ManualofChristianDoctrine

LOUISBERKHOF

TableofContents:

Preface

INTRODUCTION

Religion

Revelation

Scripture

THEDOCTRINEOFGODANDHISCREATION

THEBEINGOFGOD

TheEssentialNatureofGod

TheNamesofGod

TheAttributesofGod

TheTrinity

THEWORKSOFGOD

TheDivineDecreesinGeneral

Predestination

Creation

Providence

THEDOCTRINEOFMANINRELATIONTOGOD

MANINHISORIGINALSTATE

TheConstitutionalNatureofMan

ManastheImageofGodandintheCovenantofWorks

MANINTHESTATEOFSIN

TheOriginandEssentialCharacterofSin

SinintheLifeoftheHumanRace

MANINTHECOVENANTOFGRACE

TheCovenantofRedemption

TheCovenantofGrace

THEDOCTRINEOFTHEPERSONANDWORKOFCHRIST

THEPERSONOFCHRIST

TheNamesofChrist

TheNaturesofChrist

TheStatesofChrist

THEWORKOFCHRIST

TheOfficesofChrist

TheAtonementthroughChrist

THE DOCTRINE OF THE APPLICATION OF THE WORK OFREDEMPTION

TheCommonOperationsoftheHolySpirit

CallingandRegeneration

Conversion

Faith

Justification

Sanctification

PerseveranceoftheSaints

THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH AND THE MEANS OFGRACE

THECHURCH

NatureoftheChurch

TheGovernmentoftheChurch

ThePoweroftheChurch

THEMEANSOFGRACE

TheWordasaMeansofGrace

TheSacramentsinGeneral

ChristianBaptism

TheLord'sSupper

THEDOCTRINEOFTHELASTTHINGS

INDIVIDUALESCHATOLOGY

PhysicalDeath

TheIntermediateState

GENERALESCHATOLOGY

TheSecondComingofChrist

TheMillenniumandtheResurrection

TheLastJudgmentandtheFinalState

PREFACE

AfterthepublicationofmySystematicTheology,thepublisherrequestedme to prepare for publication a more compendious work on Christiandoctrine,whichmightbefitforhighschoolandcollegeclasses,andmightalso be used profitably by our older catechumens.Mindful of the greatimportance of the proper indoctrination of the young people of theChurch,Ididnothavethecouragetorefuse,butundertooktoprepareabriefmanual.Theworkseemedparticularly important tome inviewofthewidespreaddoctrinalindifferenceofthepresentday,oftheresultingsuperficialityandconfusion in themindsofmanyprofessingChristiansof the insidious errors that are zealously propagated even from the

pulpits, and of the alarming increase of all kinds of sects that arespringinguplikemushroomsoneveryside.IfthereeverwasatimewhentheChurchoughttoguardherpreciousheritage,thedepositofthetruththatwas entrusted to her care, that time is now. I have tried to give arather comprehensive and yet concise statement of our Reformedconceptionofthetruth,andsincerelyhopethatitsclaritymaynothavesufferedthroughitsbrevity.AttheendofeverychapterIhavegivenalistofquestionswhichwillhelpthestudenttotesthisknowledgeofwhatitcontains. Inmyreferences for furtherstudyIhavebeenrathersparing,sinceIdidnotdesiretooverloadthestudentinanywayMoreover,IhavelimitedmyselfalmostexclusivelytoReformedauthors.IhopeitwillnotseempresumptuousthatIhaveinvariablyreferredfirstofalltomyownwork on Systematic Theology, since thisManual is based on the largerwork throughout and can best be understood in the light of its moredetailed discussion of Christian doctrine. May the King of the ChurchmakethisManualablessedinfluenceintheinstructionofourcovenantyouth.

L.BERKHOF.GrandRapids,Mich.May10,1933.

INTRODUCTION

RELIGION

A. Religion a universal phenomenon. Man has been described as"incurablyreligious."Thisisbutanotherwayofsayingthatreligionisauniversalphenomenon.Missionariestestifytoitspresenceinsomeformor other, among all thenations and tribes of the earth. It is one of the

most remarkable phenomena of the life of man, touching the deepestsprings of his spiritual existence, controlling his thoughts, stirring hisemotions,andguidinghisactions.While it isgenerallyhailedasoneofthegreatestblessingsofmankind,somedenounce itasoneof themostpernicious factors in the lifeof theworld.Buteven itsgreatestenemiescannotdeny itsparamountsignificanceand its tremendous influence inthe lives of individuals and nations. It naturally forces itself upon theattention of all serious-minded people. Even the philosopher Hume,though a radical sceptic and opponent of the supernatural, once said:"Lookoutforapeopleentirelyvoidofreligion,andifyoufindthematall,beassuredthattheyarebutafewdegreesremovedfromthebrutes."

B.Theessentialnatureofreligion.Justwhatisreligion?Inourdaymanyseekananswertothisquestionbystudyingthereligionsoftheworldandthe variousmanifestations of religion in human life. By a comparativestudy they would discover the real nature of religion, and insist ondiscoveringadefinitionsufficientlybroadtocoveralltheformsinwhichthereligiouslifemanifestsitselfamongthenationsoftheworld.Butthisisnotthepropermethodtofollow.While itmaygiveusaninsight intothepresentmanifestationsof the religious life of theworld, it doesnotenableustodeterminewhatistherealnatureofreligion.TheBibleonlyenablesustogetaproperconceptionoftheideal.

Religionisconcernedwithman'srelationtoGod,andmanhasnorighttodetermine the nature of this relation. It is God's prerogative to specifyhowmanshouldberelatedtoHim,andHedoesthisinHisdivineWord.The word "religion" is in all probability derived from the Latin wordrelegere, meaning to re-read, to repeat, to observe carefully, andfrequently served todesignate a constant anddiligentobservanceof allthatpertainedtotheworshipofthegods.ReligionisdescribedintheOldTestamentas "the fearof theLord."This "fear" isnot the sameas that"dread" which is so characteristic of heathen religions, though theelementtodreadisnotalwaysabsent.Itmaybedescribedasthefeelingof reverent regard for God, tempered with awe, and the fear ofdisobedience or (occasionally) of the punishment for disobedience. Assuch it represented the response of the pious Israelite to the OldTestamentrevelationofthelaw.

In the New Testament the gospel message is prominently in theforeground, and man's response to the divine revelation assumes asomewhat different form, namely, the form of "faith." While there areothertermsforreligionintheNewTestament,suchasgodliness,1Tim.2:10, and godly fear, Heb. 5:7, the word "faith" generally serves todescribe the religious attitude of man. By this faith we accept thetestimonyofGodinHisWordastrue,andentrustourselvestoHim,asHe has revealedHimself in JesusChrist, for our salvation. In theNewTestament the element of trust is verymuch in the foreground. To thegloriousmessageofredemptionthereisanansweringfaithonthepartofman,consistinginachildliketrustinJesusChrist,andbecomingatthesametimeafountainoflovetoGodandHisservice.

InthelightofScripturewelearntounderstandthattheword"religion"denotes a relation in which man stands to God. The characteristicelement in religion has been found in piety, fear, faith, a feeling ofdependence, and so on. But these are all affections which are also feltwith reference to man. The really characteristic thing in this, that inreligionman is conscious of the absolutemajesty and infinite power ofGod,andofhisownutterinsignificanceandabsolutehelplessness.Thisdoesnotmean,however,thatreligionismerelyamatteroftheemotions,northatitisanecessitysimplyimposeduponhim.Man'srelationtoGodinreligionisaconsciousandvoluntaryone,andinsteadofenslavinghimleads him into the enjoyment of the highest liberty. Religion may bedefined as a conscious and voluntary spiritual relation to God, whichexpresses itself in life as a whole and particularly in certain acts ofworship. God Himself determines the adoration, worship, and servicethatisacceptabletoHim.Allwill-worship,contrarytotheWordofGod,isabsolutelyforbidden.

C.Theseatofreligion.Opinionsdifferverymuchrespectingtheseatofreligion in the human soul. Some lose sight entirely of the centralsignificanceofreligioninthelifeofman,andconceiveofitaslocatedinandfunctioningthroughjustoneofthefacultiesofthesoul.Othersstressthefactthatthewholepsychicalnatureofmanisinvolvedinthereligiouslife.

1.ONE-SIDEDVIEWSOFTHESEATOFRELIGION.Somefindtheseat

of religion in the intellect. They look upon religion as a kind ofknowledge,asortofincompletephilosophy,andthusvirtuallymakethemeasure of man's knowledge of God the measure of his piety. Otherslocate religion in the feelings. According to them religion has little ornothingtodowithknowledge,but ismerelya feelingofdependenceonsome superior Being. Man does not really know God, but becomesimmediatelyawareofHimdeepdowninhissoul.Stillothersclaimthatreligionhas its seat in thewill.Man isawareof the imperativevoiceofconscience within him, dictating his course of action. In religion hesimply recognizes the duties prescribed by conscience as divinecommands. On this view religion merely becomes practical morality.These views do not do justice to the fundamental and central place ofreligioninhumanlife.TheyarecontrarytoScriptureandeventomodernpsychology, since they ignore the fundamental unity of thehuman soulandproceedontheassumptionthatonefacultyofthesoulmayactapartfromtherest.Itisalwaysthewholemanthatfunctionsinreligion.

2. THE SCRIPTURAL VIEW OF THE SEAT OF RELIGION. The onlycorrect and Scriptural view is that religion is seated in the heart. InScripturepsychologytheheartisthecenterandfocusofthewholemorallifeofman,thepersonalorganofthesoul.Outofitarealltheissuesoflife,thoughts,volitions,andemotions.ReligionisrootedintheimageofGod,andthatimageiscentral,revealingitselfinthewholemanwithallhis talents and powers. Consequently, man's relation to God is alsocentral, and involves the whole man. Man must love God with all hisheart, andwith all his soul, andwith all hismind.Hemust consecratehimselftoHimentirely,bodyandsoul,withallhisgiftsandtalents,andinallrelationsoflife.Sincereligionhasitsseatintheheart,itembracestheentiremanwithallhis thoughtsand feelingsandvolitions. It is theheartthatmanmustgivetotheLord,Deut.30:6;Prov.23:26.Inreligiontheheartcontrolstheintellect,Rom.10:13,14;Heb.11:6,thefeelings,Ps.28:7; 30:12, and the will, Rom. 2:10, 13; Jas. 1:27; 1 John 1:5–7. ThewholemanismadesubservienttoGodineverysphereoflife.Thisistheonly view that does justice to religion, and recognizes its supremeimportanceinthelifeofman.

D. The Origin of Religion. The question of the origin of religion has

engagedtheattentionofmanyscholarsduringthepreviouscentury,andstillloomslargeinpresent-daytreatisesonreligion.Undertheinfluenceof the theory of evolution some proceed on the assumption that mandeveloped from a non-religious into a religious being, and makedeterminedeffortstoshowhowthetransitioncameabout.Theywhoseekthe solution of this problem in the light of God's revelation, however,cometoanentirelydifferentconclusion.Theyfindthatmanwascreatedasareligiousbeing.

1. NATURALISTIC VIEWS OF THE ORIGIN OF RELIGION. Someregardedreligionastheproductofthecunningofpriestsorthecraftofrulers,whoplayedonthecredulityand fearsof the ignorantmasses, inordertogainandmaintaincontroloverthem.Othersdesignatedfetish-worship (i. e., theworship of inanimate objectswhichwere consideredsacred, such as a stone, a stick, a bone, a claw, etc.) as the seed out ofwhichthehigherformsofreligiondeveloped.Stillotherssuggestedthataworshipofspirits,perhapsthespiritsofdepartedancestors,wasthemostfundamentalformofreligion,outofwhichalltheotherformsgraduallydeveloped. A rather popular idea is to the effect that nature-worshipgraduallygavebirthtoreligion.Manfelthimselfweakandhelplessinthepresenceof thegreatandimposingphenomenaofnature,andwasthusled to worship these phenomena themselves or the hidden powers ofwhichtheywerebuttheexternalmanifestations.Inmorerecentyearstheideaisgainingfavourwithsomethatreligioninsomewayevolvedoutofa general belief in magic. These theories fail to explain the origin ofreligion,however.Theystartwithanassumptionthatiscontradictedbythe facts, namely, that man was originally non-religious. Such a non-religiousmanhasneveryetbeendiscovered,andforthatveryreasonithas been impossible to see religion in the making. Moreover, theyproceed on the purely naturalistic assumption that the lowest form ofreligionisnecessarilytheoldest,andthatreligionistheresultofapurelynaturalisticevolution.Theylosesightofthefactthattheremayhavebeendeteriorationinthereligiouslifeoftherace.And,finally,theyfrequentlyassumetheverythingwhichtheymustexplain.Thedeceptivepriests,theworshipof fetishesandofspirits, thefeelingofdependenceonahigherpower,andtheideathatthereissomeinvisiblepowerbehindtheforcesof nature,—these are the very things that need explanation. They are

alreadymanifestationsofreligion.

2. THE SCRIPTURAL VIEW OF THE ORIGIN OF RELIGION. God'sspecialrevelationcanenlightenusastotheoriginofreligion.Itacquaintsus with the fact that religion finds its explanation only in God. If wewouldexplaintheoriginofreligionwemustproceedontheassumptionthatGodexists,forrealreligionwithoutaGodisunthinkable.Ifreligionisnotfoundedonreality,itisadeceptiveillusion,whichmayhavesomepracticalvalueforthepresentbutwilldisappoint intheend.Moreover,since man cannot of himself discover God and know Him, it wasnecessarythatGodshouldrevealHimself.Withoutsuchaself-revelationon thepartofGod itwouldbeutterly impossible forman toenter intoreligious relationship toHim. God did revealHimself, and inHis self-revelation determined the worship and service that is well-pleasing toHim.Buteven thisself-revelationofGodwouldnothaveavailed to theestablishmentofareligiousrelation,ifGodhadnotendowedmanwithacapacitytounderstanditandtorespondtoit.Religionisfoundedintheverynature ofman, andwasnot imposedonhim fromwithout. It is amistake to think that man first existed without religion and was thenendowedwithitassomethingaddedtohisbeing.CreatedintheimageofGod,manhasanaturalcapacity forreceivingandappreciatingtheself-revelation of God. In virtue of his natural endowments man seekscommunion with God, though by nature he now seeks it in the wrongway.ItisonlyundertheinfluenceofGod'sspecialrevelationandoftheilluminationof theHolySpirit that the sinner can,at least inprinciple,rendertoGodtheservicethatishisdue.

QuestionsforReview:Howdomanyinourdayseektodiscovertheessentialnatureofreligion?Which is theonlyway inwhichwecan learn toknowthis?What is thederivation of the word "religion"? What terms describe the religiousattitude in theOld and in theNew Testament?Howwould you definereligion?Whatmistaken notions are there as to the seat of religion inman?WhatisthecenterofthereligiouslifeaccordingtoScripture?Whatdifferentexplanationshavebeengivenoftheoriginofreligion?Whichistheonlysatisfactoryexplanation?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:

Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, Introductory Volume pp. 104–122;McPherson, Christian Dogmatics, pp. 9–18; Wisse, Religie enChristendom, pp. 7–57; Visscher, De Oorsprong der Religie; Edwards,ThePhilosophyofReligion,pp.29–178.

REVELATION

Theideaofreligionnaturallyleadsontothatofrevelation.Whilemanyattempts have beenmade to explain religion apart from revelation, theconviction isnowgrowing thatall religionoriginates in revelation.Andthis is the only correct view of the matter. If God had not revealedHimself,manwouldnotbeinpositiontoknowHimatall,andallreligionwouldbeimpossible.

A. Revelation in General. Before entering upon a discussion of thedifferent kinds of revelation which God has given unto man, it isnecessarytomakeafewremarksonrevelationingeneral.

1.THEIDEAOFREVELATION.GodistheincomprehensibleOne.MancannotknowHimasHeisinthehiddendepthsofHisdivinebeing.Onlythe Spirit of God can search the deep things of God, 1 Cor. 1:10. It isimpossible forman tohaveaperfectknowledgeofGod, for inorder topossess this hewould have to be greater thanGod. Job's question is apointed denial ofman's ability to comprehend the InfiniteOne: "Canstthoubysearching findoutGod?Canst thou findout theAlmightyuntoperfection?"Job11:7.AtthesametimeitispossibleformentoknowGodinameasurewhich isperfectlyadequate forhispersonalneeds.ButhecanacquireeventhisknowledgeonlybecauseithaspleasedGodtorevealHimself.Thismeans,accordingtothepresentationofScripture,thatGodhas removed the veil which covered Him and has exposed Himself toview. Inotherwords,Hehas in somewaycommunicatedknowledgeofHimselftoman,andhastherebyopenedthewayformantoknowHim,toworshipHim,andtoliveincommunionwithHim.

2.DISTINCTIONSAPPLIEDTOTHEIDEAOFREVELATION.Incourseoftimetwokindsofdivinerevelationweredistinguished,namely,naturalandsupernatural,andgeneralandspecialrevelation.Generallyspeakingthese two distinctionsmove along parallel lines; at the same time theydifferincertainparticularswhichdeservenotice.

a.Natural and supernatural revelation.This distinction is based on themodeofGod'srevelation.Inoriginallrevelationissupernatural,becauseitoriginates inGod.Thereisadifference,however, inthewayinwhichGod reveals Himself. Natural revelation is that revelation which iscommunicated through the phenomena of nature, including the veryconstitutionofman.Itisnotarevelationgiveninwordsbutembodiedinfactswhichspeakvolumes.Figuratively,naturecanbecalledagreatbookinwhichGodhaswrittenwith letters large and small, and fromwhichmanmaylearnofhisgoodnessandwisdom,"hiseverlastingpoweranddivinity," Rom. 1:20. Supernatural revelation, on the other hand, is arevelationinwhichGodintervenesinthenaturalcourseofevents,andinwhichHe, evenwhenHeusesnaturalmeans, such as dreams andoralcommunications,employstheminasupernaturalway.It isarevelationthatisbothverbalandfactual, inwhichthewordsexplainthefactsandthefactsillustratethewords.

b.General and special revelation. The second distinction hinges on thenature and object of God's revelation. General revelation is rooted increationandinthegeneralrelationsofGodtoman,isaddressedtomanconsideredsimplyasthecreatureandimage-bearerofGod,andaimsatthe realizationof theend forwhichmanwascreatedandwhichcanbeattainedonlywheremanknowsGodandenjoyscommunionwithHim.Specialrevelation,ontheotherhand,isrootedintheredemptiveworkofGod, is addressed to man as a sinner and adapted to the moral andspiritualneedsoffallenman,andaimsatleadingthesinnerbacktoGodthrough the specific knowledge of God's redemptive love revealed inChrist Jesus. It is not like general revelation a light that lighteth everyman, but a light that illumines the pathway of those who are madereceptiveforthetruthbythespecialoperationoftheHolySpirit.

3.DENIALOFGOD'SREVELATION. The fact of the divine revelationwas frequentlydenied inone formoranother.Bothgeneralandspecial

revelation, but the former less than the latter, were the object of thisdenial.

a.Denialofgeneralrevelation.Theatheist,whodeniestheveryexistenceofGod,naturallydisputesallrevelation.Sodoestheagnostic,whodoesnotbelievethatmancanknowGodandwhothereforespeaksofHimasthe great Unknowable One. Pantheists occasionally pretend to believethatGodrevealsHimself.Yet the ideaofrevelationdoesnot fit in theirsystematall.TheydonotrecognizetheexistenceofapersonalGod,whocanconsciouslyandvoluntarilyrevealHimself;andeveniftheydid,theywould not know of any object outside of God towhichHe couldmakeHimselfknown.WiththemGodandmanareone.

b. Denial of special revelation. Eighteenth century Deism, whileacknowledging God's general revelation, denied the necessity, thepossibility, and the reality of any special supernatural revelation. ItregardedthegeneralrevelationofGodassufficientevenforfallenman,andconsideredtheassumptionthatitwasnotsufficientasareflectiononthe wisdom or power of God. It would seem to imply that God waswantingeitherinthenecessarywisdomorintherequisitepowertocreateaworldthatwouldmeetalltherequirementsofadivinerevelationunderall conditions. Under the influence of pantheistic Idealism present-dayliberaltheologyalsodeniesGod'sspecialrevelation.ItreducestheBibletoapartofHisgeneral revelationand simplywipesout thedistinctionbetweenthenaturalandthesupernatural.

B.GeneralRevelation.Whileboththegeneralandthespecialrevelationof God now exist alongside of each other, the former was prior to thelatterinpointoftime,andisthereforeconsideredfirst.

1. THE IDEA OF GOD'S GENERAL REVELATION. General revelationdoes not come toman in the form of direct verbal communications. Itconsists in an embodiment of the divine thought in the phenomena ofnature,inthegeneralconstitutionofthehumanmind,andinthefactsofexperience orhistory.God speaks toman inHis entire creation, in theforces andpowersofnature, in the constitutionof thehumanmind, inthevoiceofconscience,andintheprovidentialgovernmentoftheworldin general and of the lives of individuals in particular. The poet sings:

"Theheavensdeclare thegloryofGod;and the firmamentshowethHishandiwork.Dayuntodayutterethspeech,andnightuntonightshowethknowledge,"Ps. 19:1,2.AndPaulsays: "For the invisible thingsofHimsincethecreationoftheworldareclearlyseen,beingperceivedthroughthethingsthataremade,evenHiseverlastingpoweranddivinity,"Rom.1:20. This general revelation never has been exclusively natural, butalwayscontainedanadmixtureof thesupernatural.EvenbeforethefallGodrevealedHimself tomansuper-naturally in thecovenantofworks.And in the course of the history of revelation God frequently revealedHimselfinasupernaturalwayoutsideofthesphereofspecialrevelation,Gen.20:3ff.;40:5ff;41:1ff.;Judg.7:13;Dan.2:1ff.

2. THE PRESENT ACTUAL INSUFFICIENCY OF GENERALREVELATION. While Pelagians, Deists, and Rationalists concur inregardingthegeneralrevelationofGodasquitesufficientforthepresentneeds of man, Roman Catholics and Protestants are agreed as to itsinsufficiency. There are several reasons why it must be regarded asinadequate:

a.Sinalteredboththisrevelationandman'sreceptivityforit.Asaresultof the fall of man the blight of sin rests on creation in general. TheelementofcorruptionenteredGod'sbeautifulhandiworkandobscured,thoughitdidnotaltogetherobliterate,thehandwritingofGod.Nature,itis true, still shows the earmarks of its divine origin, but is now full ofimperfections and a prey to destructive forces. It has ceased to be theperspicuous revelation of God which it once was. Moreover, man wasblinded by sin, so that he cannot read the divine script in nature, andbecamesubjecttothepoweroferrorandperversion,sothatheopposesthe truth by unrighteousness and even exchanges it for a lie. John 1:5;Rom.1:18,25;Eph.4:18;Col.1:13;1John2:9,11.

b.GeneralrevelationdoesnotconveyanythoroughlyreliableknowledgeofGodandspiritualthings.Invirtueofthefactsstatedintheprecedingparagraph, the knowledge of God and of spiritual and eternal thingsconveyed by general revelation is too uncertain to form a trustworthybasis onwhich to build for eternity; andman cannot afford to pin hishopes for the future on uncertainties. The history of science andphilosophy clearly shows that general revelation is no safe and certain

guide. One system of truth after another was constructed, only to beoverthrownbyafollowinggeneration."Ourlittlesystemshavetheirday;theyhavetheirdayandceasetobe."

c.Generalrevelationdoesnotevenaffordanadequatebasisforreligionin general. The history of religions shows, and this is recognized everincreasingly, that there are no religions that are based exclusively onnatural revelation. It is becomingmore andmore evident that a purelynaturalreligiondoesnotandcannotexist.Gentilenationsandtribesallappealtosomemorespecialrevelation,supposedlygivenbythegods,asthebasisoftheirreligion.

d.It isaltogether insufficientasa foundation for theChristian religion.Bygeneral revelationwemay receive someknowledgeof the goodness,thewisdom,andthepowerofGod,butwedonot learntoknowChrist,whoistheonlywayofsalvation,Matt.11:27;John14:6;17:3;Acts4:12.Itknowsnothingofsavinggrace,ofpardonandredemption,andthereforecannotleadsinnersoutoftheslaveryofsinintothegloriouslibertyofthechildrenofGod.ItisnotpartoftheredemptiveprocesssetinmotionbyGod for the salvation of man. This is the supreme reason for itsinsufficiency.GoddesiredtosavesinnersuntothegloryofHisname,andtherefore had to enrich mankind with a more special revelation, arevelationofredeeminggraceinJesusChrist.

3.THEVALUEANDSIGNIFICANCEOFGENERALREVELATION.Thefact that, after the fall ofman, general revelationwas superseded by aspecialrevelationmayeasilyleadtoanunder-valuationoftheformer.Weshould not forget, however, that God's original revelation remains ofgreatimportance.

a. In connection with the gentile world. God's general revelation,including the supernatural elements that were handed down fromgeneration to generation and often distorted beyond recognition,furnishes after all the firm and lasting foundation for the gentilereligions.ItisinvirtueofthisthateventhegentilesfeelthemselvestobetheoffspringofGod,Acts 17:28, that they seekafterGod, ifhaply theymight feel afterHim and findHim, Acts 17:27, that they see in natureGod'severlastingpoweranddivinity,Rom.1:19,20,andthattheydoby

naturethethingsofthelaw,Rom.2:14.Whiletheyliveinthedarknessofignoranceandsin,pervertthetruthbyturningitintoalie,andservegodswhich are no gods, but lies and vanity; yet they also share in theilluminationoftheLogosandinthegeneraloperationoftheHolySpirit,Gen.6:3;Job32:8;John1:9;Rom.2:14,15;Acts14:16,17;17:22–30.Asaresulttheirreligions,whiledescribedasfalseinScripture,alsocontainelementsof truthwhich affordpoints of contact for themessageof theChristianmissionary.

b.Inconnectionwith theChristianreligion.WhenGodgavehisspecialrevelation, He did not simply place this alongside of His originalrevelation, but incorporated in it the truths embodied in His generalrevelation,correctedtheirperversion,andinterpretedthemformankind.Consequently,theChristiannowreadsGod'sgeneralrevelationwiththeeyeoffaithandinthelightofHisWord,andforthatveryreasonisabletoseeGod'shandinnatureandHisfootstepsinhistory.HeseesGodineverythingroundabouthim,andis thus ledtoaproperappreciationofthe world. But if special revelation engenders a true appreciation ofgeneral revelation, it is equally true that general revelation promotes aproper understanding of special revelation. Scripture can be fullyunderstood only against the background of God's revelation in nature.The latter frequently sheds a welcome light on the former. Moreover,general revelation also offers Christians and non-Christians a commonbasis on which they can meet and argue. The light of the Logos thatlightetheverymanisalsoabondthatunitesthem.Finally,itisalsoduetoGod'sgeneralrevelationthatspecialrevelationdoesnotappear,as itwere, suspended in the air, but touches the life of the world at everypoint.Itmaintainstheconnectionbetweennatureandgrace,betweentheworldandthekingdomofGod,betweenthenaturalandthemoralorder,betweencreationandre-creation.

C.SpecialRevelation.Alongsideof thegeneral revelation innatureandhistorywehaveaspecialrevelation,whichisnowembodiedinScripture.TheBibleisparexcellencethebookofspecialrevelation,arevelationinwhichwordsandfactsgohandinhand,theformerinterpretingthelatter,andthelattergivingconcreteembodimenttotheformer.

1.THENECESSITYOFSPECIALREVELATION.Through the entrance

of sin into the world God's general revelation was obscured andcorrupted, so that the handwriting of God in nature and in the veryconstitution of man is not as legible now as it was in the morning ofcreation.Moreover,man became subject to the power of darkness andignorance, of error andunbelief, and inhisblindness andperversenessnow fails to read aright even the remaining vestiges of the originalrevelation.HeeventakesdelightinexchangingthetruthofGodforalie.GeneralrevelationnomoreconveystomanabsolutelyreliableknowledgeofGodandspiritualthings,isnotproperlyunderstoodbyman,anddoesnotavailtorestorehimtoaconditionoffriendshipwithGod.Thereforespecialdivineoperationswerenecessary,servingafourfoldpurpose:(a)tocorrectandinterpretthetruthswhicharenowgatheredfromgeneralrevelation; (b) to illumine man so that he can once more read thehandwriting of God in nature; (c) to furnish man with a revelation ofGod'sredemptivelove;and(d)tochangehisentirespiritualconditionbyredeeminghim from thepowerof sin and leadinghimback to a life incommunionwithGod.

2.THEMEANSOFSPECIALREVELATION.ThemeansofGod'sspecialrevelationcaningeneralbereducedtothreekinds:

a.TheophaniesormanifestationsofGod.According toScriptureGod isnotonlyaGodafaroff,butalsoaGodathand.Symbolically,Hedweltbetween thecherubim in thedaysof theOldTestament,Ps.80:1;99:1.Hispresencewasseen in fireandcloudsof smoke,Gen. 15:17;Ex.3:2;19:9, 16 f.; 33:9; Ps. 78:14; 99:7, in stormy winds, Job 38:1; 40:6; Ps.18:10–16,andinthegentlezephyr,1Kings19:12.ThesewerealltokensofHispresence, inwhichHe revealed somethingofHis glory.Among theOld Testament appearances that of the "Angel of the Lord" occupies aspecial place.ThisAngelwas evidentlynot a created angel.On theonehandHeisdistinguishedfromGod,Ex.23:20–23;Isa.63:8,9,butontheotherhandHe is also identifiedwithGod,Gen. 16:13; 31:11, 13; 32:28.TheprevailingopinionisthatHewasthesecondpersonintheTrinity,cf.Mal. 3:1. Theophany reached its highest point in the incarnation ofChrist,inwhomthefulnessofthegodheaddweltbodily,Col.1:19;2:9.InHimtheChurchbecomesthetempleoftheHolySpirit,1Cor.3:16;6:19;Eph. 2:21. An even fuller realization of God's dwelling with man will

follow,when thenewJerusalemdescendsoutofheaven fromGod,andthetabernacleofGodispitchedamongmen.

b.Directcommunications.GodcommunicatedHisthoughtsandHiswillto man in various ways. Sometimes He spoke to the organs of Hisrevelationwith an audible voice, Gen. 2:16; 3:8–19; 4:6–15; 9:1, 8, 12;32:26;Ex. 19:9;Deut. 5:4, 5; 1 Sam.3:4. Inother casesHe resorted tosuchmeansasthe lotandtheUrimandThummim,1Sam.10:20,21;1Chron.24:5–31;Neh.11:1;Num.27:21;Deut.33:8.Thedreamwasaverycommonmeansofrevelation,Num.12:6;Deut.13:1–6;1Sam.28:6;Joel2:28, and was also used in revelations to non-Israelites, Gen. 20:3–6;31:24; 40:5; 41:1–7; Judg. 7:13. A closely related but higher form ofrevelation was the vision, which was very common in the case of theprophets,Isa.6;21:6f.;Ezek.1–3;8–11;Dan.1:17;2:19;7–10;Amos7–9.The prophets received these visions while they were awake andsometimes in the presence of others, Ezek. 8:1ff. More generally,however, God revealed Himself to the prophets by means of an innerilluminationthroughthespiritofrevelation.IntheNewTestamentChristappears as the highest, the true, and, in a sense, the only prophet.Hecommunicates His Spirit, which is also the spirit of revelation andilluminationtoallthosethatbelieve,Mark13:11;Luke12:12;John14:17;15:26; 16:13;20:22;Acts6:10;8:29. InHimall those thatareHishavetheanointingoftheHolyOneandaretaughtoftheLord,1John2:20.

c.Miracles.AccordingtoScriptureGodalsorevealsHimselfinmiracles.It is especially from this point of view that the miracles of Scriptureshouldbestudied.Whiletheyexciteafeelingofwonder,theyarenot,liketheso-calledmiraclesofheathensorcerers,primarilyportentswhichfillman with amazement. They are above all manifestations of a specialpower of God, tokens of His special presence, and frequently serve tosymbolizespiritualtruths.Asmanifestationsoftheever-comingkingdomof God, they are made subservient to the great work of redemption.HencetheyfrequentlyservetopunishthewickedandtohelpordeliverthepeopleofGod.Theyconfirmthewordsofprophecyandpointtothenew order that is being established by God. Themiracles of Scripture,too,culminateintheincarnation,whichisthegreatestandmostcentralmiracle of all. In Christ, who is the absolute miracle, all things are

restoredandcreationisbroughtbacktoitspristinebeauty,Acts3:21.

3.THECONTENTSOFSPECIALREVELATION.Therearethreepointsthat deserve special mention in connection with the contents of God'sspecialrevelation.

a. It is a revelation of redemption. Special revelation does not simplyservethepurposeofconveyingtomansomegeneralknowledgeofGod.ItdisclosestomanspecificknowledgeoftheplanofGodforthesalvationofsinners, of the reconciliationofGodand sinners inJesusChrist, of thewayofsalvationopenedupbyHisredemptivework,ofthetransformingand sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit, and of the divinerequirementsforthosewhoshareinthelifeoftheSpirit.Itisarevelationwhich renewsman,which illumineshismind, inclineshiswill to good,fillshimwithholyaffections,andprepareshimforhisheavenlyhome.

b. It is both word-and fact-revelation. This revelation of God does notconsist exclusively in word and doctrine, and does notmerely addressitself to the intellect. God reveals Himself not only in the law and theprophets,thegospelsandtheepistles,butalsointhehistoryofIsrael,inthe ceremonial worship of the Old Testament, in theophanies andmiracles, and in the redemptive facts of the life of Jesus. Moreover,special revelation not only conveys to man knowledge of the way ofsalvation,butalsotransformsthelivesofsinnersbychangingthemintosaints.

c. It is a historical revelation. The content of special revelation wasgraduallyunfoldedinthecourseofmanycenturies,andisthereforeofahistorical and gradually developing character. The great truths ofredemptionappearbutdimlyatfirst,butgraduallyincreaseinclearness,and finally stand out in all their grandeur in the New Testamentrevelation. There is a constant coming of God to man in theophany,prophecy, andmiracle, and this coming reaches itshighestpoint in theincarnationoftheSonofGodandintheindwellingoftheHolySpiritintheChurch.

QuestionsforReview:What is divine revelation?Howdo natural and supernatural revelation

differ? What is the difference between general and special revelation?Wheredowemeetwith thedenialofgeneral revelation?Whodeny thereality of special revelation? What is the nature of God's generalrevelation?Whyisitinsufficientforthepresentneedsofthehumanrace?Whatvaluedoesithaveforthegentileworld?WhatsignificancehasitforChristianity?WhywasGod's special revelationnecessary?Whatmeansareemployedinspecialrevelation?What is thegeneralcharacterof thespecialrevelationgivenbyGod?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, Introductory Volume, pp. 123–146;McPherson, Christian Dogmatics, pp. 18–24; Warfield, Revelation andInspiration,pp.3–50;Orr,RevelationandInspiration,pp.1–154;Shedd,DogmaticTheology,I,pp.61–84.

SCRIPTURE

FromthediscussionofspecialrevelationwepassontothatofScripture.The transition is natural and easy, since Scripture is the book ofGod'sspecial revelation.Threepoints call for considerationhere, namely, therelation of Scripture to special revelation, the inspiration of Scripture,andtheperfectionsofScripture.

A.TheRelationBetweenSpecialRevelationandScripture. Ingeneral itmaybesaidthatGod'sspecialrevelationassumedapermanentforminScripture, and was thus preserved for posterity. God intended that hisrevelation should be His perennial speech to all the successivegenerations of men, and therefore had to guard it against loss,corruption,andfalsification.Hedidthisbyprovidinganinfalliblerecordofit,andbywatchingoverthiswithprovidentialcare.Itcannotbesaidthat special revelation and Scripture are in every respect identical. Theterm "special revelation" is not always used in the same sense. Itmaydenoteaseriesofdivineself-communications,butitmayalsoserveasadesignationofScripture.

1. THE SENSE INWHICH SPECIAL REVELATIONAND SCRIPTUREDIFFER. If the term "special revelation" is used todesignate thedirectself-communications of God, then it cannot be regarded as simplyanother name for theBible. This is perfectly evident from the fact thatScripture contains a great deal that was not communicated in asupernaturalway,butwaslearntbyexperienceorgatheredbyhistoricalstudy and from the additional fact that prophets and apostles oftenreceived the divine communications given unto them long before theycommitted these to writing, Jer. 25:13; 30:1; 36:2; John 20:30; 21:25.Using the term"special revelation" in this specific sense,wecannotsaythattheBibleisGod'sWord,butonlythatGod'sWordiscontainedintheBible. It should be noted, however, that this does not justify thedistinctionbetweentheWordofGodasdivineanditsrecordashuman.NeitherdoesitwarranttheunqualifiedstatementthattheBibleisnotbutcontains the Word of God. The terms "Word of God" and "specialrevelation" are also used in a sense in which they are identical with"Scripture."

2. THE SENSE INWHICH SPECIALREVELATIONAND SCRIPTUREARE IDENTICAL.The term "special revelation"may also be applied tothat whole complex of redemptive truths and facts, with its properhistoricalsetting,thatisfoundinScriptureandhasthedivineguaranteeof its truth in the fact that thewhole Bible is infallibly inspired by theHolySpirit.InthatsensethewholeBiblefromGenesistoRevelation,anditonly,isforusGod'sspecialrevelation.Ifthetermisunderstoodinthissense,thenitispropertomaintainthattheBiblenotonlycontainsbutistheWordofGod.Scripturederives itssignificanceexactly fromthe factthat it is the book of revelation. It is not merely a narrative of whathappenedyearsago,buttheperennialspeechofGodtoman.RevelationlivesoninScriptureandbringsevennow,justasitdidwhenitwasgiven,light,life,andholiness.

B.TheInspirationofScripture.TheBible isandwillcontinue tobe theWordofGodforallthesuccessivegenerationsofmanonlyinvirtueofitsdivineinspiration.ThewholeofScriptureisgivenbyinspirationofGod.Thismakesit theinfallibleruleoffaithandpracticeformankind.Sincethisinspirationisoftendeniedandevenmorefrequentlymisrepresented,

itcallsforparticularattention.

1.SCRIPTUREPROOFFORINSPIRATION.Thedoctrineofinspiration,just as every other doctrine, is derived from Scripture. The Bible itselftestifies abundantly to its inspiration, and favors the strictest view ofinspiration, as even rationalists arewilling toadmit.Writersof theOldTestamentarerepeatedlycommandedtowritewhattheLordcommandsthem,Ex.17:14;34:27;Num.33:2;Isa.8:1;30:8;Jer.25:13;30:2;Ezek.24:1 f.;Dan. 12:4;Heb.2:2.Theprophetswere consciousofbringingadivine message, and therefore introduced it by some such formula as"ThussaiththeLord";"ThewordoftheLordcameuntome";"ThustheLord Jehovah showed me"; etc. These formulæ frequently refer to thespokenword,butarealsousedinconnectionwiththewrittenword,Jer.36:

27,32;Ezek.,chapters26,27,31,32,39.Isaiahprobablyevenspeaksofhis own written prophecy as "the book of Jehovah," Isa. 34:16. Thewriters of the New Testament frequently quote passages from the OldTestamentaswordsofGodoroftheHolySpirit,Matt.15:4;Heb.1:5ff.;3:7; 4:3; 5:6; 7:21, etc. Paul speaks of his own words as Spirit-taughtwords,1Cor.2:13,andclaimsthatChristisspeakinginhim,2Cor.13:3.His message to the Thessalonians is the word of God. 1 Thess. 2:13.Finally,hesays in theclassicalpassageon inspiration:"EveryScripture(referringtothesacredwritingsoftheOldTestamentofwhichhespeaksin the preceding) inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, forreproof,forcorrection,forinstructionwhichisinrighteousness,"2Tim.3:16.Therenderingheregiven is thatof theAmericanRevisedVersion.That of the Authorized Version deserves preference, however: "AllScriptureisgivenbyinspirationofGod,andisprofitablefordoctrine,forreproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." It is favoredevenbytherenderinggivenbyMoffatt.

2. THE NATURE OF INSPIRATION. In discussing the nature ofinspirationattentionshouldbecalledfirstofalltotwoerroneousviews.

a. Mechanical Inspiration. The process of inspiration has often beenconceivedinarathermechanicalway.ItwasrepresentedasifGodsimplydictated what the human authors of the books of the Bible had to

incorporate in theirwritings.The latterweremerepenmenof theHolySpirit,recordingHisthoughtsinwordsofHischoosing.Theirmentallifewasinrepose,anddidnotinanywaycontributetothecontentsorformoftheirwritings.ThuseventhestyleofScriptureisthestyleoftheHolySpirit.Further investigationshaveshown,however, that thisposition isquiteuntenable. It clearly appears fromScripture itself that thewriterswerenotmerepassiveinstrumentsintheproductionoftheirbooks,butwere real authors. In some cases they evidently gave the fruits ofhistoricalinvestigations,fortheyrefertotheseinvestigations,Luke1:1–4,and sometimes evenmention their sources, as in the books of Samuel,Kings, and Chronicles. In other cases they record their own personalexperiences,asinthepsalmsandfrequentlyalsointhepropheticbooks,inActs,andintheepistles.Moreover,eachoneofthemwritesinhisownindividualstyle.ThestyleofIsaiahisnotlikethatofEzekiel,northestyleofPaullikethatofJohn.

b.DynamicalInspiration.Inoppositiontothemechanicalconceptionofinspiration, many in the eighteenth and nineteenth century advocatedwhat they called dynamical inspiration. This theory renounces the ideathattherewasanydirectoperationoftheHolySpiritontheproductionofthebooksoftheBible,anoperationthatfindsitspurposepreciselyintheproduction of those books; and substitutes for it the idea of a generalinspirationofthewriters.Thisinspirationwasapermanentcharacteristicofthewriters,andthereforeincidentallyalsoinfluencedtheirwritings.Itdoes not differ essentially but only in degree from the spiritualenlightenmentofbelieversingeneral.ItpenetratesallpartsofScripture,butnotallinthesamemeasure.ThehistoricalbooksoftheBibledonotshareitinthesamemeasureasthedoctrinalbooks.AndwhileitrenderstheBiblicalwritingsgenerallytrustworthy,itallowsforthepossibilityoferrors,especiallyinthehistoricalbooks.Thistheorycertainlydoesnotdojustice to the Biblical data on inspiration. It robs the Bible of itssupernaturalcharacter, reduces it to the levelofgeneral revelation,anddestroysitsinfallibility.

c.Organic Inspiration.The theoryof inspirationwhich isnowgenerallyaccepted in Reformed circles is usually called "organic inspiration,"thoughsomedesignateitas"dynamicalinspiration."Theterm"organic"

servestostressthefactthatGoddidnotemploythewritersmechanically,butactedontheminanorganicway, inharmonywiththe lawsof theirowninnerbeing.Heusedthemjustastheywere,withtheircharacterandtemperament, their gifts and talents, their education and culture, theirvocabulary,diction,andstyle; illuminedtheirminds,promptedthemtowrite,repressedtheinfluenceofsinontheirliteraryactivity,andguidedtheminthechoiceoftheirwordsandintheexpressionoftheirthoughts.This view is clearly most in harmony with the representations ofScripture.ItrepresentsthewritersofScripturenotasmereamanuensesbut as real authors who, while sometimes recording directcommunicationsofGod,yetonotheroccasionssetdown inwriting theresultsoftheirownhistoricalinvestigationsorregistertheirexperiencesof sin and forgiveness, of joy and sorrow, of threatening dangers andgraciousdeliverances. Italsoaccounts for the individualityof thebooksoftheBible,sinceeachwriternaturallyhadhisownstyleandputonhisliteraryproductionshisownpersonalstampandthestampofthetimeinwhichhelived.

