Bavinck? Yes. Hoeksema? No! (3)
Kenneth Koole critiques scholarly attempts to distance Herman Bavinck's covenant theology from Herman Hoeksema's position, particularly examining C. Venema's interpretation of Bavinck. The article argues that Venema misrepresents Bavinck's carefully nuanced use of 'conditional' language in covenant doctrine by reading it through a conditional-covenant framework rather than Bavinck's own unconditional covenant perspective.
Previous article in this series: March 15, 2013, p. 268. As we noted in our last article, there is evidence of a concerted effort on the part of some to distance Bavinck's doctrine of the covenant as far as possible from Hoeksema's, driving a wedge between the two. Dr. L. R. O'Donnell III's article in the Mid-America Journal of Theology (MJT 22, 2011) was one instance. And an article by Dr. C. Venema entitled "Covenant and Election in the Theology of Herman Bavinck" (MJT 19, 2008, pp. 69-115)...
Full article available on sb.rfpa.org