The method used is a qualitative method using a literature review containing books containing the doctrine of God, as well as several supporting journals in discussing this doctrine. From this research, there were findings regarding the view of God in Christianity in the form of a different understanding of how God manifests Himself as well as the qualities or things found in God based on the contents of the Bible. Even though God cannot truly be understood in its entirety through understanding the human mind, we can understand God's existence through the truth contained in the Bible.

ABSTRACT
 The purpose of this study is to have an overview of the theology of Karl Barth who is considered as one of the most influential theologians in contemporary Christian world. This study is of worthy in order to have an accurate grasp of the trend of modern Chriatian theology. After a brief survey of his life and works, this study provides an overview of Barth’s theology focusing on three major areas of his theology: the doctrines of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. Barth’s emphasis upon the transcendence of God, the centrality of Jesus Christ in Christian theology, and the importance of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity should not be ignored for better understanding of the modern Christian theology. In a word, Barth’s theology has continuity of, and, at the same time, discontinuity from liberal theology.
 Keywords: Karl Barth, morder Christian theology, transcendence of God, centraliy of Jesus Christ, importance of the Holy Spirit, neo-orthodoxy, liberal theology

BOOK REVIEWS Ue11tlation and Theology: The Gospel as Narrated Promise. By RONALD F. THIEMANN. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame, 1985. Pp. x + 272. $23.95. The author, recently named dean of Harvard Divinity School, wrote this book as chairman of the Religion Department at Haverford College. A Lutheran, he pays tribute to Hans Frei of Yale University as his principal mentor. Influenced by I<'rei's narrative theology, he argues for a doctrine of revelation understood as God's narrated promise. Narration, Thiemann contends, is essential for revelation, which is the doctrine of God's identifiability. We identify persons by ascribing character traits to them on the basis of their pattrrns of behavior. God\; patterns of hrhavior are made known through the biblical narrative. Promise, for Thiemann, is an essential category hecause it is the mode by which the biblical text encounters its readers, inviting them to put their trust in the God who was the principal agent of the history of Israel and of Jesus Christ. Faith, discerning God's identity ns thr suhject of the biblical text, goes out to him as a living reality. Thiemann's thesis of course implies that Christian revelation is given in the Bible, that the Bible is predominantly narrative, and that the main theme of the biblical narrative is the prevenient God who enacts his intentions and addresses the reader through the text. Faithful discipleship is the appropriate response to God's self-giving love as disc'.oscd in Jesus Christ. Thiemann illustrates these principles <"oncrrtrly hy a ch:ipterlength analysis of the Gospel of 11/fatthew. Thiemann defends his theolog·ical options on the ground that the alternatives do not sufficiently protect the divine prevenience. This doctrine, he holds, must be safeguarded not only because it was formally taught by the Council of Orange but also-and, one would gather, more fundnmentally -because it is implied " by a cluster of Christian convictions concerning God's promises, identity, and reality " (80-81). According to Thiemann it is a " common conviction shared by all those who confess the name of Christ . . . that all human life, including our theological thinking, is ultimately dependent on the creating, sustaining, and redeeming grace of God" (70). Apart from the rather broad use of the term "grace" this statement would be aceeptahle to very man~' Christians , including myself. In the course of establishing his own position 'l'hiemann develops au 169 170 BOOK REVIEWS incisive critique of a number of rival approaches. He rejects the "foundationalism " of classical apologetics which, as he understands it, would seek to justify Christian faith by reference to some kind of self-evident, noninferential experience from which it could be deduced. On the basis of a critical analysis of Thomas Torrance and several earlier theologians, he concludes that no such unassailable starting point exists. Thiemann also rejects the transcendental turn to the subject, which he ascribes to David Tracy and David Burrell, on the ground that this reduces biblical revelation to a generic human experience and ends by undermining the truth-status of all particular religious claims (187). Finally, Thiemann maintains that new theologies which dispense with the category of revelation (Gerald Downing, Gordon Kaufman) or give it no necessary function (David Kelsey) surrender the Christian conviction of God's prevenience and make faith dependent on purely human initiative. A nonfoundational defense of God's prevenience, according to Thiemann , has three distinct emphases. First, its justification of Christianity is conducted from within a conceptual framework supported by Christian faith, community, and tradition. Second, such a reflection evaluates and criticizes Christian doctrine and practice according to criteria internal to Christian faith. Third, this reflection seeks to justify its tenets holistically , by reference to the structures imbedded in the entire system of Christian beliefs and practices. Thiemann considers it proper to justify individual beliefs retrospectively by showing their importance for defining Christian identity. Thus he tries to show that a rejection of God's prevenience as a "background belief" would require " a radical and unwelcome revision in our understanding of Christian identity" (78). He makes use of " reflective equilibrium" and retrospective justification in ways strongly reminiscent of Francis Schussler Fiorenza's Foundational Theology (1984)-a book possibly published too late for Thiemann to refer to. Both he and Fiorenza, however, rely on authors such as John Rawls. In opposition to the foundationalists Thiemann, wisely in my opinion, eschews any sharp dichotomy between the "first-order" language of faith and the " second-order" language of theology. Christian theology, he maintains, must be carried on within Christian faith and must adopt patterns of speech that are consonant with Christian sources and premises. Theology, he asserts, "has no rationale independent of the first-order language of faith" (75). In particular, he denies that any successful account of Christian belief can be furnished by pointing to the religious experience supposedly available to all human beings. I find myself in agreement with practically all Thiemann's major positions . I applaud his skillful defense of revelation theology without recourse to rationalistic foundationalism or subjectivistic transcendentalism. BOOK REVIEWS 171 In my own Models of Revelation I made little explicit use of the categories of narrative and promise, but they are harmonious with my general approach . I rely more on the category of symbolic or saeramental communication . Thiemann might agree that Israel and Jesus Christ, as God's agents in human history, are in fact " real symbols" of the divine. By their very being they make present the hidden reality of the God who calls created persons through them into union with himself. They are thus pledges and anticipations of the age to come. The category of promise, when applied to such historical figures, could seem to tie revelation too narrowly to certain verbal expressions in the Bible, but Thiemann, while attending primarily to the linguistic component, seems open to the idea of promise "enacted" in the persons and events of the biblical narrative. In this wider understanding promise may be classified as " sacramental." A few shortcomings of the book, or personal difficulties of the present reviewer, should probably be detailed. In writings influenced by Hans Frei, including Thieman's, the biblical narratives seem to be exempted from historical criticism. Thiemann himself discusses them as pure narrative without raising the question of their objective validity. He seems to assume that these stories give true accounts of the way things are, for if they were products of fantasy or illusion they could scarcely bear the theological weight that Thiemann places on them. Granted that " Scripture depicts a God who continually keeps his promises" (154), the reflective inquirer would be justified in asking for some grounds for holding that this depiction is veridical and is not simply wishful thinking. If Thiemann had given more attention to this problem, his book might better succeed in providing, as it claims to do, " a reasoned theological account of Christian faith and hope" (7). Without such assurances the decision of faith could appear arbitrary and irresponsible. I fully agree with Thiemann's insistence on the divine prevenience, but I find some obscurity in his treatment of the connection between God's prevenience and any human response. Does God effectively influence the decision of faith 7 At one point Thiemann asserts that God is " the creator of the universe, the redeemer of a sinful humanity, and the reconciler of a broken world" (108). These terms seem to me to imply causality. Yet Thiemann repeatedly rails against understanding God's prevenience in causal terms (98, 109, et passim) . Possibly Thiemann is assuming that causality must necessarily be deterministic, but in many philosophical traditions causality is not so narrowly understood. God's prevenience would be more intelligible if