3.THEEXTENTOFINSPIRATION.Therearedifferencesofopinion,notonly regarding the nature of inspiration, but also with respect to itsextent.

a.SomeClaimInspirationfortheThoughtsbutnotfortheWords.ManydenytheinspirationofScripturealtogether.Others,however,areaverseto such a complete denial, but feel that the advocates of the doctrineshould retrench somewhat and speak of thought-rather than of word-inspiration.Thethoughts,theysay,weredivinelyinspired,butthewordsdependedsimplyonthechoiceofthehumanauthors.Thisisnotaveryplausible view, however. Thoughts cannot be dissociated from words.Says Dr. Orr: "Thought of necessity takes shape and is expressed inwords. If there is inspiration at all, itmust penetrate words as well asthought,mustmould the expression, andmake the language employedthe living medium of the idea to be conveyed," Revelation andInspiration,p.209.

b. Others Maintain that Inspiration Pertains Only to Certain Parts ofScripture. Under the influence of eighteenth century Rationalism laxviewsofinspirationfoundreadyacceptance.Itbecamerathercommonto

denytheinspirationofthehistoricalbooksoftheBible,andtolimitittothedoctrinalwritings.Andeventheinspirationclaimedforthedoctrinalbooks, though at first still regarded as supernatural in character, wasfinally conceived as a purely natural process, consisting in a specialspiritual enlightenment. It had the effect of making the writerstrustworthy witnesses in moral and spiritual matters, but offered noguarantee against all kinds of historical, chronological, and scientificmistakes. There is no agreement in the camp as to the exact extent ofinspiration. Some limit it to doctrinal matters others to the NewTestament,stillotherstothewordsofJesus,and,finally,therearethosewho regard only the Sermon on the Mount as inspired. In the lastanalysiseveryindividualmakesoutforhimselfwhichpartsofScriptureareandwhicharenotinspired.Themomentoneacceptsthisview,hehasvirtuallylosthisBible.

c.AccordingtoScriptureInspirationExtendstoEveryPartoftheBible.Jesus and the apostles speak of the books of the Old Testament as"Scripture"or"theScriptures,"andfrequentlyappealtothemassuch,inordertosubstantiatetheirteachings.Forthemanappealto"Scripture"isclearly equivalent to an appeal toGod. It is the end of all controversy.Besides, aswehave seen in thepreceding, someof theNewTestamentwritersrepeatedlyquotepassagesoftheOldTestamentsaswordsofGodor of the Holy Spirit. This is especially the case in the Epistle to theHebrews.Moreover,PeterplacestheepistlesofPaulona levelwiththewritingsoftheOldTestament.And,finally,theNewTestamentcontainsquotations from twenty-five Old Testament books all regarded as"Scripture," though some of them are taken from historical books.Wecannot divide Scripture into two parts, the one divine and the otherhuman.ItisjustasimpossibletosaywhereinScripturethehumanendsandthedivinebeginsorviceversa,asitistotellwhereinmanthebodyendsandthesoulbegins.Thetwointerpenetrate,andasaresultofthisinterpenetration the Bible is in its entirety, on the one hand, a humanproduction,andontheother,adivinecreation.

d. Inspiration Extends to the Very Words of Scripture. The Bible isverballyinspired.Itshouldbenotedparticularlythatthisisnotthesameas saying that it ismechanically inspired, though opponents frequently

insistonidentifyingthetwo.ThedoctrineofverbalinspirationdoesnotassumethatGoddictatedthewordsoftheBible,butthatHeguidedthewritersoftheBiblicalbooksinthechoiceoftheirwordsandexpressionsso as to keep them from errors, without in anyway disregarding theirvocabulary or suppressing their individuality of style and expression.Someprefer to call it plenary inspiration, in order to guard against thedangerofidentifyingitwithmechanicalinspiration.Thisdoctrineisfullywarranted by Scripture. In many instances the Lord told Moses andJoshuaexactlywhattowrite,Ex.3and4;6:2;7:1;12:1;Lev.4:1;6:1,24;7:22,28;Jos.1:1;4:1;6:2,etc.TheprophetsspeakofJehovahasputtingHiswords in theirmouth, Jer. 1:9, and as directing them to speakHiswordstothepeople,Ezek.3:4,10,11.PaulspeaksofhiswordsasSpirit-taught words, 1 Cor. 2:13, and both he and Jesus sometimes base anargumentontheuseofasingleword,Matt.22:43–45;John10:35;Gal.3:16.

C. The Perfections of Scripture. The Reformers deemed it necessary todevelop the doctrine of Scripture, in order to off-set the errors of theRomanCatholicChurch.Theystressedparticularlythefollowingpoints:

1.THEDIVINEAUTHORITYOFSCRIPTURE.TheChurchofRomeaswellastheReformersascribeddivineauthoritytoScripture;yettheydidnotbothmeanexactlythesamething.TheRomanhierarchyinsistedonit that the Bible has no authority in itself, but owes its existence andtherefore also its authority to theChurch.Over against this position ofRome, the Reformers emphasized the fact that Scripture has inherentauthorityinvirtueofitsinspirationbytheHolySpirit.TheBiblemustbebelieved for its own sake; it is the inspiredWord ofGod and thereforeaddresses man with authority. This view of the supreme authority ofScripture was generally accepted by the Churches of the Reformationuntil the chillwinds ofRationalism swept overEurope and reasonwasenthronedasthearbiteroftruth.UnderitsinfluencemanynowplacetheBibleonalevelwithotherbooksanddenyitsdivineauthority.Itisoftheutmost importance, however, to maintain this authority. Scripture hasfirstofallhistoricalauthority,thatis, it isatrueandabsolutelyreliablerecord, and as such entitled to a believing acceptance of all that itcontains.Butinadditiontothatitalsohasnormativeauthorityasarule

oflifeandconduct,andassuchdemandsabsolutesubjectiononthepartofman.

2.THENECESSITYOFSCRIPTURE.WhiletheRomanCatholicChurchrecognizestheimportanceandusefulnessofScripture,itdoesnotregarditasabsolutelynecessary.InitsestimationitismorecorrecttosaythatScriptureneedstheChurchthanthattheChurchneedsScripture.Someof themystical sects, such as theMontanists, the Anabaptists, and theLibertinesofGeneva,alsodeniedthenecessityofScripture,andascribedfar more importance to the "inner light," the word of the Holy Spiritspoken in the hearts of God's people. The Reformers joined issuewiththem on this point. They did not deny that Godmight have dispensedwiththeuseofthewrittenWord,butdefendedthepositionthattheWordwasnecessaryinvirtueofthedivinegoodpleasuretomaketheWordtheseed of the Church. From that point of view Scripture is and remainsnecessarytotheveryendoftime.

3.THEPERSPICUITYOFSCRIPTURE.IntheestimationoftheChurchofRometheBibleisobscureandisbadlyinneedofinterpretationevenin matters of faith and practice. For that reason an infallibleinterpretationisneeded,andthisissuppliedbytheChurch.Overagainstthis position of Rome the Reformers emphasized the perspicuity orclearness of Scripture. By doing this they did not deny that there aremysteries in the Bible which the humanmind cannot fathom, did notclaimthatmancanverywelldispensewiththelaboursofcommentators,and did not evenmean to assert that theway of salvation is so clearlyrevealedinScripturethateveryonecaneasilyunderstandit,irrespectiveofhisspiritualcondition.Theircontentionwassimplythattheknowledgenecessary unto salvation, though not equally clear on every page ofScripture, is yet communicated toman throughout the Bible in such asimple and comprehensive form that anyone who is earnestly seekingsalvation can easily gather this knowledge for himself, and need notdepend for it on the Church or the priesthood. The perspicuity ofScripturefollowsfromsuchpassagesasPs.19:7,8;119:105,130,andthespiritualman is said tobeable to judgeandunderstand it, 1Cor.2:15;10:15;1John2:20.

4.THESUFFICIENCYOFSCRIPTURE.NeithertheChurchofRomenor

the Anabaptists regard the Bible as a sufficient revelation of God. ThelatterhavealowopinionofScriptureandasserttheabsolutenecessityofthe inner light and of all kinds of special revelations, while the formerregards oral tradition as a necessary complement of the writtenWord.According toRomanCatholics this traditionembodies truthswhich theapostlespreachedbutdidnotcommittowriting,andwhichwerehandeddown in the Catholic Church, without interruption, from generation togeneration. These are now contained chiefly in the decrees of thecouncils, in the writings of the holy fathers, in the deliverances of thePope,andinthewordsandusagesofthesacredliturgy.Inoppositiontothis position the Reformersmaintained the perfection or sufficiency ofScripture.Thisdoesnotmeanthateverythingthatwasspokenorwrittenbytheprophets,byChrist,andbytheapostlesiscontainedinScripture,butsimplythatthewrittenWordissufficientforthemoralandspiritualneedsofindividualsandoftheChurch.Itinvolvesthedenialthatthereisalongside of Scripture an unwritten Word of God of equal or evensuperiorauthority.

QuestionsforReview:What is the relation between special revelation and Scripture? Whatdifferentmeaningshastheterm"specialrevelation"?Is itcorrecttosaythatspecialrevelationandScriptureareidentical?WhatScriptureproofcan you give for the inspiration of the Bible? What is mechanicalinspiration and what objections are there to it? What is meant by"dynamicalinspiration"?WhyisitunacceptableasappliedtoScripture?How would you describe the theory of organic inspiration? Whatadvantageshas it?Whatwould you say to the theory that the thoughtsandnotthewordsofScriptureareinspired?Whatobjectionsaretheretothenotionofapartialinspiration?Howwouldyouprovethatinspirationextends toeverypartofScripture,andeven to theverywords?What isthenatureoftheauthorityofScripture?InwhatsensearetheScripturesnecessary,perspicuousandsufficient?WhatisthepositionoftheChurchofRomeonthesejoints?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, Introductory Volume, pp. 147–179;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.24–29;Patton,TheInspirationof

the Scriptures;Orr, Revelation and Inspiration, pp. 159–218;Warfield,RevelationandInspiration,pp.169–226.

THEDOCTRINEOFGODANDHISCREATION

THEBEINGOFGOD

THEESSENTIALNATUREOFGOD

A. The knowledge of (respecting) God. The possibility of knowing Godhas been denied on several different grounds. In some cases, however,this denial is simply equivalent to the assertion that man cannotcomprehendGod.Andthis is,ofcourse,very true. It isnotpossible forman to know God with an absolutely all-comprehensive knowledge, tofathom the infinite depths of the divine being. But while we can knowGodonlyinpart,hisknowledgeisneverthelessrealandtrueknowledge.Man'sknowledgeofGodisgenerallysaidtobetwofold:

1.INNATEORINBORNKNOWLEDGE.Thestatementthatmanhasaninnate knowledge of God does notmerelymean that he has an inborncapacitytoknowGod.Itindicatessomethingmorethanthat.Atthesametime it does not imply thatman at birth brings a certain knowledge ofGodwithhimintotheworld.TheinnateknowledgeofGodis inborninthe sense that, under normal conditions, it develops spontaneously inman as soon as he comes in contact with God's revelation. It is aknowledgewhichman,asheisconstituted,developsofnecessityandnotastheresultofanychoiceonhispart.Naturallysuchknowledge isofarathergeneralnature.

2.ACQUIREDKNOWLEDGE.Acquiredknowledge,ontheotherhand,isderived from God's general and special revelation. It does not arisespontaneouslyinthemind,butresultsfromtheconsciousandsustainedpursuitofknowledge.Itcanbeobtainedonlybythewearisomeprocessofperception and reflection, reasoning and argumentation, and thereforedepends on the voluntary direction of the will and on the persistentefforts ofman.While it is possible only becauseman is born with thecapacity toknowGod, it carrieshim farbeyond the limitsofhis innateknowledgeofGod.

ItissometimessaidthatourknowledgeofGodislimitedtotherelationsinwhichHestandstoHiscreatures,anddoesnotextendtoHisessentialbeing;but this ishardly correct. Itwouldnot evenbepossible toknowtheserelationswithoutknowingsomethingoftheverynatureofGodandman.InvirtueofGod'sself-revelationitispossibleformantohavetrueand real knowledge of the being of God, though this knowledge isnecessarilylimited.

B. The being of God as known from God's revelation. While it is notpossible togiveadefinitionofGod in the strict senseof theword, it ispossible to give a general description of His being. Many so-calleddefinitionshavebeengivenofGod,butitisperhapsbesttodescribeHimsimplyasapureSpiritof infiniteperfections.Thisdescriptioncontainsthefollowingelements:

1. GOD IS A PURE SPIRIT. The Bible does not attempt to define thebeing of God. The nearest approach to anything like it is found in thewordofChristtotheSamaritanwoman:"Godisspirit,"John4:24.ThismeansthatHeisessentiallyspirit,sothatallthequalitieswhichbelongtotheperfectideaofspiritarenecessarilyfoundinHim;thatHeisaself-conscious and self-determiningbeing.The fact thatHe ispure spirit ofnecessityexcludesthenotionoftheearlyGnosticsandmedievalMystics,thatHehassomesortofanetherealorrefinedbody.ItalsorulesouttheideathatHeisvisibleandcanbediscernedbythebodilysenses.

2. GOD IS PERSONAL. The fact that God is spirit also involves hispersonality, for a spirit is an intelligent andmoral being, andwhenweascribepersonality toGod,wemeanexactly thatHe is a rationalbeing

capable of self-determination. In the present day many deny thepersonality of God and speak of Him as the unconscious cause of allexisting things,as theall-pervasiveprincipleof theworld,oras theall-inclusive purpose of the universe. The personality of God is clearlyindicated,however, in the traces of intelligent andpurposeful action intheworld;intherational,moral,andreligiousnatureofman,allofwhichcan only be the product of a personal God; and above all in therepresentations of God in Scripture. The presence of God, as it isdescribedintheOldandNewTestament,isclearlyapersonalpresence.He is represented as a personalGod,who comes and goes,withwhommen can converse, whom they can trust, who enters into theirexperiences,who sustains them in their trials anddifficulties, andwhofillstheirheartswiththejoyofvictory.Moreover,thehighestrevelationof God in the New Testament is a personal revelation. Jesus ChristrevealstheFatherinsuchaperfectwaythatHecouldsaytoPhilip:"HewhohathseenmehathseentheFather,"John14:9.

3. GOD IS INFINITELY PERFECT. God is distinguished from all Hiscreaturesby infiniteperfection.HepossessesHisbeingandHisvirtueswithoutanylimitationorimperfection.AstheinfinitelyperfectGod,Heisnotonlyboundlessorlimitless,butisexaltedaboveallHiscreaturesingrandsublimityandinineffablemajesty.Thisinfinityischaracteristicofall thedivineperfections,anddistinguishes these fromtheattributesofall creatures,however exalted theymaybe. It is extolled in the songofMoses at the Red Sea: "Who is like unto thee, O Jehovah, among thegods? Who is like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doingwonders,"Ex.15:11.Furtherreferencestoitarefoundinsuchpassagesas1Kings8:27;Ps.96:4–6;97:9;99:2,3,147:5;Isa.57:15;Jer.23:24.Somemodern scholars, such as William James and H. G. Wells, deny theinfinity ofGod. They conceive ofGod as "finite, developing, struggling,suffering,sharingwithmanhisdefeatsandvictories."

4. GOD AND HIS PERFECTIONS ARE ONE. Simplicity is one of thefundamentalcharacteristicsofGod.Thismeansnotonlythat,asaspirit,He is not composed of different parts, but also that His essence andpropertiesareone.ThebeingofGodisnotsomethingexistingbyitself,towhichHisattributesareadded;thewholeofHisessenceisineachoneof

theattributes.ItisgenerallysaidthatGod'sperfectionsareGodHimselfasHehasrevealedHimselftoman.TheyservebuttogiveamoredetaileddescriptionofHisdivineessence.HencetheBiblesaysthatGodistruth,life,light,love,etc.

QuestionsforReview:InwhatsenseisGodknowable,andinwhatsenseunknowable?WhatisinnateknowledgeofGod?Whatisacquiredknowledge?Isitpossibletoknowsomethingof theverybeingofGod? Is itpossible todefineGod?WhatisinvolvedinGod'sspirituality?Whatdowemeanwhenweascribepersonality to God? How can His personality be proved? What is thedivineinfinity?HowarethebeingofGodandHisperfectionsrelated?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 22–27; McPherson, ChristianDogmatics, pp. 104–123; Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, I, pp. 151–194;Snowden,ThePersonalityofGod.

THENAMESOFGOD

A.TheNameofGod inGeneral.TheBibleoften speaksof thenameofGodinthesingular,as,forinstanceinEx.20:7andPs.8:1.Whenitdoesthis,itdoesnotrefertoanyspecialdesignationofGod,butusesthetermin a very general sense to denote His self-revelation. The one generalnameofGodissplitupintomanyspecialnames,whichareexpressiveofHismany-sidedbeing.ItisonlybecauseGodhasrevealedHimselfinHisname,thatis,inHisself-revelationinnatureandinScripture,andalsointhespecialnamesbywhichHeisdesignatedintheBible,thatwecannowascribethesenamestoHim.Thesenamesareofdivineoriginandnotofhuman invention, thoughtheyarederived fromhuman language.FromwhatwassaidaboutthenameofGodingeneral it followsthatnotonlythe proper names of God, but also his attributes and the personaldesignationsofFather,Son,andHolySpiritmaybe includedunderthe

general heading, "TheNames of God." In the present chapter we limitourselves,however,toadiscussionofthepersonalnamesofGod.

B.TheOldTestamentNamesofGod.Of theOldTestamentnames thefollowingarethemostimportant:

1.TherearecertainnameswhichdirectattentiontothefactthatGodisthehighandexaltedOne, the transcendentGod. 'El and 'Elohimstressthe fact thatHe is strongandmighty,and therefore tobe feared,while'ElyondirectsattentiontoHisexaltednatureastheMostHigh,theobjectof reverence and worship. Another name belonging to this class is'Adonai, which is usually rendered "Lord." It was frequently used inaddressingGodandwasanexplicitrecognitionofthefactthatHeistheownerandrulerofallmen.AmongIsrael,theancientcovenantpeople,itwaslargelysupplantedbythenameJehovah.

2.Thereareothernameswhichpoint to the fact that thisexaltedbeingcondescendedtoenterintorelationsoffriendshipwithHiscreatures.Inpatriarchal times itwasespecially thenameShaddaiorEl-Shaddai thatservedthispurpose,Ex.6:3.Thisnamealsostressesthedivinegreatness,butprimarilyasasourceofblessingandcomfortforthepeopleofGod.Itindicates the fact thatGodcontrolsall thepowersofnatureandmakesthem subservient to his gracious purposes. It is especially in the nameJehovah (Yahweh), however, that God reveals Himself as the God ofgrace.ThisnamehasalwaysbeenregardedasHismostsacredandmostdistinctivename.OnthebasisofEx.3:14itmaybesaidthatthenameisderivedfromtheHebrewverb"tobe,"andthatitservestodesignatetheunchangeablenessofGod.Itimpliestheimmutabilityofthedivinebeing,but points more directly to the fact that God is unchangeable in Hiscovenantrelationship,thatHeismindfulofHispromisesandfaithfulinkeepingHisword,Mal.3:6.Thenameoftenappearsinthestrengthenedform "Jehovah of hosts." The hosts referred to are nor the stars, butrathertheangelichosts.JehovahofhostsisGodastheKingofglory,whoissurroundedbyangelichosts,whorulesheavenandearth inbehalfofhispeople,andreceivesgloryfromallHiscreatures.

C.TheNewTestamentNamesofGod.TheNewTestament simplyusestheGreekequivalents for theHebrewnamesof theOldTestament.The

followingshouldbenotedparticularly:

1.THEOS.This is simply theword for "God," and is themost commonnameemployedintheNewTestament.Itisthecommonrenderingof'El,'Elohim,and 'Elyon, though the latter is sometimesrendered"theMostHigh"or "theMostHighGod."ThenamesShaddaiandEl-Shaddaiaresimply renderedby theirGreekequivalents,meaning "theAlmighty"or"theAlmightyGod."ThesimpleTheosisfrequentlyfoundwithagenitiveofpossession,as"myGod,""thyGod,""ourGod,""yourGod,"becauseinChrist Godmay be regarded as the God of all and of each one of Hischildren.Thenationalideahasmadeplacefortheindividualinreligion.

2.KURIOS.Thisisthewordfor"Lord,"anamethatisappliednotonlytoGodbut also toChrist. It takes theplace of both 'Adonai andJehovah,though it does not have exactly the same meaning as the latter, butdesignates God as the possessor and the ruler of all things butparticularlyofHispeople,astheonewhohasregalpowerandauthority.The fundamental idea of Jehovah is sometimes reproduced in suchdescriptions as "the Alpha and the Omega," "who is and who was andwhoistocome,""thebeginningandtheend,""thefirstandthelast."

3.PATER.ItisoftensaidthattheNewTestamentintroducedanewnameinPater(Father).Butthisishardlycorrect,foritisalsofoundintheOldTestament as expressive of the special relation inwhichGod stands toIsrael.GodistheFatherofIsrael,Deut.32:6,Isa.63:16,andIsraelisthesonofGod,Ex.4:22,Deut.14:1;Isa.1:2.ThenameisnotalwaysusedinthesamesenseintheNewTestament.OccasionallyitservestodesignateGod simply as originator and creator, 1Cor. 8:6;Eph. 3:14;Heb. 12:9;James1:17.InallotherplacesitisexpressiveeitherofthespecialrelationinwhichthefirstpersonoftheTrinitystandstoChrist,oroftheethicalrelationofGodtobelieversashisspiritualchildren.

QuestionsforReview:What does Scripture mean when it speaks of the name of God in thesingular? Are the special names of God of human origin?What is thegeneraldifferencebetweenthenames'El,'Elohim,'Elyon,'Adonai,ontheonehand,andShaddai,'El-Shaddai,andJehovah,ontheother?Whatisthespecificmeaningofeachoneofthesenames?Whatisthemeaningof

thenameKurios(Lord)?IsthenameFathereverusedofGodintheOldTestament?InwhatdifferentsensesisitusedintheNewTestament?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 28–34; Bavinck, GereformeerdeDogmatiek, II,pp. 124–137;Girdlestone,OldTestamentSynonyms,pp.32–73.

THEATTRIBUTESOFGOD

GodrevealsHimselfnotonlyinHisnames,butevenmoreparticularlyinHisattributes,thatis,intheperfectionswhichareascribedtothedivinebeing in Scripture, or are visibly exercised by Him in the works ofcreation,providenceandredemption.OfthevariousdivisionsappliedtotheattributesofGodwefollowtheonethatismostcommonlyused.

A. The Incommunicable Attributes. The incommunicable attributes arethose divine perfections which have no analogies in the creature. TheyemphasizetheabsolutedistinctnessofGod,Histranscendentgreatness.Thefollowingattributesbelongtothisclass:

1. THE INDEPENDENCE OR SELF-EXISTENCE OF GOD. When weascribeindependenceorself-existencetoGodwetherebyassertthatHeexists by the necessity ofHis own being and therefore necessarily, anddoes not, like man, depend for his existence on anything outside ofHimself. Thismeansnot only thatHe is independent inHis being, butalsothatHeisindependentinallHisvirtuesandactions,andcausesallhis creatures to depend on Him. This idea is contained in the nameJehovah, finds expression in John 5:26, is indicated in passageswhichclearlyimplythatGodisindependentinHisthought,Rom.11:33,34,inHis will, Dan. 4:35; Rom. 9:19; Eph. 1:5; Rev. 4:11, in His power, Ps.115:3,andinHiscounselPs.33:11,andisalsoimpliedinthedeclarationthatHeisindependentofallthings,andthatallthingsexistonlythrough

HimPs.84:8ff.;Isa.40:18ff.;Acts17:25.

2. THE IMMUTABILITY OF GOD. Scripture teaches not only theindependence but also the unchangeableness of God.He is forever thesame, and therefore devoid of all change inHis being,His perfections,Hispurposes,andHispromises.ThisisclearlytaughtinsuchpassagesasPs. 102:27; Mal. 3:6; James 1:17. At the same time there are manypassages which seem to ascribe change to God. He is represented asrevealing and hiding Himself, as coming and going, as repenting andchangingHisintention,andsoon,Ex.32:10–15;Jonah3:10;Prov.11:20;12:22; Ps. 18:26, 27. But the unchangeableness of God, as taught inScripture,clearlydoesnotimplythatthereisnomovementinGod.Heisunchangeable in His inner being, His attributes, His purposes, Hismotivesofaction,andHispromises.AndwhentheBiblespeaksofHimasrepentingandchangingHis intention, this isevidentlyonlyahumanwayof speaking. In reality the change isnot inGodbut inmanand inman'srelationstoGod.

3. THE INFINITY OF GOD. The infinity of God in general is thatperfectionofHisnaturebywhicheverythingthatbelongstoHisbeingiswithoutmeasureorquantity.Itmaybeconsideredfromvariouspointsofview:

a.HisAbsolutePerfection.ThisistheinfinityofGodwithrespecttoHisdivine being or essence, and as such qualifies all the communicableattributesofGod.God is infinite inHisknowledgeandwisdom, inHisgoodness and love, in His righteousness and holiness, and also in Hissovereignty andpower.AllHisperfections are free from limitation anddefect.ScriptureproofforitisfoundinJob11:7–11;Ps.145:3.

b. His Eternity. God's infinity viewed in relation to time is called Hiseternity. Scripture usually represents it as endless duration, Ps. 90:2;102:12;Eph.3:21,butindoingthisitusespopularlanguage,andnotthemore specific language of philosophy. Strictly speaking, it denotes thatGodtranscendstimeandpossessesthewholeofHislifeallatonce.ThereiswithHimonlyaneternalpresent,andnopastorfuture.

c.HisImmensity.Viewedwithreference tospace, the infinityofGod is

calledHisimmensity.InvirtueofthisperfectionHetranscendsallspace,andat the same time ispresent in everypoint of spacewithHiswholebeing.He isnotpartly inourcountryandpartly inothercountries,butfills every part of space with His entire being. This is also called Hisomnipresence. God is immanent in all His creatures and in His entirecreation,but is innowayboundedby it.ThisperfectionofGod is alsoclearly revealed in Scripture, 1Kings 8:27; Isa. 66:1; Ps. 139:7–10; Jer.23:23,24;Acts7:48,49;17:27,28.

4.THESIMPLICITYOFGOD.Byascribingsimplicity toGodweassertthatHeisnotcomposite,andisnotsusceptibleofdivisioninanysenseoftheword. It implies, among other things, that the three persons in theGodheadarenotsomanypartsofwhichthedivineessenceiscomposed,thatGod'sessenceandattributesarenotdistinct,andthattheattributesarenotsuperaddedtotheessenceofGod.WhilethesimplicityofGodisnot directly asserted by Scripture, it clearly follows from His self-existence and immutability. That which is composed of different partsnever can be self-existent, just because it is composed of previouslyexistingparts;neithercanitbeunchangeable,becauseeverypartthatisaddedeffectsachange.

B. The Communicable Attributes. The communicable attributes of Godarethosetowhichtheattributesofmanbearsomeanalogy.Itshouldbeborne inmind,however, thatwhat is found inman isonlya finiteandimperfect analogy of what is infinite and perfect in God. In thisconnectionitshouldbenotedthattheincommunicableattributesofGodqualifyHiscommunicableattributes.Godisindependentandinfiniteandunchangeable in His knowledge and wisdom, and in His love andholiness.

1.THEKNOWLEDGEOFGOD.TheknowledgeofGodmaybedefinedasthat perfection by which He, in an entirely unique manner, knowsHimselfandallthingspossibleandactual.ThisknowledgeisinherentinGodand isnot obtained fromwithout.Moreover, it is always completeand stands out clearly in the consciousness of God. It is calledomniscience,becauseitisall-comprehensive.GodknowsHimselfandallthatiscontainedinHisplan.Heknowsallthingsastheyactuallycometopass,past,present,andfuture,andknowsthemintheirrealrelations.He

is fully acquainted with the hidden essence of things, to which theknowledgeofmancannotpenetrate.Theactualaswellasthepossibleispresent toHismind. The omniscience of God is clearly taught in suchpassagesofScriptureas1Kings8:39;Ps.139:1–16;Isa.46:10;Ezek.11:5;Acts15:18;John21:17;Heb.4:13.

2.THEWISDOMOFGOD.ThewisdomofGodmaybecalledaparticularaspectofHisknowledge.ItistheintelligenceofGodasmanifestedintheadaptationofmeanstoends.InvirtueofitGodchoosesthebestmeansfortheattainmentoftheendsHehasinview.ThefinalendtowhichHemakes all secondary ends subservient is the glory of His name, Rom.11:33 14:7, 8; Eph. 1:11, 12; Col. 1:16. The wisdom of God is seen increation,Ps. 19:1–7; 104:1–34; inprovidence,Ps.33:10, 11;Rom.8:28,andintheworkofredemption,1Cor.2:7;Rom.11:33;Eph.3:10.

3. THE GOODNESS OF GOD. God is good in Himself; that is, He isperfectly holy; but this is not the goodness which comes intoconsiderationhere.ItisGod'sgoodnessinaction,whichrevealsitselfindoing well unto others, that is now under contemplation. It may bedefinedasthatperfectionofGodwhichpromptsHimtodealbounteouslyand kindly with all His creatures. It is the affection which the Creatorfeels toward the sentient creatures as such. Asmanifested towardsHisrationalcreatures, it issometimescalledHis loveofbenevolenceorHiscommongrace,todesignatethefactthatitsbountiesareundeserved.TheBible refers to it inmanyplaces, suchasPs.36:6; 104:21; 145:8,9, 16;Matt.5:45;6:26;Acts14:17.

4.THELOVEOFGOD.InthepresentdaythisisfrequentlyregardedasthemostcentralattributeinGod,inthelightofwhichalltheotherdivineperfections should be interpreted. But there is no sufficient reason forregardingitasmorecentralthananyoftheothervirtuesofGod.WehaveinmindhereparticularlyGod'sloveofcomplacency,whichisHisdelightinthecontemplationofHisowninfiniteperfectionsandofthecreatureswhoreflectHismoral image.This lovemaybeconsidered fromvariouspointsofviewas:

a.TheGraceofGod.InthespecificlanguageofScripturethegraceofGodistheunmeritedloveofGodtowardthosewhohaveforfeitedit,andare

bynatureundera judgmentofcondemnation. It is thesourceofall thespiritualblessingsthatarebestoweduponunworthysinners,Eph.1:6,7;2:7–9;Tit.2:11;3:4–7.

b.TheMercyofGod.Anotheraspectof the loveofGodisHismercyortendercompassion.ItistheloveofGodtowardthosewhoareinmiseryordistress,irrespectiveoftheirdesires.Itcontemplatesmanasonewhois bearing the consequences of sin, and is therefore in a pitiablecondition.ItisexercisedonlyinharmonywiththestrictestjusticeofGod,inviewofthemeritsofJesusChrist,Luke1:54,72,78;Rom.15:9;9:16,17;Eph.2:4.

c. The Longsuffering of God. When the love of God is considered asbearing with the froward and evil, it is called His longsuffering orforbearance. This contemplates the sinner as continuing in sin,notwithstanding repeated admonitions andwarnings, and reveals itselfespecially in postponing the merited judgment, Rom. 2:4; 9:22; 1 Pet.3:20;2Pet.3:15.

5.THEHOLINESSOFGOD.TheholinessofGodisfirstofallthatdivineperfectionbywhichHeisabsolutelydistinctfromallHiscreatures,andisexaltedabovethemininfinitemajesty.ThisisthemeaningwhichithasinEx.15:11;1Sam.2:2;Isa.57:15;Hos.11:9.Wehaveinmindheremoreparticularly,however, theethicalholinessofGod,whichconsists inHisseparationfrommoralevil,thatis,fromsin.Whilethefundamentalideainthisholiness is thatofseparation, italsodenotessomethingpositive,namely,themoralexcellenceorethicalperfectionofGod.Initspresencemanfeelshimselfburdenedwithaconsciousnessofsin.Job34:10;Hab.1:13; Isa. 6:5. It may be defined as that perfection of God in virtue ofwhichHeeternallywillsandmaintainsHisownmoralexcellence,abhorssin,anddemandspurityinHismoralcreatures.

6. THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD. This attribute of God is closelyrelatedtotheimmediatelyprecedingone.ItisthatperfectionofGodbywhichHemaintainsHimselfoveragainsteveryviolationofHisholiness,andshowsineveryrespectthatHeistheHolyOne.Differentaspectsofitshouldbedistinguished.

a.HisRectoralJustice.ThisistherectitudewhichGodmanifestsastheRulerofboththegoodandtheevil.InvirtueofthisHeinstitutesamoralgovernment in the world, and imposes a just law upon man, withpromises of reward for the obedient and threats of punishment for thedisobedient,Ps.99:4;Isa.33:22;Rom.1:32.

b.HisRemunerative Justice.Thismanifests itself in thedistributionofrewards tobothmenandangels,Deut.7:9,12,13;Ps.58:11;Mic.7:20;Rom.2:7;Heb.11:26.Itisreallyanexpressionofthedivinelove,dealingoutitsbounties,notonthebasisofstrictmerit,butaccordingtopromiseandagreement,Luke17:10;1Cor.4:7.

c.HisRetributiveJustice.Thisrelatestotheinflictionofpenalties,andisanexpressionof thedivinewrath. Ina sinlessworld therewouldbenoplaceforitsexercise,butinaworldfullofsinitnecessarilyholdsaveryprominent place. while the Bible stresses the reward of the righteousmorethanthepunishmentofthewicked,eventhelatterstandsoutboldlyinScripture,Rom.1:32;2:9;12:19;2Thess.1:8.

7. THEVERACITYOFGOD. The veracity of Godmay be described asthat perfection in virtue ofwhichHe is true inHis inner being, inHisrevelation,andinHisrelationtoHispeople.ItimpliesthatHeisthetrueGodasoveragainst the idols,whichare liesandvanity; thatHeknowsthings as they really are and also enables man to know the reality ofthings;andthatHefaithfullyfulfilsallHiscovenantpromises.This lastaspectofGod'sveracityisusuallycalledHisfaithfulness.ItisthegroundofHispeople'sconfidence,thefoundationoftheirhope,andthecauseoftheirrejoicing,Num.23:19;1Cor.1:9;2Tim.2:13;Heb.6:17;10:23.

8. THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD. Under this general heading weconsider God's sovereign will, or His sovereignty in planning anddirectingtheaffairsoftheworldandofHisrationalcreatures;andGod'ssovereignpower,Hisomnipotence,orthesovereigntyofGodinexecutingHiswill.

a.TheSovereignWillofGod.ThewillofGodisrepresentedinScriptureasthefinalcauseofallthings:ofcreationandpreservation,Rev.4:11,ofgovernment,Prov.21:1;Dan.4:35;Eph.1:11,ofthesufferingsofChrist,

Luke 22:42; Acts 2:23, of election and reprobation, Rom. 9:15, 16, ofregeneration, Jas. 1:18, of sanctification, Phil. 2:13, of the sufferings ofbelievers, 1Pet. 3:17, ofman's life anddestiny,Acts 18:21;Rom. 15:32;Jas.4:15,andevenofthesmallestthingsoflife,Matt.10:29.

1)ThesecretandtherevealedwillofGod.SeveraldistinctionsareappliedtothewillofGod,ofwhichthemostcommonisthatbetweenthesecretandtherevealedwillofGod.TheformeristhewillofGod'sdecree,whichislargelyhiddeninGod,whilethelatteristhewillofHisprecept,whichisrevealedinthelawandinthegospel.ThisdistinctionisbasedonDeut.29:29.ThesecretwillofGodismentionedinPs.115:3;Dan.4:17;Rom.9:18, 19; 11:33, 34; Eph. 1:5, 9, 11; andHis revealedwill inMatt. 7:21;12:50;John4:34;7:17;Rom.12:2.TheformerpertainstoallthingswhichGodwillseithertoeffectortopermit,andwhicharethereforeabsolutelycertain. The latter has reference to the duties which God prescribes toman,representsthewayinwhichmancanenjoythedivineblessing,andisfrequentlyfrustrated.

2) The freedom of God's will. There are certain things which Godnecessarily wills. He cannot but love Himself and take delight in thecontemplation of His own perfections. And yet He is under nocompulsionevenhere,butactsaccording to the lawofHis innerbeing.No such necessity characterizes God's will with reference to Hiscreatures.God chooses voluntarilywhat andwhomHewill create, andthe times, places, and circumstances of their lives. He marks out thepaths of all His rational creatures, determines their destiny, and usesthemforHispurposes.AndwhileHeendowsthemwithfreedom,yetHiswillcontrolstheiractions.TheBiblespeaksofthefreedomofGod'swillin themost absolute terms, Job 11:10; 33:13; Ps. 115:3; Prov. 21:1; Isa.10:15;Matt.20:15Rom.9:15–18;Rev.4:11.

3)ThewillofGodinrelationtosin.Seriousproblemsariseinconnectionwith therelationofGod'swill tosin. IfGodplannedall things thenHealsoplannedtheentranceofsinintotheworld.DoesnotthismakeHimtheauthorofsin?Itshouldbeborneinmind,however,thatGoddidnotdecidetoeffectsinHimselfnorprocureitscommissionefficaciously.Hedecreed to permit His rational creatures to sin, thereby rendering theentrance of sin into the world certain, without Himself becoming its

author. This statement of the matter does not solve the problemaltogether,but safeguards the ideaof themoralpurityofGod.Anotherproblem arises from the relation of the secret and the revealed will toeach other. They are often said to be contradictory. His secret willcomprises many things which He forbids in His revealed will, andexcludesmanythingswhichHecommandsinHisrevealedwill,Gen.22;Ex.4:21–23;2Kings20:1–7.Goddecreed that theJews should crucifyJesus; yet in doing this theywent contrary to the revealedwill ofGod,Acts 2:23. It should be borne in mind, however, that in making thedistinction under consideration we are using the word "will" in twodifferentsenses.ByHissecretwillGodhasdeterminedwhatHewilldoorwhat shall come topass; inHis revealedwill, on theotherhand,Herevealstouswhatwemustdo.Moreover,thesituationisnotsuchthat,accordingtoHissecretwillHedoes,and,accordingtoHisrevealedwill,Hedoesnottakepleasureinsin.ThefactthatHedecreedthatsinshouldentertheworlddoesnotimplythatHetakesdelightinit.

b.TheSovereignPowerorOmnipotenceofGod.ThesovereigntyofGodalso findsexpression in thedivinepoweroromnipotence, thepower toexecuteHiswill. The omnipotence ofGod shouldnot beunderstood toimply that God can do everything. The Bible teaches us that there aremanythingswhichGodcannotdo.Hecannot lie,sin,change,nordenyHimself,Num.23:19;1Sam.15:29;2Tim.2:13;Heb.6:18;Jas.1:13,17.TheScholasticswerewrongwhentheytaughtthatHecoulddoallkindsof things which are inherently contradictory and could even annihilateHimself.Itismorecorrecttosaythat,invirtueofHisomnipotence,Godcan, through the mere exercise of His will, realize whatsoever He hasdecidedtoaccomplish.AndifHesodesired,HecoulddomorethanHeactuallybringstopass,Gen.18:14;Jer.32:27;Zech.8:6;Matt.3:9;26:53.TheomnipotenceofGodfindsexpressioninthenameEl-Shaddai,andisclearlymentioned in several passages of Scripture, Job 9:12; Ps. 115:3;Jer.32:17;Matt.19:26;Luke1:37;Rom.1:20;Eph.1:19.

QuestionsforReview:How dowe divide the attributes of God?Which belong to each one oftheseclasses?WhatistheindependenceofGod?Hisimmutability?HowcanweexplainthattheBibleapparentlyascribeschangetoGod?Whatis

God'seternityandimmensity?HowcanweprovethesimplicityofGod?What is thenatureandextentofGod'sknowledge?How isHiswisdomrelatedtoHisknowledge?WhatisthegoodnessofGod,andwhatothernamesareusedforit?ShouldwespeakofloveascentralinGod?Howdowe distinguish God's grace, mercy, and Iongsuffering? What is theholinessofGod?Underwhatdifferent aspects can the righteousnessofGod be considered? What is included in the veracity of God? WhatdistinctiondoweapplytothewillofGod?IsHiswillfreeornecessary?Does God's decree make Him the author of sin? Do the secret andrevealedwillofGodconflict?DoesGod'somnipotenceimplythatHecandoeverything?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 35–61; McPherson, ChristianDogmatics,pp.123–139;Hodge,OutlinesofTheology,pp.135–163;Orr,Side-Lights on Christian Doctrine, pp. 21–34; Clarke, The ChristianDoctrineofGod.

THETRINITY

A.TheTrinityinGeneral.TheBibleteachesusthattheoneGodconsistsin three persons. This is decidedly a doctrine of special revelation, adoctrinethatisnotrevealedinnature,andthatcouldnotbediscoveredbyhumanreason.

1.STATEMENTOFTHEDOCTRINE.GodisoneinHisessentialbeing,but in this one being there are three persons, called, Father, Son, andHolySpirit.Thesepersonsarenot,however,likesomanypersonsamongmen three entirely separate and distinct individuals. They are ratherthreemodesorformsinwhichthedivineessenceexists.Atthesametimeitshouldbeborneinmindthattheseself-distinctionsinthedivinebeingare of such a nature that they can enter into personal relations. TheFathercanspeaktotheSonandcansendforththeHolySpirit.Thereal

mysteryof theTrinity consists in this that the threepersonsareone intheir essentialbeing.And thisdoesnotmean that thedivineessence isdividedamongthethreepersons.Itiswholly,withallitsperfections,ineachoneofthepersons,andhasnoexistenceoutsideofandapartfromthe persons.Moreover, the persons are not subordinate the one to theother in their essential being. Itmaybe said, however, that in order ofexistence the Father is first, the Son second, and theHoly Spirit third,andthisorderalsoreflectsitselfintheworkofcreationandredemption.Thethreepersonsaredistinguishedbycertainpersonaldistinctions:theFather generates the Son, the Son is generated by the Father, and theHolySpiritproceeds frombothFatherandSon.Thisdoctrine isoneofthe great mysteries of faith, and as such is far beyond our humancomprehension.

2.SCRIPTUREPROOFFORTHETRINITY.

a.IntheOldTestament.SomeareoftheopinionthattheOldTestamentcontainsno indicationsof theTrinity, but this isnot correct.There arepassageswhichindicatethatthereismorethanonepersoninGod,asforinstance,whereGodspeaksofHimselfintheplural,Gen.1:26;11:7,whenthe angel of Jehovah is represented as a divine person, Gen. 16:7–13;18:1–21;19:1–22,andwheretheSpiritisspokenofasadistinctperson,Isa. 48:16; 63:10. In addition to these there are some in which threepersonsaremoreorlessclearlyindicated,Isa.48:16;61:1;63:9,10.

b.IntheNewTestament.It isperfectlynaturalthattheNewTestamentproofs should be clearer than those of the Old, since it records theincarnation of the Son of God and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.There are several passages in which the three persons are expresslymentioned,asinconnectionwiththebaptismofJesus,Luke3:21,22,inthe farewell discourses of Jesus, John 14–16, in the great commission,Matt. 28:19, in the apostolic blessing, 2 Cor. 13:13, and also in suchpassagesasLuke1:35;1Cor.12:4–6,and1Peter1:2.

3. ERRONEOUS REPRESENTATIONS OF THE TRINITY. In the earlyChristian Church some represented the three persons in the Trinity asthree divine beings, virtually three gods. The Sabellians regarded thethreepersonsmerelyassomanymodesofdivineactionormanifestation,

whichGodsuccessivelyassumes,revealingHimselfasFatherincreationandinthegivingofthelaw,asSonintheincarnation,andasHolySpiritinregenerationandsanctification.Thusthethreepersonswerereducedtoone.PaulofSamosata, theSociniansof thedaysof theReformation,andtheUnitariansandModernistsof thepresentday,all represent theTrinity as consisting of God the Father, the man Jesus Christ, and adivine influence which is called the Spirit of God. This view alsorepresents God as one, not only in being, but also in person, andthereforevirtuallydestroystheTrinity.

B.TheThreePersonsConsideredSeparately.

1. THE FATHER. The name "Father," as applied to God, is not alwaysusedinthesamesenseinScripture.ItmaydenotethetriuneGod(a)astheoriginofallcreatedthings,1Cor.8:6;Eph.3:14,15;Heb.12:9;Jas.1:17; (b) as the Father of the chosen nation of Israel, Deut. 32:6; Isa.63:16;64:8;Jer.3:4;Mal.1:6;2:10;and(c)astheFatherofbelieversasHisspiritualchildren,Matt.5:45;6:6–15;Rom.8:15;1John1:3.Inafarmorefundamentalsense,however,thenameisappliedtothefirstpersonintheTrinityinHisrelationtothesecondperson,John1:14,18;5:17–26;8:54; 14:12, 13. This is the original Fatherhood of God, of which allearthlyfatherhoodisbutafaintreflection.ThedistinctivepropertyoftheFather is thatHegenerates theSonfromalleternity.Certainworksareascribed particularly to the Father, though the other persons alsoparticipateinthem,suchasplanningtheworkofredemption,theworksof creationandprovidence, and theworkof representing theTrinity intheCounselofRedemption.

