Posted on 02/19/2003 11:05:28 AM PST by ksen
The Institutes of the Christian Religion
Book I: The Knowledge of God the Creator
10. IN SCRIPTURE, THE TRUE GOD OPPOSED, EXCLUSIVELY, TO ALL THE GODS OF THE HEATHEN.
Sections.
1. Explanation of the knowledge of God resumed. God as manifested in Scripture, the same as delineated in his works.
2. The attributes of God as described by Moses, David, and Jeremiah. Explanation of the attributes. Summary. Uses of this knowledge.
3. Scripture, in directing us to the true God, excludes the gods of the heathen, who, however, in some sense, held the unity of God.
1. The Scriptural doctrine of God the Creator
We formerly observed that the knowledge of God, which, in other respects, is not obscurely exhibited in the frame of the world, and in all the creatures, is more clearly and familiarly explained by the word. It may now be proper to show, that in Scripture the Lord represents himself in the same character in which we have already seen that he is delineated in his works. A full discussion of this subject would occupy a large space. But it will here be sufficient to furnish a kind of index, by attending to which the pious reader may be enabled to understand what knowledge of God he ought chiefly to search for in Scripture, and be directed as to the mode of conducting the search. I am not now adverting to the peculiar covenant by which God distinguished the race of Abraham from the rest of the nations. For when by gratuitous adoption he admitted those who were enemies to the rank of sons, he even then acted in the character of a Redeemer. At present, however, we are employed in considering that knowledge which stops short at the creation of the world, without ascending to Christ the Mediator. But though it will soon be necessary to quote certain passages from the New Testament, (proofs being there given both of the power of God the Creator, and of his providence in the preservation of what he originally created,) I wish the reader to remember what my present purpose is, that he may not wander from the proper subject. Briefly, then, it will be sufficient for him at present to understand how God, the Creator of heaven and earth, governs the world which was made by him. In every part of Scripture we meet with descriptions of his paternal kindness and readiness to do good, and we also meet with examples of severity which show that he is the just punisher of the wicked, especially when they continue obstinate notwithstanding of all his forbearance.
2. The attributes of God according to Scripture agree with those known in his creatures
There are certain passages which contain more vivid descriptions of the divine character, setting it before us as if his genuine countenance were visibly portrayed. Moses, indeed, seems to have intended briefly to comprehend whatever may be known of God by man, when he said, "The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation," (Ex. 34: 6, 7.) Here we may observe, firsts that his eternity and selfexistence are declared by his magnificent name twice repeated; and, secondly, that in the enumeration of his perfections, he is described not as he is in himself, but in relation to us, in order that our acknowledgement of him may be more a vivid actual impression than empty visionary speculation. Moreover, the perfections thus enumerated are just those which we saw shining in the heavens, and on the earth - compassion, goodness, mercy, justice, judgement, and truth. For power and energy are comprehended under the name Elohim.
Similar epithets are employed by the prophets when they would fully declare his sacred name. Not to collect a great number of passages, it may suffice at present to refer to one Psalm, (145) in which a summary of the divine perfections is so carefully given that not one seems to have been omitted. Still, however, every perfection there set down may be contemplated in creation; and, hence, such as we feel him to be when experience is our guide, such he declares himself to be by his word. In Jeremiah, where God proclaims the character in which he would have us to acknowledge him, though the description is not so full, it is substantially the same. "Let him that glorieth," says he, "glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercise loving-kindness, judgement, and righteousness, in the earth," (Jerem. 9: 24.) Assuredly, the attributes which it is most necessary for us to know are these three: Loving-kindness, on which alone our entire safety depends: Judgement, which is daily exercised on the wicked, and awaits them in a severer form, even for eternal destruction: Righteousness, by which the faithful are preserved, and most benignly cherished. The prophet declares, that when you understand these, you are amply furnished with the means of glorying in God. Nor is there here any omission of his truth, or power, or holiness, or goodness. For how could this knowledge of his loving-kindness, judgement, and righteousness, exist, if it were not founded on his inviolable truth? How, again, could it be believed that he governs the earth with judgement and righteousness, without presupposing his mighty power? Whence, too, his loving-kindness, but from his goodness? In fine, if all his ways are loving-kindness, judgement, and righteousness, his holiness also is thereby conspicuous.
