Actually, I am not too sure about it. The Author basically takes the same path as the reformed group that he attacks at the start.
He speaks at great length that repentance bears fruit but never actually says what that fruit is (well, he says that repentance bears fruit and that fruit is repentance, which seems circular to me)
I kind of skimmed, so I probably missed a bit, but it seemed to me that there was a lot of confusing double talk.
If you have read it CKG could you sum it up.
|