Remembered as the official who failed to keep Luther in the Catholic fold, Tommaso de Vio, Cardinal Cajetan (1469-1534) was a multi-faceted figure whose significance extends beyond those days in Augsburg. In the 1520s, he embarked on a labour of biblical commentary that occupied the final decade of his life, producing over a million words of translation and commentary. Offering an overview of this remarkable body of work, Michael O’Connor argues that Cajetan’s motive was the renewal of Christian living (more ‘Catholic Reform’ than ‘Counter-Reformation’), and that his method was a bold and fresh hybrid of scholasticism and Renaissance humanism, correcting the Vulgate’s errors and expounding the text almost exclusively according to the literal sense.

Since the nineteenth century, scholars have debated the controversial relationships between humanism, the Renaissance and the Reformation. Challenging the dominant narrative on the subject, Giovanni Tortoriello reconstructs the debates that characterized the early Reformation movements. He shows that Martin Luther's theology of the cross developed in reaction to the irenic tendencies of the Renaissance. With the spread of Platonism, Hermeticism, and Kabbalah in the fifteenth century, the identity of Christianity shifted and the boundaries between the different religions thinned. In response to this attempt to minimize the differences among the various religions, Luther reiterated the centrality and uniqueness of the salvific event of the cross. Confessional biases and theological prejudices have obliterated the role that Platonism, Hermeticism, and Christian Kabbalah played in the early Reformation debates. The author reconstructs these controversies and situates Luther's theology of the cross in this historical context.

A cursory glance at Hebrews' critique of Israel's fear at Sinai in Heb 12:18-29 suggests that the author has misunderstood or manipulated his sources. In the Pentateuch, the appointment of Moses as Israel's mediator receives explicit approval (Exod 19:9; Deut 5:28), while Heb 12:25 labels their request for mediation a "refusal" to heed the word of God. This book argues that Hebrews' use of the Sinai narratives resides on a complex trajectory established by four points: the Sinai covenant according to Exodus, the reenactment of that covenant according to Deuteronomy, the call for a NEW covenant according to Jeremiah, and the present reality of that covenant established by God and mediated by Jesus Christ. The basis for Hebrews' critique arises from its insight that while Israel's request established covenant-from-a-distance, Jesus demonstrates that true covenant mediation brings two parties into a single space. The purpose for Hebrews critique lies in its summons to Zion, the mountain on which Jesus sits at the right hand of God as the high priestly mediator of the new covenant.

Pursuit of Perfection explores the significance of the perfection motif in the Epistle to the Hebrews. It addresses the controversial interpretation of teleios ("perfection") in Hebrews where this notion is so central to the argument of the book. The investigation examines the meaning of perfection in an attempt to discover its significance on Hebrews theology. The need for the study is the lack of adequate treatment of the subject in the last three decades. The discussion focuses on the precise meaning to be attached to the notion of perfection and its significance for Hebrews interpretation. Through an exploration of major interpretative approaches to the notion of perfection, and its usages in classical world, Second Temple Judaism, and New Testament literature, especially Hebrews. The author argues that the notion of perfection has an eschatological significance and is linked to better provisions of the new covenant, which guarantee believers' salvation and eternal inheritance. The author sums up his argument that the call to pursue the goal of perfection is a call for commitment to the gospel message as Christians of all ages follow the example of the Christ, the one who endured suffering of the cross and its despised shame in order to bring many followers to their future eternal glory.

Ellingworth's study on the Epistle to the Hebrews is a contribution to The New International Greek Testament Commentary, a series based on the UBS Greek New Testament which seeks to provide thorough exegesis of the text that is sensitive to theological themes as well as to the details of the historical, linguistic, and textual context.

A Case for Mixed-Audience with Reference to the Warning Passages in the Book of Hebrews discusses the nature of the warnings in Hebrews and how these warnings relate to the theological question of the eternal security of believers. The main argument is that these warnings are intended to target a particular segment of the author's community, about whose appropriation of and subsequent attitude toward the Christian message he was deeply concerned. That is to say, while the book of Hebrews is addressed as a message of encouragement to the community as a whole, its warnings are aimed at a certain element in the community whose salvation is threatened by a possible dangerous course of action. The book implies that while the author is persuaded that the majority in the community are genuine believers, there are some about whose salvation he doubts; hence the «case for a mixed-audience». What is threatened, therefore, is not a salvation already possessed, but the salvation of those in danger of coming up short. Theologically, the work falls within the sphere of the Calvinistic-Arminian debate regarding the assurance of salvation and the perseverance of the saints. It argues strongly for the Calvinistic position, but does so within the confines of the discipline of biblical studies, and lends extensive exegetical support to the Calvinistic position on the warning passages. The book is highly recommended for Bible College and seminary students and professors, as well as pastors and lay leaders who must give answers to their parishoners on those tough warning passages in Hebrews.

Byung Soo Han intends to answer, by investigating the merger of patristic and contemporary sources in the theological method of Amandus Polanus, a significant question concerning the way in which the intellectual and methodological eclecticism of the Reformed was able to establish a coherent "system" of thought capable of defense as not only confessional but also orthodox in its theology and broadly catholic, drawing both on the thought of the Reformers and on the resources of the great tradition of Christian thought that extended back to the church fathers. From a methodological perspective, Polanus's development from the Ramistically-organized doctrinal framework of the early Partitiones, through the increasingly detailed and specialized efforts of the commentaries, disputations, and Symphonia, indicates a fairly clear, concerted effort to build toward a detailed systematic presentation – and in fact, each of these earlier efforts provided as it were building-blocks that would be incorporated into the Syntagma. This constructive labor itself serves to set aside the claim that Polanus based his theology on a deductive principle. The specific focus of the book is on the place and function of backgrounds and sources, traditional and contemporary, with particular emphasis on the place of the church fathers in Reformed orthodoxy. Polanus's patristic work, Symphonia, and its eventual impact on his full systematic work, the Syntagma, provides a singular case, within the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, of the reformulation of patristic thought in a fully systematized form, suitable for combination with the results of biblical exegesis and contemporary doctrinal argumentation in the formulation of Reformed orthodox theology. This study attempts to assess the claim of catholicity and orthodoxy by Reformed theology, demonstrating the formative function of patristic thought in Polanus's theology. Further, the study illustrates the place of this traditionary exercise within the methodologically eclectic approach followed by Polanus and his contemporaries as they created a theology that drew not only on Scripture and contemporary philosophical assumptions but also on patristic, medieval, Reformation-era, traditionary Aristotelian, Platonic, and Ramist sources. This study, therefore, reappraises the development of Reformed orthodoxy. In Polanus's case, an older scholarship that read his theology as based on central dogmas or as an exercise of rationalism will be set aside in favor of a more nuanced view of his sources and method. Within this larger framework, Polanus's use of the fathers builds on and confirms the Reformers's assumption of catholicity in the face of the detailed polemics of Robert Bellarmine as well as confirming the point that his approach to formulation was traditionary and somewhat eclectic. Finally, the book identifies the theological cohesion of the early orthodox Reformed model, as exemplified by Polanus's thought, especially in its method of drawing together of traditionary materials from varied sources. In short, the book demonstrates the importance of the church fathers to the formulation of a Reformed orthodox and catholic theology in the context of showing, contrary to previous studies of Polanus's thought and contrary to the older stereotypes of "Calvinist" orthodoxy, that Reformed orthodoxy was neither a rigid monolith nor a matter of philosophical speculation but the product of a carefully conceived exercise in the compilation and assessment of biblical and traditionary materials.