Along with the benefits there are also some, how should I put it, inconveniences inherent in reading theology. While many theologians have been blessed with great understanding, fewer have also been gifted wordsmiths, especially when it comes to clarity, directness and concision. Take for example this sentence from John Murray's Redemption Accomplished and Applied, which I find dificult to read without impersonating Captain Jack Sparrow in my head:
"Something has entered into the relations of the two persons which the person called the brother considers to be a grievance against the person bringing the gift to the altar, something which the former considers to be a culpable breach of harmonious relations on the part of the latter, savvy?"
"Something has entered into the relations of the two persons which the person called the brother considers to be a grievance against the person bringing the gift to the altar, something which the former considers to be a culpable breach of harmonious relations on the part of the latter, savvy?"
You're the funniest person I've ever met.
You should probably impersonate Captain Jack Sparrow all the time.
That sentence is ridiculous.
For additional conveluted, circular reading, I highly recommend the early works of Karl Marx.
p.s. ", savvy?" is a great way to end a sentence, savvy?
I agree on Schleiermacher, and Tillich isn't any better. The moral of the story is, German theologians are unintellegible. In fact after all the theology classes I'm had now I still think the textbook Adam uses is the most readable thing ever and primary sources are useless without it. The patristics are tight though. Cappadocian fathers are my friends.
I left the McGrath text, the one from Adam's theology class, in the states and I kick myself for that everyday.