it were presented in causal, though not deterministic, terms. I was not surprised to find in this book certain characteristically Lutheran motifs such as the " unconditionality " of justification and its antecedence to all human merits. Properly understood, this is not simply 172 nooK m~vrnws good Lutheranism but is basic Christian doctrine as understood by Catholics also. Thiemann, however, goes further. At one point, relying on Robert Jenson, he asserts that, on peril of works-righteousness, justification or salvation must not be conceived as any kind of causal process involving interaction between the divine and human agencies. While asserting this, he also denies that human beings are purely passive in their own justification (96-97). The idea that sanctification is a process involving the activity of both God and creatures is well rooted in the Lutheran as well as the Catholic tradition. Perhaps because he treats the whole question so briefly, Thiemann does not seem to me to provide an intelligible alternative. As should be obvious by this point, Thiemann's book deals with a multitude of crucially important questions. It enters into the very heart of the contemporary debate about revelation and theological methodology, and makes many insightful contributions. For the most part, I am enthusiastic about his approach, which seems to offer a highly promising alternative to the theological options he rejects. What I regard as shortcomings in this book are partly due to its relative brevity, granted the vast range of topics on which it touches. But the very breadth of the horizons makes this book especially stimulating and arouses the reader's eagerness to hear more from its talented author. The Catholic University of America Washington, D.C. AVERY DULLES, S.J. The Triune God: Persons, Process, an(l Community. By JOSE.PH A. BRACKEN, S.J. College Theology Society: Studies in Religion, 1. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1985. Pp. viii + 208, incl. Glossary, Bibliography and Index. $22.50 (cloth), $11.75 (pb.). Among the questions that urge themselves upon contemporary practitioners of theology few are more masic than that of the reconstruction of theology itself. How radical a reconstruction (and thus a corresponding deconstruction) is called for~ This volume represents Joseph Bracken's option on the issue. He is willing to wager all on an integral attempt to begin everything anew with the resources for a systematic theology provided by the thought of Alfred North Whitehead. This includes drawing upon other authors who have expanded upon, and in some ways altered, the seminal thought of Whitehead. Earlier attempts at something like this that come readily to mind are: Daniel Day Wil- ...

Theologians seeking to respond to the ecological crisis seldom turn to the theology of Karl Barth as a resource. In fact, some suggest that his doctrine of God is too monarchical and leads to unnecessary hierarchies between God and humans, or between humans and the rest of nature. This article counters this trend and begins a dialogue with Barth, especially on the place of non-human nature in his thought. While agreeing with the substance of Barth's theology, it is argued a number of critical additions and revisions are appropriate, especially concerning his doctrine of election. The article first briefly outlines Barth's doctrine of election and then, second, examines various New Testament passages on election and non-human nature. This second section will examine the prologue of John's Gospel, Colossians 1:15–20 and Romans 8:18–23. As key texts in Barth's exposition, it will be noted how he passes over important connections between election and nature found in them. Guided by the green exegesis of Richard Bauckham, it will be argued that nature is not merely the stage for the drama between God and humanity but that it is also an object of God's election and thereby participates in reconciliation and redemption. The third part of the article suggests various points of commensurability, correction and addition to Barth's theology arising from the biblical material examined. This includes points concerning theological epistemology, the atonement, anthropology and the theology of nature. For example, Romans 8 suggests that creation groans in anticipation of redemption. Barth's view of the cross, especially the Son's taking up of human suffering, is extended to suggest that the cross is God's way of identifying with the suffering of nature and its anticipation of redemption, and not just human sin and salvation. The most important revision, however, is to be made to Barth's doctrine of election. It may be summarised as follows: in Jesus Christ, God elects the Christian community and individuals for salvation within the community of creation. The article concludes by suggesting areas of dialogue with other types of ecotheology, especially ecofeminist forms.