Moreover, the knowledge of God, which is set before us in the Scriptures, is designed for the same purpose as that which shines in creation, viz., that we may thereby learn to worship him with perfect integrity of heart and unfeigned obedience, and also to depend entirely on his goodness.
3. Because the unity of God was also not unknown to the heathen, the worshipers of idols are the more inexcusable
Here it may be proper to give a summary of the general doctrine. First, then, let the reader observe that the Scripture, in order to direct us to the true God, distinctly excludes and rejects all the gods of the heathen, because religion was universally adulterated in almost every age. It is true, indeed, that the name of one God was everywhere known and celebrated. For those who worshipped a multitude of gods, whenever they spoke the genuine language of nature, simply used the name god, as if they had thought one god sufficient. And this is shrewdly noticed by Justin Martyr, who, to the same effect, wrote a treatise, entitled, On the Monarchy of God, in which he shows, by a great variety of evidence, that the unity of God is engraven on the hearts of all. Tertullian also proves the same thing from the common forms of speech. But as all, without exception, have in the vanity of their minds rushed or been dragged into lying fictions, these impressions, as to the unity of God, whatever they may have naturally been, have had no further effect than to render men inexcusable. The wisest plainly discover the vague wanderings of their minds when they express a wish for any kind of Deity, and thus offer up their prayers to unknown gods. And then, in imagining a manifold nature in God, though their ideas concerning Jupiter, Mercury, Venus, Minerva, and others, were not so absurd as those of the rude vulgar, they were by no means free from the delusions of the devil. We have elsewhere observed, that however subtle the evasions devised by philosophers, they cannot do away with the charge of rebellion, in that all of them have corrupted the truth of God. For this reason, Habakkuk, (2: 20,) after condemning all idols, orders men to seek God in his temple, that the faithful may acknowledge none but Him, who has manifested himself in his word.
Hey, good to get back to this! There is a basic misunderstanding on what Covenant Theologians believe, and that prompts your question. My default answer is to reject the premise: Israel as a national entity was set aside, Not the Jews. The Reformers have taught that the identity of Israel, hence the promises to Israel, will be fulfilled by the Church. This understanding comes from Paul in the Romans letter. "All Israel is not Israel". It does NOT follow that God does not deal with the Jews. Evidence of this is individual Jewish Converts. It simply means that The Gentiles and the Jews who encompass the church have replaced the national entity of Israel. So, yes, Calvin is a Covenant Theologian.
A question to DCL..Is unregenerate Israel still part of the original covenant or did the New Covenant "disown " them
I have read on this forum that some Arminians even believe that Israel may have a different means of salvation ....highly unscripitual IMHO..
Kevin thanks for the bump back on this..I have decided to cut my FR time..but it is nice to have something to read when I do show up:>)
This is a Institutes 10 clean up flag
No, I didn't know that. I always thought that Calvinism and Covenant Theology went hand in hand. Thanks for the heads up though. ;^)
I have read on this forum that some Arminians even believe that Israel may have a different means of salvation ....highly unscripitual IMHO..
I've read that too, I agree with your assessment.
Kevin thanks for the bump back on this..I have decided to cut my FR time..but it is nice to have something to read when I do show up:>)
You're welcome Mom. I've got a bit of spare time now so I think I'll go get chapter 11 and post it.
35 ¶ Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for light by day And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar; The LORD of hosts is His name:God will never cast off Israel, whom He foreknew.
36 "If this fixed order departs From before Me," declares the LORD, "Then the offspring of Israel also will cease From being a nation before Me forever."
37 Thus says the LORD, "If the heavens above can be measured And the foundations of the earth searched out below, Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel For all that they have done," declares the LORD.- Jer. 31:35-37 [NASB]
It's a huge mistake to confuse the spiritual Israel with those who are Israel after the flesh -- one which too many dispensationalists do. But it's an equally big mistake to confuse the church with Israel -- one which the amils often make.
Clarify please
The problem is that amils seem to equate "spiritual Israel" with the church, which just doesn't compute. Else, why this?