2.THESON.ThesecondpersonoftheTrinityiscalled"Son"or"SonofGod." This name is not always applied to Him in the same sense,however. Considered purely as the second person in the Trinity, He iscalled "the Son" because ofHis eternal generation by the Father, John1:14,18;3:16,18;Gal.4:4.HealsobearsthatnameastheincarnateSonofGod in an official sense, to designateHim as theMessiah chosen ofGod,Matt.8:29;27:40;26:63;John1:49;11:27.And,finally,Heiscalled"theSonofGod,"atleastinonepassage,invirtueofthefact,thatatHisbirthHewasbegottenby the specialoperationof theHolySpirit,Luke1:32, 35. In connection with the Son the following points deserve

particularattention:

a.HisEternalGeneration.ThepersonalpropertyoftheSonisthatHeiseternallybegottenoftheFather.ThedoctrineofthegenerationoftheSonisnaturally suggestedby theBiblical representationof the first and thesecondpersonintheTrinityasstandingintherelationofFatherandSonto each other, and is further based onPs. 2:7;Acts 13:33;Heb. 1:5.BymeansofthisgenerationtheFatherdoesnotcalltheessentialnatureoftheSonintobeing,butbecomesthecauseofthepersonalsubsistenceofthe Son—a second mode of existence—within the divine being. ThisgenerationoftheSonshouldnotberegardedasanactcompletedinthepast, but as a necessary and therefore eternal act of the Father. It istimeless,alwayscontinuing,andyetevercompleted.

b.TheDivinity of the Son.Thedivinity of the Son is deniedby severalsectsintheearlyChristianChurch,byahostofliberalscholarsduringthelast two centuries, and by the Unitarians and the realModernists andHumanistsofthepresentday.Itcanonlybedenied,however,bysettingasidetheexplicittestimonyoftheWordofGod.Therearepassageswhichexpressly assert the divinity of the Son, such as John 1:1; 20:28;Rom.9:5;Phil.2:6;Tit.2:13;1John5:20.Moreover,divinenamesareappliedtoHim, Jer. 23:5, 6; Joel 2:32 (comp.Acts2:21); Isa. 9:6; 1Tim.3:16;divine attributes are ascribed to Him, Isa. 9:6; Rev. 1:8; Matt. 18:20;28:20;John2:24,25;21:17;Phil.3:21;Rev.1:8;divineworksaredonebyHim,Matt. 9:2–7; Luke 10:22; John 1:3, 10; 3:35;Eph. 1:22;Col. 1:17;Heb. 1:10–12; Phil. 3:21; John 5:22, 25–30; and divine honour isaccordedHim,John5:22,23;14:1;1Cor.15:19;2Cor.13:13;Heb.1:6.

c. TheWorksMore Particularly Ascribed to the Son. The order of theexistence of the persons in the Trinity is reflected in the order of theirworks.IfallthingsareoutoftheFather,theyarethroughtheSon.Iftheformeristhefinal,thelatteristhemediatingcauseofallbothincreationand in redemption. All things are created andmaintained through theSon,John1:3, 10;Heb. 1:2,3.He is the lightwhich lightetheverymancoming into the world, John 1:9. More particularly the work ofredemptioniscarriedoutbytheSoninHis incarnation,sufferings,anddeath,Eph.1:3–14.

3. THEHOLY SPIRIT.With reference to theHoly Spirit the followingpointsdemandspecialconsideration:

a.ThePersonalityoftheHolySpirit.Itisnotsomuchthedivinityasthepersonality of the Holy Spirit that is called in question by many. It isdeniedbyseveralsectariansintheearlyChurch,bytheSociniansinthedaysof theReformation,andbytheUnitarians, theModernists,andallkinds of Sabellians in the present time. They prefer to regard theHolySpiritmerelyasapowerorinfluenceofGod.YetHeisclearlydesignatedas a person, John 14:16, 17, 26; 15:26; 16:7–15; Rom. 8:26. Personalcharacteristics are ascribed to Him, such as intelligence, John 14:26;15:26;Rom.8:16,affections,Isa.63:10;Eph.4:30,andwill,Acts16:7;1Cor. 12:11. Moreover, He performs acts proper to personality, such asspeaking,searching, testifying,commanding,revealing,striving,makingintercession, Gen. 1:2; 6:3; Luke 12:12; John 14:26; 15:26; 16:8; Acts8:29;13:2;Rom.8:11;1Cor.2:10,11.Finally,therearepassagesinwhichthe Holy Spirit is distinguished fromHis own power, Luke 1:35; 4:14;Acts10:38;Rom.15:13;1Cor.2:4.

b. The Relation of theHoly Spirit to the Other Persons in the Trinity.WhileitwasassertedfromthebeginningonthebasisofJohn15:26thattheHolySpiritproceedsfromtheFather,itwasnotuntiltheyear589A.D. that the western Church officially took the position that He alsoproceedsfromtheSon.ThisdoctrineisbasedonthefactthattheSpiritisalsocalledtheSpiritofChristandoftheSon,Rom.8:9;Gal.4:6,andissaid to be sent byChrist, John 15:26; 16:7. In virtue of this processionfromtheFatherandtheSon,theHolySpiritstandsintheclosestpossiblerelationshiptotheotherpersons.HesearchesthedeepthingsofGod,1Cor.2:10,11,andistoacertainextentidentifiedwithChrist,2Cor.3:17.In the Spirit Christ Himself returns to His disciples, John 15:16–18.Moreover, intheEpistlesofPaul it issometimesChrist,andsometimesthe Spirit of God who is said to dwell in believers, Rom. 8:9, 10; Gal.2:20;1Cor.3:16.

c.TheDivinityoftheHolySpirit.ThedivinityoftheHolySpiritmaybeestablished from Scripture by a line of proof quite similar to thatemployed in connectionwith the Son.Divine names are given toHim,Acts 5:3, 4; 1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Tim. 3:16; divine perfections are ascribed to

Him,Ps.139:7–10;Isa.40:13,15;1Cor.2:10,11;12:11;Rom.15:19;Heb.9:14;divineworksareperformedbyHim,Gen.1:2;Job26:13;33:4;Ps.104:30;John3:5,6;Tit.3:5;Rom.8:11;anddivinehonour isaccordedHim,Matt.28:19;Rom.9:1;2Cor.13:14.

d. The works More Particularly Ascribed to the Holy Spirit. There arecertainworkswhich,whileworksofthetriuneGod,aremoreparticularlyascribedtotheHolySpirit.IngeneralitmaybesaidthatitisHisspecialtask to bring the work of God to completion both in creation andredemption. In the natural sphere He generates life and thus puts thefinishingtouchtotheworkofcreation,Gen.1:3;Job26:13;Ps.33:6;Ps.104:30; and He inspires and qualifies men for special tasks, Ex. 28:3;31:2,3,6;35:35;1Sam.11:6;16:13,14.AndinthesphereofredemptionHe prepares and qualifies Christ for His redemptive work, Luke 1:35;3:22;John3:34;Heb. 10:5–7;He inspiresScripture, 1Cor.2:13;2Pet.1:21;HeformsandaugmentstheChurchanddwellsinitastheprincipleofanewlife,Eph.1:22,23;2:22;1Cor.3:16;12:4ff.;andHeteachesandguidestheChurch,leadingitinallthetruth,John14:26;15:26;16:13,14;Acts5:32;Heb.10:15;1John2:27.

QuestionsforReview:Can we discover the doctrine of the Trinity from nature? How do thepersons in God differ from three persons among men? Is there anysubordinationofthepersonsinGod?HowcanweprovetheTrinityfromtheOldTestament?FromtheNew?Againstwhaterrorsshouldweguardin this doctrine? In how many different senses is the name "Father"appliedtoGod?WhatworksareespeciallyascribedtotheFather?Inhowmany different senses is the name "Son" applied to Christ? Is thegenerationof theSonapastact?Whatworksareespeciallyascribed tothe Son? How can you prove the divinity of the Son and of the HolySpirit? How can you prove that the Holy Spirit is a person, and notmerely a power or influence? How is the Spirit related to the otherpersons?WhatworksareespeciallyascribedtotheHolySpirit?Whatisthe characteristic property of the Father, of the Son, and of the HolySpirit?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 62–81; McPherson, Christian

Dogmatics,pp.139–162;Hodge,OutlinesofTheology,pp.164–199;Orr,Side-Lights on Christian Doctrine, pp. 37–51; Steenstra, The Being ofGodasUnityandTrinity.

THEWORKSOFGOD

THEDIVINEDECREESINGENERAL

A. TheNature of theDivineDecrees. The decree of God isHis eternalplan or purpose, in whichHe has foreordained all things that come topass. It is but natural thatGod,who controls all things, should have adefinite plan according to which He works, not only in creation andprovidence, but also in the process of redemption. This plan includesmanyparticulars, and thereforeweoften speakof thedivinedecrees intheplural,thoughinrealitythereisbutasingledecree.ForthematerialcontentsofHisdecreeGoddrewontheboundlessknowledgewhichHehasofallkindsofpossible things.Of thisgreatstoreofpossibilitiesHeembodied inHis decree only those thingswhich actually come to pass.TheirinclusioninthedecreedoesnotnecessarilymeanthatHeHimselfwillactivelybringthemintoexistence,butmeansinsomecasesthat,withthedivinepermissionandaccordingtothedivineplan,theywillcertainlybebroughttorealizationbyHisrationalcreatures.Thedecreecoversallthe works of God in creation and redemption, and also embraces theactionsofHis freemoral beings,not excluding their sinful actions.Butwhiletheentranceofsinintotheworldanditsvariousmanifestationsinthe lives of angels and men were thus rendered certain, this does notmean that God decided to effectuate these Himself. God's decree withreferencetosinisapermissivedecree.

B.TheCharacteristicsoftheDivineDecree.ThedecreeofGodhasseveralcharacteristics:

1. IT IS FOUNDED IN DIVINE WISDOM. This is implied in the

statement that God's purpose is "according to the counsel ofHis will,"Eph.1:11.Thoughthereisagreatdealinitthatwedonotunderstand,itiscertainthatGodformedHisplanwithwisdom.

2. IT IS ETERNAL. This does not merely mean that the decree wasformed before the beginning of time, but also that, while it relates tothingswhichcometopass in thecourseofhistory, its formation isandremains an act within the divine being, and therefore in the strictestsenseeternal.

3.IT ISEFFICACIOUS.The fact thatGodmadeadivineplandoesnotmean that He has decided to bring to pass by His own act all that isincluded in it;but itdoesmeanthatwhatHehasdecidedwill certainlycometopass,andthatnothingcanthwartHispurpose,Ps.33:11;Prov.19:21;Isa.46:10.

4. IT IS UNCHANGEABLE. Man often changes his plans for variousreasons.Itmaybethatonsecondthoughtheconsidersthemunwise,orthatheiswantinginthepowertocarrythemout.ButneithertheonenortheotherisconceivableinGod.HedoesnotchangeHisplan,becauseHeisfaithfulandtrue,Job23:13,14;Isa.46:10;Luke22:22;Acts2:23.

5. IT IS UNCONDITIONAL. The decree is not in any of its particularsdependentonanythingoutsideofit,as,forinstance,onthefreeactionsofGod'smoralandrationalcreatures,ontheirforeseendisobedienceorforeseenfaith.Godhasdeterminednotonlywhatwillcometopass,butalsotheconditionsunderwhichitwillberealized,Acts2:23;Eph.2:8;1Pet.1:2.

6. IT IS ALL-COMPREHENSIVE. It includes the good actions ofmen,Eph. 2:10, their wicked actions, Prov. 16:4; Acts 2:23; 4:27, 28,contingentevents,Gen.45:8;50:20;Prov.16:33,themeansaswellastheend,2Thess.2:13;Eph.1:4,thedurationofman'slife,Job14:5;Ps.39:4,andtheplaceofhishabitation,Acts7:26.

7.WITHREFERENCETOSIN IT ISPERMISSIVE. The decree ofGodwithreferencetosinisusuallycalledapermissivedecree.Itrendersthefuturesinfulactabsolutelycertain,butthisdoesnotmeanthatGodwill

byHisownactbringittopass.Goddecreednottohinderthesinfulactofthecreature'sself-determination,butneverthelesstoregulateandcontrolitsresult,Ps.78:29;106:15;Acts14:16;17:30.

C.ObjectionstotheDoctrineoftheDecrees.OutsideofReformedcirclesthe doctrine of the decreesmeetswith very little favour. Pelagians andSocinians reject it as un-Scriptural and unreasonable, and Arminianseitherignoreitaltogether,orrepresentthedecreeofGodasbasedonHisforeknowledge.Thereareespeciallythreeobjectionstothedoctrine:

1. IT IS DECLARED TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE MORALFREEDOMOFMAN.IfGodhasdecreedalltheactionsofman,thenmanmustnecessarilyactasheactsanddowhathedoes,andcannotbeheldresponsible forhisactions.But theBible teachesnotonly thatGodhasdecreedthefreeactsofman,butalsothatmanisnonethelessfreeandresponsibleforhisacts,Gen.50:19,20;Acts2:23;4:27,28;anditmakesnoattempttoreconcilethetwo.Wemaynotbeabletoharmonizethem,butthatdoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheyareinherentlycontradictory.Some conceive of the freedom of the will in a way that makes itinconsistent with the divine decree, but theirs is not the properconceptionofthefreeagencyofman.Moralfreedomisthepowerofmanto determine his moral actions freely in harmony with his previousthoughtsandjudgments,withhisinclinationsanddesires,andevenwithhis very character. This freedom has its laws, and the better they areunderstood the more certain it is what a man will do under certaincircumstances.Godfullyunderstandstheselaws,andthereforeitisquiteconceivablethatHeshoulddeterminethefutureactionsofmaninsuchawayasnot to impingeon themoral freedomofman,even ifwedonotfullyunderstandhowthiscanbedone.

2. IT IS SAID TO ROB MEN OF ALL MOTIVES FOR SEEKINGSALVATION. If all things happen as God has decreed, people willnaturally feel that they need not give themselves any concern for thefuture, normake any efforts to obtain salvation. If their destruction ispredetermined,theywillbelostinspiteoftheirbestefforts;andiftheirsalvationisdecreed,theywillbesaved,thoughtheyneglectallthemeansof salvation. In answer to this objection it may be said, (a) That thehidden decree of God cannot possibly be man's rule of action; this is

foundonlyinthelawandthegospel.(b)ThatGodhasnotonlydecreedthe final destiny of man, but also the means leading up to it. It wasabsolutely certain that all whowere in the vessel with Paul were to besaved, but it was equally certain that, in order to secure this end, thesailorshadtoremainaboard.(c)That,sincethedecreeconnectsmeansandends together, andendsaredecreedonlyas the resultofmeans, itencourageseffortinsteadofdiscouragingit,Eph.2:10;Phil.2:13.

3.ITMAKESGODTHEAUTHOROFSIN. IfGodhasdecreed sin,Hemustberegardedastheauthorofsin;andyetthiscannotbeinviewofthe fact thatHe isholy, thatHehimself forbids sin, and that Scripturestresses His moral purity, Ps. 92:15; Eccl. 7:29; Hab. 1:13; Jas. 1:13; 1John1:5.Itmaybesaid,however,thatthedecreemerelymakesGodtheauthorof freemoralbeingswhoare themselves theauthorsof sin.Thedecreewith reference to sin is not an efficient but a permissivedecree.God did not decree to produce sin by direct divine efficiency. Thisconsideration,itistrue,doesnotfullyremovethedifficulty.TheproblemofGod'srelationtosinremainsamysteryforus,whichwecannotfullysolve.

QuestionsforReview:Whatisthedivinedecree?Whydowesometimesspeakofdecreesintheplural?Whicharethecharacteristicsofthedivinedecree?Inwhatsenseis it eternal?Whatdoes it imply that thedecree is efficacious? Inwhatsense is it unconditional?What is included in the decree?What is thenatureofGod'sdecreerespectingsin?Whatobjectionsareraisedagainstthe doctrine of the decrees? What can be said in answer to theseobjections?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 82–92; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 200–213; Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, I, pp. 393–415;Girardeau,TheWillinitsTheologicalRelations,pp.17–409.

PREDESTINATION

Whenwe pass from the discussion of the decrees in general to that ofpredestination, we are proceeding from the general to the particular.Predestination is simply—toexpress it ingeneral terms—thepurposeofGodrespectingHismoralcreatures.

A.TheObjectsofPredestination.Predestinationinthebroadersenseofthe term refers to allGod's rational creatures. It bearsonallmenbothgood and evil, and that not merely as groups but as individuals, Acts4:28; Rom. 8:29, 30; 9:11–13; Eph. 1:4–6. Moreover, this decree alsoincludestheangels,bothgoodandevil.TheBiblespeaksnotonlyof"holyangels,"Mark8:38;Luke9:26,andofwickedangelswhokeptnottheirfirst estate, 2Pet. 2:4; Jude6;but alsomakes explicitmentionof electangels, 1 Tim. 5:21, thus implying that there are also non-elect angels.Since many of the angels never fell, the predestination of the angelscannot be conceived of in the same way as that of men. God did notchoose a certain number of the angels out of the common fallenmass,leavingtheotherstoperishintheirsin.Theirpredestinationconsistsinthis thatGoddecreed, for reasons sufficientuntoHimself, to giveuntosomeangels, inadditionto thegracewithwhich theywereendowedbycreation and which included sufficient power to remain holy, a specialgraceofperseverance,andtowithholdthisfromothers.Finally,ChristastheMediator was also the object of divine predestination. This simplymeans that, as Mediator, He was the special object of God's goodpleasure,1Pet.1:20;2:4.

B. The Two Parts of Predestination. Predestination includes two parts,namely,electionandreprobation.

1.ELECTION.TheBible speaksof election inmore thanone sense: (a)theelectionof Israel as apeople for special serviceandalso for specialprivileges, Deut. 4:37; 7:6–8; 10:15; Hos. 13:5; (b) the election ofindividualstosomeofficeorspecialservice,Deut.18:5;1Sam.10:24;Ps.78:70;Jer.1:5;John6:70;Acts9:15;and(c)theelectionofindividualsto

be childrenofGodandheirsof eternal glory,Matt.22:14;Rom. 11:5; 1Cor. 1:27, 28; Eph. 1:4. The last is the election that comes intoconsiderationhereasapartofpredestination.ItmaybedefinedasGod'seternalpurposetosavesomeofthehumanraceinandbyJesusChrist.

2.REPROBATION.Thedoctrineofelectionnaturally impliesthatsomeof thehuman racewerenot elected. IfGodpurposed to save some,Healsopurposednot tosaveothers.This isalso inperfectagreementwiththeteachingsofScriptureonthispoint,Matt.11:25,26;Rom.9:13,17,18,21,23;11:7;Jude4;1Pet.2:8.Reprobationmaybedefinedasthatdecreeof God whereby He has determined to pass some men by with theoperation of His special grace and to punish them for their sin to themanifestationofHisjustice.Fromthisdefinitionreprobationappearstobereallyatwofoldpurposenamely,(a)topassbysomeinthebestowalofregeneratingandsavinggrace;and(b)toassignthemtodishonourandtothewrathofGodfortheirsins.Theobjectionissometimesraisedthatthis doctrine exposes God to the charge of injustice. But this is hardlycorrect.We can speak of injustice onlywhen one party has a claim onanother. If God owed forgiveness of sin and eternal me to all men, itwouldbeaninjusticeifHesavedonlyalimitednumberofthem.ButthesituationisquitedifferentwhereallhaveforfeitedtheblessingsofGod.NoonehasarighttocallGodtoaccountforelectingsomeandpassingbyothers.Hewouldhavebeenperfectlyjust,ifHehadnotsavedany,Matt.20:14,15;Rom.9:14,15.

C. The Question of Supra- and Infralapsarianism. The doctrine ofpredestinationhasnotalwaysbeenpresented inexactly thesameform.Supra-andInfralapsarianswerepittedagainsteachother,andevennowexistalongsideofeachotherinReformedcircles.ThelimitationsofthisManual do not permit us to discuss the relative merits of Supra- andInfralapsarianism,andthereforewelimitourselvestoabarestatementofthedifferencebetweenthetwoviews.Thedifferencepertainsprimarilytotheorderof thedivinedecrees.Thequestion is,whether in theplanofGodthedecreesofelectionandreprobationprecedeorfollowthedecreestocreatetheworldandtopermitthefall.Thisnaturallyinvolvesanotherquestion,namely,whetherinthedecreeofpredestinationGodregardedmanasalreadycreatedandfallen,orasanobjectstilltobecreatedand

certaintofall.Theresultingorderinbothcasesisasfollows:

1. THE SUPRALAPSARIANORDER. The supralapsarian ordermay bestatedthus:

a.GodfirstdecreedtoglorifyHimselfinthesalvationofsomeandinthedamnationof othermen,whoat this stage existed inHismindonly aspossibilities.

b.Asameanstothatend,Hedecreedtocreatethosealreadyelectedorreprobated.

c.Fortheconsummationoftheplansofarformed,Hefurtherdecreedtopermitmantofall.

d.Finally,Hedecreedtoopenupawayofsalvationfortheelectandtoleadthemtoeverlastingglory,passingtheothersbyandconsigningthemtoeverlastingdestructionfortheirsin.

2.THEINFRALAPSARIANORDER.Whilethesupralapsarianordermaybe regarded as the more ideal of the two, the infralapsarian is morehistorical.

a.Godfirstdecreedtocreateman.

b.ThenHedecreedtopermitthefallofman.

c. Next He decreed to elect a certain number of the fallen and justlycondemned race to eternal life, and to pass the others by, consigningthemtoeverlastingdestructionfortheirsin.

d.Finally,Hedecreedtoprovideawayofsalvationfortheelect.

This is the order officially adopted by the Reformed Churches in theCanonsofDordt.

QuestionsforReview:HowispredestinationrelatedtothedecreeofGod ingeneral?Whoaretheobjectsof thedecreeofpredestination?Howshouldwe conceiveof

the predestination of the angels? In what sense is Christ the object ofpredestination? Which are the parts of predestination? In how manydifferent senses does the Bible speak of election? What is election asdistinguished from reprobation? What does the decree of reprobationinclude?What Scripture proof is there for the doctrine of reprobation?Does this doctrine involve injustice on the part of God? What is thedifferencebetweenInfra-andSupralapsarianism?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 93–111; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 214–236; Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, I, pp. 415–462;Girardeau, The Will in its Theological Relations; Dijk, Om't EeuwigWelbehagen,pp.265–456.

CREATION

A.CreationinGeneral.Thediscussionofthedecreesnaturallyleadsontothe consideration of their execution, which begins with the work ofcreation.Creationisthebeginningandbasisofalldivinerevelation,andalso the foundation of all ethical and religious life. The doctrine ofcreationcanbelearnedfromnoothersourcethanScriptureandcanbeacceptedonlybyfaith.

1.THEIDEAOFCREATION.Theword"creation"isnotalwaysusedinthesamesense,andasaresultthedefinitionsofcreationvary.ItmaybedefinedasthatactofGodbywhichHeproducestheworldandallthatisin it, partlywithout the use of pre-existentmaterials, andpartly out ofmaterialthatisbyitsverynatureinadequate,forthemanifestationofHisglory. Though it is often ascribed to the Father, it is also clearlyrepresentedas aworkof the triuneGod,Gen. 1:2; Job26:13;33:4;Ps.33:6;104:30;Isa.40:12,13;John1:3;1Cor.8:6;Col.1:15–17.Moreover,

itwasafreeactofGodandnotanecessaryact.Heistheself-sufficientOne,andthereforedidnotneedtheworld.Hisproductionoftheuniversewasnotdependentonaninherentnecessityinthedivinebeing,butonlyon a perfectly voluntary decision of His sovereign will. This must bemaintainedoveragainstallsortsofpantheistictheories.TheBibleclearlyteachesthatGodcreatedallthings,accordingtothecounselofHiswill,Eph. 1:11;Rev.4:11.ByHiscreativeworkHegave theworlda separateexistence, distinct fromHis own being, so that the universe cannot beregarded as itself God or even a part of God. At the same time HeconstitutedtheworldsothatitisalwaysdependentonHimandmustbeupheldfromdaytodaybyHisalmightypower.Heisneverdistantfrom,buteverpresentinHisentirecreation,Ps.139:7–10;Jer.23:24.

2. THE TIME OF CREATION. In speaking of the time of creation theBibleemploystheordinarylanguageofdailylife.Itbeginswiththeverysimple statement: "In the beginning God created the heavens and theearth," Gen. 1:1. The "beginning" to which this statement refers is thebeginningofalltemporalthings,andevenoftimeitself.Itwouldnotbecorrect to assume that timewasalready in existencewhenGodcreatedtheworld, and thatHe at some point in that existing time, called "thebeginning,"broughtforththeuniverse.Theworldwascreatedwithtimerather than in time. Back of the beginningmentioned inGen 1:1 lies abeginninglesseternity.

3.THEMANNEROFCREATION.Inthestrictestsenseof theword"tocreate"meanstobringforthsomethingoutofnothingorwithouttheuseofpre-existentmaterials.Theexpression"tocreateorbringforthoutofnothing" is not found in Scripture, but only in one of the apocryphalbooks,namely,IIMacc.7:28.Somehaveinterpretedittomeanthattheworldcameintoexistencewithoutacause.Butthisinterpretationiswideof themark. The expression simplymeans that in thework of creationGod did not make use of pre-existent materials. The world could notcome intoexistencewithouta cause.GodHimselfor,more specifically,thewillofGod,shouldberegardedasitscause.Scripturalwarrantforthedoctrine that God created the world without the use of pre-existentmaterials is found in such passages as Ps. 33:9; 148:5, and Heb. 11:3,which is the strongest Scriptural expression. The statement found in

Rom.4:17doesnotspeakoftheworkofcreation,butmayyetbebroughttobearonthesubjectunderconsideration. Itshouldbeborne inmind,however, thattheexpression,"tocreate"doesnotalwaysmeantobringforth something out of nothing. It may also mean to bring forthsomethingoutofsomepre-existentmaterialwhich isby itsverynatureunfit.GodcreatedthebodyofAdamoutof thedustof theground,andthebodyofEveoutofaribofAdam.

4.THEFINALENDOFCREATION.ThequestionofthefinalendofGodintheworkofcreationhasfrequentlybeendebated.Thereareespeciallytwoanswersthathavebeengiventothisquestion:

a.ThattheHappinessofManistheFinalEnd.SomeoftheearlyGreekandRomanphilosophers,theHumanistsofthedaysoftheReformation,and the Rationalists of the eighteenth century, found the final end ofcreation in thehappinessofman.Thebest forminwhich this theory isstated, is to the effect that God could not make Himself the end ofcreation, because He is sufficient unto Himself and has absolutely noneedofHiscreatures.And ifHecouldnotmakeHimself theend, thenthis can be found only in the creature, and ultimately in its supremehappiness.But itwouldseemtobeperfectly self-evident thatGoddoesnotexistforthesakeofman,butmanforthesakeofGod.Thecreaturecannotbethefinalendofcreation.Moreover, itcanhardlybesaidthateverythingincreationministerstohumanhappiness.

b. That the Declarative Glory of God is the Final End. According toScripturethetrueendofcreationisnotfoundinanythingoutsideofGod,but only inGodHimself, andmoreparticularly in themanifestation ofHisinherentexcellency.ThisdoesnotmeanthatGodcreatedtheworldprimarilytoreceivegloryfromHiscreaturesinadorationandpraise,butespeciallytomanifestHisglory.ThegloriousperfectionsofGodareseenintheentirecreation.Butthisfinalendincludesothersubordinateends.ThemanifestationofthegloryofGodinnatureisnotintendedasemptyshow,amereexhibitiontobeadmiredbythecreature,butalsoaimsatpromoting their welfare and perfect happiness. It seeks to attune theirhearts to the praises of the Creator, and to elicit from their souls theexpressionsoftheirgratefulness,theirlove,andadoration.ThisdoctrineisabundantlysupportedbyScripture,Isa.43:7;60:21;61:3;Ezek.36:21,

22; 39:7;Luke2:14;Rom.9:17; 11:36; 1Cor. 15:28;Eph. 1:5, 6, 12, 14;3:9,10;Col.1:16.

5. SUGGESTEDSUBSTITUTESFORTHEDOCTRINEOFCREATION.Thosewhoreject thedoctrineofcreationnaturallyresort tosomeothertheoryastotheoriginoftheworld.Threetheoriesdeservebriefmentionhere:

a. TheDualistic Theory. This theory is to the effect that bothGod andmatterareeternal.OriginalmatterisfrequentlyrepresentedastherudematerialoutofwhichGodformedtheworld.OnthisviewGodisnottheCreator but merely the Framer of the universe. There are seriousobjections to this theory, however. It involves the impossible, namely,that two eternals, and therefore two infinites, exist alongside of eachother. Moreover, matter shows clear traces of composition andarrangement,andthereforecannotberegardedasself-existent.

b.TheEmanationTheory.AccordingtothistheoryGodandtheworldareessentiallyone,andtheworldisanecessaryemanationoroutflowingoutofthedivinebeing.Thisideaischaracteristicofallpantheistictheories.Theobjectionstothisviewareveryserious.ItappliestoGodaprincipleofchange,ofgrowth,andofprogress,whichcharacterizesonlythefiniteandimperfect.ItrobsGodofthepowerofself-determination,andmenoftheir freedom and of their moral and responsible character. And inaddition to that, itmakesGod responsible for all that transpires in theworld,theevilaswellasthegood.

c.TheTheoryofEvolution.Thetheoryofevolutionissometimesspokenof as if it could be a substitute for the doctrine of creation. But this isclearlyamistake.Evolutionpresupposessomethingthatevolves,andthismustbeinthelastresorteithereternalorcreated,sothattheevolutionistmustchoosebetweenthetheorythatmatteriseternalandthedoctrineofcreation. Some seek to escape the difficulty by adoptingwhat they calltheisticorcreativeevolution.Butthisisreallyacontradictioninterms.Itis neither the Biblical doctrine of creation, nor a consistent theory ofevolution.

B. The Spiritual World. God created not only a material but also a

spiritual world, consisting of the angels, which calls for a briefconsiderationatthispoint.

1. THE EXISTENCE AND NATURE OF THE ANGELS. All religionsrecognize the existence of a spiritual world. Many prominentphilosophersevenadmittedthepossibilityoftheexistenceofaworldofangelsandsoughttoprovethisbypurereason.Thisisquiteimpossible,however,andthereforemodernliberaltheologyhaslargelydiscardedthebeliefinsuchspiritualbeings.TheBibleassumestheexistenceofangelsthroughoutandascribestothemrealpersonality.Theyarerepresentedashaving intelligence, 2 Sam. 14:20;Matt. 24:36, and amoral character,Jude6;Rev.14:10.Moreover,personalactionsareascribedtothem:theylove and rejoice, Luke 15:10, desire, 1 Pet. 1:12, contend, Jude 9; Rev.12:7,worship,Heb.1:6,talk,Zech.1:9;Luke1:13,comeandgo,Gen.19:1;Luke9:26,andsoon.Somehaveascribedtothemairyoretherealbodies,but this isquite contrary toScripture,whichclearly represents themaspurespiritualbeings,Matt.8:16;12:45;Luke7:21;8:2;11:26;Acts19:12;Eph.6:12;Heb.1:14.Theydonotmarry,Matt.22:30,areinvisible,Col.1:16, have no flesh and bone, Luke 24:39, and can be present in greatnumbers in a very limited space, Luke 8:30. Some of them arerepresented as good, holy, and elect, angels of light, 1 Tim. 5:21;Mark8:38;Luke9:26;Rev.14:10;2Cor.11:14;andothersasfallenfromtheiroriginalestate,andthereforeevil,John8:44;2Pet.2:4;Jude6.

2.THEANGELICORDERS.Besidesthegeneralname"angels,"thereareseveralspecificnameswhichpointtodifferentclassesofangels:

a. Cherubim. The Bible repeatedly speaks of cherubim. They guard theentranceofparadise,Gen.3:24,arerepresentedaslookingdownonthemercy-seat,Ex.25:18,andconstitutethechariotonwhichGoddescendsto the earth, 2 Sam. 22:11; Ps. 18:10. God is said to dwell between thecherubimintabernacleandtemple,Ps.80:1;99:1;Isa.37:16.Theyrevealthe power, majesty, and glory of God, and guard His holiness in thegardenofEden, in tabernacleand temple,andat thedescentofGod totheearth.

b.Seraphim.Arelatedclassofangelsaretheseraphim,mentionedinIsa.6:2, 3, 6. Like the cherubim, they are also represented symbolically in

human form. In distinction from the latter, however, they stand asservants roundabout the throneof theheavenlyKing, singHispraises,andareeverreadytodoHisbidding.Whilethecherubimsarethemightyones,theymaybecalledthenoblesamongtheangels.Whiletheformerguard theholinessofGod, they serve thepurposeof reconciliationandthuspreparemenfortheproperapproachtoGod.

c.Gabriel andMichael. There are two angels which are mentioned byname in Scripture, namely, Gabriel and Michael. The former ismentioned in Dan. 8:16; 9:21; Luke 1:19, 26. Some regard him as anuncreatedbeing,andevensuggest thathemightbe the thirdperson inthe Trinity; but the passages referred to show this to be an untenableposition.Evidentlyitwashisspecialtasktoconveydivinerevelationstomenandtointerpretthem.MichaelismentionedinDan.10:13,21;Jude9;Rev.12:7.SomeregardhisnameasadesignationofthesecondpersonintheTrinity,butthispositionisalsountenable.InviewofJude9,whereheiscalledthearchangel,andofRev.12:7itwouldseemthatheoccupiesa unique place among the angels. We see in him the valiant warriorfightingthebattlesofJehovahagainsttheenemiesofIsraelandagainsttheevilpowersinthespirit-world.

d. Principalities, powers, thrones, dominions. These names, found inEph.1:21;3:10;Col.1:16;2:10;1Pet.3:22,alsoservetodesignateangels.Theydonotpointtodifferentkindsofangels,butsimplytothefactthattherearedifferencesofrankanddignityamongtheangels.

3. THE SERVICE OF THE ANGELS. The angels are represented inScripture as praising God day and night, Job 38:7; Isa. 6; Ps. 103:20;148:2;Rev.5:11.Sincetheentranceofsinintotheworld,theyare"sentforthtodoserviceforthesakeofthemthatshallinheritsalvation,"Heb.1:14.They rejoice at the conversionof a sinner,Luke 15:10,watchoverbelievers,Ps.34:7;91:11,protectthelittleones,Matt.18:10,arepresentin theChurch,1Cor. 11:10;1Tim.5:21, learning fromher themanifoldrichesofthegraceofGod,Eph.3:10;1Pet.1:12,andconveybelieversintothe bosom of Abraham, Luke 16:22. They also frequently mediate thespecial revelations of God, Dan. 9:21–23; Zech. 1:12–14; Acts 7:38,communicateblessingstoHispeople,Ps.91:11,12;Isa.63:9;Dan.6:22;Acts 5:19, and execute judgments upon His enemies, Gen. 19:1, 13; 2

Kings19:35;Matt.13:41.

4.THEEVILANGELS.Besides thegoodtherearealsoevilangels,whodelight in opposing God and destroying His work. They were createdgood, but didnot retain their original position, 2Pet. 2:4; Jude6.Thespecialsinoftheseangelsisnotrevealed,butprobablyconsistedinthisthat they exalted themselves over against God and aspired to supremeauthority.Satan,whowasevidentlyoneoftheprincesamongtheangels,became the recognized head of those that fell away,Matt. 25:41; 9:34;Eph.2:2.Heisrepresentedastheoriginatorofsin,Gen.3:1;John8:44;2Cor.11:3;1John3:8;Rev.12:9;20:2,10.Theyalsopossesssuperhumanpower,butemploythis incursingGod, inbattlingagainstHimandHisAnointed, and in destroyingHis work. They seek to blind andmisleadeventheelect,andencouragethesinnerinhisevilway.

C.TheMaterialWorld.Besidesthespiritualthereisamaterialworld,andthisiscontemplatedhereinrelationtoGod,thatis,asaworkofGodandasarevelationofHisdivineperfections.

1.THENARRATIVEOFCREATION.ThestoryofcreationwasrevealedtoMosesortooneoftheearlierpatriarchs.Ifitwaspre-Mosaic,itmusthavepassedintradition,oralorwritten,fromonegenerationtoanother,andwasfinallypennedbyMosesundertheguidanceoftheHolySpirit.

a.TheOriginalCreation.Some regardGen. 1:1 as the superscriptionortitleofthewholenarrativeofcreation.Butinthatcasetherewouldbenoaccountwhateveroftheoriginalcreation,norofthecreationofheaven.ForthatreasonitisbettertoregardGen.1:1astherecordoftheoriginaland immediate creation of the universe, called in Hebrew fashion"heavenandearth." In this expression theword "heaven" refers to thatinvisible order of things in which the glory of God reveals itself in themostperfectmanner.Thesecondversedescribestheoriginalconditionoftheearth(comp.Ps.104:5,6).

b.TheCompletionofCreationinSixDays.SomeassumethatthedaysofwhichGenesis1speakswerelongperiodsoftime,correspondingwiththeperiodsofGeology.They findthatScriptureallowsandevenfavors thisinterpretation,since(1)theword"day"sometimesdenotesanindefinite

period,Ps.50:15;Eccl.7:14;Zech.4:10;(2)thesunwasnotcreateduntilthe fourth day, so that the length of the previous days could not bedetermined by the earth's relation to the sun; and (3) the seventh daycontinuesuptothepresenttime,andisthereforealreadymorethansixthousandyearslong.However,thefactthattheword"day"maydenoteaperiod of some length, does not prove that it is so used in Genesis 1.Neitherdoes the absenceof the sunprove that thedaysprevious to itscreationwere longperiods.AndtheseventhdayofGen.2:2,3, thedaywhichGodhallowed,doesnotcontinueuptothepresent,butterminatedthousands of years ago. The literal interpretation of the word "day" isfavoredbythefollowingconsiderations:(1)TheHebrewwordyom(day)primarilydenotesanordinaryday,andshouldbe sounderstoodunlessthecontextdemandsanotherinterpretation.(2)Genesis1wouldseemtoshut us up to the literal interpretation by its repeated "and there waseveningandtherewasmorning."Eachdayhadjustoneeveningandonemorning.IfthesedayswerethelongperiodsofGeology,theremusthavebeen interminablenightsof thousandsofyears.Whatwouldbecomeofall vegetation during the long 'nights following the third day? (3) InExodus20:9–11Israeliscommandedtolaboursixdays,becauseJehovahmade heaven and earth in six days. Thiswould seem to imply that theword"day"shouldbetakenintheordinarysense.(4)Thelastthreedayswere certainly ordinary days, for they were determined by the earth'srelationtothesun.Andiftheywereordinarydays,whynottheothers?

c.TheWorkoftheSeparateDays.TheworkofGodontheseparatedayswasasfollows:

1)On the firstday lightwascreated,andby the separationof lightanddarknessdayandnightwereconstituted.Thisdoesnotconflictwiththeideathatthesunandthestarswerecreatedonthefourthday;fortheseare not themselves lights, but light-bearers. The account of each day'swork closes with the words, "and there was evening and there wasmorning."Thedaysarereckonedfrommorningtomorning.Aftertwelvehours there was evening, and after another twelve hours there wasmorning.

2) The work of the second day was also a work of separation: thefirmamentwasestablishedbydividing thewatersaboveand thewaters

below,thatis,thecloudsandtheseas.NoticethattheHebrewwordfor"firmament" does not denote a solid vault, as some claim, but isequivalenttoourword"expanse."

3)Theworkofseparationiscontinuedonthethirddayintheseparationoftheseaandthedryland,cf.Ps.104:8.Inadditiontothatthevegetablekingdomofplantsand treeswasestablished.By thewordofHispowerGod caused the earth to bring forth flowerless plants, vegetables, andfruit-trees,eachyieldingfruitaccordingtoitskind.Godevidentlycreatedthedifferentspeciesofplants,andeachoneofthesecouldreproduceonlyits kind. The doctrine of evolution, of course, denies both of theseassertions.

4)Onthefourthday,sun,moon,andstarswerecreatedaslight-bearers,toserveavarietyofpurposes:todividedayandnight,toserveassignsofweather conditions and of important future events, to determine thesuccessionoftheseasonsandofdaysandyears,andtofunctionaslightsfortheearth.

5)Thefifthdaybroughtthecreationofbirdsandfishes,theinhabitantsoftheairandofthewater.Weshouldnoticethatthese,too,werecreatedaftertheirkind,thatis,thespecieswerecreated.

6)Finally,thesixthdayismarkedbytheclimaxoftheworkofcreation.The higher classes of animals were created. They did not naturallydevelopoutof theearth,butwere clearlybrought forthoutof itby thecreativefiatofGod.Thewholecreativeworkwascrownedbythecreationofman,madeintheimageofGod.Hisbodywasformedoutofthedustoftheearth,whilehissoulwasanimmediatecreationofGod.

7)GodrestedfromHislaboursontheseventhday.ThismeansfirstofallthatHeceased fromHiscreativework,butalso thatHe tookdelight inwhatHehadaccomplished.Hisrestwas likethatofanartistwhofindsprofoundsatisfactioninthecontemplationofhisproduction.HerejoicedintheworksofHishands,andradiatedgood-willtowardsHiscreatures.

2. THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION AND THE THEORY OFEVOLUTION.Someseemtothinkthatthetheoryofevolutionmighttake

theplaceofthedoctrineofcreationinexplainingtheoriginoftheworld.Butthisisclearlyamistake,foritoffersnosuchexplanation.Evolutionisdevelopment, and all development presupposes the existence ofsomethingthatdevelops.Thatwhichdoesnotexistcannotdevelop intoexistence.Fortheexplanationoftheoriginoftheworld,theevolutionistmusteitherresorttothetheorythatmatteriseternal,ortothedoctrineofcreation.Weshoulddistinguishbetweentwoformsofthedoctrineofevolution:

a.Naturalistic Evolution. Naturalistic evolution assumes that from thesimplest forms of matter and life all existing species of plants andanimals(includingman),andalsothevariousphenomenaoflife,suchassentiency, intelligence, morality, and religion, developed by a perfectlynaturalprocess,purelyastheresultofnaturalforcesresidentinnature.Itshouldbeborneinmind,however,thatthisisasyetonlyanunprovedassumption,andonethatfailsatseveralpoints.Itcannotexplainhowtheinorganic changed into the organic, nor how the brute changed into arational,moral,andreligiousbeing.Someevolutioniststhemselvesadmitthat it has failed to produce a single example of one species producinganother distinct species. Moreover, it is absolutely in conflict with thenarrative of creation as to the origin of species and of man, as to theoriginal condition of man, and as to his fall in sin and consequentdeterioration.

b.TheisticEvolution.Due to the failureofnaturalisticevolution togiveanadequateexplanationofthings,someChristianscholarstakerefugeinwhatiscalled"theistic"or"creativeevolution."ThispostulatesGodasthealmightyWorkerbackof thewholeprocessofdevelopment. ItamountstothisthatGodcreatedtheworldbyaprocessofevolution,aprocessofnatural development, in which God does not miraculously intervene,exceptwhenthisisabsolutelynecessary,asintheoriginationoflifeandofman. The very fact that it has a certain religious appealmakes thistheoryadangeroushybrid.AsamatteroffactitisnomoreinharmonywithScripturethannaturalisticevolution.It,too,teachesthatittookGodmillionsofyearstocreatetheworld,thatGoddidnotcreatethevariousspecies of plants and animals, that man at least on his physical sidedescendedfromthebrute,andthattherewasnofallintheBiblicalsense

oftheword.

QuestionsforReview:Whatiscreation?WascreationafreeoranecessaryactofGod?HowisGodrelatedtotheworld?Whatismeantby"thebeginning"inGen.1:1?Istheword"create"alwaysusedinthesamesenseinScripture?Howcanwe prove that God created the world without the use of pre-existentmaterial?What two views are there as to the final end of creation? InwhatsenseisthegloryofGodthefinalend?Whatsubstituteshavebeensuggestedforthedoctrineofcreation?Whatisthenatureoftheangels?WhatordersofangelsareindicatedinScripture?WhatisthefunctionofGabrielandMichael?Whatistheworkoftheangels?Whatproofhavewefor the existence of evil angels? How should Gen. 1:1 be interpreted?WerethedaysmentionedinGen.1ordinarydaysorlongperiods?Why?What did God create on each of the six days? Why is the doctrine ofevolution inconsistent with the Biblical narrative of creation?Does thetheoryofcreativeevolutionagreewithScripture?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 113–151; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 237–257;McPherson, ChristianDogmatics, pp. 163–174;Orr,Side-LightsonChristianDoctrine,pp.55–66;Clarke,TheChristianDoctrineofGod,pp.135–153;Price,ThePhantomofOrganicEvolution;Fairhurst,TheisticEvolution.

PROVIDENCE

Christianfaith isequallyopposedtoapantheisticconfusionofGodandthe world, and to a deistic separation of God from the world. This

becomes evident in the doctrine of divine providence. The name"providence"isnotfoundinScripture,butthedoctrineofprovidenceisnevertheless eminently Scriptural. It concerns the provisionwhichGodmakesforattainingtheendsofHisgovernment,andthecarewhichHemanifestsforallcreatures.

A.ProvidenceinGeneral.DivineprovidenceisthatworkofGodbywhichHepreservesallHiscreatures,isactiveinallthattranspiresintheworld,and directs all things to their appointed end. This definition indicatesthattherearethreeelementsindivineprovidence,namely,preservation,concurrence or cooperation, and government. The first has referenceprimarily to the being, the second to the activity, and the third to theguidanceofallthings.

1.MISCONCEPTIONSOFTHENATUREOFPROVIDENCE.IndealingwithGod'srelationtotheworldweshouldbeonourguardagainst twomisconceptions:

a. TheDeistic Conception. According to DeismGod's concernwith theworld is of a very general nature.He created theworld, established itslaw, set it in motion, and then withdrew from it. He looks on from adistanceastheworldruns itscourseaccordingtothe invariable lawsofnature, and interferes with its regular operation at most only whensomething goeswrong. Thus theworld is like amachinewhichHehasputintooperation,andnotatalllikeavesselwhichHepilotsfromdaytoday.

b. The Pantheistic Conception. Pantheism does not recognize thedistinction between God and the world. It identifies the two, andthereforereallyleavesnoroomforprovidenceinthepropersenseoftheword.Thewholecourseofnature issimplytheself-revelationofGod,aself-revelation that leaves no room for the independent operation ofsecondarycauses.The so-called lawsofnatureare simplymodesof thedirectactivityofGod.He is inaverydirect sense theauthorofall thattranspiresintheworld.EventheactswhichweascribetomanarereallyactsofGod.Accordingtothissystemmanisnotafreemoralbeing,andisnotresponsibleforhisacts.

