Literally by the same author, and spouting the same false dichotomy between Scottish and Dutch traditions of Reformed theology.
About the only issues I agree with the author on, as a former pastor in a liberal Reformed denomination trained a liberal Reformed seminary, and consequently as someone with some knowledge of Calvinism and Reformed theology, are that “ Emphasis on the five points of Calvinism fails to capture the full breadth of the heritage of Reformed thought,” which is certainly true, particularly considering that the “Five Points” of “TULIP” were not even defined by John Calvin himself, but emerged at the Synod of Dort, and also that Dutch and Scottish Reformed theology are complementary.
Forgive me, but that’s a gross mischaracterization of my post. As I said in my post, regarding Swiss Calvinism, John Calvin was a French emigre to Switzerland, who wound up leading the Church in Geneva (after some initial clashes with the city council during which he took refuge in Basel) and he was the first to articulate the Swiss theological concept, and I stated as much. It was also the place from which early Calvinists including the Dutch and the Scottish learned about it. This is why the English-language translation of the Bible favored by the early Calvinists in England and the early Scottish Presbyterians is called “The Geneva Bible.”
I also mentioned that Huldrych Zwingli, who represented a more extreme form of Calvinism, was also Swiss, having been born in St. Gallen, and taking charge of the church in Zurich (and eventually dying on the battlefield in a failed and malicious attempt to blockade the Roman Catholic cantons to impose his views on them, essentially an attempt at waging a civil war in the Swiss confederation, an act which does little to make Zwingli more endearing to me personally, and I doubt my pious Lutheran friend
@Ain't Zwinglian would be impressed by it either. And I felt it superfluous to mention several other 16th century Calvinists whose importance to the development of Reformed theology was on a par with John Knox, such as William Bucanus, Thomas Erastes and Heinrich Bullinger.
The reason why I mentioned Karl Barth was not to claim that Calvinism originated in Switzerland, because this fact is self-evident to anyone aware of the history of Calvinism and the geographical location of the major Swiss cities which became centers of the Reformation, but rather because the article you linked to cited the influential Systematic Theology of Louis Berkhof, which is important, but no recent work of systematic theology has attracted as much interest, or elicited such support and opposition, as Karl Barth’s
Church Dogmatics, which I would argue are so influential as to be the most influential work of Reformed theology since John Calvin’s I
nstitutes of the Christian Religion.
Nor did I exclusively limit myself to praising Swiss Reformed theology - I also heaped praise upon the German Reformed theologians, among others, but omitted to included among their number the very important work of Martin Bucer, leader of the Reformed Church in Strasbourg, which is now part of France, but at the time was part of the Holy Roman Empire, and Bucer, while of French descent, was a German theologian who, like Martin Luther, wrote and spoke in the German and Latin languages.