24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?
25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;
26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB."
27 "THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM, WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."
28 From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers;
29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.Rom. 11:24-29 [NASB]
Now, the Israel here is clearly not the church (notice v. 28-- they're enemies to the Gospel at this present time, yet elect!). The only conclusion I can come to, therefore, is that the church and Israel are as yet distinct.
There will come a time when all Israel will be saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
I still don't know how the eschatology of that works out, but this is what I do know.
A question to DCL..Is unregenerate Israel still part of the original covenant or did the New Covenant "disown " them
Unregenerate "Israel" was already under condemnation, the same as unregenerate Gentiles. Let's not loose our perspective.
i do happen to be one of those who believe that the church IS Israel. It is the Israel of the Promise, and consists of Gentile and Jewish believers throughout all history.
If that bothers you, shoot me.
This is an absolutely beautiful argument, CDL. I wish I'd thought of it (and be assured that I shall now plagiarize it).
It certainly gives the Lie to any "dispensationalist" claims that Covenant Theology is "anti-Semitic".
This is particularly re-assuring to me, because I have always maintained... I am a Zionist. I don't have any moral objection to that Label. I wear it freely. OP = Zionist; Zionist = OP.
What I am not, at least any more, is a Dispensationalist Zionist. I do not presume that the modern State of Socialist Israel, mired in Marxist Economics and the Denial of the Messiah, represents the fulfillment of God's Promises to the Jewish People.
It is my belief that God has a better plan entirely for the Jews. "All Israel shall be Saved". I believe this on the basis of of the Salvationist promises of Romans 11, not an idolatrous and therefore Materialist worship of modern Socialist Israel.
Unlike the Dispensationalist Zionists, my support of Modern Israel is in no way whatsoever founded upon the (anti-Christian) belief that the modern State of Socialist Israel, mired in Marxist Economics and the Denial of the Messiah, represents the fulfillment of God's Promises to the Jewish People. Modern Israel may be incorporated into God's Plan for the Salvation of the Jews (at least if the "Jews for Jesus" have anything to say about it, provided that the Orthodox Jews of Israel do not OUTLAW their Evangelism), but Modern Israel does not represent the fulfillment of God's Promises to the Jewish People.
Rather, my Zionism is a political Zionism. I believe that Contracts are Binding, and that Men should Honor their Word. A Bargain was struck in 1917 between the Zionists and the Arab Nationalists -- the Turkish Empire would be destroyed, both the Zionists and the Arab Nationalists would support Great Britain in her War against the Turks.
In return for Zionist and the Arab Nationalist support ("Lawrence of Arabia", y'all?), it was agreed that 99% of the Turkish Middle East would be given over to Arab Nationalist regimes, and 1% of the Turkish Middle East ("Jewish Palestine", from the Mediterranean to the River Jordan -- including the so-called "West Bank") would be given over to the Zionists as a "Jewish National Homeland".
As such, I am sorry to have to tell the Palestinian Arabs to go "piss up a rope", and since I am not a Dispensationalist Zionist, I have the Theological Honesty to criticize Modern Israel for her human-rights violations against the Palestinian Arabs for what they are -- human rights violations, whether the Israel uber alles Dispensationalist Zionists want to admit it or not.
But at the same time, if the Representative Principle means anything, I am prepared to advise the Palestinian Arabs, get with the program -- your Muslim Arabic brethren agreed to accept 99% of the Turkish Middle East as the price of their support for gutting the Turkish Empire, and they agreed to cede 1% of the Turkish Middle East to the Jews as the price of Zionist support for gutting the Turkish Empire.
Either you agree to become peaceful, productive citizens of Zionist Israel (Israeli Arabs enjoy fundamental Constitutional rights), or you agree at least to non-violent protest of your situation... or you move. Your Muslim Arab brethren control 99% of the Middle East, and that is your alloted portion. Contracts are Binding, and Men should Honor their Word.
The funny thing is, even Turkey seems to understand this. Israel has few better allies in the Middle East than the Kemal-Ataturkized Nation of Turkey (Turkey -- from whom the land was stolen -- which is a crying shame; A Turkish Middle East would be far easier to deal with, and if unruly Arabs must be managed, I think it was a better world when the Turks spent their own Blood trying to manage them, then if America must expend her own Blood).