2. THE OBJECTS OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE. It is customary todistinguishbetweengeneralandspecialprovidence,theformerdenotingGod'scontroloftheuniverseasawhole,andthelatterHiscareforeachpart of it. Some even speak of a very special providence respecting thechildrenofGod.ScriptureclearlyteachesGod'sprovidentialgovernmentandcontrol(a)overtheuniverseatlarge,Ps.103:19;Eph.1:11;(b)overthephysicalworld,Ps.104:14;Matt.5:45;(c)overthebrutecreation,Ps.104:21, 28;Matt. 6:26; (d) over the affairs of nations, Job 12:23; Acts17:6;(e)overman'sbirthandlotinlife,Ps.139:16;Gal.1:15,16;(f)overthingsseeminglyaccidentalorinsignificant,Prov.16:33;Matt.10:30;(g)in the protection of the righteous, Ps. 4:8; 121:3; Rom. 8:28; (h) insupplying thewants ofGod's people,Deut. 8:3;Phil. 4:19; (i) in givinganswers to prayer, Ps. 65:2; Matt. 7:7; and (j) in the exposure andpunishmentofthewicked,Ps.7:12,13;11:6.Theywhobelievethatnatureiscontrolledentirelybyaniron-cladsystemoflaws,whichtieseventhehandsofGod,usuallydenyall specialprovidences.TheydonotbelievethatGod can performmiracles, nor thatHe can answer prayer.Othersareoftheopinionthat,whileHecontrolsthebigthingsoflife,Hepaysnoattentiontothesmallerones.ButifHedoesnotheedthesmallerthingsoflife,Hecannevercontrolthelargerones.

B. The Elements of Providence in Particular. The definition given ofprovidence in the preceding clearly indicates that there are threeelementsinprovidence;andthesedeservespecialconsideration.

1.DIVINEPRESERVATION.PreservationisthatcontinuousworkofGodbywhichHeupholdsallthings.Thisdoesnotmean,assomepantheistsassume,thatGodcontinuestocreatetheworldfrommomenttomoment,nor simply, as the deists think, that He withdraws His hand from theworld and does not destroy it. It proceeds on the assumption that theworldhasadistinctexistenceapartfromGod,butthatitneverthelesshasthegroundofitscontinuedexistenceinGodandnotinitself.Itcontinuesto exist in virtue of a continued exercise of divine power by which allthings aremaintained in being and action. God alone is sovereign andabsolutely independent, and the creature is and always remainsdependent on Him. This doctrine is clearly taught in the followingpassages,Ps.63:8;Neh.9:6;Acts17:28;Col.1:17;Heb.1:3.

2.DIVINECONCURRENCE.ConcurrencemaybedefinedasthatworkofGodbywhichHeco-operateswithallHiscreaturesandcausesthemtoact precisely as they do. This means that there are real causes in theworld, such as the forces of nature and thewill ofman, but that thesecausesdonotworkindependentlyofGod.GodisoperativeineveryactofHis creature, not only in their good but also in their evil acts. Hestimulates them to action, accompanies their action at every moment,andmakes this action effective.We should guard against the idea thatGodandmanhaveanequalpart inthework, forGodeverremainstheprimary cause, without which man can do nothing; and against thenotion that the twodivide thework,Goddoing apart andmanapart.The same deed is in its entirety both a deed ofGod and a deed of thecreature. This should be so conceived, however, that where God co-operates with man the responsibility for the deed remains that of themoral creature. God cannot be held responsible for the sins of Hiscreatures. Thismust bemaintained in spite of the fact that we cannotfullyexplainwhatiscertainlytrue,namely,thatGod'sconcurrentactioninvolves no responsibility on His part for the evil of man. Scriptureplainly teaches that God works in the entire creation and in all Hiscreatures, Ps. 104:20, 21, 30; Amos 3:6;Deut. 8:18,Matt. 5:45; 10:29;Acts14:17.It isalsoclearthatsinfulactsareunderdivinecontrol,Gen.45:5;50:20;Ex.14:17;Isa.66:4;Rom.2:4;9:22;2Thess.2:11thatGodrestrainsthesinfulworksofthesinner,Gen.6:3;Job1:12;2:6;Ps.76:10;Isa.10:15;Acts7:51;andthatHeoverrulesevilforgood,Gen.50:20;Ps.76:10;Acts3:13.

3. DIVINE GOVERNMENT. The divine government is the continuedactivity ofGodwherebyHe rules all things, so that they answer to thepurposeoftheirexistence.BoththeOldandtheNewTestamentteachusthat God is King of the universe and rules all things according to Hisdivinegoodpleasure.ThenotionthatinthenewdispensationtheideaofGod's sovereignty is supplanted by that of His Fatherhood, is not inagreementwithsuchpassagesasMatt.6:33;1Tim.1:17;6:15;Rev.19:6;GodadaptsHisruletothenatureofthecreatureswhichHegoverns;Hisgovernmentofthephysicalworlddiffersfromthatofthespiritualworld.This government is universal, Ps. 103:19;Dan. 4:34, 35; Ps. 22:28, 29,butalsorelatestoparticulars.Themostsignificantthings,Matt.10:29–

31, that which is seemingly accidental, Prov. 16:33, the good deeds ofman,Phil.2:13,aswellastheirevildeeds,Acts14:16—theyareallunderdivinecontrol.GodisKingofIsrael,Isa.33:22,butHealsorulesamongthe nations, Ps. 47:9. Nothing can ever be withdrawn from Hisgovernment.

C.ExtraordinaryProvidencesorMiracles.Amongthespecialprovidencesof God wemay also reckon themiracles, in which God does not workthrough secondary causes or employs them in an unusual way.McPherson gives the following definition of a miracle: "A miracle issomethingdonewithoutrecoursetotheordinarymeansofproduction,aresultcalledforthdirectlybythefirstcause(God)withoutthemediation,at least in theusualway,ofsecondcauses."Thedistinctive thing in themiracle is that it results from theexerciseof the supernaturalpowerofGod.Andthismeans,ofcourse,thatitisnotbroughtaboutintheusualwaybymeansofsecondarycausesthatoperateaccordingtothelawsofnature.Somemaintain thatmiraclesare impossibleon theground thattheyimplyaviolationofthelawsofnature.Butthisisnotthecase.Theso-calledlawsofnaturemerelyrepresentGod'susualmethodofworkingin nature. It isHis good pleasure towork ordinarily in an orderlywaythrough secondary causes, that is, through the powers of nature orthrough the activity of man. But this does not mean that He cannotdepartfromtheestablishedorderandproduceextraordinaryeffectsbyasingleactofHiswill,andthatwithoutviolatingtheorderofnature.Evenman can counteract the laws of naturewithout disturbing them in anyway.Hecanliftuphishandandthrowaball intotheairinspiteofthelaw of gravitation. And if this is possible for man, it is all the morepossiblefortheomnipotentGod.

QuestionsforReview:How is the doctrine of providence related to that of creation?What isdivine providence? What is the deistic view of God's relation to theworld? How does the pantheist conceive of this relation? What is thedifferencebetween general and special providence?Whydo somedenyspecialprovidence?Whicharetheobjectsofdivineprovidence?Whatismeant by divine preservation? By divine concurrence? How should weconceiveofthisconcurrence?Towhatdifficultproblemdoesitgiverise?

Howfardoesthedivinegovernmentextend?Whatisamiracle?Whyaremiraclesconsideredbysometobeimpossible?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 152–168: Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 258–295;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics, pp. 174–184;Orr,Side-LightsonChristianDoctrine,pp.66–71;Clarke,TheChristianDoctrineofGod,pp.174–212;Thomson,TheChristianMiraclesandtheConclusions of Science; Bruin,Het Christelijk Geloof en de BeoefeningderNatuurwetenschap,pp.110–138.

THEDOCTRINEOFMANINRELATIONTOGOD

MANINHISORIGINALSTATE

THECONSTITUTIONALNATUREOFMAN

FromthediscussionofthedoctrineofGodwepassontothatofman,thecrownofGod'shandiwork.Thestudyofman in theologyshouldnotbeconfused with the science of anthropology, though it bears the samename. It does not make man as such, but very particularly man inrelationtoGodtheobjectofitsconsiderationanddiscussion.Underthepresent heading the essential constituents of human nature, and theoriginofthesoulintheindividualsoftheracewillbeconsidered.

A. The Essential Elements of Human Nature. There are especially twoviewsrespectingthenumberofelementsthatgotomakeuptheessentialnatureofman.

1. DICHOTOMY OR THE VIEW THAT MAN CONSISTS OF TWO

PARTS,BODYANDSOUL.Theusualviewoftheconstitutionofmanisthat he consists of two, and only two, distinct parts, namely, body andsoul or spirit. This is in harmony with the self-consciousness of man,which clearly testifies to the fact thatman consists of amaterial and aspiritual element. It is also borne out by the study of Scripture, whichspeaksofmanasconsistingof"bodyandsoul,"Matt.6:25;10:28,orof"body and spirit," Eccl. 12:7; 1 Cor. 5:3, 5. The two words, "soul" and"spirit" do not denote two different elements in man, but serve todesignate the one spiritual substance of man. This is proved by thefollowing consideration: (a) There are several passages which clearlyproceed on the assumption that man consists of only two parts, Rom.8:10; 1 Cor. 5:5; 7:34; 2 Cor. 7:1; Eph. 2:3; Col. 2:5. (b) Death issometimes described as the giving up of the soul, Gen. 35:18; 1 Kings17:21;Acts15:26;andinothercasesasthegivingupofthespirit,Ps.31:5;Luke23:46;Acts7:59.(c)Theimmaterialelementofthedeadisinsomeinstancestermed"soul,"Rev.9:6;20:4,andinothers"spirit,"1Pet.3:19;Heb. 12:23. These two terms merely serve to designate the spiritualelement of man from two different points of view. The word "spirit"contemplates it as the principle of life and action which controls thebody;while theword "soul" refers to it as thepersonal subject inman,which thinks and feels andwills, and in some cases particularly as theseatofaffections,Gen.2:7;Ps.62:1;63:1;Ps.103:1,2.

2. TRICHOTOMY, OR THE VIEWTHATMANCONSISTSOF THREEPARTS,BODY,SOUL,ANDSPIRIT.Alongsideoftheusualviewanotheronearose,whichconceivesofmanasconsistingofthreeparts,body,soul,and spirit. This conception of man did not result from the study ofScripture,butwasbornofthestudyofGreekphilosophy.ItwasadoptedbyseveralGermanandEnglishtheologians.Thesedonotagree,however,astothenatureofthesoul,norastotherelationinwhichitstandstotheotherpartsofhumannature.Someregardthesoulastheprincipleoftheanimal life inman,and thespiritas theprincipleof thehigherrationaland moral life. Others consider the soul to be a sort of intermediateelement,whichfurnishesthepointofcontactbetweenthebodyandthespirit. Biblical support for this viewwas sought particularly in 1 Thess.5:23andHeb.4:12,butthesedonotprovethepoint.ItistruethatPaulspeaksinthefirstpassageof"spiritandsoulandbody,"butthisdoesnot

necessarilymeanthatheregardstheseasthreedistinctelementsinmanrather than as three different aspects ofman.When Jesus summarizesthefirsttableofthelawbysaying,"ThoushaltlovetheLordthyGodwithallthyheart,andwithallthysoul,andwithallthymind,"inMatt.22:37,He does not have in mind three distinct substances. Such expressionssimply serve to emphasize the fact that the whole man is intended.Moreover,Hebrews4:12shouldnotbe taken tomean that theWordofGod, penetrating to the innerman,makes separation between his soulandhis spirit,whichwouldnaturally imply that these twoaredifferentsubstances;butsimplythatitbringsaboutaseparationinbothoftheseaspectsofmanbetweenthethoughtsandintentsoftheheart.

B. The Origin of the Soul in Each Individual. There are three theoriesrespectingtheoriginofthesoulineachindividual.

1.PRE-EXISTENTIANISM.Somespeculative theologiansadvocated thetheorythatthesoulsofmenexistedinapreviousstate,andthatcertainoccurrencesinthatformerstateaccountfortheconditioninwhichthosesouls are now found. It was thought to afford the most naturalexplanationofthefactthatallmenarebornassinners.Thistheorymeetswithlittlefavoratpresent.

2. TRADUCIANISM. According to Traducianism the souls of men arepropagated along with the bodies by generation, and are thereforetransmitted to the children by the parents. Scripture support for it isfoundinthefactthatGodceasedfromtheworkofcreationafterHehadmademan,Gen. 2:2; that the Bible says nothing about the creation ofEve'ssoul,Gen.2:23;1Cor.11:8;andthatdescendantsaresaidtobeintheloinsoftheirfathers,Gen.46:26;Heb.7:9,10.Furthermore,itwouldseem to be favored (a) by the analogy of the animalworld,where bothbody and soul are passed on from the old to the young; (b) by theinheritanceofmentalpeculiaritiesand family traitswhich inhere in thesoulratherthaninthebody;and(c)bytheinheritanceofmoraldepravityorsin,whichisamatterofthesoulratherthanofthebody.Thistheoryisburdenedwithcertaindifficulties,however,ofwhichthefollowingarethemostimportant:(a)Iteithermakestheparentsinsomesensecreatorsofthesoulofthechild,orproceedsontheassumptionthatthesouloftheparents can split itself up into several souls, which is contrary to the

doctrinethat thesouldoesnotadmitofdivision.(b)Itproceedsontheassumption that God works only in a mediate manner after He hasfinished the creationof theworld.But this is anunprovedassumption.Godoftenworksimmediatelyintheperformanceofmiraclesandinsomepartsoftheworkofredemption.(c)ItmakesitverydifficulttoguardthesinlessnessofJesus,ifHederivedbothHisbodyandsoulfromthesinfulMary.

3. CREATIONISM. The creationist view is to the effect that eachindividualsoulisanimmediatecreationofGod,whichowesitsorigintoadirect creative act, ofwhich the time cannotbepreciselydetermined.Thesoulissupposedtobecreatedpure,buttobecomesinfulevenbeforebirthbyenteringintothatcomplexofsinbywhichhumanityasawholeis burdened. This theory is more in harmony with Scripture than thepreceding one, since the Bible throughout represents body and soul ashaving different origins, Eccl. 12:7; Isa. 42:5; Zech. 12:1;Heb. 12:9; cf.Num.16:22.Moreover, it is farmoreinharmonywiththenatureofthehuman soul than traducianism, since it safeguards the spiritual andtherefore indivisible nature of the soul. And, finally, it also avoids thepitfalls in connectionwith the doctrine of Christ, since it enables us toguard the sinlessness of Jesus. This does notmean, however, that it isfree from all difficulties. Itmakes it rather hard to account for the re-appearanceofthementalandmoraltraitsoftheparentsinthechildren.Inadditiontothat itascribestothebeastnoblerpowersofpropagationthantoman,forthebeastmultipliesitselfafteritskind.And,finally,itisindangerofmakingGodatleastindirectlyresponsibleforsin,sinceHeputsapuresoulintoacomplexwhichwillinevitablycorruptit.Inspiteofthesedifficulties,however,itdeservesthepreference.

QuestionsforReview:Whatisthedichotomicviewoftheessentialelementsofhumannature?How can this view be proved from Scripture?What is the trichotomicview?WhatScripturalproofisadvancedforit?Whatobjectionsarethereto this view?What theories are thereas to theoriginof the soul in theindividual?WhatdoesPre-existentianismteach?Whatisthetraducianistview?Whatarguments canbeadvanced in favorof it?Whatobjectionsare there to it?What is the theoryof creationism?Whatconsiderations

favorthisview?Whatobjectionsaretheretoit?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 179–190; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 299, 300, 351, 352; McPherson, Christian Theology, pp.192–201;Laidlaw,TheBiblicalDoctrine ofMan, pp. 49–138;Weidner,TheDoctrineofMan,pp.13–23,28–35.

MANASTHEIMAGEOFGODANDINTHECOVENANTOFWORKS

Inthediscussionofthemoralandspiritualconditionofman,itisoftheutmost importance to consider first of all his original state. The twosubjectsthatcall forspecialconsiderationherearemanastheimageofGod,andmaninthecovenantofworks.

A.ManastheImageofGod.

1.THESCRIPTURALTEACHINGRESPECTINGMANASTHEIMAGE-BEARER OF GOD. The Bible represents man as the crown of God'shandiwork,whosespecialgloryconsists in this thathe iscreated in theimageofGodandafterHis likeness,Gen.1:26,27.Attemptshavebeenmade to distinguish sharply between the terms "image" and "likeness."Somewereof theopinion that the formerreferred to thebody,and thelattertothesoul.Augustineheldthattheyhadreferencerespectivelytothe intellectual and to the moral qualities of the soul. And RomanCatholicsregard"image"asanindicationofthenaturalgiftsbestowedonman, and "likeness" as a designation of the gifts with which he wassupernaturally endowed, that is, his original righteousness. In allprobabilityhowever, thewordsareusedas synonymsandboth refer tothe same thing, though from a slightly different point of view. The

followingpassagesclearlyshowthattheyareusedinterchangeably,Gen.1:26, 27; 5:1; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7; Col. 3:10; Jas. 3:9. Thewords "after ourlikeness"inGen.1:26apparentlyservetostressthefactthattheimageismostlikeorverysimilar.Thedoctrineofman'screationintheimageofGod is of the greatest importance, for the image is that which ismostdistinctive inman, that which distinguishes him from the animals andfromeveryothercreature.Asfarasweknoweventheangelsdonotsharethathonourwithhim.Theycertainlyarenottheimage-bearersofGodinthesenseandtotheextentthatmanis.

2. HISTORICAL CONCEPTIONS OF THE IMAGE OF GOD IN MAN.ThereareespeciallythreeimportanthistoricconceptionsoftheimageofGodinman.

a. The Roman Catholic View. Roman Catholics believe that God atcreationendowedmanwithcertainnaturalgifts,suchasthespiritualityof the soul, the freedom of the will, and the immortality of the body.These natural endowments constitute the image of God. In this purelynatural condition of man, however, there was a tendency of the lowerappetitesandpassionstorebelagainst thehigherpowersofreasonandconscience. This tendency was not in itself sin, but would naturallybecomesinassoonasthewillyieldedto itanditpassedintovoluntaryaction.Inordertoenablemantoholdhislowernatureincheck,however,Godendowedmanwithasupernaturalgift,calledoriginalrighteousness.Andthisissupposedtoconstituteman'slikenesstoGod.

b. The Lutheran View. The Lutherans are not all agreed as to whatconstitutestheimageofGod.Theprevailingopinion,however, isthatitconsistsonlyinthosespiritualqualitieswithwhichmanwasendowedatcreation, and which are generally called original righteousness. Thesequalitiesconsistintrueknowledge,righteousness,andholiness.Intakingthis view of thematter, they do not sufficiently recognize the essentialnatureofman,asdistinctfromthatoftheanimalsontheonehand,andthatof theangelson theotherhand. If the imageofGod, consisting intrueknowledge,righteousness,andholiness,constitutestheveryessenceofman, thequestionarises,howcanman lose this image, ashedidbysin,andstillremainman.And,again,iftheimageofGodsounderstooddeterminestheessentialnatureofman,whatessentialdifferenceisthere

betweenmenandtheangels,whoalsopossessthesespiritualqualities?

c. The Reformed View. The Reformed have a far more comprehensiveview of the image of God than either the Roman Catholics or theLutherans. They usually distinguish between the image of God in arestricted, and the image of God in a more comprehensive sense. Theformer consists in the spiritual qualities with which man was created,namely,trueknowledge,righteousnessandholiness.ThatthesebelongtotheimageofGod,followsfromEph.4:24andCol.3:10.TheimageofGodin themore comprehensive sense of theword is found in the fact thatmanisaspiritualbeing,rational,moral,andimmortal, inthebody,notasamaterialsubstance,butastheorganofthesoul,andinhisdominionover the lower creation. Notice that Scripture links up this dominionimmediatelywithman'screationintheimageofGod,Gen.1:26.ItisonlyinvirtueoftheimageofGodinthisbroadersensethatman,evenafterhehas lost the image of God in the restricted sense, consisting in trueknowledge, righteousness, and holiness, can still be called the image-bearerofGod,Gen.9:6;1Cor.11:7;15:49;Jas.3:9.

B.ManintheCovenantofWorks.ThenaturalrelationshipbetweenGodand man was supplemented by a covenant relationship, in which Godmade the future perfection and bliss contingent on the temporaryobedienceofman.Thiscovenantisknownasthecovenantofworks.

1. SCRIPTUREPROOFFORTHECOVENANTOFWORKS. In view ofthefactthatsomedenytheexistenceofthecovenantofworks,itishighlydesirable to examine its Scriptural basis. The Scripture proof for it isfoundinthefollowing:

a. All the elements of a covenant are indicated in Scripture; and if theelements are present, we have not only the right but also the duty tocombine them and to give the doctrine so construed an appropriatename. There are clearly two parties, God and man, entering into anagreement; there is a condition, the conditionof obedience,whichGodimposesonman,Gen.2:16,17;andthereisalsoapromise,thepromiseofeternal life.This is impliedinthealternativeofdeathastheresultofdisobedience, in such passages as Rom. 10:5 andGal. 3:12, and in thesymbolicalsignificanceofthetreeoflife,Gen.3:22.

b.TheparallelwhichPauldrawsbetweenAdamandChristinRom.5:12–21, in connection with the imputation of sin on the one hand and theimputationofrighteousnessontheotherhand,canonlybeexplainedontheassumptionthatAdam,likeChrist,wastheheadofacovenant.Ifweshare in the righteousness of Christ, because He is our representative,thenitfollowsthatweshareintheguiltofAdamforthesamereason.

c. There is one passage in Scripture which speaks of Adam as havingtransgressed the covenant. InHosea 6:7 we read: "But they like Adamhave transgressed the covenant." (Am.Rev.) This rendering of the textcorresponds with that in the Dutch Bible. The Authorized Version,however, renders: "But they likemen have transgressed the covenant."Theotherrenderingisclearlytobepreferred,andisalsofavoredbytheparallelpassageinJob31:33.

2. THE ELEMENTS OF THE COVENANT OF WORKS. The followingelementsmustbedistinguished.

a.TheCovenantingParties.Acovenantisalwaysacompactbetweentwoparties.Inthecaseofthecovenantofworkstherewas,ontheonehand,thetriuneGod,thesovereignLordofallcreation,bindingHimselfbyanactofcondescendinggracetogivetoman,ontheconditionofobedience,the blessings of eternal life and perfect happiness. And, on the otherhand,therewasAdam,therepresentativeofthehumanrace,absolutelydependent and without any claim on God, graciously permitted tocovenant with God for himself and his posterity, and assuming theresponsibilityofobeyingGodimplicitly.

b.ThePromiseof theCovenant.Thegreatpromiseof thecovenantwasthepromiseof life inthe fullestsenseof theword, that is,notmerelyacontinuanceofthenaturalexistenceofman,butliferaisedtothehighestdevelopmentofperennialblissandglory.Adamwasindeedcreatedinastateofpositiveholiness,andwasnotsubjecttothelawofdeath.Buthedidnotyetpossessthehighestprivilegesinstoreforman;hewasnotyetraisedabovethepossibilityoferring,sinning,anddying.Hedidnotyetpossessthehighestdegreeofholiness,norenjoylifeinallitsfulness.

c.TheConditionoftheCovenant.Thepromiseinthecovenantofworks

wasnotunconditional.Theconditionwas thatofperfect,unconditionalobedience. The divine law can demand no less than perfect obedience,andthepositivecommandnottoeatofthefruitofthetreeofknowledgeofgoodandevilwasclearlyatestofpureobedience.Initthedemandsofthe law of God converged, so to speak, in a single point. The greatquestion had to be settled,whethermanwould obeyGod implicitly, orfollowtheguidanceofhisowninsight.

d.ThePenaltyoftheCovenant.Thepenaltythatwasthreatenedincaseof transgression was death in the most inclusive sense of the word,physical,spiritual,andeternal.Thefundamentalideaofdeathisnotthatofextinctionofbeing,butthatofseparationfromthesourceoflife,andtheresultingdissolutionofmiseryandwoe.Itconsistsintheseparationof body and soul; but also, and this is evenmore fundamental, in theseparationofthesoulfromGod.

e. The Sacrament (s) of the Covenant. Opinions vary a great dealrespectingthesacrament(s)ofthecovenantofworks.Thoughsomespeakoftwo,three,orevenfoursacraments,themostprevalentopinionisthatthe treeof lifewas theonly sacrament.Thiswould seem tobe theonlyonethatfindsanywarrantinScripture.Inallprobabilitythetreeoflifewas an appointed symbol andpledge or seal of life. Thewords inGen.3:22shouldthenbeunderstoodsacramentally.

3. THE PRESENT VALIDITY OF THE COVENANT OF WORKS. TheArminians of the seventeenth centurymaintained the position that thecovenantofworkswaswhollyabrogatedbythefallofAdam,sothathisdescendantsareentirelyfreefromitsobligations.InoppositiontothemtheReformed took theposition that it ispartlya thingof thepast, andpartlystillinforce.

a. The Sense in Which it is Not Abrogated. The demand for perfectobedience still holds. The curse and punishment pronounced on thetransgressor still apply to all those who continue in sin. And theconditionalpromise is also still ineffect.Godmighthavewithdrawn it,butdidnot,cf.Lev.18:5;Gal.3:12.Itisevident,however,thatafterthefallnoonecancomplywiththecondition.

b. The Sense in Which it is Abrogated. The special obligations of thiscovenanthaveceased for thosewhoreally live in thecovenantofgrace.This does not mean that these obligations are simply set aside anddisregarded,but that theyweremetby theMediator forallHispeople.Moreover, the covenant of works is abrogated as an appointed way ormeans to obtain eternal life, for as such it is powerless after the fall ofman.

QuestionsforReview:WhyisthedoctrineoftheimageofGodinmanimportant?Dothewords"image" and "likeness" denote different things? What is the RomanCatholic view of the image and likeness of God in man? What theLutheran viewof the image ofGod inman?What objection is there tothisview?WhatdistinctiondotheReformedapplytotheimageofGodinman?Whatconstitutes the imageofGod in therestrictedsense?In themorecomprehensivesense?WhatBibleproofhaveweforthecovenantofworks?Whicharethepartiesofthecovenant?Whatisthepromise,thecondition,thepenalty,andthesacramentofthecovenant?Inwhatsensedoesthecovenantstillhold?Inwhatsenseisitabrogated?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 191–206; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 296–314;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics, pp. 201–210;Orr,Side-LightsonChristianDoctrine,pp.75–89;Kuyper,DeLeerderVerbonden(intheseries,UithetWoord),pp.107–229;A.Kuyper,Jr.,DeVastigheiddesVerbonds,pp.33–45.

MANINTHESTATEOFSIN

THEORIGINANDESSENTIALCHARACTEROFSIN

A.TheOriginofSinintheFallofMan.Theproblemoftheoriginofsinisone that necessarily forces itself upon the attention of thoughtfulmen,andstillcontinuestobafflethosewhoarenotsatisfiedwiththeBiblicalaccount of it. Some earlier and later theologians simply pushed theproblem back a step by saying that the souls of men sinned in someprevious existence, and that consequently all men are now born assinners.Thegreatphilosopher,ImmanuelKant,recognizedtheexistenceofradicalevilinman,butdespairedofexplainingitsorigin.Evolutionistsfind its explanation in the tendencies, impulses, andpassions inheritedfrom the brute. The Bible, however, directs our attention to the fall ofman.It teachesusthattherootofallmoralevil intheworld lies inthefirstsinofAdam,thenaturalandrepresentativeheadofthehumanrace.

1. THENATUREOF THE FIRST SIN. The first sin consisted inman'seatingofthetreeoftheknowledgeofgoodandevil.ThiseatingwassinfulsimplybecauseGodhadforbiddenit.Wedonotknowwhatkindoftreethis was. It was called "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,"becauseitwasdestinedtoreveal(a)whetherman'sfuturestatewouldbegoodorevil;and(b)whethermanwouldallowGodtodetermineforhimwhatwasgoodandevil,orwouldundertaketodeterminethisforhimself.The first sin was of a typical character, clearly revealing the essentialnatureofsin.Thisliesinthefactthatmanrefusedtosubjecthimselftothe will of God and to have God determine the course of his life, anddecidedtosettlethisforhimself.Differentelementscanbedistinguishedinthisfirstsin.Intheintellectitrevealeditselfasunbeliefandpride,inthewill as thedesire tobe likeGod,and in theaffectionsasanunholysatisfactionineatingoftheforbiddenfruit.

2.THEOCCASIONOFTHEFIRSTSIN.Thefallofmanwasoccasionedbythetemptationoftheserpent,whosowedinman'smindtheseedsofdistrust and unbelief. Though it was undoubtedly the intention of thetemptertocauseAdam,theheadofthecovenant,tofall,yetheaddressedhimselftoEve,probablybecauseshe(a)wasnotthecovenantheadandthereforewould not have the same sense of responsibility; (b) had notreceived the command of God directly but only indirectly, and wouldconsequently bemore susceptible to argumentation anddoubt; and (c)

wouldundoubtedlyprove tobe themosteffectiveagent inreaching theheart ofAdam.The speaking serpent has been a great stumbling-blockformanyandoftenledtoafigurativeorsymbolicalinterpretationofthenarrativeofthefall.Scriptureclearlyintimates,however,thattheserpentwas but the instrument of Satan, and that Satanwas the real tempter,whowasworkinginandthroughtheserpent,justasinthedaysofJesus'ministry he worked inmen and swine, John 8:44; Rom. 16:20; 2 Cor.11:3;Rev.12:9.

3. THERESULTSOF THE FIRST SIN. In consequence of the first sinman lost the image of God in the restricted sense of the word, trueknowledgeofGod, righteousness, andholiness; and,moreover, becametotallydepraved, that is,depraved ineverypartofhisbeingandutterlyincapableofdoinganyspiritualgood.Thischangeintheactualconditionof man also reflected itself in his consciousness. There was a sense ofpollution,revealingitselfinafeelingofshame,andasenseofguilt,whichfound expression in an accusing conscience and in fear of God. Inaddition to thatman became subject to the law of death in the fullestsenseoftheword,Gen.3:19;Rom.5:12;6:23,thoughthefullexecutionof the sentencewas stayed.Finally,manwasdriven fromparadise andbarredfromthetreeoflife,whichsymbolizedthelifethatwaspromisedinthecovenantofworks.

B.TheEssentialCharacterofSin.Therearemanyerroneousconceptionsoftherealcharacterofsin.ItisonlyfromScripturethatwecanlearnjustwhat sin is. In connectionwith theScriptural ideaof sin several pointsshouldbeemphasized.

1.SIN ISASPECIFICKINDOFEVIL. In thepresentdaymanypeopleshowatendencytosubstitutetheword"evil"for"sin."Butthisisapoorsubstitute.While it isperfectly true thatall sin isevil, it cannotbesaidwithequaltruththatallevil issin.Sicknessmayberegardedasanevil,butcanhardlybecalledasin.Moreover,themoderntendencytospeakofevilratherthanofsinfindsitsexplanationlargelyinthefactthatpeopleprefertoregardsinsimplyasadiseaseorasanimperfection,forwhichmancanhardlybeheldresponsible.TheBibleteachesustoregardsinasa specific kind of evil, as a moral evil for which man is directlyresponsibleandwhichbringshimunderasentenceofcondemnation.

2. SIN HAS AN ABSOLUTE CHARACTER. In the ethical sphere thecontrastbetweengoodandevilisabsolute.Thereisnoneutralconditionbetweenthetwo.ThisistheclearteachingofScripture.Hewhodoesnotlove God from the heart, is thereby already characterized as evil. TheBibleknowsofnopositionofmoralneutrality.Iturgesthewickedtoturnto righteousness, and frequently speaks of the righteous as falling intoevil;butitdoesnotcontainasingleindicationthateithertheoneortheothereverlandsinaneutralposition.Maniseitherontherightoronthewrongside,Matt.10:32,33;12:30;Luke11:23;Jas.2:10.

3. SIN ALWAYS HAS RELATION TO GOD AND HIS WILL. Moderntheologyinsistsoninterpretingsininasocialway,thatis,withreferenceto one's fellow-men. Sin is wrong done to one's fellow-beings. But thismissesthepointentirely,forsuchawrongcanbecalledsinonlyinviewofthefactthatitiscontrarytothewillofGod.Siniscorrectlydefinedas"lack of conformity to the law of God," and this means that it is theoppositeofthatlovetoGodwhichisrequiredbythedivinelaw.ItisquiteevidentthatScripturealwayscontemplatessininrelationtoGod,andthelaw,eitheraswrittenonthetabletsofman'sheartorasgivenbyMoses,Rom.1:32;2:12–14;4:15;5:13;Jas.2:9,10;1John3:4.

4. SIN INCLUDES BOTH GUILT AND POLLUTION. Sin is first of allguilt, that is, it isa transgressionof the law,whichmakesmenliable tothepunishmentofarighteousGod.Manyindeeddenythatsinincludesguilt,butthisdenialgoescontrarytothefactthatthesinneristhreatenedand actually visited with punishment, and to the plain statements ofScripture, such as Matt. 6:12; Rom. 3:19; 5:18; Eph. 2:3. Sin is alsopollution,an inherentcorruption towhicheverysinner is subject.Guiltalwayscarriespollutionwith it.Everyonewho isguilty inAdamis,asaresult, also born with a corrupt nature. The pollution of sin is clearlytaughtinsuchpassagesasJob14:4;Jer.17:9;Matt.7:15–20;Rom.8:5–8;Eph.4:17–19.

5.SINHAS ITSSEAT INTHEHEART.Sindoesnot reside in anyonefacultyofthesoul,butintheheart,whichinthepsychologyofScriptureisthecentralorganofthesoul,outofwhicharetheissuesof life,Prov.4:23. And from this center its influence and operations spread to the

intellect,thewill,theaffections,inshort,tothewholeman,includinghisbody. This view is clearly based on the representations of Scripture insuch passages as the following: Prov. 4:23; Jer. 17:9; Matt. 15:19, 20;Luke6:45;Heb.3:12.

6.SINDOESNOTCONSIST INOUTWARDACTSONLY.OveragainstPelagians and Semi-Pelagians of every description the fact should beemphasizedthatsinconsistsnotonlyinoutwardacts,butalsoinsinfulhabits and in a sinful conditionof theheart.These three are related toone another as follows: the sinful state is thebasis of the sinful habits,and these, in turn, lead on to the sinful deeds. That the evil thoughts,affections, and intents of the heart should also be regarded as sinfulfollowsfromsuchpassagesasthefollowing:Matt.5:22,28;Rom7:7;Gal.5:17,24.

C.DivergentViewsofSin.ThereareseveralviewsofsinwhicharenotatallinharmonywiththeScripturalrepresentationofit.Justafewofthesecanbebrieflyindicatedhere.

1. THE PELAGIAN VIEW OF SIN. The Pelagian does not believe inoriginalsin,andthereforedoesnotsharetheconvictionthateverymanisbornasasinner.Adamwascreated,andeveryoneofhisdescendantsisborn,inastateofmoralneutrality,neitherpositivelygoodnorpositivelybad.Sinistheresultofthefreechoiceofeveryman.Nooneneedsin,ifhedoesnotwantto.Thereisnosuchthingasasinfulnatureorasinfulcharacter; neither are there sinful dispositions. Sin consists only in adeliberatechoiceofevilbyawillwhichisperfectlyfree,andcanjustaswellchooseandfollowthegood.

2. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC VIEW OF SIN. According to the RomanCatholicsoriginalsinisprimarilyanegativecondition,consistingintheabsence of that original righteousness with which man was super-naturallyendowed.ItisastateofaversiontoGod,andthereforeastateofsin.Actualsinconsistsonlyinthoseactionsofmanwhicharetheresultof a deliberate choice of the will. The unholy disposition, desires, andaffectionsthatliebackofthesedeedsmaybeofasinfulnatureandtendtoproducesin,butcannotthemselvesbeconsideredassininthestrictestsenseoftheword.

3.THEEVOLUTIONARYVIEWOFSIN.Inmodernliberaltheologytheevolutionaryviewofsinisverypopular,thoughitisnotalwayspresentedin exactly the same way. It was developed particularly in the works ofTennant.Accordingtohimtherearemanyimpulsesandqualitieswhichmanhas inherited from thebrute.Thesearenot in themselves sin,butnaturally become sin under certain conditions. There is a graduallyawakening moral sense in man, which condemns those impulses andqualities. And these actually become sin, if man continues to yield totheminspiteofthecondemningvoiceofconscience.Sinconsistsinthis,therefore,thatman,asamoralbeing,stillallowshimselftobecontrolledby the appetites and passions of his sensual nature rather than by theaspirationsofhishighernature.

QuestionsforReview:What is theBiblical viewof the origin of sin?Can younameanyotherviews?Whatwas the first sin?Whywas the tree concerned called "thetree of the knowledge of good and evil"? What elements can bedistinguished in the first sin?Whydid the tempter approachEve?CanyouprovethatSatanwastherealtempter?Whichweretheresultsofthefirstsin?Whyisitundesirabletosubstitutetheword"evil"for"sin"?Isitpossibleformantooccupyaneutralposition,neithergoodnorbad?Isitcorrecttointerpretsinwithreferencetoman?Howcanweprovethatsinincludesguilt?Wheredoessinhave itsseat inman?Howcanweprovethat sin does not consist exclusively in outward acts? What is thePelagian,theRomanCatholic,andtheevolutionaryviewofsin?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 207–225; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.315–324;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.220–242;Orr,Side-LightsonChristianDoctrine,pp.93–99;Candlish,TheBiblicalDoctrineofSin,pp.9–44.

SININTHELIFEOFTHEHUMANRACE

A.TheConnectionBetweenAdam'sSinandthatofHisDescendants.ThePelagiansdenythatthereisanynecessaryconnectionbetweenthesinofAdamandthatofhisdescendants.TheearlierArminiansmaintain thatmanhasinheritedhisnaturalcorruptionfromAdam,butis innosenseresponsible for the sin of the latter, while the later or WesleyanArminiansadmitthatman'sinborncorruptionalsoinvolvesguilt.ThereareespeciallythreedifferentwaysofexplainingtheconnectionbetweenthesinofAdamandthatofhisdescendants.

1. THE REALISTIC THEORY. The earliest of the three is the realistictheory, which is to the effect that God originally created one generalhumannature,which incourseof time isdivided intoasmanypartsastherearehuman individuals.Adampossessed thewholeof thisgeneralhumannature;andastheresultofhissinitbecameguiltyandpolluted.Consequently every individual part of it also shares in this guilt andpollution.This theorydoesnotexplainwhyweare responsibleonly forthe firstsinofAdam,andnot for therestofhissins,committedby thesame human nature, nor for the sins of the rest of our forefathers.Neitherdoes itgiveananswerto thequestion,whyChristwasnotheldresponsibleforthesinofAdam,forHecertainlysharedtheverynaturethatsinnedinAdam.

2. THE THEORY OF IMMEDIATE IMPUTATION (COVENANT OFWORKS).AccordingtothisviewAdamstoodinatwofoldrelationtohisdescendants.Hewasthenaturalheadofthehumanrace,theprogenitorof all the children ofmen. To this natural relationship God added thecovenant relationship, in virtue of which Adam was also therepresentative head of all his descendants. When he sinned in thisrepresentative capacity, theguiltofhis sinwasnaturally imputed toallthosewhomherepresented;andastheresultofthistheyareallborninacorrupt state. This theory explains why the descendants of Adam areresponsible only for the one sin which he committed as head of thecovenant,whytheyarenotresponsibleforthesinsoftheirforbears,and

why Christ, who is not a human person, does not share in the guilt ofAdam.

3.THETHEORYOFMEDIATEIMPUTATION.ThelasttheoryproceedsontheassumptionthattheguiltofAdam'ssinisnotdirectlyimputedtohis descendants, and advocates the following idea:Adam'sdescendantsderive their innate corruption from him by the process of naturalgeneration;andonthebasisofthatinherentdepravitywhichtheysharewith him they are also considered guilty of his apostasy. They are notborn corrupt because they are guilty in Adam, but they are consideredguilty because they are born corrupt. If this theory were consistent, itought to teach the mediate imputation of the sins of all previousgenerationstothosefollowing,fortheirjointcorruptionispassedonbygeneration.Moreover,byholdingthatourmoralcorruptionisimputedtous as sin, it clearly implies that this corruptionwouldnot be guilt, if itwerenotsoimputed;butthereisnomoralcorruptionthatisnotatthesametimeguiltandthatdoesnotmakeoneliabletopunishment.

B.Original andActualSin. Inageneralway sin isdivided intooriginalandactualsin.

1.ORIGINALSIN.Invirtueof theirconnectionwithAdamallmenare,after the fall, born in a sinful state and condition. This state is calledoriginalsinandistheinwardrootofalltheactualsinsthatdefilethelifeofman.Itcontainstwoelements:

a.OriginalGuilt.ThismeansthattheguiltofAdam'ssinisimputedtous.Sincehesinnedasourrepresentative,weareguilty inhim.Thismeansthat thestate inwhichweareborn isoneofwilfulviolationof the law,andthatwearethereforebynatureliabletopunishment.TheArminiansoftheseventeenthcenturyandtheadvocatesofmodernliberaltheologybothdenythatoriginalsininvolvesoriginalguilt.Yetthisiscertainlythecase according to the plain teachings of Scripture, Rom. 5:12–19; Eph.2:3.

b.Original Pollution. The descendants of Adam are not only burdenedwithhisguilt,butalso inherit fromhimtheirmoralpollution.Theyarenot only deprived of original righteousness, but also have an inherent

positive disposition toward sin. This pollutionmay be considered fromtwodifferentpointsofview:

1)Astotaldepravity.Thisdoesnotmeanthateverymanisasbadashecanbe,cannotdogoodinanysenseof theword,andhasabsolutelynosenseofadmirationforthetrue,thegood,andthebeautiful;butsimplythat the inherent corruptionextends toeverypartofman'snature, andthatthereisinhimnospiritualgood,thatisgoodinrelationtoGod,atall, but onlymoral perversion. The total depravity ofman is denied byPelagians,Socinians,and theearlierArminians,but is clearly taughtbyScripture, John 5:42;Rom. 7:18, 23; 8:7; 2 Cor. 7:1; Eph. 4:18; 2 Tim.3:2–4;Tit.1:15;Heb.3:12.

2)Astotalinability.Here,again,itisnecessarytodistinguish.Reformedtheologiansgenerallymaintainthatthesinnerisstillabletoperform(a)natural good; (b) civil good or civil righteousness; and (c) externallyreligious good. He may perform acts and manifest sentiments thatdeservethesincereapprovalandgratitudeoftheirfellow-men,andthatevenmeetinameasurewiththeapprovalofGod.YetwhentheseworksareconsideredinrelationtoGod,theyareradicallydefective,sincetheyarenotpromptedbylovetoGod,norbyanyregardforthewillofGodasrequiring them. Moreover, man cannot change his fundamentalpreferenceforsintoloveforGod,norevenmakeanapproachtosuchachange.ThereisabundantScripturalsupportforthisdoctrine,John1:13;3:5;6:44;8:34;15:4,5;Rom.7:18,24;8:7,8;1Cor.2:14;2Cor.3:5;Eph.2:1,8–10;Heb.11:6.

2.ACTUALSIN.

a.TheDifferenceBetweenActualandOriginalSin.Theterm"actualsin"denotes not only sins consisting in outward acts, but also all thoseconscious thoughtsandvolitionswhichproceed fromoriginal sin.Theyare the sins which an individual performs, in distinction from hisinheritednatureandinclination.Whileoriginalsinisone,actualsinsaremanifold.Theymaybesinsoftheinnerlife,suchaspride,envy,hatred,sensual lusts and evil desires; or sins of the outer life, such as deceit,theft,murder,adultery,andsoon.Whiletheexistenceoforiginalsinhasmet and is stillmeetingwithwidespread denial, the presence of actual

sin, at least in some sense of the word, is generally admitted. At thepresenttime,however,manydenythatitconstitutesguilt,andthusclosetheireyestotherealsinfulnessofsin.

b.TheUnpardonableSin.TherearepassagesofScripturewhichspeakofasinthatcannotbeforgiven,afterwhichachangeofheartisimpossible,andforwhichitisnotnecessarytopray,Matt.12:31,32;Mark3:28–30;Luke12:10;Heb.4:4–6;10:26,27;1John5:16.Itisgenerallyknownasthe sin or blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. This sin consists in theconscious, malicious, and wilful rejection and slandering, againstevidence and conviction, of the testimony of theHoly Spirit respectingthegraceofGodinJesusChrist,attributingitoutofhatredandenmitytotheprince of darkness. It presupposes in thosewho commit it a ratherprofoundknowledgeofthetruth,aninnerilluminationoftheHolySpirit,andan intellectual convictionof the truth so strongandpowerful as tomake anhonest denial of it impossible. The sin itself then consists notsimply in doubting the truth or in a simple denial of it, but in acontradictionofitthatgoescontrarytotheconvictionofthemindandtothe illumination of the conscience. It is unpardonable, not because itsguilttranscendsthemeritsofChrist,orbecausethesinnerisbeyondtherenewingpoweroftheHolySpirit;butbecauseitisasinthatexcludesallrepentance, sears the conscience, andhardens the sinner. In thosewhohave committed this sinwemay therefore expect to find apronouncedhatredofGod,adefiantattitudetoHimandtoallthatisdivine,delightin ridiculingandslandering thatwhich isholy,andabsoluteunconcernrespectingthewelfareoftheirsoulandthefuturelife.Inviewofthefactthat this sin is not followed by repentance,wemay be reasonably surethattheywhofearthattheyhavecommittedit,whoworryaboutit,andwhodesiretheprayersofothersforthem,havenotcommittedit.