The doctrine of God moves from the divine existence to the divine essence, and is subdivided into the divine names and attributes, to the discussion on the Trinity, and shared by other seventeenth-century Reformed theologians. A brief excursus on the doctrine of God in the writings of several of these theologians contribute to the understanding of Petrus van Mastricht's exposition of the doctrine of God. The teaching of the doctrine of God was expressed in works of exegesis (Scripture commentaries and homily), doctrine (systematic theology and catechetical instructions), polemic (exegetical-elenctic, doctrinal-elenctic) and praxis (systematic theology). This chapter examines the existence, name, essence, and attributes of God. It discusses about a polemic section refuting the atheists, Manicheans, Anthropomorphists, and idolatry.Keywords: Anthropomorphists; atheists; doctrine; exegesis; God; idolatry; Manicheans; Petrus van Mastricht; praxis; Trinity

Three perspectives on international trade are present in current debates. From the first perspective, trade is regarded as a set of individual transactions among consenting parties and considerations of fairness and justice barely feature, if at all. The second perspective underlines the importance of background structures for trade, maintained by states, which gives rise considerations of fairness and justice. One prominent version of this perspective, for example as defended by Aaron James, views all trading states as having in principle equal claims to the gains from trade. A third perspective puts the focus on exploitation. In this special issue, Mathias

Three perspectives on international trade are present in current debates. From the first perspective, trade is regarded as a set of individual transactions among consenting parties and considerations of fairness and justice barely feature, if at all. The second perspective underlines the importance of background structures for trade, maintained by states, which gives rise considerations of fairness and justice. One prominent version of this perspective, for example as defended by Aaron James, views all trading states as having in principle equal claims to the gains from trade. A third perspective puts the focus on exploitation. In this special issue, Mathias

A crucial issue in contemporary theology is the doctrine of God and especially the nature of the divine reality. What kind of reality is God? How is God's reality like, unlike, and related to other kinds of reality? There are many ways to talk about the reality of God. I want to focus on one way, namely, God as being or beingitself, not because I believe that it is the best way to talk about God but because it is one of the oldest ways, because it seems to be undergoing something of a revival, and because I am baffled and intrigued by it.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is one of the most famous scientists in the United States. In particular, Tyson has expertise as an astrophysicist and hehas written several books and received extraordinary awards as an Astrophysician. Tyson is not only a scientist, he also recognizes himself as an agnostic. Tyson’s disbelief in the existence of God by seeing various event such as volcanoes, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, pestilences, and birth defects that produce suffering is totally against the Nature of Almighty God. Tyson considers God's intelligent Design as a philosophy of ignorance or neglect. The subject raised by Tyson that rejects God’s omnipotence and His Intelligent Design is categorized as a Problem of Evil. This article rejects Neil deGrasse Tyson's opinion built on God's teleological and theodicy philosophy as a form of defense of God's intelligent design and God's omnipotence. It is evident that a plan is needed for the existence of every creature by looking at integrated goals and structures. The beauty of the world also shows the existence of God's intelligent design as the Great Creator. Because the universe has been designed for the life of living things themselves, a plan is needed that is produced through a Person for the lives of the living things themselves. God's omnipotence means that God has no limits and He is able to do something that is impossible for anyone else who is limited through one’s nature and ability. Evil itself arises from humans who are God's creations, but they have free will. The very existence of Evil cannot detract from God's purpose in the creation of the universe. Evil itself requires the existence of an objective standard of goodness with a metaphysical foundation, namely God himself. Christianity cannot ignore the existence of evil itself. Crime is a reality. Crime itself is divided into three types: moral crime, physical crime and natural crime. Evil is in a sense very dependent on the existence of God who opposes evil. Evil cannot take away the Providence of God who has a wise, good and holy purpose. James has taught that there are different attitudes in the face of trials (James 1:2-18). Believers are encouraged to be diligent in facing trials that make one's personality mature and give one spiritual strength. People who believe Jesus Christ is God, have hope as the children of God to obtain certainty of the afterlife in the future based on striving for ideal conditions in their earthly human life. These notions support the existence of God's intelligent design and His Omnipotence.