But despite giving their Word, at the 1917 Balfour Declaration and the 1921 Paris Peace Agreements, the Arab Nationalists and the Palestinians still can't seem to get with the program (even when Turkey, CAN).
And so...
I AM A Covenant Theologian.
But at the same time, I AM A Zionist.
(Whether the Dispensationalists can accept that or not)
The Belgic Confession, in Article XXVII, states, We believe and profess one catholic or universal Church... This Church has been from the beginning of the world, and will be to the end thereof... It has not, however, always had the same form. In the Garden of Eden God identified and separated the church (then consisting of two) using the essential elements, Word and Sacrament, Promise and Token, which would be present throughout the church's history, in some form or another. Our first parents were created to understand themselves and all things else in terms of a word. They had received the defining Word of God; they had heard the anti-word of the serpent. Choosing the devil's definitions, they had broken covenant with their Creator and entered into league with the destroyer, becoming co-pretenders with him to the throne.
God was not about to forsake His purposes, or to quickly formulate a Plan B. He graciously and forcefully took back Adam and Eve-He redeemed them-by placing hostility between them and their new master (the Antithesis), by promising in their hearing the incarnation of the conquering, suffering Messiah (the Protevangelium, first proclamation of the Gospel), and by clothing them with God-provided coverings (the Sacrament), indicating in the clearest terms that their fig leaves (their instinctive effort at self-atonement/covering) were wholly inadequate and unacceptable. It is God who saves. Calvinism did not originate in Geneva; it is found in Eden. God's people, the Covenant Line, would henceforth be the people redeemed by Him to live, once again, in terms of His Word. ~~ Rev. Steve Schlissel, Jewish-Christian Presbyter, “The Synagogue of Christ”
OP, it would be inappropriate to accuse covenant theology of being anti-semitic. It is only possible to accuse individuals of being anti-semitic. In this world, past and present, there have been a variety of folks who have dehumanized Jews. This was true even before Jesus, so there's a deeper problem there than just the satanic claim that they are "Christ-killers."
The most prominent haters of Jews have been politically persuaded. Nazism used racism as one of its means to acquire and maintain power and to justify expansionism. Stalinism simply extended czarist pogromism to violate racial groups....especially Jews.
Covenant Theology is an EASIER vehicle for advocating anti-semitism because it does displace Israel. With Israel intentionally being set aside by the theology, it is easier for unscrupulous or unbalanced individuals to abuse that idea into an anti-semitic position.
Dispensationalism, as I understand it, could ALSO be abused. In it, Israel has been "set aside" for an indeterminate period of time. I can see an an anti-semitic position being built from that perspective were an unscrupulous person to abuse it. (After all, people DO follow Binny Hinn, and did follow Jim Jones, Joe Smith, etc.)
Dispensationalism simply has never been in a position of political influence as has covenant theology. CT, in terms of being an articulated position, is older, was the position of the Reformation, and found its way by that into governmental circles. Luther did not help with his conversion to a thorough-going Jew hater late in life. His writings in that period did serious damage, and they are an area of his theology that need to be repudidated by every generation of Lutherans.
My views on this subject are far too controversial, though not at all anti-Semitic, and i wish to waste no time in attempting to defend a matter that is not an essential to me, and has little immediate importance to me.
i do not hold to the view that the present "State of Israel" has any particular prophetic significance.
i'm not quite certain of what you are referring to mom, could you ping me to it?
Seeing that there remains a "Nation of Israel" ..I thought you were seperating the national from the spiritual
BTW, it is quite obvious that as a culture the Jews are still with us. Whether or not this holds any prophetic significance i cannot determine, though i lean away from such an idea.
I don't distiniguish between a spirtual and political Church. The Church's importance is both spiritual and political. Therefore, I don't distinguish between a spiritual and political Israel. Since, after Israel repents, there will be no distinction between Jew or Gentile in the Church there will be no need to distinguish any political differences. It is not a national Israel that we look forward to but an international Church that includes the Jewish people. Further, I would add that geography is important too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.