C.TheUniversalityofSin.Scriptureandexperiencebothteachusthatsinis universal. EvenPelagians do not deny this, though they ascribe it toexternal conditions, such as a bad environment, evil examples, and awrong kind of education. According to Scripture, however, theexplanationforitliesinthefallofAdamandintheimputationofhissintoallhisdescendants.Itmaybeprovedinvariousways:

1. The universality of sin is asserted in several direct statements of

Scripture. The following are some of themost important passages thatcome intoconsiderationhere: 1Kings8:46;Ps. 143:2;Prov.20:9;Eccl.7:20;Rom.3:1–12,19,20,23;Gal.3:22;Jas.3:2;1John1:8,10.

2.SeveralpassagesofScriptureteachthatsinistheheritageofmanfromthe timeofhisbirth,and is thereforepresent inhumannaturesoearlythat itcannotpossiblybeconsideredastheresultof imitation,Ps.51:5;Job14:4;John3:6.

3.Deathasthepenaltyofsinisvisitedevenuponthosewhohaveneverexercised a personal and conscious choice,Rom. 5:12–14. This passageimplies that sin exists, in the case of infants, prior to moralconsciousness.Sinceinfantsdie,andthereforetheeffectofsinispresentintheircase,itisbutnaturaltoassumethatthecauseisalsopresent.

4.AccordingtoScriptureallmenareundercondemnationandthereforeneed the redemptionwhich is inChristJesus.Childrenarenevermadeanexceptiontothisrule.Thisfollowsfromthepassagesquotedunder(1),and also from John 3:3, 5; Eph. 2:3; 1 John 5:12. They all need theregeneratingpoweroftheHolySpirituntosalvation.

QuestionsforReview:What different opinions are there respecting the connection betweenAdam'ssinandthatofhisdescendants?Whatistherealistictheory,andwhyisitobjectionable?Howdoesthedoctrineofthecovenantofworksconceive of the connection between the sin of Adam and our sinfulcondition?Whatadvantageshasthisview?Whatsolutionoftheproblemis suggested by the theory ofmediate imputation?What objections arethere to this solution?What is original sin?What two elementsdoes itinclude?Howshouldweconceiveofman'stotaldepravity?Howmusthistotal inabilitybeunderstood?What is included inactualsin?Howdoesactual sin differ from original sin? What is the nature of theunpardonable sin? Can there be any reasonable doubt as to theuniversalityof sin?Whatexplanationdosomeoffer for this?HowdoestheBibleaccountforit?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 226–242; Hodge, Outlines of

Theology,pp.325–366;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.242–256;Orr, Side-Lights on Christian Doctrine, pp. 100–106; Candlish, TheBiblicalDoctrineofSin,pp.55–81,90–128.

MANINTHECOVENANTOFGRACE

THECOVENANTOFREDEMPTION

InthecovenantofredemptionwehaveanagreementbetweentheFather,astherepresentativeoftheTrinity,andtheSon,astherepresentativeofHispeople,inwhichthelatterundertakestomeettheobligationsofthosewhomtheFatherhasgivenHim,andtheformerpromisestheSonallthatisnecessary forHis redemptivework.This eternal covenant is the firmfoundationofthecovenantofgrace.Iftherehadbeennoeternalcounselof peace between the Father and the Son, there could have been noagreement between God and the sinner. The covenant of redemptionmakesthecovenantofgracepossible.

A.TheScripturalBasisfortheCovenantofRedemption.Thecovenantofredemption is frequently called the counsel of peace, a name that isderivedfromZech.6:13.ThedoctrineofthiseternalcounselrestsonthefollowingScripturalbasis:

1. Scripture clearly points to the fact that the plan of redemption wasincluded in the eternal decree or counsel of God, Eph. 1:4 ff.; 3:11; 2Thess.2:13;2Tim.1:9;Jas.2:5;1Peter1:2,andotherpassages.

2.TherearepassageswhichpointtothefactthattheplanofGodforthesalvation of sinners was of the nature of a covenant. Christ speaks ofpromises made to Him before His advent, and repeatedly refers to a

commissionwhichHereceivedfromtheFather,John5:30,43;6:38–40;17:4–12. Moreover, in Rom. 5:12–21 and in 1 Cor. 15:22 He is clearlyrepresentedasa covenanthead.TheparallelbetweenAdamandChristleavesnodoubtonthispoint.

3.Theelementsofacovenantareclearly indicated, suchascontractingparties, a promise, and a condition. In Ps. 2:7–9 the parties arementionedandapromiseisindicated(comp.Acts13:33;Heb.1:5;5:5).In another Messianic passage, Ps. 40:7–9 (comp. Heb. 10:5–7) theMessiah expresses His readiness to do the Father's will in becoming asacrificeforsin.ChristrepeatedlyspeaksofataskwhichtheFatherhasentrustedtoHim,John6:38,39;10:18;17:4.Moreover,John17:5,6,9,24 (cf. also Phil. 2:9–11) refer to a rewardwhichHe receives from theFather.

4.TherearetwopassagesintheOldTestament,whichconnecttheideaofthe covenant immediately with theMessiah, namely, Ps. 89:3 and Isa.42:6, which refers to the Servant of the Lord. The connection clearlyshows that this servant is not merely Israel. Moreover, there are alsopassages in which the Messiah speaks of God as his God, which iscovenantlanguage,Ps.22:1,2;Ps.40:8.

B.TheSon in theCovenantofRedemption.Therearea fewthings thatshouldbestressedinconnectionwiththeplaceandworkofChristinthecovenantofredemption.

1.THEOFFICIALPOSITIONOFCHRISTINTHECOVENANT.Christisbothsuretyandheadofthecovenantofredemption.Heiscalled"surety"in Heb. 7:22. A surety is a person who takes upon himself the legalobligations of another. Christ stepped into the place of the sinner andundertooktoatoneforsinbybearingthenecessarypunishment,andtomeet the demands of the law for allHis people. By taking the place ofdelinquentmanHebecamethesecondorlastAdam,andinthatcapacityis the head of the covenant, the representative of all those whom theFatherhasgivenHim.

2.THECOVENANTWASFORCHRISTACOVENANTOFWORKS.Thecovenant of redemption is indeed the eternal basis of the covenant of

grace, and for sinners also its original pattern. But for Christ it is acovenantofworksratherthanacovenantofgrace.ForHimthelawoftheoriginalcovenant,thecovenantofworksapplies,namely,thateternallifecan only be obtained by meeting the demands of the law. As the lastAdam,Christobtainseternallifeasarewardforfaithfulobedience,andnotatallasanunmeritedgiftofgrace.

3.CHRIST'SWORK INTHECOVENANT ISLIMITEDBYELECTION.The covenant of redemption has sometimes been confused with thedecree of election, but the two are not identical. Thedecree of electiondetermines thenumberof thosewhoaredestined tobeheirsofeternalglory inChrist,while thecovenantof redemptionrepresents theway inwhich grace and glory are prepared for sinners. Logically, electionprecedes the counselof redemption,because the suretyofChrist in thecovenant isparticularandnotuniversal.Christundertakes tosaveonlythosewhoaregivenHimbytheFather.

4. THE COVENANT OF REDEMPTION AND THE USE OF THESACRAMENTSBYCHRIST.ChristusedthesacramentsofboththeOldandtheNewTestament.ClearlytheycouldnotmeanforHimwhattheymeanforbelievers;theycouldnotbesymbolsnorsealsofsavinggrace;neither could they be instrumental in strengthening saving faith. In allprobability they were for Him signs and seals of the covenant ofredemption.Heusedtheminanofficialcapacity,astherepresentativeofHis people. He was burdened with the guilt of His people, and thesacramentscouldsignifyandsealforHimtheremovalofthisburdenandthe fulfilmentof thepromisesof theFather.And in so farasHe in thecapacityofMediatorwascalledupontoexercisefaith(notsavingfaith),theycouldalsoservetostrengthenthisfaithasfarasHishumannaturewasconcerned.

C.RequirementsandPromisesintheCovenantofRedemption.

1. REQUIREMENTS. The Father required of the Son as the surety andheadofHispeople:

a.ThatHeshouldassumehumannaturebybeingbornofawoman,andshould assume this nature with its present infirmities, though without

sin,Gal.4:4,5;Heb.2:10,11,14,15;4:15.

b. That He should place Himself under the law, in order to pay thepenaltyforsinandtomeriteverlastinglifefortheelect,Ps.40:8;Matt.5:17,18;John8:29;9:4,5.

c.ThatHeshouldapplyHismeritstoHispeoplebyregeneratingthem,leading them to conversion, endowing themwith faith, and sanctifyingthem, through the powerful operation of theHoly Spirit, thus securingtheconsecrationoftheirlivestoGod,John16:13–15;17:19–22.

2.PROMISES.ThemainpromisesoftheFather,whichcorrespondtothedemandsoftheSon,were:

a.ThatHewouldprepare forHimabodyuncontaminatedbysin,Heb.10:5, andwouldanointHimbygivingHim theSpiritwithoutmeasure,thus qualifying Him for His Messianic offices, Isa. 42:1, 2; 61:1; John3:34.

b.ThatHewouldsupportHimintheperformanceofHiswork,andthusenableHimtoaccomplishthedestructionofSatanandtheestablishmentofthekingdomofGod,Isa.42:6,7;Luke22:43.

c.ThatHewoulddeliverHimfromthepowerofdeath,andexaltHimtoHis own righthand inheaven, committing toHimall power inheavenandonearth,Ps.16:8–11;Acts2:25–28;Phil.2:9–11.

d. That He would enable Him, as a reward for His accomplishedatonement,tosendouttheHolySpiritfortheformationofHisspiritualbody by regeneration and sanctification, and for the instruction,guidance,andprotectionoftheChurch,John14:26;15:26;16:13,14.

e.ThatthroughtheoperationoftheHolySpiritallthosegivenuntotheSonwould really come untoHim, so that none of themwould be lost,John6:37,39,40,44,45.

f. That a multitude which no man can number would thus be madepartakersof redemption,so thatultimately thekingdomof theMessiahwouldembraceallthenationsoftheearth,Ps.22:27;72:17.

g.Thatinandthroughthiswondrousworkofredemptionthegloryofthedivineperfectionswouldbecomemanifest tomenand angels, andGodwouldreceiveallthehonor,Eph.1:6,12,14.

QuestionsforReview:Whatisthecovenantofredemption?Howisitrelatedtothecovenantofgrace?Bywhatothernameisitknown?WhatScripturalevidenceisthereforthecovenantofredemption?WhatistheofficialpositionofChristinthiscovenant?IsitforChristacovenantofworksoracovenantofgrace?WhomdoesChristrepresentinthiscovenant?Whatwasthesignificanceof theuse of the sacraments byChrist?What did theFather require ofChristinthecovenantofredemption?WhatdidHepromisetheSon?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 247–256; Hodge, SystematicTheology,II,pp.359–362;Dabney,Theology,pp.432–437.

THECOVENANTOFGRACE

OnthebasisofthecovenantofredemptionGodestablishedthecovenantofgrace,acovenantoffriendshipwithman,whichrepresentsthewayinwhichtheblessingsofredemptionaremediatedtothesinner.Underthepresentheadingseveralparticularscallforconsideration.

A.TheContractingPartiesintheCovenantofGrace.Godisthefirstpartyinthecovenantofgrace,thepartythattakestheinitiativeandgraciouslydeterminestherelationinwhichthesecondpartywillstandtoHim.Heappears in the covenant as a gracious and forgiving Father, willing topardonsinandtorestoresinnerstoHisblessedcommunion.Itisnotso

easytodeterminepreciselywhothesecondpartyis,thoughingeneralitmaybesaidthatGodestablishedthecovenantwithfallenman.Thoughtherewasnohistoricallimitationatfirst,itbecameevidentinthedaysofAbrahamthat itwasnot intendedto includeallmen.For thatreason itdoesnotsatisfytosaythatGodmadethecovenantwiththesinner.Theremust be some limitation, and therefore some hold that Godmade thecovenantwithAbrahamandhis seed, that is, hisnatural but especiallyhis spiritual descendants; or, slightly different,with believers and theirseed. The majority maintain, however, that He entered into covenantrelationshipwiththeelectortheelectsinner.Tobeperfectlyclearinthematter,itisofgreatimportancetomakeaverynecessarydistinction.

1. THE COVENANT AS AN END IN ITSELF, A COVENANT OFMUTUAL FRIENDSHIP OR COMMUNION OF LIFE. The covenant ofgrace may be contemplated as an end which God had in view in thecovenantofredemption,asanultimatespiritualrealitywhichHebringsto realization in thecourseofhistory through theministryof theWordandthepowerfuloperationoftheHolySpirit,andwhichwillbeperfectedatthetimeoftheconsummationofallthings.Fromthispointofviewitisa relation sought and established, namely, a relation of friendshipbetween God andman, a communion of life in whichman ismade toshare in the divine life, the life of the resurrection. It represents acondition in which privileges are improved for spiritual ends, thepromises of God are embraced by a living faith, and the promisedblessingsarebroughttofullfruition.Ifthecovenantisregardedfromthispoint of view, there would seem to be only one possible position withrespect to the second party in the covenant, and that is that GodestablishedHiscovenantofgracewiththeelect.It is thenthatgraciousagreementbetweenGodandtheelectsinner,inwhichGodgivesHimselfwith all the blessings of salvation to the elect sinner, and the latterembracesGodandallHisgraciousgiftsbyfaith.InviewofthefactthatinAbraham the central blessing of the covenantwas realized, he is called"the friendofGod,"Jas.2:23.Jesus callsHisdisciples friends,becausetheysharethecovenantblessingofthenewlifeandliveinobediencetoHiscommandments,John15:14,15.SeveralpassagesofScripturespeakofGod'scovenantmerciesasrealizedinthosethatfearHim,Deut.7:9;2Chron. 6:14; Ps. 103:17, 18. The way in which this is done in the new

dispensation is indicated in Jer. 31:31–34; Heb. 10:8–12. The finalrealizationofthecovenantisdescribedinRev.21:3,"AndIheardagreatvoiceoutofthethronesaying,Behold,thetabernacleofGodiswithmen,andHe shall dwell with them, and they shall beHis peoples, andGodHimselfshallbewiththem,andbetheirGod."

2. THE COVENANT AS A MEANS TO AN END, A PURELY LEGALRELATIONSHIP INDICATIVE OF THE SPIRITUAL END THATSHOULDBEREALIZED.ItisquiteevidentthattheBiblealsospeaksofthecovenantinabroadersense,asincludingmanywhodonotshareinthelifeofthecovenant,andevensomeinwhomthecovenantpromisesarenever realized. IshmaelandEsauwere in thecovenant; sowere thewickedsonsofEli.TherebelliousIsraelites,whodiedintheirsins,werecovenant people, and even the Scribes and Pharisees, so stronglydenounced by Jesus, shared in the privileges of the covenant. Thecovenant may be regarded as a purely legal agreement, in which Godguarantees the blessings of salvation to all those who believe. Thisagreement may exist as a purely objective arrangement even wherenothing is done to realize its purpose. The relationwhich it representsmayexistindependentlyoftheattitudeassumedbymantohiscovenantobligations.Thatis,amanmaynotmeetthecovenantrequirements,maynot believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and yet stand in covenantrelationshiptoGod.Ifweconceiveofthecovenantinthisbroadersense,as a purely legal relationship, as a means by which God realizes theblessings of salvation in the lives of those who meet the covenantrequirements,—then we shall have to say that God established thecovenantwithbelieversandtheirchildren.

B. The Promises and Requirements of the Covenant of Grace. Everycovenant has two sides: it offers certain privileges and imposes certainobligations.Thereareinitpromisesandrequirements.

1. THE PROMISES OF THE COVENANT. The main promise of thecovenant, which includes all other promises, is contained in the oft-repeatedwords, "Iwill be aGodunto thee and to thy seed after thee."ThispromiseinitsfullorinanabbreviatedformisfoundinseveralOldandNewTestamentpassages,especially inpassageswhichspeakof theintroduction of a new phase of the covenant life, or which refer to a

renewalof the covenant, Jer. 31:33;32:38–40;Ezek. 34:23–25,30,31;36:25–28; 37:26, 27; Heb. 8:10; 2 Cor. 6:16–18. The promise is fullyrealized when at last the new Jerusalem descends out of heaven fromGod, and the tabernacle ofGod is pitched amongmen,Rev. 21:3. Thisgrandpromise is re-echoed timeandagain in the jubilant exultationofthosewhostand incovenantrelationship toGod,"Jehovah ismyGod."This one promise really includes all other promises, such as (a) thepromise of various temporal blessings, which often serve to symbolizethose of a spiritual kind (b) the promise of justification, including theforgivenessofsins, theadoptionofchildren,andaclaimto lifeeternal;(c) thepromiseof theSpiritofGod for theapplication, fulland free,oftheworkofredemptionandofalltheblessingsofsalvation;and(d)thepromiseoffinalglorificationinalifethatneverends,Job19:25–27;Ps.16:11;73:24–26;Isa.43:25;Jer.31:33,34;Ezek.36:27;Dan.12:2,3;Gal.4:5,6;Tit.3:7;Heb.11:7;Jas.2:5.

2.THEREQUIREMENTSOFTHECOVENANT.Itissometimessaidthatthecovenantofgrace,indistinctionfromthecovenantofworks,containsno requirements and imposes no obligations onman.However, this ishardlycorrect intheabsolutesenseof theword.It isperfectlytruethattherearenorequirementsofameritoriouscharacter.Manearnsnothingby meeting the demands of the covenant. It is also true that all therequirementsofthecovenantarecoveredbythepromisesofGod,thatis,GodpromisestogivemanallthatHerequiresofhim.Hencetheprayerof Augustine: "Lord, give what Thou commandest, and then commandwhat Thouwilt." Bearing these things inmind, however, it is perfectlycorrect to speak of covenant requirements. There are especially twothingswhichGoddemandsof thosewhostand incovenantrelationshipto Him. He requires of them, (a) that they accept the covenant andcovenantpromisesbyfaith,andthusenteruponthelifeofthecovenant;and (b) that, from the principle of the new life bornwithin them, theyconsecratethemselvestoGodinanewobedience.

C.TheCharacteristicsof theCovenant.Thereareseveralcharacteristicsofthecovenantofgrace.

1.ITISAGRACIOUSCOVENANT.Thiscovenantmayhecalledgracious,(a)becauseinitGodallowsasuretytomeetourobligations;(b)because

HeHimself offers the surety in the person of His Son, whomeets thedemands of justice; and (c) because by His grace, revealed in theoperationof theHolySpirit,Heenablesman to liveup tohis covenantresponsibilities.

2.ITISATRINITARIANCOVENANT.ThetriuneGodisoperativeinthecovenant of grace. It has its origin in the elective love and grace of theFather,findsitslegalfoundationinthesuretyshipoftheSon,andisfullyrealizedinthelivesofsinnersonlybytheeffectiveapplicationoftheHolySpirit,John1:16;Eph.2:8;1Pet.1:2.

3.ITISANETERNALANDTHEREFOREUNBREAKABLECOVENANT.Ifwedistinguishbetweenthecovenantofredemptionandthecovenantof grace, thenwe cannot say that the latterwas established in eternity.We can maintain, however, that it will endure eternally, Gen. 17:19; 2Sam. 23:5; Heb. 13:20. And because the covenant is eternal, it is alsoinviolable,Heb.6:17.GodremainsforevertruetoHiscovenantandwillinvariably bring it to full realization in the elect. This does not mean,however,thatmanwillneverbreakthecovenantrelationship.

4. IT IS A PARTICULAR ANDNOT A UNIVERSAL COVENANT. Thismeans that the essence of the covenant, the relation of friendshipwithGodandoflifeincommunionwithHim,willberealizedonlyintheelect,and that even the external covenant relationshipdoesnot extend to allmen, but only to believers and their seed. The New Testamentdispensationofthecovenantmaybecalleduniversalinthesensethatinit thecovenant isextendedtoallnations,and isnomore limitedto theJews,asitwasintheolddispensation.

5. THE COVENANT IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME IN ALLDISPENSATIONS, THOUGH THE FORM OF ITS ADMINISTRATIONCHANGES.Theessentialcovenantpromiseisthesamethroughout,Gen.17:7;Ex.19:5;20:1;Deut.29:13;2Sam.7:14;Jer.31:33;Heb.8:10.Thegospel,whichrepresentsthecontentsofthecovenant,isthesameinbothTestaments, Gen. 3:15; Gal. 1:8, 9; 3:8. The way in which Abrahamobtainedtherealizationofthecovenantpromise,isalsothewayinwhichtheNewTestamentbelieversobtainthis,Rom.4:9–25;Gal.3:7–9,17,18.Moreover, theMediator is the sameyesterday, today,and forever,Heb.

13:8;Acts4:12.

6.THECOVENANTISBOTHCONDITIONALANDUNCONDITIONAL.The covenant is clearly conditional on the suretyship of Jesus Christ.Man's conscious entrance into the covenant as a communion of life isconditionedbyfaithandhiscontinuedenjoymentofitsblessingsbythepersistentexerciseoffaith.Atthesametimethereisnoconditioninthecovenant that can be regarded as meritorious. In that sense it isunconditional. The sinner is called upon to repent and believe, but hisfaith and repentance do not in any way merit the blessings of thecovenant.

7.THECOVENANTCANBECALLEDATESTAMENT.Thecovenantis,ofcourse,two-sided,that is, it isanagreementbetweentwoparties.Anabsolutelyone-sidedcovenant isacontradiction interms.Yet there isasense inwhich the covenant of grace canbe calledone-sided. Inoriginthe covenant is simply of the nature of a divine disposition orarrangement by which God communicates His blessings to man.Moreover, in the covenant God freely gives all that He demands. Andbecause the covenant is a free and sovereigndisposition on the part ofGod,itcanalsobecalledatestament,Heb.9:16,17.Thisnamestressesthefacts,(a)thatthecovenantisasawholeagiftofGod;(b)thatitsNewTestamentdispensationwasusheredinbythedeathofChrist;(c)thatitisfirmandinviolable;and(d)thatinitGodgiveswhatHedemands.

D.TheRelationofChristtotheCovenantofGrace.ChristisrepresentedinScriptureastheMediatorof theCovenant.Amediator inthegeneralsenseofthewordissimplyapersonwhomediatesbetweentwooppositepartiesinanattempttobringthemtogether.TheScripturalideaofChristasourMediator,however,isfarmorespecificandmoreprofound.Christis Mediator in more than one sense. He intervenes between God andman,notmerely tosue forpeaceandtopersuade to it,butarmedwithfullpowertodoallthatisnecessaryfortheactualestablishmentofpeace.He is theMediatorwho, as our surety, takes uponHimself the guilt ofsinners, pays the penalty of sin, fulfils the law, and thus restores thosewhomHe represents to the right relation toGod,Heb. 7:22; 8:6; 9:15;12:24.ButHeisalsotheMediatorofaccess,whorevealstomenthetruthconcerning God and their relation to Him, and the conditions of

acceptableservice;whopersuadesandenablesthemtoreceivethetruth,anddirectsandsustainstheminallcircumstancesoflife,soastoperfecttheirdeliverance,Rom.5:2.IndoingallthisHeemploystheministryofmen,2Cor.5:20.

E. Membership in the Covenant. In speaking of membership in thecovenant the distinction between the covenant as a purely legalagreement and the covenant as a communion of life should always beborneinmind.

1.ADULTSINTHECOVENANT.Adultscanonlyenterthecovenantasalegalagreementbyfaithandconfession.Andwhentheysoenterit,theyatthesametimegainentranceintothecovenantasacommunionoflife.Theonlycaseinwhichthisdoesnotholdiswhenthefaithispretendedandtheconfessionisfalse.Theyenteruponthefullcovenantlifeatoncetherefore,andthisistheonlywayinwhichtheycanenterthecovenant.They not only become participants in certain external privileges andengage in the performance of certain external duties, but confess thattheyacceptthecovenantwithalivingfaith,andthatitistheirdesireandintentiontocontinueinthisfaith.

2. CHILDREN OF BELIEVERS IN THE COVENANT. Children ofbelieversenterthecovenantasalegalrelationshipbybirth,butthisdoesnot necessarily mean that they are also at once in the covenant as acommunionoflife.Itdoesnotevenmeanthatthecovenantrelationwillevercometoitsfullrealizationintheirlives.Atthesametimethereisinthecaseofthesechildrenareasonableassurancethatthecovenantwillintime become a living reality in their experience. This is based on thepromise of God, which is absolutely reliable, that He will work in thehearts of the covenant seedwithHis saving grace and transform themintolivingmembersofthecovenant.Aslongastheydonotmanifestthecontrary, we shall have to proceed on the assumption that they are inpossessionofthecovenantlife.Andwhenthesechildrencometoyearsofdiscretion, it is incumbent on them to accept their covenantresponsibilitiesvoluntarilybyatrueconfessionoffaith.Failuretodothisis,strictlyspeaking,adenialoftheircovenantrelationship.

3.UNREGENERATEINTHECOVENANT.Fromtheprecedingitfollows

thatevenunregenerateandunconvertedpersonsmaybeinthecovenantasalegalagreement.Theymayclaimthecovenantpromises,whichGodgave when He established the covenant with believers and their seed,Rom.9:4.Theyaresubjecttotheministrationsofthecovenant,andareconstantly admonished and exhorted to live according to itsrequirements.TheChurchtreatsthemascovenantchildren,offersthemthesealsofthecovenantandexhortsthemtoaproperuseofthese.Theyalsoshareinthecommonblessingsofthecovenant,andareevensubjectto certain special operations of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit strives withthem in a special manner, convicts them of sin, enlightens them in ameasure,andenrichesthemwiththechoicestblessingsofcommongrace,Gen. 6:3; Matt. 13:18–22; Heb. 6:4, 5. Finally, they are also undercovenantresponsibility,andare indutybound torepentandbelieve. IftheydonotturntoGodandacceptChristbyfaith,theywillbejudgedasbreakersofthecovenant.

F. The Different Dispensations of the Covenant. There are only twodispensationsinthestrictsenseoftheword,thatoftheOldandthatofthe New Testament. But in the old dispensation we may distinguishseveral periods or stages in the revelation of the covenant. A briefcharacterizationofthesestagesmustsufficehere.

1. THE FIRSTREVELATIONOF THE COVENANT INGEN. 3:15. Thefirst revelation of the covenant is found in what is usually called theprotevangelorthematernalpromise.Thisdoesnotyetrefertotheformalestablishment of the covenant. The revelation of such a formalestablishment could only follow after the covenant idea had beendevelopedinhistory.Itcontainsanindicationofthedivisionofmankindintotwoparts,theseedofthewomanandtheseedoftheserpent,andofthefriendshipofGodestablishedwiththeseedofthewoman,involvingenmitywiththeseedoftheserpent.Thecovenantideaisthereforeclearlypresent.

2.THECOVENANTOFNATUREWITHNOAH.ThecovenantwithNoahisofaverygeneralnature.GodpromisesthatHewillnotagaindestroyall flesh by the waters of a flood, and that the regular succession ofseedtimeandharvest,coldandheat,summerandwinter,dayandnight,willcontinue.Theforcesofnaturearebridled,thepowersofevilareput

undergreatrestraint,andman isprotectedagainst theviolenceofbothmanandbeast.Itisacovenantconferringonlynaturalblessings,andisthereforeoftencalledthecovenantofnatureorofcommongrace.Thereis no objection to this designation, provided it does not convey theimpression that this covenant has no connection whatever with thecovenantof grace.Though the twodiffer, they are alsomost intimatelyconnected.ThecovenantofnaturealsooriginatedinthegraceofGod.Itguarantees those earthly and temporal blessingswhichwere absolutelynecessaryfortherealizationofthecovenantofgrace.

3. THE COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM. The covenant was formallyestablished with Abraham. This transaction with Abrahammarked thebeginning of the particularistic Old Testament administration of thecovenant. It is now limited to a single family, to Abraham and hisdescendants. In the establishment of the covenant with Abraham itbecomesperfectlyevidentthatmanisaparty inthecovenantandmustrespond to the promises of God by faith. The great central fact in theattitudeofAbrahamis thathebelievedGodandthat thiswasreckonedunto him for righteousness. Moreover, the spiritual blessings of thecovenantnowbecomefarmoreapparentthantheywerebefore,suchasthe forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Spirit. The covenant withAbraham clearly had two sides. On the one hand it had reference totemporal blessings, such as the land of Canaan, a numerous offspring,and victory over the enemies; and on the other hand it referred tospiritualblessings.Thetemporalblessingsservedtosymbolizeandtypifyspiritualandheavenly things.Thespiritualpromisesarenotrealized inthenaturaldescendantsofAbrahamassuch,butonlyinthosewhoalsofollowinthefootstepsofAbraham.

4.THESINAITICCOVENANT.ThecovenantatSinaiwasessentiallythesame as that established with Abraham, though the form differedsomewhat. It was now established with the nation of Israel, and thusbecamea trulynational covenant. Ina largemeasureChurchandStatebecameone.TheSinaiticcovenantincludedaservicewhichcontainedapositivereminderofthestrictdemandsofthecovenantofworks.Itwasnotarenewedcovenantofworks,however;thelawwasmadesubservientto the covenant of grace.While the theocratic standing of the Israelite

wasmadedependentonhiskeepingofthelaw,Lev.18:5;Deut.27:26;2Cor. 3:7, 8, the law served a twofold purpose in connection with thecovenantofgrace,namely,(a)toincreasetheconsciousnessofsin,Rom.3:20;4:15; 5:13;Gal. 3:19; and (b) tobe a tutoruntoChrist,Gal. 3:24.There was a detailed ceremonial and typical service. A separatepriesthoodwas instituted, and a continuous preaching of the gospel insymbols and types was introduced. These symbols and types appearedunder two different aspects: as the demands of God imposed on thepeople; and as a divine message of salvation to the people. The Jewslargely lost sight of the latter aspect, and fixed their attention almostexclusivelyonthe former.Theyregardedthecovenantever increasinglyas a covenant of works, and saw in the symbols and types a mereappendagetothis.

5.THENEWTESTAMENTDISPENSATIONOFTHECOVENANT.Thecovenantof grace, as it is revealed in theNewTestament, is essentiallyonewiththecovenantthatstandsoutonthepagesoftheOldTestament.ThisisabundantlyevidentfromRomans4andGalatians3.Itistruethatit is sometimescalledanewcovenant,Jer.31:31;Heb.8:8, 13;but thisfinds a sufficient explanation in the fact that the New TestamentadministrationofthecovenantdiffersinseveralparticularsfromthatoftheOldTestament.WhileintheOldTestamentformitwaslimitedtoasinglenation,initsNewTestamentaspectitbrokethroughthebarriersofparticularismandbecameuniversal in the sense that its blessingswereextendedtopeopleofallnations.ThroughthefinishedworkofChristthemiddle wall of partition was broken down, all nations were given freeaccesstoGod,andthosethatwereafaroffwerebroughtnear.Moreover,thereisalsoadifferenceinthequalityofitsbenefits,inthespiritualandgraciouscharacterofitsblessings.TheHolySpiritispouredoutupontheChurch,andoutofthefulnessofthegraceofGodenrichesbelieverswithspiritualandeternalblessings.ThepresentdispensationofthecovenantwillcontinueuntilthereturnofJesusChrist,whenthecovenantrelationwill be realized in the fullest sense of the word in a life of intimatecommunionwithGod.Rev.21:3.

QuestionforReview:What distinction do we apply to the covenant of grace? What answer

shouldbegiven to thequestionas to thesecondparty in thecovenant?What is the all-embracing promise of the covenant? What spiritualblessingsdoesthisinclude?WhattemporalblessingsdiditincludeintheOldTestament?What doesGod require of thosewithwhomHe entersinto covenant relationship? Which are the characteristics of thecovenant?Inwhatsenseisthecovenantunbreakable,andinwhatsenseisitsometimesbroken?Howcanyouprovetheunityofthecovenantinboth dispensations? In what sense is it conditional and in what senseunconditional?Why can the covenantbe called a testament?Wheredowe find the first revelation of the covenant?What is the nature of thecovenantwithNoah? Is it at all related to the covenant of grace?Withwhom was the covenant formally established? What characterizes thecovenant with Abraham?Howwas the Sinaitic covenant related to thecovenantwithAbraham?Howdidthetwodiffer?WhatcharacterizestheNew Testament dispensation in the covenant? What is the position ofChrist in thecovenantofgrace? Inwhat twofoldsense isHeMediator?Howcanadultsbecomecovenantmembers?Howdochildrenofbelieversenter the covenant? What is expected of them? In what sense canunregeneratepersonsbecovenantmembers?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 256–294; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 367–377; Hodge, Systematic Theology, II, 354–377;Hendriksen,TheCovenantofGrace;Dabney,Theology,pp.440–463.

THEDOCTRINEOFTHEPERSONANDWORKOFCHRIST

Thediscussionof thedoctrineofman is followed in theologyby thatofthedoctrineofChrist.Thetransitionfromtheonetotheotherisnotonlylogical,butalsoverynaturalandeasy.Ourstudyofthedoctrineofmanconcludedwithadiscussionof the covenantof grace, and from thiswenownaturallypassontoaconsiderationoftheMediatorofthecovenant,JesusChrist,andoftheobjectiveworkofredemptionwroughtbyHimforallHis people.The subjective applicationof thiswork is discussed in alatersection.

THEPERSONOFCHRIST

THENAMESOFCHRIST

ThereisagreatnumberofnamesthatareappliedtoChristinScripture,of which some point to His essential being and others to His natures;someservetodesignateHisstatesandothersHisoffices.HeiscalledtheSonofGod,theSonofMan,theManofSorrows,theLordofGlory,theMessiah, theMediator, theLord,Prophet,Priest, andKing.FiveofHisnamescallforspecialdiscussion,namely,Jesus,Christ,SonofMan,SonofGod,andLord.

A. The Name Jesus. The name Jesus is simply the Greek form of theHebrewnameJehoshuaJos.1:1;Zech.3:1,ofwhichtheregularforminthe post-exilic historical books is Jeshua, Ezra. 2:2. The name is in allprobability derived from theHebrewword "to save."This is entirely inagreementwiththeinterpretationofthenamegivenbytheangeloftheLordinMatt.1:21.Thenamewasbornebytwowell-knowntypesofJesusintheOldTestament,namely,byJoshua,thesonofNun,whoprefiguresChristastheroyalleader,givingHispeoplethevictoryovertheirenemiesand bringing them into the Holy Land; and by Joshua the son ofJehozadak,whotypifiesChristasthegreathighpriestbearingthesinsofHispeople,Zech.3:1ff.

B.TheNameChrist.ThenameChrist is theNewTestamentequivalentfor theOldTestamentnameMessiah,whichmeans"theanointedone."Kings and priests were regularly anointed during the old dispensation,Ex.29:7;Lev.4:3;Judg.9:8;1Sam.9:16;10:1;2Sam.19:10.Thekingiscalled"theanointedofJehovah,"1Sam.24:6.Onlyasingle instanceofthe anointing of a prophet is recorded, 1 Kings 19:16, but there wereprobablyreferencestoitinPs.105:15andIsa.61:1.TheoilthatwasusedintheanointingsymbolizedtheSpiritofGod,Isa.61:1;Zech.4:1–6,andtheanointingitselfrepresentedatransferoftheSpirittotheconsecratedperson, 1 Sam. 10:1, 6, 10; 16:13, 14. It included three elements: (1) anappointment to office; (2) the establishment of a sacred relationshipbetweentheanointedoneandGod;and(3)acommunicationoftheSpiritofGodtotheoneinductedintooffice,1Sam.16:13.TheOldTestamentrefers to the anointing of the Lord in Ps. 2:2; 45:7, and the NewTestamentinActs4:27and10:38.ChristwassetuporappointedtoHisoffices frometernity,buthistoricallyHisanointing tookplacewhenHewas conceivedby theHolySpirit,Luke 1:35, andwhenHe received theSpirit,especiallyatthetimeofHisbaptism,Matt.3:16;Mark1:10;Luke3:22;John1:32;3:34.ItservedtoqualifyHimforHisgreattask.

C.TheNameSonofMan.Thename "SonofMan" is found inPs.8:4;Dan. 7:13;Enoch46 and62; 2Esdras 13, and is,moreover, a frequentdesignationoftheprophetEzekiel.Itisnowquitegenerallyadmittedthatthename,asappliedtoChrist,isderivedfromDan.7:13,thoughinthatpassage it ismerely adescriptive appellative, andnot yet a title. Ithadalreadyturnedintoatitle,however,whenthebookofEnochwaswritten.Thename"SonofMan"wasthemostcommonself-designationofJesus.Heused it onmore than forty occasions,while others all but refrainedfrom employing it, the only exceptions being those indicated in John12:34;Acts 7:56;Rev. 1:13; 14:14.Thename is, of course, expressiveofthehumanityofChrist,andissometimesusedinpassagesinwhichJesusspeaksofHissufferingsanddeath;butitisalsoclearlysuggestiveoftheuniqueness of Jesus, of His superhuman character and of His futurecomingwiththecloudsofheavenincelestialglory,Matt.16:27,28;Mark8:38; John 3:13, 14; 6:27; 8:28. Some are of the opinion that Jesuspreferredthisnametoothers,becauseitwaslittleunderstoodandwouldexcellentlyservethepurposeofveilingHisMessiahship.Itismorelikely,

however, thatHegave itpreference,because itcontainednosuggestionofthemisinterpretationsoftheMessiahshipthatwerecurrentamongtheJews.

D.TheNameSonofGod.Thename"SonofGod"isvariouslyusedintheOldTestament.It isappliedtoIsraelasanation,Ex.4:22;Hos.11:1,tothepromisedkingofthehouseofDavid,2Sam.7:14;Ps.89:27,toangels,Job1:6;38:7;Ps.29:1,andtopiouspeopleingeneral,Gen.6:2;Ps.73:15;Prov.14:26.IntheNewTestamentJesusappropriatedthename,andHisdisciplesandeventhedemonsoccasionallyascribeittoHimoraddressHimby it.Thename,asappliedtoChrist,doesnotalwayshaveexactlythesameconnotation.Itisused:

1. IN THE NATIVISTIC SENSE, that is, to designate that the humannatureofChristowesitsorigintothedirectsupernaturalactivityofGod,moreparticularly,oftheHolySpirit.ItisclearlyexpressiveofthatfactinLuke1:35.

2. IN THE OFFICIAL ORMESSIANIC SENSE, as a description of theofficeratherthanofthenatureofChrist.TheMessiahisfrequentlycalledtheSonofGodasGod'sheirandrepresentative.Thedevilsevidentlysousedthename,Matt.8:29.ThenameseemstohavethismeaningalsoinMatt.24:36;Mark13:32.Therearesomepassagesinwhichitcombinesthismeaningwiththefollowingone.

3.INTHETRINITARIANSENSE,inwhichitservestodesignateChristas the secondperson in theTrinity.This is themostprofoundsense inwhich the name is used. In all probability Jesus Himself invariablyemploys thename in thatparticularsense. It isclearlysoused inMatt.11:27; 14:28–33; 16:16; 21:33–46; 22:41–46; 26:63, and in the parallelplacesintheothergospels.InsomeofthepassagesindicatedtheideaoftheMessianicsonshipalsoentersmoreorless.

E. The Name Lord. The name Lord, as applied to Christ in the NewTestament,alsohasseveralconnotations.

1. In some cases it is simply used as a form of polite and respectfuladdress, Matt. 8:2; 20:33. In such cases it means little more than the

word"sir,"whichwefrequentlyuseinpoliteaddress.

2.Inotherpassagesitisexpressiveofownershipandauthority,withoutimplyinganythingastothedivinecharacterofChristandHisauthorityinspiritualandeternalmatters,Matt.21:3;24:42.

3. Finally, there are passages in which it is expressive of the exaltedcharacterofChrist,ofHissupremespiritualauthority,andispracticallyequivalenttothenameofGod,Mark12:36,37;Luke2:11;3:4;Acts2:36;1 Cor. 12:3; Phil. 2:11. It is particularly after the resurrection that thenameisappliedtoChristasanindicationofthefactthatHeistheownerandtheruleroftheChurch,thoughthereareinstanceswhichshowthatthenameapproachedthisspecificmeaningevenbeforetheresurrection,Matt.7:22;Luke5:8.

QuestionsforReview:Howdoes the doctrine of Christ connect upwith the doctrine ofman?WhatdifferentkindsofnamesareappliedtoChristinScripture?Whatisthe derivation and meaning of the name Jesus? Who are the OldTestamenttypesofJesus?WhatisthemeaningofthenameChrist?Whatdidtheoilusedinanointingsignify?Whatelementswereincludedintheanointing?WhenwasChristanointedforHiswork?Whenceisthename"SonofMan"derived?Whatdoesthenameexpress?WhydidChristgivepreferencetothisname?DidotherseverapplyittoHim?Inwhatsenseis the name "Son of God" used in the Old Testament? What are itsdifferentconnotations,as it isapplied toChrist?Whatare thedifferentmeanings of the name "Lord," as it is applied to Christ in the NewTestament?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, ReformedDogmatics, I, pp. 303–309;Dalman, TheWords ofJesus, pp 234–331; Vos, The Self-Disclosure of Jesus, pp. 104–256;Warfield,TheLordofGlory.

THENATURESOFCHRIST

A.TheDistinctionofNaturesinChrist.WhiletheBibleteachesthatthereis but a single Mediator between God and man, it represents thisMediator as having two distinct natures, the one divine and the otherhuman.Itisthegreatmysteryofgodliness,Godmanifestedintheflesh,1Tim.3:16.Thisisamystery,notonlyintheBiblicalsenseoftheword,assomething thatwasnot fully revealed in theOldTestament,butalso inthe sense that it is beyond the comprehension of man. The problemwhich it presents has given rise to many conflicting opinions, but hasneveryetreceivedanadequatesolution.Someofthesuggestedsolutionsfailed to do justice to the two natures in Christ, while others failed tomaintain the unity of the person. No solution can be regarded assatisfactorywhich does not safeguard both. Scripture demands thatwerecognizetwodistinctnaturesinChrist.

1. THE DIVINE NATURE OF CHRIST. There is today a widespreaddenialofthedivinityor,morespecically,thedeityofChrist.AndyetthisisclearlytaughtinScripture.EventheOldTestamentaffordsproofforitin its predictions of the comingMessiah, Isa. 9:6; Jer. 23:6;Dan. 7:13;Micah5:2;Zech.13:7;Mal.3:1.TheNewTestamentproofsforitareevenmoreabundant.ItisawellknownfactthattheGospelofJohnpresentsthemost exalted viewofChrist in suchpassages as John 1:1–3, 14, 18,25–27;11:41–44;20:28.ButitisnotgenerallyrecognizedthatthepicturepresentedbytheotherGospelsisinfullaccordwiththatofJohn,andyetthis is true. Notice particularly the following passages:Matt. 5:17; 9:6;11:1–6, 27; 14:33; 16:16; 25:31 ff.; 28:18;Mark 8:38, andmany others.Again, we have the very same representation of Christ in the PaulineEpistles and in theEpistle to theHebrews,Rom. 1:7;9:5; 1Cor. 1:1–3;2:8;2Cor.5:10;Gal.2:20;4:4;Phil.2:6;Col.2:9;1Tim.3:16;Heb.1:1–3,5,8;4:14;5:8,andotherpassages.

2.THEHUMANNATUREOFCHRIST.IntheearlyChristiancenturiessome called the real humanity of Christ in question, but at the presenttime no one seriously questions this. For a long time therewas a one-sidedemphasisonthedeityofChrist,andscantjusticewasdonetoHis

humanity, but today the opposite is true: an ever-growinghumanitarianism places all the emphasis on the veritable humanity ofChrist.Theonlydivinitymany still ascribe toHim is simply thatofhisperfect humanity. There is abundant Scriptural proof for the realhumanity of Christ.He callsHimself "man" and is so called by others,John8:40;Acts2:22;Rom.5:15;1Cor.15:21.WearetoldrepeatedlythatHecameorwasmanifested inthe flesh, that is, inhumannature,John1:14; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 John 4:2.He had the essential elements of humannature, amaterial body and a rational soul,Matt. 26:26, 28, 38; Luke23:46; 24:39; John 11:33; Heb. 2:14. Moreover, He was subject to theordinary laws of human development, and to human wants andsufferings,Matt.4:2;8:24;9:36;Mark3:5;Luke2:40,52;22:44;John4:6; 11:35; 12:27; 19:28, 30; Heb. 2:10, 18; 5:7, 8. It should be notedhowever, thatwhileChristwasa realman,Hewaswithout sin.Henotonlydidnosin,butcouldnotsin,becauseoftheessentialbondbetweenthehumanandthedivinenaturesinHim.Inthepresentdaysomedenythe sinlessness of Christ, but the Bible clearly testifies to it in thefollowingpassages:Luke1:35;John8:46;14:30;2Cor.5:21;Heb.4:15;9:14;1Pet.2:22;1John3:5.

