Which one of Calvin's Institutes...

[pawnraider]

Which one of Calvin's Institutes would you recommend? This one, or this one? Cost is not a factor so don't let it influence your recommendation.

 

[JM]

This one:

http://www.amazon.com/Institutes-Ch...=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1324577877&sr=1-2

...the reviews explain why.

 

[St_Worm2]

Which one of Calvin's Institutes would you recommend? This one, or this one? Cost is not a factor so don't let it influence your recommendation.

They're both excellent, but I use the Beveridge much more often because it's the one that is also part of my Logos Electronic Library (and because it's a better read). They say the Battles is more accurate however, that tremendous care was taken in translating it.


--David

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Some interesting quotes from an Amazon review of the Battles translation...

"1. Here's what Reformed Christian scholar and theological philosopher Paul Helm (who himself has studied and contributed several works on John Calvin) says:

"Incidentally, if you have the need of a translation of the Institutes, then the reissue of the Beveridge translation (newly published by Hendrickson) may be just the thing. It has new indexes, and has been 'gently edited', which means, I hope, only the removal of typos and other detritus. (I have not yet had the chance to check). Beveridge is superior to Battles in sticking closer to the original Latin, and having less intrusive editorial paraphernalia."

2. Here's another Calvin scholar, Richard A. Muller, on the two translations (from the preface of The Unaccommodated Calvin):

"I have also consulted the older translations of the Institutes, namely those of Norton, Allen and Beveridge, in view of both the accuracy of those translation and the relationship in which they stand to the older or 'precritical' text tradition of Calvin's original. Both in its apparatus and in its editorial approach to the text, the McNeill-Battles translation suffers from the mentality of the text-critic who hides the original ambience of the text even as he attempts to reveal all its secrets to the modern reader."

3. The following is from J.I. Packer in the foreword to A Theological Guide to Calvin's Institutes:

"No English translation fully matches Calvin's Latin; that of the Elizabethan, Thomas Norton, perhaps gets closest; Beveridge gives us Calvin's feistiness but not always his precision; Battles gives us the precision but not always the punchiness, and fleetness of foot; Allen is smooth and clear, but low-key."

4. Finally, the following is from David Calhoun:

"Let me just say a few words about English translations. The first was Thomas Norton back in the sixteenth century. Calvin was very fortunate with his first English translator. Norton did an exceptionally good job. Very soon after the completion of the Institutes in 1559, which was written in Latin, it was translated by Calvin into French and then quite soon into English. John Allen was the second translator. John Allen and Henry Beveridge were both nineteenth-century translators. The Beveridge translation is still in print. It was until fairly recently anyway. Those are not bad but not very good either. Ford Lewis Battles' 1960 translation is the one that we are using. Even though it has been criticized some, it is by far the most superior translation that we have at present."

I cannot say if the quotations are indeed confirmed to be accurate and true, but they are interesting. I recommend both translations, both have different but good qualities. I also recommend books that can help with understanding and reading Calvin's Institutes such as "Analysis of the Institutes of the Christian Religion" by Ford Lewis Battles.

 

[JM]

I haven't got around to ordering the single volume published by Hendrickson but I'm still interested in picking it up. Anyone order it based on that review from Amazon?

 

[JM]

I love the single volume edition gord sent me. It was published again in a Deluxe format with ribbon marker etc. It's on sale here for $16.99: Christianbook.com: Institutes of the Christian Religion, Deluxe Edition: John Calvin: 9781598563610

 

[AmericanSamurai]

I love the single volume edition gord sent me. It was published again in a Deluxe format with ribbon marker etc. It's on sale here for $16.99: Christianbook.com: Institutes of the Christian Religion, Deluxe Edition: John Calvin: 9781598563610

Ordered it from Amazon for even cheaper. $14.97 brand new with $3.99 shipping. Out the door for $18.96.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

I'm embarrassed that I have not yet read through all of Calvin's Institutes yet, but I will.

 

[JM]

Calvin's arguments against Rome were probably the most eye opening, for me at least... The teachings of Rome at the time of the Reformation seem a lot different from modern the RCC. The RCC has Protestantized its theology a lot since Vat. II including moving the altar, performing the liturgy in English, etc. When contrasted with the scriptures and yes, Calvin references the church fathers, it just seems so strange.



Enjoy it.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

We need to reform Romanism even more, til it is no longer Romanism.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

Dangit I should've ordered John Gerstner's book "Wrongly Dividing the Word" while I was at it.

 

[JM]

Calvin's arguments against Rome were probably the most eye opening, for me at least... The teachings of Rome at the time of the Reformation seem a lot different from modern the RCC. The RCC has Protestantized its theology a lot since Vat. II including moving the altar, performing the liturgy in English, etc. When contrasted with the scriptures and yes, Calvin references the church fathers, it just seems so strange.



Enjoy it.

Let me clarify what I posted.

Calvin's arguments contra Rome still stand. RC's have muddied the water by borrowing from Protestant theological language and changing their outward practices but their theology remains the same.

While waiting for my wife just now I read Book Four, chapter 2:1-4. A very clear rebuttal to authority based on a succession of bishops.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
PS: Read CALVIN!

 

[AmericanSamurai]

I have read a shortened version of Institutes, but now its time to get down to the dirty nitty gritty of reading the WHOLE Institutes and the hard, arduous work of extrapolating its truths.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

Let me clarify what I posted.

Calvin's arguments contra Rome still stand. RC's have muddied the water by borrowing from Protestant theological language and changing their outward practices but their theology remains the same.

While waiting for my wife just now I read Book Four, chapter 2:1-4. A very clear rebuttal to authority based on a succession of bishops.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
PS: Read CALVIN!

Who fought harder against the Papists, Calvin or Luther?

 

[JM]

Who fought harder against the Papists, Calvin or Luther?

I think Calvin was more consistent from the beginning of his ministry until the end. Luther was the first to lunch an attack but faded just a little and softened near the end. My guess is that Philipp Melanchthon had this effect on him but it could have been the weight of the Reformation on Luther's shoulders that caused him to tire.

 

[AmericanSamurai]

Book arrived today! It's a beautiful book too with the page ribbons. thanks to JM and gord for pointing out this edition.

 

[JM]

Pic!

 

[JM]

Some advice on reading Calivn: read large portions, don't cherry pick...

Recently I found a blog by an RC and they quoted a conclusion Calvin made in his Institutes without reference to THE 11 POINTS he made before that helped to arrive at that conclusion. By doing this they tore the conclusion from its moorings, left an unguarded statement to poke holds in. Calvin builds to his conclusions and you will miss his point if you read only bits and pieces.

Yours in The Lord,

jm

 

[AmericanSamurai]

I am finally back! Old computer is dead. Got the blue screen of death. Just got a new PC today.

 

[JM]

Wecolme back. Things had been slow.