MLR, 10I .4, 2oo6 IIII le lieu pacifique n'exclut pas la presence d'une nature menaSante et des cataclysmes de l'Histoire' (p. I I3). Also included in this edition are, first, the text of five sonnets (I572-76), belonging to the tradition of 'eloges des femmes illustres' but linking up with the general philosophical tendencies of the two major collections, and, second, in appendices but fully annotated, the remainder of Pibrac's poetry in French. Petris provides a chronological overview, an exhaustive list of editions, each with one local ization, and a full list of significant variants in those printed during Pibrac's lifetime. A glossary, index, table of incipits and full bibliography complete this model edition. UNIVERSITYOFWALES, LAMPETER TREVORPEACH La 7ustice de Dieu: 'Les Tragiques' d'Agrippa d'Aubigne et laReforme protestante en France au xvie siecle. By ELLIOTT FORSYTH. (Etudes et Essais sur laRenais sance, 57) Paris: Champion. 2005. 567 pp. ?IO5. ISBN 2-7453-I I28-X. Having amply treated the notion of vengeance in the French tragedies of the Renais sance and the baroque period (La TragMdiefranraise deyodelle a Corneille I553-I640 (Paris: Champion, I994)), Elliott Forsyth continues to approach the additional ques tion of divine justice in thework by Agrippa d'Aubigne entitled Les Tragiques. These two themes aremore closely related than one might suppose since the justice present inAubigne's work takes on an essentially vindictive form. The crucial problem with which the Protestants who experienced the religious wars were faced is the following: how to reconcile divine grace and justice with the contemporary events which showed the oppressors triumphing with impunity and the just being persecuted without any apparent reaction from God? Forsyth traces a three-phased evolution of the idea of justice during the Renaissance. In Calvinist thought, the notion of Providence em phasizes the value of salvation in divine justice, which in turn authorizes tribulations as away of testing and correcting the faithful. Yet the reality of the wars rather dis credits this point of view and pushes Calvin's successors to emphasize a punitive aspect of justice which would promise the due punishment of the oppressors for their crimes. After theMassacre of Saint Bartholomew, when there isno apparent evidence of an act of punishment from God, consideration of justice moves to an apocalyptic structure with the Final Judgement carrying the banner of hope, hope that is founded on the immediate judgement of the perverted. The first part (Chapters I and 2) provides a conceptual framework for the analysis of the notion of justice through research in the biblical texts and in the writings of the primary Reformers. Three essential distinctions can be displayed. First there is the difference between two types of justice, which correspond to two different words inHebrew (tsedeq and mishpat): the justice of salvation (iustitia Dei) and the justice of punishment or judgement (iudicium), the first corresponding to providential will designed for the good of the faithful in the scope of the Alliance, the second aimed at the application of the principles of uprightness and equity. Then there is the defini tion of three phases of punitive action: chastisement (of the sinners in order to reform them), vengeance (against the enemies of God, instruments of the punishment of the population), and judgement (which inaugurates the definitive reign of God). Finally there is the distinction between prophecy (which seeks to influence present actions and believes in the possibility of redemption) and apocalypse (which is aimed at the End and insists not on pardon but on the interruption of the cycle of justice). In the second part (Chapters 3 to 7) Forsyth analyses the theme of justice in Les Tragiques. He applies the three-part scheme to the structure of the poem by making Books Iand II the punishment phase, Books iii, Iv, and v he describes as an interme diary moment (God's 'patience', which awaits the 'height of sin' before intervening), I I I2 Reviews Book vi as vengeance, and Book vii as judgement. This part is by far themost fastidi ous. It iscertainly useful for its collection of references to the Bible and toCalvinism as well as for itsmeticulous display of apocalyptic themes and...