3.THENECESSITYOFTHETWONATURESINCHRIST.Inthepresentday many consider Jesus as a mere man, and do not recognize thenecessityofthetwonaturesinChrist.ButifChristisnotbothmanandGod,HecannotbeourMediator.Hehadtobeoneofthehumanrace,inorder to be able to represent sinners in His redemptive work. It wasnecessary that He should assume human nature, not only with all itsessentialpropertiesofbodyandsoul,butalsowithall the infirmitiestowhich it is liable after the fall.Only sucha trulyhumanMediator,whohadexperimentalknowledgeofthewoesofmankindandrosesuperiortoalltemptations,couldentersympathetically intoall theexperiences,thetrials, and the temptations of man, Heb. 2:17, 18; 4:15–5:2, and be aperfecthumanexampleforHisfollowers,Matt.11:29;Mark10:39;John13:13–15;Phil.2:5–8;Heb.12:2–4;1Pet.2:21.AtthesametimeHehadtobeasinlessman, foronewhohadforfeitedHisownlifesurelycouldnot atone for others, Heb. 7:26. Moreover, it was necessary that Heshould be veryGod, in order thatHemight bring a perfect sacrifice ofinfinitevalue,mightbearthewrathofGodredemptively,thatis,soasto

deliverothers fromthecurseof the law,andmightbeable toapplythefruitsofHisredemptivework,Ps.49:7–10;130:3.

B.TheUnityof thePersonofChrist.While theChurchhasmaintainedthedoctrineofthetwonaturesofChristfromthedaysoftheCouncilofChalcedon,itatthesametimeassertedtheexistenceofthesetwonaturesinoneperson.

1.STATEMENTOFTHEDOCTRINEOFTHETWONATURESINONEPERSON.ThereisbutonepersonintheMediator,andthatpersonistheunchangeable Son ofGod. In the incarnationHedidnot change into ahumanperson,nordidHeadoptahumanperson;Hesimplyassumedahumannature,which did not develop into an independent personality,but became personal in the person of the Son of God. The one divineperson,whopossessedadivinenaturefrometernity,assumedahumannatureandnowhasboth.After thisassumptionofahumannature thepersonof theMediator isnotdivineonlybutdivine-human;He isnowthe God-man. He is a single individual, but possesses all the essentialqualities of both thehumanand thedivinenature.WhileHehasbut asingle self-consciousness, He has both a divine and a humanconsciousness,aswellasadivineandahumanwill.

2.SCRIPTUREPROOFFORTHEUNITYOFTHEPERSONINCHRIST.If therewere adualpersonality inChrist,wewouldnaturally expect tofindsometracesofitintheBible;butthereisnotasingletraceofit.Itisalwaysthesamepersonwhospeaks,whethertheconsciousnessthatfindsutterance be human or divine, cf. John 10:30; 17:5 as compared withMatt. 27:46, John 19:28. There is no interchange of "I" and "thou"between the human and divine natures, such as there is between thepersonsintheTrinity(cf.John17:23).Humanattributesandactionsaresometimesascribedtothepersondesignatedbyadivinetitle,Acts20:28;1Cor.2:8;Col.1:13,14.Ontheotherhanddivineattributesandactionsareascribedtothepersondesignatedbyahumantitle,John3:13;6:62;Rom.9:5.

3. THE EFFECTS OF THEUNIONOF THE TWONATURES IN ONEPERSON. Since the divine nature is immutable, it naturally did notundergo any essential change in the incarnation. There is, however, a

threefold communication, which results from the union of the twonaturesinChrist:

a.ACommunication of Attributes or Properties. Thismeans that, aftertheincarnation,thepropertiesofboththehumanandthedivinenaturesarethepropertiesofthepersonandarethereforeascribedtotheperson.Thepersoncanbesaidtobealmighty,omniscient,omnipresent,andsoon, but can alsobe called amanof sorrows, of limitedknowledge, andsubjecttohumanwantsandmiseries.

b.ACommunicationofOperations. Invirtueof this itmaybesaid thattheredemptiveworkofChrististheworkoftheoneundividedpersonalsubject in Christ; that it is brought about by the co-operation of bothnatures;thateachoneofthesenaturesworkswithitsownspecialpower;and that the result of this, as the work of a single person, forms anundividedunity.

c. A Communication of Graces. From the very first moment of itsexistencethehumannatureofChristwasadornedwithallkindsofrichandgloriousgifts.Itsharesinthegraceandgloryofbeingunitedwiththedivine person, and even becomes the object of prayer and adoration.Moreover,itpartakesofthosegiftsoftheHolySpirit,particularlyoftheintellect,of thewill,andofpowerbywhichthehumannatureofChristwasexaltedhighaboveallotherintelligentcreatures.

C.SomeoftheMostImportantErrorsintheDoctrineofChrist.

1.DENIALOFTHEREALITYOFTHEDIVINENATURE. In the earlyChristiancenturiestherealityofthedivinenatureofChristwasdeniedbytheEbionitesandtheAlogi.Inmorerecenttimesthisdenialwassharedby theSociniansof thedaysof theReformation, andby theUnitariansandmodernliberaltheologiansofthepresentday.

2.DENIALOFTHEREALITYOFCHRIST'SHUMANNATURE.SecondcenturyGnosticismdeniedtherealhumanityofChrist.SomeascribedtoChrist merely a refined or heavenly body, while others distinguishedbetweenahumanJesusandadivineChristwhowasconnectedwiththeformertemporarily.TheSabelliansofthefourthcenturyregardedChrist

merelyasamodeinwhichGodmanifestedHimself.

3.DENIALOFTHEINTEGRITYOFTHETWONATURES.TheAriansregardedChristasacreatedbeing,neitherGodnorman,asortofdemi-god, while Appolinaris, who conceived of man as consisting of threeparts,body,soul,andspirit,maintainedthatthehumannatureofChristconsisted only of two, body and soul, while the divine Logos took theplaceofthespirit.

4. DENIAL OF THE UNITY OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. TheNestorians virtually denied the real union of the twonatures inChrist.Theydistinguishedthetwososharplyastomakethemreallytwopersonsmorallyagreedinpurposeandaction.

5. DENIAL OF THE TWO NATURES OF CHRIST. The EutichiansrepresentedtheoppositeextremeinspeakingofthetwonaturesofChristasfusedintosomethirdnatureneitherhumannordivine.Sometimesitwasrepresentedasifthehumannaturewereabsorbedinthedivine.TheLutheranviewofChristissomewhatakintotheEutichian.

QuestionsforReview:WhatBibleproof is there for thedeity and for thehumanity ofChrist?WhatScriptureproof is there for the sinlessnessofChrist?What is thenatureofthepersonofChrist,divine,human,ordivine-human?HowcantheunityofthepersonofChristbeprovedfromScripture?Whataretheeffects of the union of the two natures in Christ? Is it proper tomakeChristtheobjectofourprayers?WhicharethemainerrorsrelatingtothedoctrineofChrist?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 310–332; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.378–390;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.288–321;Orr,Side-LightsonChristianDoctrine,pp.115–122.

THESTATESOFCHRIST

The doctrine of the states of Christ was developed in the seventeenthcentury. The states in question are the states of the person of theMediator and not, as the Lutheransmaintain, of the human nature ofChrist.Itshouldbeborneinmindthatastateisnotexactlythesameasacondition.Theformerisone'spositioninlifeandparticularlytherelationinwhichonestandstothelaw,whilethelatterisone'smodeofexistence,especiallyasthis isdeterminedbythecircumstancesof life.Onewhoisfoundguilty in a court of justice is in a state of guilt or condemnation,and this is usually followed by a condition of incarcerationwith all itsattendant deprivation and shame. The states of the Mediator aregenerallytreatedasincludingtheresultingconditions.Infact,theusualenumeration of the stages of Christ's humiliation and exaltationmakestheresultingconditionsmoreprominentthanthestatesthemselves.

A.TheStateofHumiliation.ThestateofhumiliationconsistsinthisthatChristlaidasidethedivinemajestywhichwasHisasthesovereignRuleroftheuniverse,andassumedhumannatureintheformofaservant;andthat He, who is Himself the supreme Lawgiver, became subject to thedemands and the curse of the law. This doctrine is based on suchpassagesasMatt.3:15;Gal.3:13;4:4;Phil.2:6–8.ThisstateofChristisreflectedinthecorrespondingcondition,inwhichweusuallydistinguishthefollowingstages:

1.THEINCARNATIONANDBIRTHOFCHRIST.IntheincarnationtheSonofGod,sometimescalledtheWord(John1),becameflesh.ThisdoesnotmeanthatHeceasedtobewhatHewasandchangedintoaman.InHisessentialnaturetheSonofGodisexactlythesamebeforeandafterthe incarnation. It merely means that He assumed, in addition to Hisdivine nature, a complete human nature, consisting of body and soul,John 1:14; Rom. 8:3; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 John 4:2; 2 John 7. Through theincarnationHe really became one of the human race, sinceHe derivedHis human nature from the substance of Mary. This should bemaintainedinoppositiontotheAnabaptists,whoclaimthatHereceived

itfromheavenandthatMarywasmerelytheconduitorchannelthroughwhichitpassed.Scriptureteachesusthattheincarnationwaseffectedbyavirginbirth,and inviewof thisourConfessionstates that thehumannatureofChristwas"conceivedinthewomboftheblessedvirginMarybythepoweroftheHolyGhost,withoutthemeansofman."ThisdoctrineisbasedonthefollowingpassagesofScripture,Isa.7:14;Matt.1:20;Luke1:34, 35. The work of the Holy Spirit in connection with the birth ofChrist was twofold: (a) He caused the conception of Christ's humannatureinthewombofMary;and(b)Hesanctifiedthishumannatureinits very inception, and thus kept it free from the pollution of sin. ThedoctrineofthevirginbirthwasacceptedbytheChurchfromtheearliesttimes,butisdeniedbymodernliberaltheologians,ascontrarytothelawsof nature. Some maintain that the incarnation is not a part of thehumiliationofChrist,sinceHestillhasHishumannature,andyetisnomoreinastateofhumiliation.Butweshouldcarefullydiscriminatehere.Whileanactofgreatcondescension,itwasnotnecessarilyahumiliationthat the Son of God assumed a human nature; but it was an act ofhumiliationthatHeassumed"flesh,"thatis,humannatureasitissincethefall,weakenedandsubjecttosufferinganddeath,thoughinHiscasefreefromthetaintofsin.

2.THESUFFERINGSOFCHRIST.WeareofteninclinedtothinkofthesufferingsofChristaslimitedtoHisfinalagonies.YetHiswholelifewasalifeofsuffering.Itwastheservant-lifeoftheLordofHosts,thelifeofthesinlessOneinasin-cursedworld.ThewayofobediencewasforHimawayofsuffering.HesufferedfromtherepeatedassaultsofSatan,fromthehatredandunbeliefofHisownpeople,and fromthepersecutionofHisenemies.Hislonelinessmusthavebeenoppressive,andHissenseofresponsibilitycrushing.TherealessenceofHissufferingsshouldnotbesought in His bodily discomfitures and pains as such, but in theseaccompaniedwithanguishofsoulandamediatorialconsciousnessofsin.BecauseofHisethicalperfectionandHispassionforrighteousnessandholiness and truth, the causes of sufferingwere farmorenumerous forHim than they are forus.Noone could feel thepoignancyof pain andgriefandmoralevilasJesuscould.ThetemptationsofChristalsoformedapartofHissufferings,andaveryessentialpart.Itwasonlybyenteringinto thevery trialsofmen thatJesuscouldbecomea truly sympathetic

HighPriest, "able tosuccor themthatare tempted,"Matt.4:1–11;Luke22:28; John 12:27;Heb. 2:18; 4:15; 5:7–9.No fully satisfactory answercanbegivento thequestion,howitwaspossible thatJesus, thesinlessOne,shouldbetempted.OntheonehandwemustmaintaintherealityofHis temptations, and on the other hand the certainty that thesetemptationscouldneverresultinsinonHispart.

3.THEDEATHOFCHRIST.WhenwespeakofthedeathofChristhere,wehaveinmindHisphysicaldeath.Christdidnotdieastheresultofanaccident,norbythehandofanassassin,butunderajudicialsentence.Itwasofimportancethatthisshouldbeso,becauseHehadtobecountedwiththetransgressors.Moreover,itwassignificantthatHewastriedandsentencedbyaRomanjudge,representingthehighest judicialpower inthe world, functioning by the grace of God, and dispensing justice inGod's name. Furthermore, it had special significance that He was notbeheadedorstonedtodeath,butcrucified.BysufferingthatRomanformof punishment He was reckoned with the meanest criminals and thescumofmankind,andthusmettheextremestdemandsofthelaw.AtthesametimeHesufferedanaccurseddeath,andthusgaveevidenceofthefactthatHebecameacurseforus,Deut.21:23;Gal.3:13.

4.THEBURIALOFCHRIST.ItmightseemthatthedeathofChristwasthe laststageofHishumiliation,especially inviewof the lastwordsonthecross:"It is finished."Butthesewords inallprobabilityrefertoHisactivesufferings.ItisquiteclearthatHisburialalsoformedapartofHishumiliation.Man'sreturningtothedustispartofthepunishmentofsin,Gen.3:19.Moreover,severalpassagesofScriptureclearlyimplythattheSaviour'sabodeinthegravewasahumiliation,Ps.16:10;Acts2:27,31;13:34,35.ThesinnerisrepresentedasbeingburiedwithChrist,andthisreferstothegoingdown,theputtingoff,thedestructionoftheoldman,Rom.6:1–6.ItclearlyshowsthattheburialofChristisregardedasapartofHishumiliation.TheburialofChristservedthepurposeofremovingtheterrorsofthegravefortheredeemedandofsanctifyingthegraveforthem.

5. THE DESCENT OF CHRIST INTO HADES. After speaking of thesufferingsanddeathof theSaviour, theApostolicConfessionadds:"Hedescended into hell (hades)." These words are variously interpreted.

RomanCatholicsinterpretthemtomeanthatChristafterHisdeathwentdown into the Limbus Patrum, where the Old Testament saints wereconfined,toreleasethemandbringthemtoheaven.Lutheransregardthedescent into hades as the first stage of Christ's exaltation, a triumphalmarch, perhaps between His death and resurrection, to celebrate Hisvictoryover thepowersofdarkness.TheChurchofEnglandholds that,whileChrist'sbodywasinthegrave,thesoulwentintothatpartofhades,calledparadise,theabodeoftherighteoussouls,andgavethemafullerexpositionofthetruth.Finally,theReformedChurchesusuallyinterpretthephrase,"Hedescendedintohell,"figurativelyasanexpressionoftheideathatChristsufferedthepangsofhellbothinGethsemaneandonthecross.Onthewholeitseemsbesttocombinetwothoughts:(a)thatChristsufferedthepangsofhellinthegardenandonthecross;and(b)thatHeentered the deepest humiliation of the state of death. The Scripturepassages on which the doctrine of the descent into hades is based areespeciallythefollowing:Ps.16:8,10;Eph.4:9;1Pet.3:18,19;4:6.

B.TheStateofExaltation. In the stateof exaltationChristpassed fromunder the law as a covenant obligation, havingpaid thepenalty for sinandmeritedrighteousnessandeternallifeforthesinner.AsMediatorHenowenteredintotheundividedfavorandgoodpleasureofGod,andwascrownedwithacorrespondinghonorandglory.IthadtoappearalsoinHis condition that thepenalty of sinwas lifted.His exaltationwas alsoHis glorification. Roman Catholics and Lutherans teach that theexaltation of Christ began with the descent into hades. ReformedChurches, however, maintain that it began with the resurrection ofChrist.Fourstagesmustbetakenintoconsiderationhere.

1. THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. The resurrection was the greatturning-pointinthestatesofChrist.

a. The Nature of the Resurrection. The resurrection of Christ did notconsistinthemerefactthatHecametolifeagainandthatbodyandsoulwere re-united. If thiswere all it involved,He could not be called "thefirstfruits of them that slept," 1 Cor. 15:20, nor "the firstborn from thedead,"Col.1:18;Rev.1:5.Itratherconsistedinthisthat inHimhumannature,bothbodyandsoul,wasrestoredtoitspristinepurity,strength,and perfection, and even raised to a higher level, while body and soul

were re-united into a living organism. It was quite evident after theresurrection thatHis bodyhadundergone a remarkable change. Itwasthesameandyet sodifferent that itwasnoteasily recognized. Itwasamaterial and real body, and yet one that could suddenly appear anddisappear in a surprising manner, a body transformed into a perfectorgan of the spirit, and therefore "spiritual," Luke 24:31, 36, 39; John20:19;21:7;1Cor.15:50.Evidentlytherewasalsoachangeinthesoullifeof Christ. This does not mean that He was changed religiously andethically, but that His soul was endowed with new qualities, perfectlyadjusted toHis futureheavenly environment.Through the resurrectionHebecamethelife-givingSpirit,1Cor.15:45.

b.TheSignificanceoftheResurrection.TheresurrectionofChristhasathreefoldsignificance:

(a) It constitutes, a declaration of the Father that Christ met all thedemandsofthelawasacovenantobligation;(b)itsymbolizeswhatwillhappen to believers in their justification, spiritual birth, and futureresurrection,Rom.6:4,5,9;8:11;1Cor.6:14;15:20–22;2Cor.4:10,11,14; Col. 2:12; 1 Thess. 4:14; and (c) it is the cause of our justification,regeneration, and final resurrection, Rom. 4:25 5:10; Eph. 1:20; Phil.3:10;1Pet.1:3.

c.TheDenial of theResurrection. The resurrection of JesusChrist is amiraclewhichdefiesallnaturalexplanation.Forthatveryreasonmanyatpresent deny the resurrection of Christ, declaring it to be a physicalimpossibility,sincematerialparticlesinthecourseoftimeenterintothecompositionofmanybodies,andcanneverberestoredtoallthebodiesof which they once formed a part. But they who deny the resurrectionmust,ofcourse,explaintheundeniablefactthatbeliefintheresurrectionofChristwasgeneralinthefirstChristiancentury.Varioustheorieshavebeen suggested in explanation, such as (a) that the apostles and otherearly witnesses palmed off a falsehood on a credulous people; (b) thatJesusdidnotreallydie,butmerelyswooned,whiletheapostlesthoughtthatHehadactuallydied; (c) that theapostles and thewomen in theirexcitedstateofmindsawvisionsofJesusandconfusedthesewithactualappearances;and(d)thattheresurrectionstorywasreallyimportedfromother oriental religions and derived from pagan myths. But these

explanationsfailtodojusticetothefactsinthecase,astheyarenarratedinScripture.

2.THEASCENSIONOFCHRIST.TheascensionofChristdoesnotstandoutasboldlyonthepagesoftheBibleastheresurrection.Thelatterwastherealturning-pointinthelifeofJesus,andtheascensionmaybecalleditsnecessarycomplementandcompletion.Thisdoesnotmean that theascensionwas devoid of independent significance. The Scriptural prooffor it is quite sufficient. Jesus referred to it time and again beforeHisdeath,John6:62;14:2, 12; 16:5, 10, 17,28; 17:5;20:17.Lukegivesusadouble account of it, Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:6–11. Paul refers to itrepeatedly, Eph. 1:20; 4:8–10; 1 Tim. 3:16, and the Epistle to theHebrewscallsattentiontoitssignificance,1:3;4:14;9:24.

a.TheNatureof theAscension.Theascensionmaybedescribedas thevisible ascent of the person of the Mediator from earth to heaven,according toHis human nature. Itwas a local transition, a going fromplace toplace.This implies, of course, thatheaven is aplaceaswell asearth.But the ascensionof Jesuswasnotmerely a transition fromoneplacetoanother;italsoincludedafurtherchangeinthehumannatureofChrist. That nature now passed into the fulness of heavenly glory, andwas perfectly adapted to the life of heaven. Some Christian scholars ofrecent date consider heaven to be a condition rather than a place, andtherefore do not conceive of the ascension locally. Scripture clearlyrepresentsheavenasaplace,however.Itisthedwelling-placeofcreatedbeings, such as angels and saints,Matt. 18:10; 2 Cor. 5:1, and is oftenmentionedalongsideoftheearth,whichisaplace,1Chron.16:31;Eccl.5:2;Isa.66:1.Moreover,theBibledirectsourthoughtupwardtoheavenanddownwardtohell,Deut.30:12;Josh.2:11;Ps.139:8;Rom.10:6,7.

b.TheLutheranConceptionof theAscension.TheLutheranviewoftheascensiondiffers from thatof theReformed.Theydonot regard it asalocaltransitionbutasachangeofcondition,wherebythehumannatureof Christ passes into the full enjoyment and exercise of the divineperfections,whichwerecommunicatedtoitattheincarnation,andthusbecamepermanentlyomnipresent.

c.TheSignificanceoftheAscension.IntheascensionweseeChristasour

greatHighPriestenteringtheinnersanctuarytopresentHiscompletedsacrifice to the Father. It is prophetic of the ascension to all believers,whoareevennowsetwithChrist inheavenlyplaces,Eph.2:6, andaredestined to be with Him forever, John 17:24. Finally, it is alsoinstrumental inpreparingaplace for those thatareofChrist.TheLordHimselfpointstothenecessityofgoingtotheFather.inordertoprepareaplaceforHisdisciples,John14:2,3.

3. CHRIST'S SESSION AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD. After Hisascension Christ tookHis place on the throne at the right hand of theFather.HepredictedthatHewouldbeseatedattherighthandofpower,Matt. 26:64. Peter makes mention of it in his sermons, Acts 2:33–36;5:31,andseveralpassagesintheEpistlesrefertoit,Eph.1:20–22;Heb.10:12;1Pet.3:22;Rev.3:21;22:1.Naturally,theexpression"righthandofGod"cannotbetaken literally,butshouldbeunderstoodasa figurativeindication of the place of power and glory. That Christ is seated at therighthandoftheFathersimplymeansthatthereinsofgovernmentovertheChurchandtheuniverseareentrustedtoHim,andthatHeismadetoshare in the corresponding glory. It is His public inauguration as theGod-man.DuringHissessionattherighthandofGod,ChristrulesandprotectsHisChurchandexercisesauthorityovertheuniverseinbehalfofHis people; presents His completed sacrifice to the Father, making iteffective and securing its benefits by constant intercession for allbelievers;andcontinuestoteachHispeoplethroughtheHolySpiritandthroughtheinstrumentalityofHisservants.

4. THE PHYSICAL RETURN OF CHRIST. The highest stage in theexaltation of Christ is not reached until He returns in the capacity ofJudge.HeHimselfreferstothisasaspecialprerogative,John5:22,27,andsodotheapostles,Acts10:42;17:31.Severalotherpassagesalsoreferto His judicial activity, Matt. 19:28; 25:31–34; Luke 3:17; Rom. 2:16;14:9;2Cor.5:10;2Tim.4:1;Jas.5:9.SomeplacethereturnofChristinthe past, claiming that the promise of His coming again was realizedwhenHereturnedintheHolySpiritonthedayofPentecost.Butthiswasa spiritual and invisible return,while theBible teachesus to look for aphysical and visible returnofChrist,Acts 1:11.Even afterPentecostwearetaughttolookforwardtothecomingofChrist,1Cor.1:7;4:5;11:26;

Phil.3:20;Col.3:4;1Thess.4:15–17;2Thess.1:7–10;Tit.2:13;Rev.1:7.ThesecondcomingofJesusChristwillbeforthepurposeofjudgingtheworld and perfecting the salvation of His people. It will signalize thecompletevictoryofHisredemptivework.

QuestionsforReview:What is meant by the states of the Mediator? What is the state ofhumiliation?Inwhatdidtheincarnationconsist?HowdidChristreceiveHis humannature?What Scripture proof havewe for the virgin birth?What was the work of the Holy Spirit in connection with the birth ofChrist? Was the incarnation a part of Christ's humiliation? Were thesufferingsofChristlimitedtotheendofHislife?WhatwasthenatureofHissufferings?WhatsignificancedoesithavethatChristdiedajudicialdeath,andthatHediedbycrucifixion?WhatsignificancedidtheburialofChristhave?Whatdifferentviewsarethereofthedescentintohades?What is thecorrectview?What is thestateofexaltation?Whatwasthenature of the resurrection of Christ? In what respect was the body ofChristchangedaftertheresurrection?DidHeundergoanyotherchange?What was the significance of the resurrection? On what ground is itdeniedbysome?Whattheoriesaresuggestedtoexplainthegeneralbeliefin the resurrection of Christ?How is the ascension of Christ related toHis resurrection? How does Scripture prove that the ascension was achange from place to place? How do the Lutherans conceive of theresurrection?Whatsignificancehastheascension?Whatismeantbythesession of Christ at the right hand of God? What work does HeaccomplishduringHissession?DidChristreturnintheHolySpirit?Wasthis thepredictedsecondcomingofChrist?What is thepurposeofHissecondcoming?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 333–362; Hodge, SystematicTheology, II, pp. 610–638; Hodge, Outlines of Theology, pp. 438–44;McPherson, Christian Theology, pp. 321–330; Dick, Lectures onTheology,Lect.LX–LXIII.

THEWORKOFCHRIST

THEOFFICESOFCHRIST

Since thedays ofCalvin it is customary to speak of three offices of theMediator.Man, as hewas created byGod,was intended to function asprophet, priest, and king. Hence he was endowed with knowledge andunderstanding,withrighteousnessandholiness,andwithdominionoverthelowercreation.Theentranceofsinintotheworldaffectedthewholemanandmadeitimpossibleforhimtofunctionproperlyinhisthreefoldcapacityasprophet,priest,andking.Heissubjecttothepoweroferrorand deception, of unrighteousness and moral pollution, and of miseryanddeath.Christcameastheidealmanandforthepurposeofrestoringman to his original condition, and as such necessarily functioned asprophet,priest,andking.Insomecirclesthereisatendencytorecognizeonly one of the offices of Christ. Rationalism stresses the prophetic,Mysticismthepriestly,andChiliasmthekinglyofficeofChrist.Modernliberaltheologyisinclinedtodenytheofficesaltogether.ItissomuchinlovewithChristastheidealman,thelovinghelper,andtheelderbrother,thatitdislikestothinkofHiminanyofficialcapacity.

A.ThePropheticOffice.TheOldTestamentpredictsthecomingofChristasaprophetinDeut.18:15,apassagethatisappliedtoChristinAct3:22,23. He speaks of Himself as a prophet in Luke 13:33. Moreover, Heclaims to bring a message from the Father, John 8:26–28; 12:49, 50;14:10, 24; 15:15; 17:8, 20, foretells future things, Matt. 24:3–35; Luke19:41–44, and therefore speaks with singular authority, Matt. 7:29. Inview of all this it is no wonder that the people recognized Him as aprophet, Matt. 21:11, 46; Luke 7:16; 24:19; John 3:2; 4:19; 6:14; 7:40;9:17.

1.THESCRIPTURALIDEAOFAPROPHET.Theclassicalpassages,Ex.7:1 and Deut. 18:18, indicate that there are two sides to the prophetic

office, theone receptiveand theotherproductive.Theprophet receivesdivine revelations in dreams, visions, or verbal communications; andpassestheseontothepeople,eitherorally,orvisiblyinpropheticactions,Num.12:6–8;Isa.6;Jer.1:4–10;Ezek.3:1–4,17.Thereceptivesideisthemost important and controls the other. Without receiving the prophetcannotgive,andhecannotgivemorethanhereceives.Yettheproductiveside is also essential. One whomerely receives revelations is not yet aprophet.Itwasthedutyof theprophets toreveal thewillofGodtothepeople, to interpretthe lawin itsmoralandspiritualaspects, toprotestagainst formalism and sin, calling the people back to the path of duty,andtodirectattentiontothegloriouspromisesofGodforthefuture.

2. THE WAYS IN WHICH CHRIST FUNCTIONS AS PROPHET. ThepropheticworkofChristshouldnotbelimitedtothetimeofHisearthlylife or His public ministry. He functioned as prophet during the olddispensation as the Angel of the Lord, and also in and through theprophets, 1 Pet. 1:11; 3:18–20.He did it whileHewas on earth inHisteachings and bymeans of the accompanying signs.AndHis propheticworkdidnotceasewhenHeascendedtoheaven.HecontinueditbytheoperationoftheHolySpiritinandthroughtheteachingoftheapostles,John14:26;16:12–14;Acts1:1;andstillcontinuesitthroughtheministryoftheWordandinthespiritualilluminationofbelievers.EvenwhileHeis seated at the righthandof theFather,He is ever active as our greatProphet.

3.MODERNEMPHASISONTHEPROPHETICWORKOFCHRIST.InsofarasthereisanyrecognitionoftheofficialworkofChristinmodernliberal theology, the emphasis is altogether on the prophetic work ofChrist.Christstandsoutbeforethemodernmindprimarilyasthegreatteacherofmankind.TobelieveinChristissimplytoacceptHisteachingsandtosubmit toHisguidance.ByHiswordandexampleHe is leadingHisfollowerstoeverhigherlevelsofmoralandspirituallife.

B. The Priestly Office. The Old Testament predicts and prefigures thepriesthoodofthecomingRedeemer.ThereareclearreferencestoitinPs.110:4 and Zech. 6:13. In Isaiah 53 we see the Servant of the Lordespecially in His priestly capacity. Moreover, the Old Testamentpriesthood,andparticularly thehighpriest,clearlyprefiguredapriestly

Messiah.IntheNewTestamentthereisonlyasinglebookinwhichHeiscalledpriest,namely, theEpistle to theHebrews,but there thename isappliedtoHimrepeatedly,3:1;4:14;5:5;6:20;7:26;8:1.However,otherNewTestamentbooksalsorefertoHispriestlywork,Mark10:45;John1:29;Rom.3:24,25; 1Cor.5:7;Eph.5:2; 1John2:2;4:10; 1Pet.2:24;3:18.

1.THESCRIPTURALIDEAOFAPRIEST.TheBiblemakesabroadbutimportantdistinctionbetweenaprophet andapriest.TheprophetwasappointedtobeGod'srepresentativewiththepeople,andwasprimarilyareligiousteacher.Thepriest,ontheotherhand,wasman'srepresentativewith God. He had the special privilege of approach to God, and ofspeaking and acting inbehalf of thepeople.TheOldTestamentpriestswerealsoteachers,buttheirteachingdifferedfromthatoftheprophets.While the latter emphasized the moral and spiritual duties,responsibilities,andprivileges,theformerstressedtheritualobservancesinvolvedintheproperapproachtoGod.ThecharacteristicsofapriestaregivenratherfullyinHeb.5:1.Thepriest(a)istakenfromamongmentobetheirrepresentative;(b)isappointedbyGod(vs.3);(c)isactiveintheinterestofmeninthingspertainingtoGod,thatis,religiousthings;and(d) offers gifts and sacrifices for sins. In addition he also makesintercessionforthepeople.

2.THESACRIFICIALWORKOFCHRIST.

a.TheNatureofChrist'sSacrificialWork.TheworkofChristwasfirstofall to bring a sacrifice for sin. The peculiarity inHis casewas that thepriestwasalsothesacrifice.Inotherwords,thesacrificeofChristwasaself-sacrifice, a sacrifice in which He laid down His life for sinners.Moreover,thisonesacrificecombinedalltheelementsrepresentedinthevarious sacrifices of the Old Testament. It was a sin- and trespass-offering to make atonement for sin; it was a burnt-offering of whole-hearted and complete consecration to God; and it was also a peace-offering throughwhich the sinner enters into blessed communionwithGod. In viewof this itmaybe said that the sacrifice ofChristwas of amany-sidedcharacter.

b. The SacrificialWork of Christ Prefigured in theOld Testament. The

Old Testament sacrifices had spiritual aand typical significance. TheywerepropheticalandprefiguredthesacrificeofChrist.ThepaschallambisregardedasatypeofChrist.Thereisadistantreferencetoit inJohn1:29.Moreover, Christ is called "our passover" in 1 Cor. 5:7. There areclear indicationsandevenexpress statements to the effect that theOldTestamentsacrificesprefiguredChristandHiswork,Col.2:17;Heb.9:23,24; 10:1; 13:11, 12.Besides, there are several passageswhich teach thatChristaccomplishedforsinnersexactlywhattheOldTestamentsacrificesweresaidtoeffectforthosewhobroughtthem,andthatHeaccomplisheditinasimilarmanner,2Cor.5:21;Gal.3:13;1John1:7.

c.ScriptureProoffortheSacrificialWorkofChrist.ThepriestlyworkofChrist ismost clearly represented in theEpistle to theHebrews,wherethe Mediator is described as our only real, eternal, and perfect HighPriest, appointed by God, who takes our place vicariously, and by Hisself-sacrificeobtainsarealandperfectredemption,Heb.5:1–10;7:1–28;9:11–15,24–28;10:11–14,19–22;12:24.WhilethisistheonlyEpistleinwhichChristiscalledpriest,Hispriestlyworkisalsoclearlyrepresentedin theEpistlesofPaul,Rom.3:24,25; 5:6–8; 1Cor. 5:7; 5:3;Eph. 5:2.ThesamerepresentationisfoundinthewritingsofJohn,John1:29;3:14,15;1John2:2;4:10,andintheFirstEpistleofPeter,2:24;3:18.

3.THEINTERCESSORYWORKOFCHRIST.ThepriestlyworkofChristisnot limitedtothebringingofasacrifice;He isalsothe intercessorofHispeople.Heiscalledour"parakletos"byimplicationinJohn14:16andexplicitlyin1John2:2.Thetermmeansonewhoiscalledintohelp,anadvocate, onewho pleads the cause of another. Christ as the believer'sadvocatepleadsHiscausewiththeFatheragainstSatan,Zech.3:1;Heb.7:25;1John2:1;Rev.12:10.

a. The Nature of Christ's IntercessoryWork. The intercessory work ofChrist is based on His atoning sacrifice, is but a continuation of Hispriestlywork, and carries this to completion.Thenatureof thework isindicatedbyScriptureinRom.8:24;Heb.7:25;9:24.Itisnotlimitedtointercessory prayer, as is oftenmistakenly thought, but includesmuchmore.AsintercessorChristcontinuouslypresentsHissacrificetoGodasthegroundofallnecessaryblessings forHispeople,persistently claimstheseblessingsforthemaccordingtotheirneed,answersallaccusations

preferredagainstthembySatan,bythe law,andbyconscience,securesforgiveness for everything that is justly charged against them, andpresents to God their worship and service, rendering it acceptablethroughHisownrighteousness.

b.TheExtent andEfficacy ofHis Intercession.Christ intercedes for allthoseforwhomHehasmadeatonementandforthoseonly.Thismaybeinferred from the limited character of the atonement and from suchpassages as Rom. 8:29, cf. vss. 33, 34, and Heb. 7:25. Moreover, it isexplicitlystatedinJohn17:9.Itshouldbecarefullynoted,however,thatChristdoesnotintercedeforbelieversonly,butforalltheelect,whetherthey be already believers, or are still unbelievers, John 17:20.Furthermore,itshouldnotbeforgottenthatHestandsbeforeGodasanauthorizedintercessor,andthereforeasonewhocanpresentlegalclaims.WhatHeasksof theFatherHeasksasamatterof right, and thereforeHis prayers on behalf of His people never fail. They are based on Hisatoningwork,andHehasmeritedallthatHeasks.

C. The Kingly Office. Christ as the Son of God naturally shares in thedominion of God over allHis creatures. This kingship is rooted inHisdivinenatureandisHisbyoriginalright.Inthisconnection,however,weareconcernedwithakingshipwithwhichHeasMediatorwasinvested.We distinguish a twofold Mediatorial kingship of Christ, His spiritualkingshipovertheChurch,andHiskingshipovertheuniverse.

1. THE SPIRITUAL KINGSHIP OF CHRIST. The Bible speaks of thiskingshipinmanyplaces,Ps.2:6;45:6,7(cf.Heb.1:8,9);132:11;Isa.9:6,7;Micah5:2;Zech.6:13;Luke1:33;19:27,38;John18:36,37;Acts2:30–36.

a. TheNature of This Kingship. The spiritual kingship of Christ is Hisroyal rule over His people, or over the Church. It is called spiritual,because it relates to a spiritual realm, is established in the hearts andlivesofbelievers,bearsdirectlyand immediatelyonaspiritualend, thesalvationofsinners,andisadministered,notbyexternal,butbyspiritualmeans, the Word and the Spirit. This kingship is exercised in thegathering, the government, the protection, and the perfection of theChurch.Theterm"head"issometimesappliedtoChristasthekingofthe

Church, 1Cor. 11:3;Eph. 1:20–22; 5:23. It is just becauseChrist is theheadoftheChurchthatHecanruleitinanorganicandspiritualway.

b.TheRealmOverWhichitExtends.ThespiritualkingdomofChrist isidenticalwithwhattheNewTestamentcalls thekingdomofGodorthekingdom of heaven. This kingdom is first of all the kingship of God inChristestablishedandacknowledgedintheheartsofmanbytheworkofregeneration.Inthesecondplaceitisalsotherealmoverwhichtheruleof God in Christ extends, a realm created by the Spirit of God andcomposed exclusively of those who share in the life of the Spirit. And,finally, it is also a new condition of things which results from theapplication of the principles of the kingdom of God and which oftenextends beyond the sphere of the kingdom in the strictest sense of theword. The citizenship of the kingdom is co-extensive with themembership of the invisible Church. Its field of operation, however, iswider than that of the Church and aims at the control of life in all itsmanifestations. The visible Church is themost important and the onlydivinely instituted external organization of the kingdom. The term"kingdom of God" is sometimes used in a sense which makes thekingdompracticallyequivalenttothevisibleChurch,Matt.8:12;13:24–30,47–50.The spiritual kingdomofChrist is bothpresent and future. It is on theone hand a present, ever-developing spiritual reality in the hearts andlives of men, and as such exercises influence in a constantly wideningsphere,Matt.12:28;Luke17:21;Col.1:13.Butontheotherhanditisalsoafuturehope,whichwillnotberealizeduntilthereturnofJesusChrist.This future aspect of it is themore prominent of the two in Scripture,Matt. 7:21; 19:23; Luke 22:29; 1 Cor. 6:9; 15:50;Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5; 2Tim.4:18;2Pet.1:11.Inessencethefuturekingdomwillconsist,likethatofthepresent,simplyintheruleofGodestablishedandacknowledgedinthe hearts of men. But at the glorious coming of Jesus Christ thisestablishmentandacknowledgmentwillbeperfected, thehidden forcesof the kingdomwill stand revealed, and the spiritual rule ofChristwillfinditsconsummationinavisibleandmajesticreign.

c.TheDurationofChrist'sSpiritualKingship.SociniansclaimthatChristdidnotbecomekinguntilthetimeofHisascension,andPremillenarians,

that He will not be seated upon the throne as Mediator until Heestablishes the millennium at the second advent. As a matter of fact,however,Hewasappointedaskingfrometernity,Prov.8:23;Ps.2:6,andbegan to function as such immediately after the fall. Yet He did notformallyandpubliclyassumeHisthroneuntilthetimeofHisascensionandelevationtotherighthandofGod.SomeopinethatthiskingshipwillceaseatthereturnofChrist,butScripturewouldseemtoteachexplicitlythatitwillendureforever,Ps.45:6;72:17;89:36,37;Isa.9:7;Dan.2:44;2Sam.7:13,16;Luke1:33;2Pet.1:11.

2. THE KINGSHIP OF CHRIST OVER THE UNIVERSE. Before HisascensionChristsaidtoHisdisciples:"Allauthorityhathbeengivenuntomeinheavenandonearth,"Matt.28:18.ThesametruthisalsotaughtinEph.1:20–22;1Cor.15:27.

a. The Nature of This Kingship. This kingship should not be confusedwiththeoriginalkingshipofChristastheSonofGod,thoughitextendstothesamerealm.ItisthekingshipoftheuniverseentrustedtoChristasMediatorinbehalfofHisChurch.AsKingoftheuniverseHenowguidesthe destinies of individuals, of social groups, and of nations, so as topromotethegrowth,thegradualpurification,andthefinalperfectionofthepeoplewhichHehasredeemedbyHisblood.Moreover,thiskingshipenablesHim to protectHis own against the dangers towhich they areexposed in the world, and to vindicate His righteousness by thesubjectionanddestructionofallHisenemies.

b.TheDurationofThisKingship.ChristwasformallyinvestedwiththiskingshipovertheuniversewhenHewasexaltedattherighthandofGod.Itwas a promised reward ofHis labours, Ps. 2:8, 9;Matt. 28:18; Eph.1:20–22; Phil. 2:9–11. This investiture did not give Him any power orauthoritywhichHedidnotalreadypossessastheSonofGod;neitherdidit increase His territory. It simply gave this authority to Christ as theGod-man,sothatHishumannaturewasnowmadetoshareinthegloryof this royal dominion. The government of the world was madesubservienttothe interestsof theChurchofJesusChrist.Thiskingshipwilllastuntilthevictoryovertheenemiesofthekingdomiscomplete,1Cor.15:24–28.Whentheendisaccomplished,itwillbereturnedtotheFather.

QuestionsforReview:WhyhasChrista threefoldoffice?WhatScriptureproof is there for thepropheticofficeofChrist?Whatisaprophet?Whattwosidesaretheretothepropheticoffice?Whatarethedutiesofaprophet?InwhatdifferentwaysdoesChristfunctionasprophet?HowdoesmodernliberaltheologystressthepropheticofficeofChrist?HowwasChristaspriestprefigured?WhatScriptureproof is there forHispriestlywork?What isapriest indistinctionfromaprophet?HowdidtheirteachingdifferamongIsrael?Whatarethecharacteristicsofapriest?WhatwasthenatureofChrist'ssacrificial work?Howwas this prefigured in theOld Testament?WhatScriptureproofisthereforthiswork?Whatisaparaclete?InwhatdoestheworkofChristasintercessorconsist?HowfardoesHisintercessionextend andwhy is it always effective?What is the spiritual kingship ofChrist?Overwhatrealmdoesitextend?Whatdoestheterm"kingdomofGod" denote in the Gospels? Is the kingdom the same as the Church?How is the present kingdom related to the future kingdom?When didChrist becomeking?How longwillHis spiritual kingship last?What isthenatureandpurposeofChrist'skingshipovertheuniverse?Howlongwillthiskingshiplast?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I, pp. 363–388; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 391–400; Hodge, Systematic Theology, II. pp. 459–479,592–609;Stevenson,TheOfficeofChrist.

THEATONEMENTTHROUGHCHRIST

A.TheMovingCauseandNecessityoftheAtonement.

1. THE MOVING CAUSE OF THE ATONEMENT. It is sometimesrepresented as if the moving cause of the atonement lay in thesympathetic love of Christ for sinners. In this representation theimpressionisoftengiventhatGodisanangryGodbentonthesinner'sdestruction,butthatthelovingChriststepsinbetweenandatthecostofHis life saves the transgressor. Christ receives the glory and God isforgotten,robbedofHishonour.Scripturefindsthemovingcauseoftheatonement in the good pleasure of God to save sinners by asubstitutionaryatonement,Isa.53:10;Luke2:14;Col.1:19,20.ThisgoodpleasureofGodshouldnotberegardedassomearbitrarychoiceofGod.ItismoreinharmonywithScripturetosaythatthegoodpleasureofGodto save sinnersbya substitutionaryatonementwas founded in the loveand justiceofGod. Itwas the loveofGod thatofferedsinnersawayofescape,John3:16.AnditwasthejusticeofGodwhichrequiredthatthedemands of the law should be met, "that He might be just, and thejustifiedofhimwhichbelievethinJesus,"Rom.3:26;cf.vss.24,25.

2.THENECESSITYOFTHEATONEMENT.Some,suchasDunsScotus,Socinus,andmanymodernliberaltheologians,denythenecessityoftheatonement. They do not believe that anything in God requiredsatisfactionforsinbeforeHecouldpardonthesinner.Itisquiteevident,however,thatatonementwasnecessaryinviewofthejusticeofGod.Thiswas violated byman's transgression, and therefore naturally called forsatisfaction.TherighteousnessandholinessofGod,whichcanbrooknosin, certainly cannot simply overlook open defiance to His infinitemajesty.Godhatessinwithadivinehatred,andHiswholebeingreactsagainstit,Gen.18:25;Ex.20:5;23:7;Ps.5:6,7;Nah.1:2;Rom.1:18,32.Moreover, theveracityofGodrequired that thesentencewhichHehadpronouncedonsinshouldbeexecuted,Ezek.18:4;Rom.6:23.

B.TheNatureoftheAtonement.

1. IT SERVED TORENDER SATISFACTION TOGOD. The atonementhasfrequentlybeenrepresented,andisnowoftenregarded,assomethingthat was primarily intended to influence the sinner, to awakenrepentance, and thus to bring him back to God. But this is an entirelyerroneousconceptionofit.Ifamandoeswrongandrenderssatisfaction,this satisfaction is naturally intended to influence the personwronged,

and not the offending party. In the case of the sinner the atonementservedtopropitiateGod,andtoregainHisgoodfavorbymakingamendsfor the sin committed. This means that the primary purpose of theatonement was to reconcile God to the sinner. This does not imply,however,thatwecannot,inanysenseoftheword,speakofthesinner'sbeing reconciled to God. The Bible does this in more than one place,Rom.5:10;2Cor.5:19,20.ThereconciliationofthesinnertoGodmayberegardedasthesecondarypurposeoftheatonement.ThereconciledGodjustifiesthesinnerandsooperatesinhisheartbytheHolySpiritthatthelatteralsolaysasidehiswickedalienationfromGod,andthusentersintothefruitsoftheperfectatonementofChrist.

3.ITWASAVICARIOUSATONEMENT.There is adifferencebetweenpersonal and vicarious atonement. When man fell away from God, hebecameatransgressorandassuchowedGodsatisfaction.Butmancouldatoneforhissinonlybysufferingthepenaltyofsineternally;andthisiswhatGodmighthaverequiredinstrictjustice,andwouldhaverequired,if He had not been actuated by love and compassion for the sinner.Insteadofinsistingonsuchpersonalatonement,however,Heappointeda vicar (substitute) in Jesus Christ to take man's place; and this vicaratoned for the sin ofmankind and wrought an eternal redemption forman. In this case, therefore, theoffendedpartyhimselfmadeprovisionfor atonement. While a personal atonement would have excluded theelementofmercy, thisvicariousatonement represents thehighest formofmercy.Andwhileapersonalatonementbythesinnerwouldhavebeenforever in themakingandcouldneverhaveresulted inredemption, thevicariousatonementprovidedbyGodHimselfleadstoreconciliationandlife everlasting. The vicarious atonement wrought by Christ wasprefigured in the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament. Scripturerepeatedly says that these sacrifices atoned for sin and thus resulted inthe pardoning of the transgressor, Lev. 1:4; 4:20, 31, 35; 5:10, 16; 6:7;17:11.Severalpassagesspeakofoursinsbeing"laidupon"Christ,andofHis"bearing"sinoriniquity,Isa.53:6;John1:29;2Cor.5:21;Gal.3:13;Heb. 9:28; 1 Pet. 2:24. Others make mention of His dying or givingHimself forsinor for thesinner,Mark10:45;Rom.8:3;Gal.1:4;1Pet.3:18;1John2:2.

3.IT INCLUDEDCHRIST'SACTIVEANDPASSIVEOBEDIENCE. It iscustomary to distinguish between the active and passive obedience ofChrist.HisactiveobedienceconsistsinallthatHedidtoobservethelawin behalf of sinners, as a condition for obtaining eternal life; and HispassiveobedienceinallthatHesufferedinpayingthepenaltyofsinandthus discharging the debt of all His people. While it is necessary todiscriminatebetweenthetwo,itshouldbedistinctlyunderstoodthattheycannotbeseparated.ThetwoaccompanyeachotherateverypointintheSaviour'slife.ItwasapartofChrist'sactiveobediencethatHesubjectedHimself voluntarily to suffering and death, John 10:18. On the otherhand, it was also a part of Christ's passive obedience that He lived insubjection to the law and moved about in the form of a servant. Ingeneral itmay be said that throughHis passive obedienceHe paid thepenaltyforsinandconsequentlyremovedthecursefromman,Isa.53:6;Rom.4:25;1Pet.3:18;1John2:2;andthatthroughHisactiveobedienceHemerited eternal life for the sinner, bringing him to the goal whichAdamfailedtoreach,Rom.8:4;10:3,4;2Cor.5:21;Gal.4:4,5,7.

C. The Extent of the Atonement. It is generally admitted that thesatisfactionrenderedbyChristwasinitselfsufficientforthesalvationofallmen,thoughtheydonotattainuntosalvation.Thereisadifferenceofopinion,however,astothequestion,whetherChristsufferedanddiedforthepurposeofsavingallmenoronlytheelect.

1. THE LIMITED EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. Roman Catholics,Lutherans, and Arminians of every description, maintain that theatonement wrought by Christ is universal. This does notmean that intheirestimationallmenwillbesaved,butsimplythatitwastheintentionof theFather insendingChrist,andofChrist in theaccomplishmentofHis redemptive work, to save them all without any exception. They alladmit that, as a matter of fact, the intended effect is not achieved. Indistinction from them the Reformed Churches believe in a limitedatonement. Theymaintain that it was the intention of both the Fatherand the Son to save only the elect, a purpose that is actuallyaccomplished.TheadvocatesofauniversalatonementassertthatChristmerely made salvation possible for all men, and that their actualredemption is dependent on their own free choice. The advocates of a

limitedatonement,ontheotherhand,maintainthatChristactuallysavestotheuttermosteveryoneofthoseforwhomHehaslaiddownHislife.Notoneofthoseforwhomthepriceispaidfinallyfallsshortofsalvation.TheBibleclearlyteachesthattheeffectoftheworkofChristisnotmerelytomakeatonementpossible,buttoreconcilementoGodandtoputtheminactualpossessionof eternal salvation,Luke 19:10;Rom.5:10;2Cor.5:21;Gal.1:4;3:13;Eph.1:7.Moreover,it indicatesinvariouswaysthatChrist laiddownHis life foracertainqualifiednumber, forHispeople,Matt.1:21,forHissheep,John10:11,15,fortheChurch,Acts20:28;Eph.5:25–27, or for the elect, Rom. 8:32–35.Moreover, if it was really thepurpose of God to save all men, then we shall have to come to theconclusion that the divine purpose is frustrated bymen, and this is animpossibility.

2.OBJECTIONSTOALIMITEDATONEMENT.Severalobjectionshavebeen raised to the doctrine of a particular atonement, of which thefollowingarethemostimportant.

a. There are passageswhich teach that Christ died for theworld, John1:29; 3:16; 1 John 2:2; 4:14. The objectors proceed on the assumptionthattheword"world"inthesepassagesalwaysdenotesalltheindividualsthatconstitutetheworldofhumanity.Buttheworddoesnotalwayshavethismeaning;itsmeaningiscertainlymorelimitedinLuke2:1;12:19.InthepassagesreferredtoitmaysimplyservetoindicatethatChristdied,notmerelyfortheJews,butforpeopleofallthenationsoftheworld.

b.Again, there are passages inwhichChrist is said tohavedied for allmen,Rom.5:18; 1Cor. 15:22;2Cor.5:14; 1Tim.2:4,6;Tit.2:11;Heb.2:9;2Pet.3:9.Buttheword"all"sometimeshasarestrictedmeaninginScripture,denotingallofaparticularclass,1Cor.15:22;Eph.1:23,orallkindsofclasses,Tit.2:11.Ifitwerealwaystakenintheabsolutesenseinthepassagesreferred toby theobjectors,someof thesepassageswouldteach thatallmenareactually saved, somethingwhich they themselvesdonotbelieve,cf.Rom.5:18;1Cor.15:22;Heb.2:9,cf.v.10.

c.Finally,itissaidthattheuniversalofferofsalvationinthepreachingofthewordpresupposesauniversalatonement.IfChristdidnotdieforallmen,theofferofsalvationcannotbeextendedtoallingoodfaith.Butthe

universal offer of salvation does not include the declaration thatChristmadeatonementforeveryindividual;moreover,itisalwaysconditionedby a faith and repentance that canonlybewrought in theheart by theHolySpirit.Onlytheelectcomplywiththerequirementsandthusreceivetheblessingsofsalvation.

D. The Atonement in Present-Day Theology. There is a wide-spreaddenialof theatonement in theproper senseof theword inpresent-daytheology.Modernliberaltheologyreallyhasnoplaceforadoctrineoftheatonementinanysenseoftheword.Itregardssinsimplyasaweaknessorasanimperfectionwhichmanhasnotyetovercomebutwilloutgrowin the process of evolution; an imperfection for which man is notresponsible, which constitutes no guilt, and therefore calls for noatonement.ButevenmanymodernevangelicalChurchesadvocateaviewoftheatonementwhichisreallyequivalenttoadenialofit.TheyignoretheideathattheatoningworkofChristservedthepurposeofappeasingthe wrath of God against sin and of gaining His favor for the sinner.AccordingtothemtheatonementdidnoteffectachangeintheattitudeofGod to the sinner, but only a change in the attitude of the sinner toGod.What they call atonement is really reconciliation. Christ sufferedanddiedtorevealtosinnersthegreatloveofGod,andthustoawakenaresponsive love in their hearts, which will induce them as lost sons toreturn to God in a penitent state ofmind. This view of the atonementcertainlydoesnotdojusticetotherepresentationsofScripturerespectingthe work of Christ. It ignores the justice of God, which requiresatonement,andfailstogiveanyadequatereasonforthedeathofChrist.

QuestionsforReview:Whatwas themovingcauseof theatonement?Whywas theatonementnecessary?Whaterroneousconceptiondomanyhaveof thepurposeoftheatonement?Whatwastherealpurpose?HowcanthisbeprovedfromScripture? What is the difference between personal and vicariousatonement?Howwas the vicarious sacrifice of Christ prefigured in theOld Testament? What Scripture proof is there for it? What is thedifference between the active and the passive obedience of Christ?Canthese twobeseparated?Whatdideachoneof theseeffect?What is thequestionindebateinconnectionwiththeextentoftheatonement?What

is meant by universal atonement, and who teach it? What is limitedatonement,andwhatScripturalproofisthereforit?Whatobjectionsareraised to the doctrine of a limited atonement, andwhat can be said inanswertothese?Whatistheprevalentviewoftheatonementinpresent-daytheology?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, I. pp. 389–427; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.401–425;Orr,Side-LightsonChristianDoctrine,pp.125–139; McPherson, Christian Dogmatics, pp. 329–367, Hodge, TheAtonement.

THEDOCTRINEOFTHEAPPLICATIONOFTHEWORKOFREDEMPTION

THECOMMONOPERATIONSOFTHEHOLYSPIRIT

The immediately preceding division of this work was devoted to adiscussion of the person and the work of Christ, by which the way ofsalvationwasopenedforsinnersandalltheblessingsofsalvationandofeternal life in communion with God were merited for all those whomChristrepresentedinthecounselofpeace.ThisisnaturallyfollowedbyadiscussionofthewayinwhichtheworkofredemptionwroughtbyChristisappliedintheheartsandlivesofsinnersbythespecialoperationoftheHoly Spirit. In order that this work may be seen against the properbackground,weshallbrieflyconsider inanopeningchapter thegeneraloperationsoftheHolySpirit.

A.TheGeneralOperationsoftheHolySpiritinNature.Itisofthehighest

importance that thespecialoperationsof theHolySpirit in theworkofredemption should be seen against the background of His generaloperations in the sphere of nature and in the life of man. There is acertainsimilaritybetweenthetwo,butalsoaveryessentialdifference.InthesphereofnatureitistheHolySpiritthatgivesbirthtoalllife,organic,intellectual,andmoral,thatmaintainsitamidallchanges,andthatleadsittoitsdevelopmentanddestiny.AndthisisexactlywhatHealsodoesinthesphereofgraceorofredemption.HeoriginatesthenewlifeinChristJesus,guides it in itsdevelopment,makes it fruitful ingoodworks,andleadsittoitsdestiny.Butthereisalsoanessentialdifferencebetweenthetwo.ThegeneraloperationsoftheHolySpiritpertaintotheestablishedorder of nature and of the life ofman, as it is rooted in creation, andguaranteeitsdevelopmentandcompletion.Hisspecialoperation,ontheotherhand,bearsdirectlyonlyontheelectandintroducesaneworderofthingsthatdoesnotfinditsexplanationintheworkofcreation,butonlyin the grace of God, revealed in Jesus Christ. Without the generaloperationsoftheHolySpirit,however,therewouldbenopropersphereforHisspecialoperations.

B.CommonGrace.AmongthefruitsofthegeneraloperationsoftheHolySpiritcommongracedeservesspecialmention.

1. DESCRIPTION OF COMMON GRACE. The distinction betweencommonandspecialgracedoesnotapplytograceasanattributeofGod,but only to the gracious operations of God and to the effects of theseoperationsinnatureandinthelifeofman.Whenwespeakofcommongrace we have inmind either (a) those general operations of theHolySpirit wherebyHe, without renewing the heart, exercises such amoralinfluenceonmanthatsinisrestrained,orderismaintainedinsociallife,andcivilrighteousnessispromoted;or(b)thosegeneralblessingswhichGod imparts to allmen indiscriminately in whatevermeasure it seemsgoodtoHim.TheArminianbelievesthatcommongraceenablesmantoperform a certain measure of spiritual good, and to turn to God withheartfeltrepentance;andthatitevenincitesmantoacceptJesusChristby faith, andwill accomplish its end, unlessman obstinately resists itsoperations. But this is an un-Scriptural view of the matter. Commongrace does not enable the sinner to perform any spiritual good, nor to

turntoGodinfaithandrepentance.Itisnotsufficienttoremovethetotaldepravity ofman, nor to lead him in theway of spiritual renewal. Thefollowingpointsofdistinctionbetweencommonandspecialgraceshouldbecarefullynoted:(a)Theformereffectsnospiritualchangeintheheartof man, while the latter does; (b) the former works in a rational andmoralwaybymakingmenreceptiveforthetruth,presentingmotivestothe will, and appealing to the natural desires of man, while the latterworksinaspiritualandcreativeway,renewingthewholenatureofmanand producing spiritual fruits; and (c) the former is resistible and isalwaysmoreorlessresisted,whilethelatterisirresistible,changingmansothathewillinglyyieldstoitsoperations.

2.COMMONGRACEANDTHEATONINGWORKOFCHRIST.ByHisatoningworkChristmeritedtheblessingsofspecialgrace.DidHealsobyHis sacrificial deathmerit themore common blessings of divine gracewhicharebestowedonallmen,andthereforealsoontheimpenitentandreprobate?IfHedidnotmeritthem,thenwhatisthelegalbasisonwhichGod can extend grace and show favor to men who have forfeitedeverything and have no share in the righteousness of Christ?Now it ispossiblethatnosuchbasisisneededinviewofthefact(a)thatcommongrace does not remove the guilt of sin and therefore does not carrypardonwithit;and(b)thatitdoesnotliftthesentenceofcondemnation,butonlypostponesitsexecution.Perhapsthedivinegoodpleasuretostaythe manifestation of the wrath of God against sin offers a sufficientexplanation for the blessings of common grace. It is not unlikely,however,thateventheseblessingsmustbeconnectedinsomewaywiththedeathofChrist.Thisdoesnotnecessarilymean thatChristmeritedthese blessings for the impenitent and reprobate, but simply thatimportant benefits accrue to the whole human race from the death ofChrist,andthatinthesebenefitstheunbelieving,theimpenitent,andthereprobate share. These general blessings indirectly resulting from theatoningworkofChristwere,ofcourse,notonlyforeseenbyGod,butalsodesignedbyHimasblessingsforallmankind.

3. THEMEANSBYWHICHCOMMONGRACEOPERATES. There areseveralmeansbywhichcommongraceoperates,suchas:

a.TheLightofGod'sRevelation.This is fundamental, forwithout it all

other means would be impossible and ineffective. We have in mindprimarily the lightofGod'sgeneral revelation innature,which lightenseveryman and serves to guide the conscience of the naturalman. In amorerestrictedsensecommongracealsooperatesinconnectionwiththelightofGod'sspecialrevelation.

b. Governments. Our Belgic Confession teaches that God institutedgovernments, inorder to curb the evil tendencies, "thedissolutenessofmen,"andtopromoteamongthem"goodorderanddecency."

c.PublicOpinion.ThelightofGodthatshinesinnature,especiallywhenreinforcedbythelightofspecialrevelation,resultsintheformationofapublic opinion that is in harmonywith the law of God; and this has atremendousinfluenceontheconductofmenwhoareverysensitivetothejudgmentofpublicopinion.

d.DivinePunishmentandRewards.Godvisitstheiniquityofmenuponthemeveninthislife,andrewardsdeedsthatareinoutwardconformitywith the law.Thepunishmentshaveadeterringeffect,and therewardsserve as incentives. Thus whatever there is of moral goodness in theworldisgreatlyencouraged.

4.THEEFFECTSOFCOMMONGRACE.

a.ExecutionoftheSentenceStayed.ItisduetocommongracethatGoddidnotatoncefullyexecutethesentenceofdeathuponthesinner,anddoesnotdosonow,butmaintainsandprolongsthenatural lifeofmanandgiveshimtimeforrepentance.

b. Restraint of Sin. Through the operation of common grace sin isrestrained in the lives of individuals and society. The element ofcorruption that entered the lifeof thehuman race isnotpermitted, forthepresent,toaccomplishitsdisintegratingwork.

c.SenseofTruth,Morality,andReligion.Invirtueofcommongracemanstillhassomesenseofthetrue,thegood,andthebeautiful,appreciatesthese inameasure,andrevealsadesire fortruth, forexternalmorality,andevenforcertainformsofreligion.

d.CivilRighteousness. Common grace enablesman to performwhat isgenerally called civil righteousness or natural good, works that areoutwardly inharmonywith the lawofGod, thoughentirelydestituteofanyrealspiritualquality.

e.NaturalBlessings.Tocommongracemanfurtherowesallthenaturalblessingswhichhe receives in the present life. Thoughhehas forfeitedall,hereceivesabundanttokensofthegoodnessofGodfromdaytoday.

5. SCRIPTURE PROOF FOR COMMON GRACE. Some passages ofScriptureclearlyintimatethatthereisastrivingoftheSpiritofGodwithmenwhichdoesnotleadtorepentanceandfinallyceases,Gen.6:3;Isa.63:10;Acts7:51;1Sam.16:14;Heb.6:4–6;Ps.81:12;Rom.1:24,26,28.OtherspointtothefactthatGodrestrainssininvariousways,Gen.20:6;31:7;Job1:12;2:6;2Kings19:27,28;Rom.13:1–4.Stillothersrepresentunregenerate men as doing things which are good and right, 2 Kings10:29,30;12:2;14:3;Luke6:33;Rom.2:14.And,finally,therearesomewhich point to God as showering undeserved blessings upon all menindiscriminately,Gen.17:20;39:5;Ps.145:9,15,16;Matt.5:44,45;Luke6:35,36;Acts14:16,17;1Tim.4:10.

QuestionsforReview:Howdoes thepresentdivision linkupwith theprecedingone?What isthenatureofthegeneraloperationsoftheHolySpiritinnature?HowdoHisspecialoperationscomparewiththese?Whatiscommongrace?Howdoes our view of it differ from that of the Arminian? What is thedifference between special and common grace? Do the blessings ofcommongraceinanysenseresultfromthedeathofChrist?Ifso,inwhatsense?Bywhatmeansdoescommongracework?Whataretheeffectsofcommongrace?WhatScriptureproofisthereforcommongrace?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 11–31; Hodge, SystematicTheology, II, pp. 654–675; Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine ofPredestination,pp.179–181;Shedd,CalvinismPureandMixed,pp.96–106;Bavinck,CalvinandCommonGrace(inCalvinandtheReformation,pp.99–130);H.Kuiper,CalvinonCommonGrace.

CALLINGANDREGENERATION

A.GeneralRemarksontheOrderofSalvation.Webeginthediscussionoftheorderofsalvation,thatis,oftheorderinwhichtheHolySpiritappliestheworkofredemptiontotheheartsandlivesofman,withthestudyofcalling and regeneration.Thismeans thatwe takeour starting-point inthoseredemptiveactsofGodinwhichmandoesnotco-operate,andinwhich redemption stands out most prominently as a work of God. BydoingthisweclearlyrecognizethefactthatGodandnotmanbeginstheredemptive process, and that salvation is altogether a work of divinegrace, a work of which we become partakers only in union with JesusChrist, with whom we are united by the work of regeneration. Manyothers,suchastheLutheransandArminians,taketheirstarting-pointinmanandbegintheirtreatmentoftheorderofsalvationwithadiscussionofsavingfaith,consideredmoreparticularlyasanactofman,bywhichhetakesuntohimselftheblessingsofsalvationwroughtbyChrist.Theydonot speak of the application of thework of redemption by theHolySpirit, but of its appropriation by man. And in this appropriationeverything ismade dependent onman's act of faith. It is even by faiththat man is regenerated. This representation clearly fits in with theirconceptionofthefreewillofman.WhilewehonourGodastheauthorofour salvation, and as theprimary cause of every redemptive act,wedonot lose sight of the fact that, after regeneration,manappropriates theblessingsofsalvationbyfaith,andco-operateswiththeSpiritofGodinsomeoftheredemptiveacts,suchasconversionandsanctification.

B.Calling.Whenwespeakofcallingingeneral,wehavereferencetothatgracious act of GodwherebyHe invites sinners to accept the salvationthat is offered in Christ Jesus. It is a work of the triune God, and is

thereforeascribedtotheFather,1Cor.1:9;1Thess.2:12;1Pet.5:10,totheSon,Matt.11:28;Luke5:32;John7:37;Rom.1:6(Auth.Ver.),andtotheHolySpirit,Matt.10:20;John15:26;Acts5:31,32.Thiscallingmaybeeitherexternalor internal.Godistheauthorofboth;theHolySpiritoperates in both; and in both the Word of God is employed as aninstrument. Yet there are important differences: the external callingcomes toall thosewhohear theWord,while the internal callingcomesonlytotheelect;theexternalcallingassuch,thatis,withoutthespecialoperation of the Holy Spirit, affects only the natural life, while theinternal calling affects the internal or spiritual life. It is the externalcallingmadeeffectiveuntosalvation.

1.EXTERNALCALLING.TheBiblespeaksofexternalcallinginthegreatcommission, Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:15; in passages showing that somewho were called did not come, Matt. 22:2–14; Luke 14:16–24; inreferences to a rejection of the gospel, John 3:36; Acts 13:46; 2 Thess.1:8; and, finally, in statements concerning the terrible sin of unbelief,Matt.10:15;11:21–24;John5:40;16:8,9;1John5:10.ItconsistsinthepresentationandofferingofsalvationinChristtosinners,togetherwithan earnest exhortation to accept Christ by faith, in order to obtain theforgivenessofsinsandeternallife.

a.TheElementsComprisedinit.Fromthedefinitiongivenitfollowsthatthe external calling comprises three elements: (1)Apresentationof thegospel facts and ideas. Theway of redemption revealed in JesusChristmust be set forth clearly in all its relations. (2)An invitation to acceptChristinfaithandrepentance.Therepresentationofthewayofsalvationmust be supplemented by an earnest invitation, and even a solemncommandtorepentandbelieve,John6:28,29;Acts19:4;2Cor.5:11,20.(3) A promise of forgiveness and salvation. This promise, however, isneverabsolutebutalwaysconditional.Noonecanexpect its fulfilment,exceptinthewayoftruefaithandrepentance.

b.ItsCharacteristics.This external call has two characteristics: (1) It isgeneraloruniversal.Thisdoesnotmeanthatitactuallycomesorinthepasthascometoallmen,butthatitcomestoallmenindiscriminatelytowhom the gospel is preached. It is not limited to any age or nation orclassofmen.Itcomestoboththejustandthewicked,theelectandthe

reprobate.Thegeneralnatureof thiscallingappears fromthe followingpassages,Joel2:32;Ps.86:5;Isa.55:1;Matt.11:28;Rev.22:17.Thatitisnotconfinedtotheelect,isquiteevidentfromProv.1:24–26;Ezek.3:19;Matt. 22:2–8, 14; Luke 14:16–24. (2) It is seriouslymeant.WhenGodcalls the sinner through the gospel, He calls him in good faith, andearnestlydesires that the latteraccept the invitation tobelieve inJesusChrist;andwhenHepromisesthosewhorepentandbelieveeternallife,Hispromise isdependable.This follows from theverynature, from thetruthfulness and faithfulness of God, and also from such passages ofScripture as Num. 23:19; Ps. 81:13–16; Prov. 1:24; Isa. 1:18–20; Ezek.18:23,32;33:11;Matt.21:37;2Tim.2:13.

c.Its Significance.Bymeansof this external callingGodmaintainsHisclaim on the sinner.He is entitled to the service ofman, retained thisrightinspiteofman'sfall,andassertsHisrightinboththelawandthegospel.Manis indutyboundtoacceptthecallof thegospel.Ifhedoesnot,heslights theclaimofGodandthus increaseshisguilt.Thiscall isalso the appointedmeansbywhichGodgathers the elect out of all thenationsoftheworld,Rom.10:14–17.Moreover,itisarevelationofGod'sholiness, goodness, and compassion. In virtue of His holiness Goddissuadessinnerseverywherefromsin,andinvirtueofHisgoodnessandmercyHewarns themagainst self-destruction,postpones theexecutionofthesentenceofdeath,andblessesthemwiththeofferofsalvation.Thisgraciouscallisrepresentedasablessingforsinners,Ps.81:13;Prov.1:24;Ezek. 3:18, 19; 18:23, 32; 33:11; Amos 8:11; Matt. 11:20–24; 23:37.Finally, this external calling also serves to justify God in thecondemnationofsinners. Ifsinnersdespise the forbearanceofGodandreject His gracious offer of salvation, the greatness of their corruptionandguilt,andthejusticeofGodintheircondemnation,standsoutintheclearestlight.

2.INTERNALOREFFECTUALCALLING.ThecallingwhichcomesfromGod to the sinner is really one, thoughwe speakof an external and aninternal calling. Through the operation of the Holy Spirit the formerissues in and ismade effective in the latter. The fact that they are onedoes not mean, as the Lutherans maintain, that the inner call alwaysaccompaniesthepreachingoftheWord.Itdoesmean,however,thatthe

innercall isalwaysmediatedby thewordofpreaching.Thesamewordthat is heard in the external call, is made effective in the heart of thesinnerintheinternalcallingthroughtheoperationoftheHolySpirit.Theinternalcallhascertaindistinctivemarks:(a)ItisacallingbytheWordofGod,savinglyappliedbytheoperationoftheHolySpirit,1Cor.1:23,24. (b) It is a powerful calling, that is, a calling that is effectual untosalvation, Acts 13:48; 1 Cor. 1:23, 24. (c) It is a calling withoutrepentance, one that is not subject to change and is never withdrawn,Rom.11:29.Thepersonwhoiscalledwillsurelybesaved.Withrespecttothiscallingthefollowingparticularsshouldbenoted:

a. It Works by Means of Moral Persuasion. In the internal calling theSpiritofGoddoesnotworkthroughtheWordinacreativewaybutinapersuasive manner. God does sometimes work creatively through theword,Gen.1:3;Ps.33:6;Ps.147:15,butinthesecasesthewordreferredto is thewordofGod'spower, andnot thewordofpreaching,which isinstrumentalincallingthesinner.TheSpiritofGodoperatesthroughthepreachingof theWordbymaking itspersuasionseffective, so thatmanlistenstothevoiceofhisGod.

b.ItOperatesintheConsciousLifeofMan.Ifthewordofpreachingdoesnot operate creatively but only in amoral and persuasive way, then itfollowsthatitcanonlyworkintheconsciouslifeofman.Itaddressestheunderstanding enlightened by the Holy Spirit, and through theunderstanding influences thewilleffectively, so that thesinner turns toGod.

c.ItisAlwaysDirectedtoanEnd.Internalcallingisalwaysdirectedtoacertainend,thatis,tothesalvationtowhichtheSpiritofGodisleadingtheelect,andconsequentlyalsototheintermediatestagesonthewaytothis finaldestiny. It is a calling to the fellowshipofJesusChrist, 1Cor.1:9, to inherit blessing, 1 Pet. 3:9; to liberty,Gal. 5:13, to peace, 1 Cor.7:15,toholiness,1Thess.4:7,toonehope,Eph.4:4,toeternallife,1Tim.6:12,andtoGod'skingdomandglory,1Thess.2:12.

C.Regeneration.Thedivinecallingandregenerationstandintheclosestpossiblerelationtoeachother.

1. THE MEANING OF THE TERM "REGENERATION." The word"regeneration"isnotalwaysusedinthesamesense.Calvinemployeditina very comprehensive sense, to denote the whole process of man'srenewal, including even conversion and sanctification. In ourconfessional standards it serves to designate the beginning of man'srenewalinthenewbirthplusconversion.Atthepresenttimeitisusedinafarmorerestrictedsense,todenotethedivineactbywhichthesinnerisendowedwithnewspiritual life,andbywhich theprincipleof thatnewlifeisfirstcalledintoaction.Sometimesit isemployedinanevenmorelimited sense, as a designation of the implanting of the new life in thesoul,apart fromthe firstmanifestationsof this life. In this senseof theword regeneration may be defined as that act of God by which theprinciple of the new life is implanted in man, and the governingdispositionofthesoulismadeholy.

2. THE ESSENTIAL NATURE OF REGENERATION. The followingparticularsservetoindicatetheessentialnatureofregeneration:

a.ItisaFundamentalChange.Regenerationconsistsintheimplantingoftheprincipleof thenewspiritual life inman, ina radical changeof thegoverningdispositionof the soul. Inprinciple it affects thewholeman:the intellect, 1 Cor. 2:14, 15; 2 Cor. 4:6; Eph. 1:18; Col. 3:10,—thewill,Phil.2:13;2Thess.3:5;Heb.13:21;—andtheemotions,Ps.42:1,2Matt.5:4;1Pet.1:8.

b.It is an InstantaneousChange. The assertion that regeneration is aninstantaneouschangeimpliestwothings:(1)thatitisnotaworkthatisgraduallypreparedinthesoul;thereisnointermediatestagebetweenlifeanddeath;and(2)thatitisnotagradualprocesslikesanctification,butiscompletedinamomentoftime.

c.It isaChangeintheSub-consciousLife.RegenerationisasecretandinscrutableworkofGodthatisneverdirectlyperceivedbyman,butcanbeperceivedonlyinitseffects.Naturally,manmaybedirectlyconsciousofachangeincaseswhereregenerationandconversioncoincide.

3. THERELATIVEORDEROFCALLINGANDREGENERATION. Theorderinwhichcallingandregenerationstandtoeachothermaybestbe

indicated as follows: The external call in the preaching of the Word,exceptinthecaseofchildren,precedesorcoincideswiththeoperationoftheHolySpirit in theproductionof thenew life.ThenbyacreativeactGod generates the new life, changing the inner disposition of the soul.Thisisregenerationintherestrictedsenseoftheword.Initthespiritualear is implanted which enables man to hear the call of God to thesalvationofhissoul.Havingreceivedthespiritualear,thecallofGodisnowbroughthomeeffectivelytotheheart,sothatmanhearsandobeys.This effectual calling, finally, secures the firstholy exercisesof thenewdispositionthatisborninthesoul.Thenewlifebeginstomanifestitselfandissuesinthenewbirth.Thisisregenerationinthebroadersenseandmarksthepointatwhichregenerationpassesintoconversion.

4.THENECESSITYOFREGENERATION.Scripturedoesnotleaveusindoubtaboutthenecessityofregeneration,butassertsthisintheclearestterms,John3:3,5,7;1Cor.2:14;Gal.6:15.Cf.alsoJer.13:23;Rom.3:11;Eph. 2:3. This necessity also follows from the sinful condition ofman.Holinessorconformitytothedivinelawistheindispensableconditionofsecuring the divine favour, attaining peace of conscience, and enjoyingfellowship with God, Heb. 12:14. Now the natural condition of man isexactly the opposite of that holiness which is so indispensable.Consequently,aradicalinternalchangeisnecessarybywhichthewholedispensationofthesoulisaltered.

5. THE USE OF THE WORD OF GOD AS AN INSTRUMENT INREGENERATION.Thequestion isoftenraised,whether theWord, thatis, theword of preaching, is instrumental in the implanting of thenewlife, in regeneration in the most restricted sense of the word. SinceregenerationisacreativeactofGod,andthewordofthegospelcanonlyworkinamoralandpersuasiveway,itwouldseemthatthiscannotverywell be instrumental in implanting the new life in man. Such aninstrumenthasnospiritualeffecton thosewhoarestilldead insin.Toassertitsusewouldseemtoimplyadenialofthespiritualdeathofman,thoughthisisnotintendedbythosewhomaketheassertion.Moreover,regenerationtakesplaceinthesphereofthesub-consciouslife,whilethetruthaddressesitselftotheconsciousnessofman.And,finally,theBibleclearly intimates thatman is enabled tounderstand the truthonlybya

specialoperationoftheHolySpirit,Acts16:14;1Cor.2:12–15;Eph.1:17–20. It isoftensaid thatJas. 1:18and1Pet. 1:23prove that theWord isused as an instrument in regeneration. But it is certain that James isspeakingofregenerationinabroadersense,asincludingthenewbirthorthefirstmanifestationsofthenewlife,andinallprobabilitythisisalsothe case with Peter. And in that more inclusive sense regeneration isundoubtedlywroughtthroughtheinstrumentalityoftheWord.

6. REGENERATION EXCLUSIVELY A WORK OF GOD. God is theauthorofregeneration. It is represented inScriptureas theworkof theHoly Spirit directly and exclusively, Ezek. 11:19; John 1:13; Acts 16:14;Rom.9:16;Phil.2:13.Thismeans that in regenerationGodonlyworks,and there is no co-operation of the sinner in this work whatever. TheArminiansdonotagreewith this view.They speakof a co-operationofGod and man in the work of regeneration. In their estimation thespiritualrenewalofmanisreallythefruitofman'schoicetoco-operatewith the divine influences exerted by means of the truth. Strictlyspeaking,theyregardtheworkofmanaspriortothatofGod.Mancanresist,buthecanalsoyieldtotheinfluencesoftheHolySpirit.

7. BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. According to the Church of Romeregenerationincludesnotonlyspiritualrenewal,butalsojustificationorthe forgiveness of sins, and is effected by means of baptism. Aninfluential section of the Anglican Church is in agreement with theChurchofRomeonthispoint.AndevenmanyLutheransteachacertainkindofbaptismalregeneration, thoughaccording tosomethisdoesnotincludespiritualrenewal,butonlyservestoplacethebaptizedpersoninanewrelationtotheChurch.Allthesegroupsagreeinteachingthattheblessingofregenerationcanagainbelost.

QuestionsforReview:HowdoestheReformedorderofsalvationdifferfromtheArminianandLutheran?What dowemean by calling?Howdo external and internalcallingdiffer?What is external calling?What elementsdoes it include?Whatarethetwocharacteristicsoftheexternalcall?Whatpurposedoesitserve?Howistheinternalcallingrelatedtotheexternal?Whatareitsdistinctivemarks?Howdoesitoperate?Inwhatspheredoesitoperate?To what end is it directed? What different meanings has the word

"regeneration"?Whatisregenerationintherestrictedsense?Whatisthenatureofthechangewroughtinregeneration?Whatistherelativeorderofcallingandregeneration?Howcanweprovetheabsolutenecessityofregeneration?WhyisitunlikelythattheWordisusedasaninstrumentin regeneration? Do Jas. 1:18 and 1 Pet. 1:23 teach the contrary? IsregenerationaworkofGodonlyorofGodandmantogether?Whoteachbaptismalregeneration?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 33–71; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.445–464;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.377–378,397–401;Orr,Side-LightsonChristianDoctrine,pp.143–152;Candlish,TheWorkoftheHolySpirit,pp.49–76.

CONVERSION

A.TheScripturalTermsforConversion.TheBibleusesseveraltermstodenoteconversion.

1.INTHEOLDTESTAMENT. TheOld Testament employs twowords,each one of which indicates a specific element of conversion. The one(nicham)meanstorepentwitharepentancewhichisoftenaccompaniedwith a change of plan andof action.And the other (shubh) signifies toturnabout,andespeciallytoreturnafteradeparture.Intheprophetsitusually refers to Israel's return to the Lord, after it has departed fromHim.Thisisaveryimportantaspectofconversion.

2. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. The New Testament contains threeimportantwords for conversion. Theword that occursmost frequently

(metanoeo,metanoia)denotesprimarilyachangeofmind.However,thischangeisnottobeconceivedexclusivelyasanintellectual,butalsoasamoralchange.Boththemindandtheconsciencearedefiled,Tit.1:15,andwhenaperson'smind is changed,henot only receivesnewknowledge,but thedirectionofhisconscious life, itsmoralquality isalsochanged.Theword that is next in importance (epistrepho, epistrophe)means toturnabout,ortoturnback.Itreallystressesthefactthattheactivelifeismade tomove in another direction, and thus indicates the final act inconversion. While the first word stresses the element of repentance,though not always to the exclusion of the element of faith, the secondalways contains both elements. The third word (metamelomai) occursonlyfivetimes,andliterallymeanstobecomeacaretooneafterwards.Itstresses the element of repentance; but that this is not always truerepentanceisevidentfromthefactthatitisalsousedoftherepentanceofJudas,Matt.27:3.Theemotionalelementisuppermostinthisword.

B.TheBiblicalIdeaforConversion.TheScripturaldoctrineofconversionis basednotmerely on thepassages inwhich the terms referred to arefound, but also on many others in which conversion is described orconcretely represented in living examples. The Bible does not alwaysspeakofconversioninthesamesense.

1.NATIONAL CONVERSION. Itmakesmention repeatedly of nationalconversions,as,forinstance,ofIsraelinthedaysofthejudges,ofJudahinthetimeofthekings,andoftheNinevites,Jonah3:10.

2. TEMPORARY CONVERSION. It also speaks of conversions thatrepresentnochangeofheart,andareofonlypassingsignificance,Matt.13:20, 21; Acts 8:9 ff.; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20; 2 Tim. 2:18; 4:10;Heb. 6:4, 5.Thesemayforatimehavealltheappearanceoftrueconversion.

3. TRUE CONVERSION. The Bible contains several examples of trueconversion,suchasNaaman,2Kings5:15;Manasseh,2Chron.33:12,13;Zaccheus, Luke 19:8, 9; theman born blind, John9:38; the Samaritanwoman,John4:29,39; theeunuch,Acts8:30 ff.;Cornelius,Acts 10:44ff., Paul Acts 9:5 ff.; Lydia, Acts 16:14, etc. This conversion is but theoutward expression of the work of regeneration, or the accompanyingchangewroughtintheconsciouslifeofthesinner.Therearetwosidesto

this conversion, the one active and the other passive. In the formerconversion is contemplatedas the changewroughtbyGod inwhichHechangestheconsciouscourseofman'slife.Andinthelatteritisregardedastheresultofthisdivineactionasseeninman'schanginghiscourseoflifeandturningtoGod.FromtheformerpointofviewitmaybedefinedasthatactofGodwherebyHecausestheregenerated,intheirconsciouslife,toturntoHimforfaithandrepentance.

4.REPEATEDCONVERSION.Regenerationastheimplantingofthenewlife cannot possibly be repeated. Neither can conversion in the strictsenseoftheword,forthisisbuttheinitialoutwardmanifestation,intheconsciouslifeofman,ofthechangewroughtinregeneration.Atthesametime it ispossible tospeakofa repeatedconversion.Theactivityof thenew life may suffer eclipse through worldliness, carelessness, andindifference,andthenmaybecalledforthandrenewedagainandagain.ScripturereferstosuchrepeatedconversioninLuke22:32;Rev.2:5,16,21,22;3:3,19.

C. The Elements of Conversion. From the preceding it already appearsthat conversion comprises two elements, namely, repentance and faith.Ofthesetheformerhasreferencetothepast,andthelattertothefuture,the former isdirectlyconnectedwithsanctification,andthe lattermoreparticularly,thoughnotexclusively,withjustification.Inviewofthefactthat faithwill be discussed in a separate chapter,we limit ourselves torepentancehere.

1. THE ELEMENTS OF REPENTANCE. Repentance includes threeelements:(a)Anintellectualelement,namely,achangeofviewinwhichthe past life is recognized as a life of sin, involving personal guilt,defilement, andhelplessness.This is the knowledgeof sin ofwhich theBible speaks, Rom. 3:20. (b) An emotional element, which is really achangeof feeling,asenseofsorrowforsinascommittedagainstaholyand just God. If this issues in a real change of life, it is called a godlysorrow,2Cor.7:9,10.(c)Avolitionalelement,whichconsistsinachangeofpurpose,aninwardturningfromsin,andadispositiontoseekpardonand cleansing, Acts 2:38; Rom. 2:4. This is the crowning element ofrepentance.

2. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CONCEPTION OF REPENTANCE. TheChurch of Rome has externalized the idea of repentance entirely in itssacrament of penance. This contains especially three elements (a)Contrition,thatis,realsorrowforsin,notforinbornsin,butforpersonaltransgressions.Inlieuofthis,however,attrition,mayalsosuffice.Thisisreallynothingmorethanfearforthepunishmentofsin.(b)Confession,whichinthesacramentofpenance isconfessiontothepriestwho,onasatisfactory confession,notmerelydeclares thatGod forgives the sinofthepenitent,butactuallypardons ithimself, (c)Satisfaction, consistingin the sinner's doing penance, that is, enduring something painful, orperformingsomedifficultordistastefultask.

3.THESCRIPTURALVIEWOFREPENTANCE.TheScriptural viewofrepentance is quite different from the external view of the RomanCatholics. It views repentance wholly as an inward act, an act ofcontritionorsorrowonaccountofsin.Itdoesnotconfoundthiswiththechange of life in which it results, but regards confession of sin andreparation of wrongs as fruits of repentance.Moreover, it conceives ofrealrepentanceasalwaysaccompaniedwithtruefaith.Thetwogohandinhand,andarebutdifferentaspectsofthesamechangeinman.

D. The Characteristics of Conversion. The following characteristicsshouldbenoted:

1.ConversionisnotalegalactofGodlikejustification,butamoralorre-creativeactlikeregeneration.Itdoesnotalterthestatebuttheconditionofman.

2.Conversiondoesnot,likeregeneration,takeplaceinthesubconscious,butintheconsciouslifeofman.Itmaybesaidtobegininregeneration,andthereforeintheregionbelowconsciousness,butasacompletedactitcertainlyfallswithintherangeoftheconsciouslife.

3.It includes inprinciplenotonlytheputtingawayof theoldman,butalsotheputtingonofthenewman.ThesinnerconsciouslyforsakestheoldsinfullifeandturnstoalifeincommunionwithanddevotedtoGod.

4. If we take the word "conversion" in its specific sense, it denotes a

momentary change and not a process like sanctification. It is a changethat takesplacebutonceandcannotberepeated. Inaslightlydifferentsense,however,itispossibletospeakofrepeatedconversion.

E. The Author of Conversion. God only can be called the author ofconversion.ThisistheclearteachingofScripture,Acts11:18;2Tim.2:25.There isan immediateactionof theHolySpirit inconversion.Thenewlifeof theregeneratemandoesnot issue inconsciousactionby itsowninherent power, but only through the illuminating and fructifyinginfluenceoftheHolySpirit,John6:44;Phil.2:13.ThereisalsoamediateoperationthroughtheWordofGod,however. Ingeneral itmaybesaidthatGodworksrepentancebymeansofthelaw,Ps.19:7;Rom.3:20,andfaith by means of the gospel, Rom. 10:17; 2 Cor. 5:11. But while Godworksaloneinregenerationandmanisentirelypassive,manco-operateswithGodinconversion.Thatmanisactiveinconversionisquiteevidentfromsuchpassages as Isa. 55:7; Jer. 18:11;Ezek. 18:23, 32; 33:11;Acts2:38; 17:30, and others. But this activity ofman always results from apreviousworkofGodinman.ManworksonlywiththepowerwhichGodimpartstohim.

F. The Necessity of Conversion. Scripture speaks in the most absoluteterms of the necessity of regeneration, John 3:3, 5. No such absoluteexpression canbe found respecting conversion.Thismaybedue to thefactthatinthecaseofchildrenwhichdieininfancywecannotspeakofconversion,butonlyofregeneration.TheBibledoes teachthenecessityofconversioninthecaseofadultsinsuchpassagesasEzek.33:11;Matt.18:3,thoughitistruethatthesestatementsarenotabsolutebutrefertospecificgroups.Itmaybesaidthatinthecaseofalladultsconversionisnecessary.Thisdoesnotmean,however,thatconversionmustappearinthelifeofeachoneasastronglymarkedcrisis.Thiscanbeexpected,asarule,onlyinthecaseofthosewhoareregeneratedaftertheyhavecometoyearsofdiscretion. In them the lifeof consciousenmity toGod is atonce transformed into a life of friendship with God. It can hardly beexpected as such, however, in the life of those who, like Jeremiah andJohntheBaptist,wereregeneratedfromearlyyouth.Yettheelementsofconversion,thatis,realrepentanceandtruefaith,mustbepresentinthelivesofall.

QuestionsforReview:What do the Old Testament words for conversion mean? What is themeaning of the New Testament words? In how many different sensesdoestheBiblespeakofconversion?Whatistemporaryconversion?Whatis true conversion? What is repeated conversion, and where doesScripturespeakofit?Whatelementsareincludedinconversion?Howdotheydiffer?What elements are included in repentance?What elementsare included in theRomanCatholic sacramentofpenance?What is theScriptural view of repentance? What are the characteristics ofconversion?Whoistheauthorofconversion?HowcanitbeprovedfromScripturethatman isalsoactive inconversion?Isconversionnecessaryinallcases?Inwhatsenseisitnecessary?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 72–84; McPherson, ChristianDogmatics,pp.393–397;Candlish,TheWorkoftheHolySpirit,pp.67–84;Walden,TheGreatMeaningofMetanoia.

FAITH

A.TheScripturalWordsforFaith.TheOldTestamentreallyhasnowordfor faith, though there are especially threewordswhich denote variousaspects of the activity of faith.Themost commonword for "tobelieve"(he'emin)stressestheintellectualelementandsignifiestheacceptanceofsomething as true on the testimony of another. The other two words(batachandchasah)emphasizerather theelementofconfidentrelianceon or of trust in someone else. The New Testament has one veryimportantwordforfaith(pistis),whichdenotes(1)generalconfidenceinaperson, (2) the readyacceptanceofhis testimonyon thebasis of this

confidence, and (3) the trust reposed in him for the future. As adesignationofsavingfaithitdenotesaconvictionrespectingtheveracityofGod,abelievingacceptanceofHisWord,andaheartfelttrustinHimfor thesalvationof thesoul.Thecorrespondingword for "tobelieve" isusedwithvariousshadesofmeaning,insomecasesstressingtheelementofknowledge,andinotherstheelementoftrust.

B.Different Kinds of FaithMentioned in the Bible. Scripture does notalwaysspeakof faith in thesamesense,andthishasgivenoccasion forthefollowingdistinctions:

1. HISTORICAL FAITH. Historical faith is a purely intellectualacceptance of the truth of Scripturewithout any realmoral or spiritualresponse.Thenamedoesnotimplythatitembracesonlyhistoricalfactsand events to the exclusion ofmoral and spiritual truths; nor that it isbased only on the testimony of history, for it may have reference topresent facts,John3:2. It is ratherexpressiveof the idea that this faithacceptsthetruthsofScriptureasonemightacceptahistoryinwhichoneisnotpersonallyinterested.Thismeansthat,whilethetruthisacceptedintellectually, it isnottakenseriouslyandawakensnorealinterest.TheBiblereferstoitinMatt.7:26;Acts26:27,28;Jas.2:19.

2. FAITH OF MIRACLES. Faith of miracles consists in a person'sconvictionthatamiraclewillbewroughtbyhimorinhisbehalf.Ifheispersuadedthathehimselfcanorwillworkamiracle,hehasthisfaithintheactivesense,Matt.17:20;Mark16:17,18,whilehehasitinthepassivesense,ifheissatisfiedthatamiraclewillbeperformedonhimorinhisbehalf,Matt.8:11–13;John11:22(comp.25–27),40;Acts14:9.Thisfaithmay or may not be accompanied with saving faith. Roman Catholicsclaimthatwearestillwarrantedinexercisingthisfaith,whileProtestantsgenerallydenythis,sincethereisnobasisforit,thoughtheydonotdenythatmiraclesmaystilloccur.

3. TEMPORAL FAITH. Temporal faith is a persuasion of the truths ofreligionwhichisaccompaniedwithsomepromptingsofconscienceandastirring of the affections, but is not rooted in a regenerated heart. ThenameisderivedfromMatt.13:20,21.Itiscalledtemporaryfaith,becauseithasnoabidingcharacterandfailstomaintainitselfindaysoftrialand

persecution. It cannot be regarded as a hypocritical faith, for theywhopossessitreallybelievethattheyhavetruefaith,butitmaybecalledanimaginaryfaith,seeminglygenuinebutofanevanescentcharacter.Greatdifficultymaybeexperiencedindistinguishingitfromtruesavingfaith.Christsaysoftheonewhosobelieves:"hehathnorootinhimself,"Matt.13:21. In general itmay be said that temporal faith is grounded in theemotionallifeandseekspersonalenjoymentratherthanthegloryofGod.

4.TRUESAVINGFAITH.Truesavingfaithisafaiththathasitsseatinthe heart and is rooted in the regenerate life. The seed of the faith isimplantedbyGod in theheart in regeneration, and it is only afterGodhasimplantedthisseedintheheartthatmancanactivelyexercisefaith.Theconsciousexerciseof itgraduallyformsahabit,andthisbecomesapowerfulaidinthefurtherexerciseoffaith.WhentheBiblespeaksofthisfaithitgenerally,thoughnotalways,referstoitasanactivityofman.Itmaybedefinedasacertainconviction,wroughtintheheartbytheHolySpirit,astothetruthofthegospel,andaheartyrelianceonthepromisesofGodinChrist.

C.TheElementsofFaith.Faith is an activity ofmanas awhole.As anactivityofthesoulitappearssimple,andyetoncloserscrutinyitisfoundto be rather intricate and complex. Several elements should bedistinguished.

1. AN INTELLECTUAL ELEMENT (KNOWLEDGE).While saving faithdoes not consist in amere intellectual acceptance of the truth, it doesincludeapositiverecognitionof the truthrevealed in theWordofGod.This knowledge of faith should not be regarded as a completecomprehension of the truth; neither should it be considered as ameretakingnoticeofthethingsbelieved,withouttheconvictionthattheyaretrue. It is a spiritual insight into the truthsof theChristian religion, sothat these find response in the heart of the sinner. It is an absolutelycertainknowledge,basedon thepromisesofGod,and thereforehavingits divinewarrant in GodHimself. It need not be very comprehensive,though it should be sufficient to give the believer some idea of thefundamental truths of the gospel. In general it may be said that, if allother things are equal, one's faith will become richer and fuller in themeasureinwhichone'sknowledgeincreasesinfulnessandclarity.

2. AN EMOTIONAL ELEMENT (ASSENT). The Heidelberg Catechismdoesnotmentionthiselementoffaithseparately.Thisisduetothefactthatwhatiscalled"assent"isreallyincludedintheknowledgeofsavingfaith.Itischaracteristicoftheknowledgeincludedinsavingfaiththatitcarrieswithitaconvictionofthegreatimportanceofitsobject,andthisisassent.Whilethemanwhohasamerelyhistoricalfaithdoesnotreactonthetruth,becauseitdoesnotgriphissoul,thisisquitedifferentwiththepersonwhopossessesandexercisessavingfaith.Heisconsciousofapersonalinterestinthetruth,andrespondstoitwithaheartyassent.

3.AVOLITIONALELEMENT(TRUST).Thisisthecrowningelementoffaith.Faithisnotmerelyamatteroftheintellect,noroftheintellectandtheemotionscombined; it isalsoamatterof thewillwhichdeterminesthedirectionof life,anactof thesoulbywhich itgoesout to itsobjectand embraces this. This third element consists in a personal trust inChrist as Saviour and Lord, which includes a surrender of the soul asguiltyanddefiledtoChrist,andareceptionandappropriationofHimasthesourceofpardonandspirituallife.Itnaturallycarrieswithitacertainfeelingofsafetyandsecurity,ofgratitudeandjoy.Faith,whichisinitselfcertainty,tendstoawakenasenseofsecurityandafeelingofassuranceinthesoul.

D.TheObjectofSavingFaith.Inconnectionwiththeobjectoffaithitisnecessarytodistinguishbetweenfaithinageneralandfaithinaspecificsense.

1.SAVINGFAITHINGENERAL.Theobjectofsavingfaith inthemoregeneralsenseofthewordisthewholeofdivinerevelationascontainedintheWordofGod.EverythingthatisexplicitlytaughtinScriptureorcanbededucedfromitbygoodandnecessaryinference,belongstotheobjectoffaithinthisgeneralsense.

2. SAVING FAITH IN THE MORE SPECIFIC SENSE. While it isnecessarytoaccepttheBibleastheWordofGod,thisisnotthespecificactoffaithwhichjustifiesandthereforesavesdirectly.Itmust,andasamatter of fact does, lead on to a more special faith. There are certaindoctrinesconcerningChristandHiswork,andcertainpromisesmadein

Him to sinful men, which the believer accepts believingly and whichinducehim toputhis trust in JesusChrist.Briefly stated, theobject ofsaving faith is Jesus Christ and the promise of salvation in Him. ThespecialactofsavingfaithconsistsinreceivingChristandrestingonHimasHeispresentedinthegospel,John3:15,16,18;6:40.

E. The Roman Catholic View of Faith. The Roman Catholic Churchconceivesoffaithasamereassenttothetruth,thoughitdoesnotregardthis as a full-fledged and therefore saving faith. It virtually denies theabsolute necessity of the element of knowledge in faith. If one is onlyready to assent to the teachings of the Church,without really knowingwhat these are, one can be considered as a true believer. Faith will befuller and richer, however, if it includes the element of knowledge.Butthisassenttothetruth,withorwithoutknowledge,becomesrealsavingfaithonlywhenitbecomesoperativethroughloveintheperformanceofgoodworks.

F.FaithandAssurance.Thequestionarises,whetherfaithalwayscarrieswith it the assurance of salvation. Opinions differ verymuch as to therelationofassurancetofaith.RomanCatholicsandtheArminiansoftheseventeenthcenturyteachthatbelieverscannot,exceptinveryrarecases,besureoftheirsalvation.Moreover,theyholdthatsuchassuranceisonthewholeundesirable.WesleyanArminiansorMethodistsmaintainthatconversioncarriesimmediatecertaintywithit.Hewhobelievesisatoncesure thathe is redeemed.Thisdoesnotmean,however, thathe is alsocertainofultimate salvation.This is a certainty towhich the consistentMethodistcannotattain,sinceheisalwaysliabletofallfromgrace.Thecorrectviewwouldseemtobethattruefaith,including,asitdoes,trustinGod,naturallycarrieswithitasenseofsafetyandsecurity,thoughthismayvaryindegree.Theassurancewhichisincludedinfaithisnotalwaysaconsciouspossession,however,sincetheChristiandoesnotalwayslivethefull-orbedlifeoffaithandconsequentlyisnotatalltimesawareoftherichesofthelifeoffaith.Heisoftenswayedbydoubtsanduncertainties,andisthereforeurgedtocultivateassurance,Eph.3:12;2Tim.1:12;Heb.10:22;—Heb. 6:11; 2 Pet. 1:10; 1 John 2:9–11; 3:9, 10, 18, 19; 4:7, 20.Assurancecanbecultivatedbyprayer,bymeditatingonthepromisesofGodandbythedevelopmentofatrulyChristianlifeinwhichthefruitsof

theSpiritbecomeevident.

QuestionsforReview:What is themeaningof theOldTestamentwords for faith?What is themeaning of theNew Testament word?Of howmany different kinds offaithdoestheBiblespeak?Whatischaracteristicofhistoricalfaith?Whatis the faithofmiracles? Is thereanywarrant for itat thepresent time?How does temporal faith differ from true saving faith? What is thecharacteristicof truesaving faith?Whatelementsare included in faith?How much knowledge is needed in faith? How is the assent of faithrelatedtoitsknowledge?Whatisthenatureofthetrustincludedinfaith?What is the object of saving faith? What conception does the RomanCatholicChurchhaveoffaith?Whatdifferentviewsarethererespectingthe assurance of faith? What is the true view? How can assurance becultivated?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Gerkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 85–106; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.465–481;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.388–393;Candlish, The Work of the Holy Spirit, pp. 76–84; Machen. What isFaith;Berkhof,TheAssuranceofFaith.

JUSTIFICATION

A.TheScripturalTermsfor"tojustify."TheOldTestamentemploystwodifferent forms of the sameword (hidsdik and tsiddek) to express thisidea.Thesewordsdonot,exceptinacoupleofpassages,denoteamoralchange wrought by God in man, but regularly designate a divinedeclarationrespectingman.TheyconveytheideathatGodinthecapacity

ofJudgedeclaresmanrighteous.Hencethethoughtwhichtheyexpressisoftenplaced inopposition to thatof condemnation,Deut.25:1;Prov.17:15;Isa.5:23,andisrepresentedastheequivalentofnotenteringintojudgmentwith the sinner, Ps. 143:2, andof forgivinghis sins, Ps. 32:1.TheNewTestamentword (dikaio-o)has the samemeaning,namely, todeclare righteous, as appears from the following facts: (1) In manyinstancesitcanbearnoothersense,Rom.3:20–28;4:5–7;5:1;Gal.2:16;3:11;5:4.(2)Itisplacedinoppositiontocondemnation,Rom.8:33,34.(3) Other terms which are sometimes used instead of it also convey alegal idea,John3:18;5:24;Rom.4:6,7;2Cor.5:19.FromthestudyofthesewordsitisquiteevidentthatinScripture"tojustify"doesnotmeantomakebuttodeclarerighteous.

B.TheNature andCharacteristics of Justification. Justificationmay bedefinedasthatlegalactofGodbywhichHedeclaresthesinnerrighteousonthebasisoftheperfectrighteousnessofJesusChrist.Itisnotanactorprocessofrenewal,suchasregeneration,conversion,andsanctification,anddoesnotaffecttheconditionbutthestateofthesinner.Thefollowingpoints of difference between justification and sanctification should benotedparticularly:

1.Justificationremovestheguiltofsinandrestoresthesinnertoalltherightsof a childofGod, includinganeternal inheritance.SanctificationremovesthepollutionofsinandrenewsthesinnerinconformitywiththeimageofGod.

2.Justification takesplaceoutsideof the sinner in the tribunalofGod,thoughitisappropriatedbyfaith.Sanctificationtakesplaceintheinnerlifeofmanandgraduallyaffectshiswholebeing.

3. Justification takes place once for all: it is not repeated, nor is it aprocess; it is complete at once and for all time. Sanctification, on theotherhand,isacontinuousprocesswhichisnotcompletedinthepresentlife.

4.WhilebotharefruitsofthemeritsofChrist,theworkofjustificationisascribedmoreparticularlytotheFather,andthatofsanctificationtotheHolySpirit.

C. The Elements of Justification. There are especially two elements injustification,ofwhichtheoneisnegative,andtheotherpositive.

1. THENEGATIVEELEMENT. The negative element of justification istheforgivenessofsinsonthebasisoftheimputedrighteousnessofJesusChrist. The pardon granted in justification applies to all sins, past,present,andfuture,andthereforeincludestheremovalofallguiltandofeverypenaltyThisfollowsfromthefactthatjustificationdoesnotadmitof repetition, and from such passages as Rom. 5:21; 8:1, 32–34; Heb.10:14;Ps.103:12;Isa.44:22,andisalsoimpliedintheanswertothe60thquestionoftheHeidelbergCatechism.ItmayseemtobecontradictedbythefactthatChristtaughtHisdisciplestoprayfortheforgivenessofsins,andthatBiblesaintsareoftenfoundpleadingforpardonandobtainingit,Matt.6:12;Ps.32:5;51:1–4;130:3,4.Theexplanationforthis lies inthe fact that the sins of believers in themselves still constitute guilt(thoughit isguiltalreadycovered),andassuchcall forconfession;thattheconsciousnessofguiltstillremainsandnaturallyurgesthebelievertoconfesshissinandtoseekthecomfortingassuranceofforgiveness;andthattheconsciousnessofpardon,whichisrepeatedlyobscuredbysin,isagain quickened and strengthened by confession and prayer, and by arenewedexerciseoffaith.

2. THE POSITIVE ELEMENT. There is also a positive element injustification,inwhichtwopartsmaybedistinguished:

a.TheAdoptionofChildren. In justificationGodadopts thebelieverasHischild,that is,placeshiminthepositionofachildandgiveshimalltherightsofachild.Thissonshipbyadoptionmustbedistinguishedfromthe moral sonship of believers, which results from regeneration andsanctification. Believers are not only children of God by adoption andthereforeinalegalsense,butalsobyvirtueofthenewbirthandthereforeinaspiritualsense.ThistwofoldsonshipismentionedtogetherinJohn1:12,13;Rom.8:15,16;Gal.4:5,6.

b. The Title to Eternal Life. This privilege is virtually included in theprecedingone.WhensinnersareadoptedtobechildrenofGod,theyareinvestedwithallthelegalrightsofchildren,andbecomeheirsofGodandco-heirs with Christ, Rom. 8:17. They are constituted heirs of all the

blessingsofsalvationinthepresentlife,andinadditiontothatreceiveatitleto"aninheritanceincorruptible,andundefiled,andthatfadethnotaway,"reservedinheavenforthem.1Pet.1:4.

D. The Sphere in Which Justification Takes Place. In answering thequestion as to the sphere in which justification takes place, we mustdistinguishbetweenactiveandpassivejustification.

1. ACTIVE JUSTIFICATION. Active justification takes place in thetribunal of God, Rom. 3:20; Gal. 3:11. In the sphere of heaven God,appearing as a righteous Judge, declares the sinner righteous, not inhimself,butinviewofthefactthattherighteousnessofChristisimputedto him. The Judge is also the gracious Father freely forgiving andacceptingthesinner.

2. PASSIVE JUSTIFICATION. Passive justification takes place in theheartorconscienceofthesinner.Ajustificationthatisnotbroughthometothesinnerwouldnotanswerthepurpose.Pardonmeansnothingtoaprisonerunlessthegladtidingsarecommunicatedtohimandthedoorsof the prison are opened. The sentence of acquittal, pronounced in thetribunal of God; is communicated to the sinner and accepted by faith.When the Bible speaks of justification by faith, it usually refers to thisaspectofit.

E.TheTimeofJustification.Opinionsdiffersomewhatastothetimeofjustification. Insomecases,however, thedifferencesaredue to the factthattheterm"justification"isnotalwaysusedinthesamesense.Insuchcases the different opinions are not necessarily mutally exclusive, butmayexistalongsideofeachother.

1. JUSTIFICATION FROMETERNITY.Many Antinomians confuse thedivinedecree respecting the redemptionofmenwith theapplicationoftheworkofredemptionbytheHolySpirit.TheybelievethatthegraceofGod to sinners in the eternal decree is all that is necessary for theredemptionofman.ThereisnofurtherneedthatChristshouldmeritthisgrace, nor that the Holy Spirit should apply it. Everything isaccomplished inthedecree; thismeansamongother thingsthatmanisjustified from eternity. But there are also others who believe in

justification from eternity. Some Reformed theologians advocate thisdoctrine, though without subscribing to the peculiar tenets of theAntinomians.Theyareoftheopinionthattheelectwerejustifiedinthecounselofredemption,whentherighteousnessofChristwasimputedtothem; but they believe at the same time that this justification frometernityisfollowedintimebyanotherjustification.Someevenspeakofafour-fold justification:a justification frometernity,a justification in theresurrectionofChrist,ajustificationbyfaith,andapublicjustificationinthe final judgment. Now there is no doubt about it that there was acertain imputation of the righteousness of Christ to the elect in thecounselof redemption,but itmaywellbedoubted that this iswhat theBiblemeans,when it speaksof the justificationof the sinner.Wemustdistinguish between what wasmerely ideal in the counsel of God, andwhatisrealizedinthecourseofhistory.

2. JUSTIFICATION IN THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. SomeAntinomiansdonotgototheextentofmaintainingthateverythingwasaccomplishedinthedecree,andthateventheworkofChristwas,strictlyspeaking, unnecessary; but they do hold that, after Christ hasaccomplishedHiswork,nothingfurtherisrequired,andthusignoretheapplicationoftheworkofredemptionbytheHolySpirit.Theelectwerejustified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Those Reformed scholarswhoalsospeakofajustificationintheresurrectionofChrist,naturallydonot regard thisas thewholeof the justificationof the sinner.Theyalsobelieveinjustificationbyfaith.Itmaybesaidthat,whilewecanspeakofa justification of the body of Christ as a whole in the resurrection ofChrist, this is something purely objective and should not be confusedwiththepersonaljustificationofthesinner.

3.JUSTIFICATIONBYFAITH.WhentheBiblespeaksofthejustificationof the sinner, it usually refers to the subjective application andappropriation of the justifying grace of God. It speaks of this asjustificationbyfaith,becauseitisbyfaiththatweappropriatethemeritsofChristasthebasisofourjustificationandthuscomeintopossessionofthe justifying grace of God. The relation of faith to justification is notalwaysrepresentedinthesameway.Thereareespeciallytwosignificantrepresentationsofit.(a)IntheProtestantConfessionsitisusuallycalled

theinstrumentortheinstrumentalcauseofjustification.Faithisontheone hand the gift of God wrought in the sinner unto justification, themeansbywhichHecarriesthedeclarationofpardonintotheheart.Butitis also on the other hand the instrument by which man appropriatesChrist and all His precious gifts, Rom. 4:5; Gal. 2:16. (b) It is alsofrequentlycalledtheappropriatingorgan.Thisnameexpresses the ideathatby faith thesinnerappropriates therighteousnessofChrist,on thebasisofwhichheisjustifiedbeforeGod.FaithjustifiesinsofarasittakespossessionofChrist.

F.TheGroundofJustification.TherewasaveryimportantdifferenceofopinionbetweentheChurchofRomeandtheReformer'srespectingtheground of justification. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that thesinnerisjustifiedonthebasisofhisowninherentrighteousness,whichisinfused into his heart in regeneration. But it is impossible that theintrinsic righteousness of the believer or his good works should everconstitutethegroundofhisjustification,sinceit is itselfthefruitoftherenewinggraceofGod,andalwaysremainsimperfectinthepresentlife.Moreover, Scripture teaches thatman is justified freely by the grace ofGod,Rom.3:24,andcannotpossiblybejustifiedbytheworksofthelaw,Rom.3:28;Gal.2:16;3:11.TherealgroundofjustificationcanbefoundonlyintheperfectrighteousnessofJesusChrist,whichisimputedtothesinner in justification. This is plainly taught in several passages ofScripture,Rom.3:24;5:9,19;8:1;10:4;1Cor.1:30;6:11;2Cor.5:21;Phil.3:9.

G. Objections to the Doctrine of Justification. Three objections arefrequentlyraisedagainstthedoctrineofjustification:

1.Itissaidthatjustificationisalegaltransaction,andthereforeexcludesgrace, while Scripture teaches that the sinner is saved by grace. Butjustification,withallthatitincludes,isagraciousworkofGod.ThegiftofChrist, the imputation of His righteousness, and God's dealing withbelieversasrighteous,—itisallgracefromstarttofinish.

2.SomespeakofjustificationasaprocedureunworthyofGod,becauseitdeclares sinners righteous, while as a matter of fact they are notrighteous. The objection does not hold, however, because it does not

declare that they are righteous in themselves, but that they are clothedwiththerighteousnessofJesusChrist.

3.Itisoftensaidthatthisdoctrineleadstolicentiousness,sincetheywhoarejustifiedareapttothinkthattheirpersonalpietyisamatteroflittleimportance.However,injustificationthesurefoundationislaidforthatvital and spiritualunionwithChrist,which is the surest guaranteeof atrulygodlylife.

QuestionsforReview:What is the meaning of the Scriptural terms for "to justify"? What isjustification?How does it differ from santification?What elements areincluded in justification? In how far are sins forgiven in justification?Proof.Why is it necessary to pray for the forgiveness of sins?What isincluded in the adoption of children? Inwhat sphere does justificationtake place?How do active and passive justification differ?What is theAntinomianpositionrespectingthetimeof justification?DoesScriptureteach justification from eternity? In what sense can we speak of ajustification in the resurrection of Christ? How is faith related tojustification? What is the ground of justification? What objections areraisedtothedoctrineofjustification,andhowcantheybeanswered?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II pp. 107–125; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.496–514;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.379–386;Orr, Side-Lights on Christian Doctrine, pp. 154–159; Buchanan, TheDoctrineofJustification.

SANCTIFICATION

A. The Scriptural Terms for Sanctification. The Hebrew word for "tosanctify" (qadash) is inallprobabilityderived fromarootwhichmeans"tocut,"andthereforeemphasizestheideaofseparation.Thisisalsotheprimary ideaof theNewTestamentword(hagiazo). Indealingwith thesubjectofsanctificationitisnecessarytobearthispointinmind.TothemindsofthegreatmajorityofChristiansitconveysfirstofalltheideaofspiritual renewal, of the endowment of man with moral and spiritualqualities.Andyetthisisnottheoriginalidea.TheBiblicalwordsexpresstheideaofapositionorrelationshipbetweenGodandmanratherthanthatofspiritualqualitieswroughtintheheart.ThemanwhoissanctifiedisinprincipleliftedoutofthesinfulrelationsoflifeandplacedinanewrelationtoGod,inwhichheisconsecratedtoHimandtoHisservice.TheOld Testament speaks repeatedly of holy persons and holy things,referring to persons and things which are externally set aside orconsecrated to the service of God. This external consecration to theserviceofGodsymbolizedthedeeperandinnerdevotionoftheheart.ButwhiletheScripturalwordsarefirstofallindicativeofarelationship,theyalsodenotethatoperationofGodbywhichHe,throughtheHolySpirit,works inmanthesubjectivequalityofholiness,John17:17;Acts20:32;26:18;1Cor.1:2;1Thess.5:23.

B.TheBiblicalIdeaofHolinessandSanctification.InScripturetheideaofholinessisappliedfirstofalltoGod.ItdenotesprimarilythatGodisabsolutelydistinct from thecreature, is exalted farabove it inheavenlymajesty,andisthereforetheunapproachableOne.Outofthisfirstideaasecondgraduallydeveloped.SincesinfulmanismorekeenlyconsciousofthemajestyofGodthanasinlessbeing,hebecomesawareofhisimpurityas over against themajestic purity of God, cf. Isa. 6. Thus the idea ofGod's separation from the creature passed into that of His separationfromall impurityandparticularly fromsin.Only theclean inheartcanstandinHispresence,Ps.24:3f.Buteventhis isnotall.Positively, theideaofthedivineholinessshadesrightintoandbecomesalmostidenticalwiththatofthelightofthedivineglory.

In the second place the idea of holiness is also applied to persons andthings thatareplaced in special relationship toGod. Israelhad itsholyplaces,suchasJerusalemandthetemple,itsholypersonsinthepriests

and levites, and its holy rites in sacrifices and purifications. Thesepersons and things were separated unto the service of God. But thisexternal consecrationof certainpersonsmerely served tosymbolize theinnerconsecrationoftheheart,anddidnotnecessarilycarrythiswithit.Onemightbeasacredperson,andyetbeentirelydevoidofthegraceofGod in theheart.Andyetonly theywhopossessedthe latterwere trulyholy unto the Lord. Through the influence of the Holy Spirit ethicalqualitiesarewroughtintheirheart.ThisOldTestamentideaofholinesspassed right over into theNewTestament. It is of great importance toobserve that this Biblical idea of holiness is never that of mere moralgoodness,consideredinitself,butalwaysthatofethicalgoodnessseeninrelationtoGod.Amanmayboastofgreatmoralimprovement,andyetbeanutter stranger to theworkof sanctification.TheBibledoesnoturgemoralimprovementpureandsimple,butmoralimprovementinrelationtoGod,forGod'ssake,andwithaviewtotheserviceofGod.Sanctificationmaybedefinedasthatgraciousandcontinuousoperationof theHolySpiritbywhichHepurifies thesinner fromthepollutionofsin, renews his whole nature in the image of God, and enables him toperformgoodworks.

C.TheCharacteristicsofSanctification.

1.Godandnotmanis theauthorofsanctification.Thisdoesnotmean,however,thatmanisentirelypassiveintheprocess.Hecanandshouldco-operatewithGodintheworkofsanctificationbyadiligentuseofthemeanswhichGodhasplacedathisdisposal,2Cor.7:1;Col.3:5–14;1Pet.1:22.

2.Sanctification isnot, like justification,a legalactofGod,butamoralandre-creativeactivity,bywhichthesinnerisrenewedinhisinnerbeingandmadetoconformever-increasinglytotheimageofGod.

3.Itisusuallyalengthyprocessandneverreachesperfectioninthislife.In cases in which regeneration and conversion are soon followed bydeath,theprocessmay,ofcourse,beveryshort.

4. The process of sanctification is either completed at death orimmediately after it as far as the soul is concerned, and at the

resurrection in so far as it pertains to the body, Phil. 3:21;Heb. 12:23;Rev.14:5;21:27.

D.TheNatureofSanctification.

1.SANCTIFICATIONISASUPERNATURALWORKOFGOD.Somehavethemistakennotionthatsanctificationconsistsmerelyinthedrawingoutofthenewlifewhichisimplantedinregenerationbypresentingmotivestothewillandthuspersuadingmantoincreaseinholiness.Inrealityitisadivineoperation in thesoulwhereby theholydisposition imparted inregeneration is strengthened and its holy exercises are increased. It isessentiallyaworkofGod,partlyimmediateandpartlymediateInsofarasGodusesmeansmanisexpectedtoco-operatebytheproperuseofthemeans at his disposal, 1 Thess. 5:23; Heb. 13:20, 21; 2 Cor. 7:1; Heb.12:14.

2.ITCONSISTSOFTWOPARTS:

a.TheMortificationof theOldMan.Thenegative sideof sanctificationconsistsinthisthatthepollutionandcorruptionofhumannaturewhichresultsfromsinisgraduallyremoved.Theoldman,thatis,humannaturein so far as it is controlled by sin, is gradually crucified,Rom.6:6Gal.5:24.

b.TheQuickeningoftheNewMan.Thepositivesideofsanctificationliesin this that the holy disposition of the soul is strengthened, its holyexercisesareincreased,andthusanewcourseoflifeisengendered,Rom.6:4,5;Col.2:12;3:1,3.Thenewlifetowhichitleadsiscalled"alifeuntoGod,"Rom.6:11;Gal.2:19.

3. IT AFFECTSTHEWHOLEMAN. Since sanctification takes place intheheart,itnaturallyaffectsthewholeorganism.Thechangeintheinnermanisboundtocarrywithitachangeintheouterlife,Rom.6:12;1Cor.6:15,20;2Cor.5:17;1Thess5:23.Itiscompletedespeciallyinthecrisisof death and in the resurrection of the dead. Scripture teaches that itaffectstheunderstanding,Jer.31:34;John6:45,thewill,Ezek.36:25–27;Phil. 3:13; the passions, Gal. 5:24, and the conscience, Tit. 1:15; Heb.9:14.

4.ITISAWORKINWHICHBELIEVERSCO-OPERATE.Thatmanmustco-operate in the work of sanctification follows from the repeatedwarningsagainstevilsandtemptations,Rom.12:9,16,17;1Cor.6:9,10;Gal. 5:16–23; and from the constant exhortations to holy living,Micah6:8;John15:2,8,16;Rom.8:12,13;12:1,2,17;Gal.6:7,8,15.

E. The Imperfect Character of Sanctification in This Life. Whilesanctificationaffectseverypartofman,yetthespiritualdevelopmentofbelieversinthisliferemainsimperfectindegree.Believersmustcontendwithsinaslongastheylive,1Kings8:46;Prov.20:9;Eccl.7:20;Jas.3:2;1John1:8.AccordingtoScripturethereisaconstantwarfarebetweentheflesh and the spirit in the lives of God's children, and even the best ofthemarestillstrivingforperfection,Rom.7:7–26;Gal.2:20;5:17;Phil.3:12–14.Confessionofsinandprayerforforgivenessarerepresentedasanecessity,Job.9:3,20;Ps.32:5;130:3;Prov.20:9;Isa.64:6;Dan.9:16;Rom. 7:14; Matt. 6:12, 13; 1 John 1:9. This truth is denied by thePerfectionists,whobelievethatmancanattaintoperfection inthis life.TheyappealtothefactthattheBiblecommandsbelieverstobeperfect,1Pet. 1:16; Matt. 5:48; Jas. 1:4; that holiness and perfection are oftenascribedtobelievers,1Cor.2:6;2Cor.5:17;Eph.5:27;Heb.5:14;Phil.3:15;Col.2:10;thatsomeBiblicalsaintsledperfect lives,asNoah,Gen.6:9;Job,Job1:8;andAsa,1Kings15:14;andthatJohndeclaresexplicitlythattheywhoarebornofGoddonotsin,1John3:6,8,9;5:18.Butallthisdoesnotprovethepoint.Goddemandsholinessoftheunregenerateas well as of the regenerate, but this certainly does not prove that theunregenerate can lead a holy life. If the Bible occasionally speaks ofbelieversasperfect,thisdoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheyarewithoutsin.TheycanbecalledperfectinChrist,orperfectinprinciple,orperfectin thesenseof fullgrown,1Cor.2:6;3:1,2;Heb.5:14;2Tim.3:17.TheBible contains no examples of believerswho led sinless lives. Even themenmentionedasexamplesfellintogrievoussins,Gen.9:21;Job3:1;2Chron. 16:7 ff. And the statement found in the Epistle of John that hewhoisbornofGoddoesnotsinevidentlymeanseitherthatthenewmanassuchdoesnotsin,orthatthebelieverdoesnot live insin.Moreover,this statement of John would prove too much for the Perfectionist,namely,thatthebelieveractuallyneversins.EventhePerfectionistdoesnotmaintainthat.Consequentlyitprovesnothingtothepoint.

F.SanctificationandGoodWorks.Sanctificationnaturallyissuesinalifeof good works. Thesemay be called the fruits of sanctification, and assuchcomeintoconsiderationhere.

1.THENATUREOFGOODWORKS.Whenwespeakofgoodworks,wedonotmeanperfectworks,butworkswhich,atleastinprinciple,answerto thedivine requirementsandwhicharegood in the spiritual senseoftheword.SuchgoodworksspringfromtheprincipleoflovetoGodandthedesiretodoHiswill,Deut.6:2;1Sam.15:22;Isa.1:12;Matt.7:17,18;12:33;theyarenotonlyinexternalconformitytothelawofGod,butarealso done in conscious obedience to the revealed will of God; andwhatevertheirproximateaimmaybe,theirfinalaimisthegloryofGod,Rom.12:1;1Cor.10:31;Col.3:17,23.Onlytheywhoareregeneratedbythe Spirit of God can perform such good works. This does not mean,however,thattheunregeneratecannotdogoodinanysenseoftheword.To say this would be to contradict the plain teachings of Scripture, 2Kings 10:29, 30; 12:2; 14:3; Luke 6:33; Rom. 2:14. They can performworksthatareinexternalconformitywiththelaw,thatspringfromnoblemotivesrespectingtheirfellowmen,andthatanswertoaproximateaimwhichmeetstheapprovalofGod.TheseworksfindtheirexplanationonlyinthecommongraceofGod.Whiletheycanbecalledgoodinageneralsense,theyareyetradicallydefective,becausetheyaredivorcedfromthespiritualrootoflovetoGod,representnorealinnerobediencetothelawofGod,anddonotaimatthegloryofGod.

2. THE MERITORIOUS CHARACTER OF GOOD WORKS. The goodworksofbelieversarenotmeritoriousinthestrictsenseoftheword,thatis, theydonothave the inherentvaluewhichnaturally carrieswith it ajust claim to a reward. If God does reward their good works, it is notbecause He is under obligation to them, but only because He hasgraciously promised to attach a reward to works that meet with Hisapproval. It is a reward like parents occasionally bestow upon theirchildren. Scripture clearly teaches that the goodworks of believers arenotmeritorious,Luke17:9,10;Rom.5:15–18;6:23;Eph.2:8–10;2Tim.1:9;Tit.3:5.Thereareseveralreasonswhytheycannotbe:(a)Believersowe their whole life to God, and cannotmerit anything by giving Godsimply what is His due, Luke 17:9, 10. (b) They cannot perform good

worksexceptwith thestrengthwhichGod imparts to themfromday today,andthereforecannotclaimcreditforthem,1Cor.15:10;Phil.2:13.(c)Eventheirbestworksare imperfect,whileGodcanbesatisfiedwithnothing less than perfect obedience, Isa. 64:6; Jas. 3:2. (d) Their goodworksareoutofallproportiontotheeternalrewardofglory.TheRomanCatholicChurchholdsthat,afterthesinnerhasreceivedthegraceofGodinhisheart,hecanperformmeritoriousworks,thatis,workswhichgivehimajustclaimtosalvationandglory.

3.THENECESSITYOFGOODWORKS.Therecanbenodoubtaboutthenecessity of good works, but this necessity should be properlyunderstood. They are not necessary to merit salvation, nor even as anecessary condition of salvation. Infants enter heaven without havingdoneanygoodworks.TheBibledoesnotteachthatnoonecanbesavedapart from good works. Yet they are necessary in the lives of adultbelieversasrequiredbyGod,Rom.7:4;8:12,13;Gal.6:2,asthefruitsoffaith,Jas.2:14,17,20–22,asanexpressionofgratitude,1Cor.6:20,untotheassuranceoffaith,2Pet.1:5–10,andtothegloryofGod,John15:8;1Cor. 10:31. Their necessity must be maintained over against theAntinomians, who assert that believers are free from the obligation tokeep the law as a rule of life, since Christ did this for them. This is athoroughlyfalseposition.ChristfulfilledthelawasacovenantobligationandboreitspenaltyinbehalfofHispeople,butHekeptthelawasaruleoflifeforHimselfandforHimselfonly.BytheoperationofHisSpiritHeenables believers to keep the law in principle for themselves, and they,withoutanyconstraint,willinglyobeyitfromtheheart.

PERSEVERANCEOFTHESAINTS

A. Nature of the Perseverance of the Saints. The Reformed Churchesstandpractically alone inmaintaining that aChristian cannot fall fromthe state of grace. Roman Catholics, Socinians, Arminians, and evenLutherans maintain that he can, and therefore do not believe in theperseverance of the saints. This doctrine can easily be misunderstood.Thenamenaturally suggests a continuous activity of believerswherebytheypersevereinthewayofsalvation.Asamatteroffact,however,thisperseverance is not thought of primarily as an activity of believers,though it is certainly regarded as a work in which they co-operate.Believers would fall away, if they were left to themselves. Strictlyspeaking, it is not man but God that perseveres. Perseverance is thatcontinuousoperationoftheHolySpiritinthebeliever,bywhichtheworkof divine grace that is begun in the heart, is continued and brought tocompletion.

B.Proof for theDoctrineofPerseverance.ThedoctrineofperseverancemaybeprovedbydirectstatementsofScripture,suchasJohn10:28,29;Rom.11:29;Phil.1:6;2Thess.3:3;2Tim.1:12;4:18.Itfollowsalsofromthedoctrineofelection,whichisnevermerelyelectiontocertainmeansofsalvationortoawayinwhichmanmaybesaved,buttotheendofaperfectsalvation. Itmaybe inferred fromtheefficacyof themeritsandtheintercessionofChrist.TheyforwhomHehaspaidthepricecanneveragain fallundercondemnation.Moreover,Hisconstant intercession forthem is always effective, John 11:42; Heb. 7:25. It is also a naturalinferencefromthemysticalunionofbelieverswithChrist.Howcantheywhoareonce implantedinChristandtherefore inpossessionofeternallife againbe severed from thebodyofChrist and lose this life?Canweproceed on the assumption that eternal life will not be everlasting?Finally,itfollowsfromthefactthatbelieverscaninthislifeattaintotheassuranceofsalvation,Heb.3:14;6:11;10:22;2Pet.1:10.Thiswouldbequiteimpossible,ifbelieverscouldfallfromgraceatanymoment.

C.Objections to the Doctrine of Perseverance. It is often said that thedoctrineofperseveranceleadstofalsesecurityandtoindolence,license,andimmorality.Butthisisnottrue.WhiletheBibletellsusthatwearekeptbythegraceofGod,itdoesnotencouragetheideathatGodkeepsuswithout constant watchfulness, diligence, and prayer on our part.

Moreover, there are three classes of passages in Scripture which aredeclared to be contrary to this doctrine. These are: (1) Passagescontainingwarningsagainstapostasywhichwouldbeunnecessary,ifthebelievercouldnotfallaway,Matt.24:12;Col.1:23;Heb.2:1;3:14;6:11;1John2:6.But theseonlyprove that thebelievermust co-operate in thework of perseverance. Compare Acts 27:22–25 with verse 31 for anillustrationofthispoint.(2)Passagesinwhichbelieversareexhortedtocontinue in the way of sanctification. Such exhortations would seemunnecessary,ifthereisnodoubtabouttheircontinuance.Buttheseonlygo to show thatGod usesmoralmeans to attainHis end. (3) Passageswhich record cases of actual apostasy, 1 Tim. 1:19, 20; 2 Tim. 2:17, 18;4:10;2Pet.2:1,2.Butthereisnoproofthatthepersonsmentionedweretruebelievers.TheBibleitselfteachesthattherearepersonswhoprofessthefaithandyetarenotofthefaith,Rom.9:6;1John2:9;Rev.3:1.Johnsaysofsome:"Theywentoutfromus,buttheywerenotofus;foriftheyhadbeenofus,theywouldhavecontinuedwithus,"1John2:19.

QuestionsforReview:What is the primarymeaning of the Scripturalwords for "to sanctify"?What is the original idea of sanctification? What are the differentmeaningsofholinessasapplied toGod?Whatdoes itmean,when it isapplied to persons and things? What is the difference betweensanctification andmoral improvement?What are the characteristics ofsanctification? Is sanctification a work of God or of man?What is thenegative and the positive side of sanctification? How far doessanctification extend?What proof is there that it is incomplete in thislife?Whodenythisandonwhatgrounds?Howcantheirargumentsbemet?Whataregoodworksinthestrictsenseoftheword?Inhowfarcantheunregenerateperformgoodworks?Whatismeantwhenitissaidthatgoodworks are notmeritorious?How canwe prove that they are not?Why is it impossible that they should be meritorious? Are they notrepresentedasmeritoriouswhenweare taught that theyarerewarded?Inwhatsensearegoodworksnotnecessary,andinwhatsensearetheynecessary?Whatismeantbytheperserveranceofthesaints?Whodenythis doctrine? How can this doctrine be proved? What objections aretheretoit,andhowcanthesebemet?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 126–151; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.520–547;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.404–408;Candlish. TheWork of theHoly Spirit, pp. 89–96;Orr, Side-Lights onChristianDoctrine,pp.159–162.

THEDOCTRINEOFTHECHURCHANDTHEMEANSOFGRACE

THECHURCH

NATUREOFTHECHURCH

A. Different Uses of the Word "Church" in Scripture. The principaldesignation of theChurch in theOld Testament is derived from a rootwhichmeans"tocall."ItwasappliedespeciallytotheassemblyofIsraelas itmet forworship.Themostcommonword for "church" in theNewTestament, which is also the most important, comes from a verbmeaning, "to call out." Both words contemplate the Church as anassemblycalledbyGod.IntheNewTestamenttheword"church"isfirstusedbyJesus.Heapplied it to thecompany thatgatheredroundaboutHim,recognizedHimpubliclyastheirLord,andacceptedtheprinciplesof thekingdomofheaven.Later on thewordacquired severaldifferentconnotations.

1.Mostfrequentlyitdenotesacircleofbelieversinsomedefinitelocality,a local church, irrespective of the question,whether it is assembled forworshipornot.Somepassagesregarditasassembled,Acts5:11;11:26;1Cor.11:18;14:19,28,35,andothersdonot,Rom.16:4;1Cor.16:1;Gal.1:2;1Thess.2:14,etc.

2.Insomepassages itdenotesadomesticchurch,or"thechurchinthehouse"ofsomeindividual.Thewealthy,itwouldseem,oftenprovidedameeting-place in their homes, Rom. 16:5, 23 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15;Philemon2.

3.In itsmost comprehensive sense theword serves as adesignationofthe whole body of believers, whether in heaven or on earth, who havebeenor shallbe spirituallyunited toChrist as theirSaviour,Eph. 1:22;3:10,21;5:23,24,25,27,29,32;Col.1:18,24.

ThereareseveralfigurativedesignationsoftheChurchinScripture.Itiscalled"thebodyofChrist,"1Cor.12:27;Eph.1:23;Col.1:18,"thetempleoftheHolySpirit,"1Cor.3:16;1Pet.2:5,"theJerusalemthatisabove,"Gal.4:26,"theheavenly,"Heb.12:22,or"thenewJerusalem,"Rev.21:2(cf.verses9and10),and"thepillarandgroundofthetruth,"1Tim.3:15.Itshouldbenotedthatourword"church"isderivedfromawordwhichmeans"belongingtotheLord,"andthusstressesthefactthattheChurchisthepropertyofGod.

B. The Essence of the Church. There is quite a difference of opinionbetweenRomanCatholics and Protestants as to the essential nature oftheChurch.TheformerfinditsessenceintheChurchasanexternalandvisible organization. And this organization, strictly speaking, does notconsistofthewholebodyofthefaithfulthatconstitutetheirChurch,butofthehierarchy,consistingoftheprieststogetherwiththehigherordersof bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and the Pope. They distinguish thisbodyasthe"teachingchurch"fromthecommonbodyofbelieversasthe"learning"or"hearingchurch."Thishierarchicalbodysharesdirectly inthe glorious attributes of the Church, such as its unity, holiness,catholicity, and apostolicity, while the general body of believers isadorned with these only indirectly. Theoretically Roman Catholics stillhold to theprinciple that there isno salvationoutsideof their external

organization, though the facts often constrain them to modify it invariousways.TheReformation reactedagainst this external conceptionoftheChurchandsoughttheessenceoftheChurchintheinvisibleandspiritualcommunionofthesaints.ThisChurchincludesthebelieversofallagesandnooneelse,andoutsideof it thereisnosalvation.It isthespiritualbodyofJesusChrist,destinedtoreflectthegloryofGodasthisismanifestedintheworkofredemption.

C.TheMany-sidedCharacter of theChurch. In speakingof theChurchseveraldistinctionscomeintoconsideration.

1.THECHURCHMILITANTANDTHECHURCHTRIUMPHANT.TheChurch as she now exists on earth is amilitant Church, that is, she iscalleduntoandisactuallyengagedinaholywar.Shemustcarryonanincessant warfare against the hostile world in every form in which itrevealsitself,andagainstthespiritualpowersofdarkness.TheChurchinheaven,ontheotherhand,isthetriumphantChurch,inwhichtheswordisexchangedforthepalmofvictory,thebattle-criesareturnedintosongsoftriumph,andthecrossisreplacedbythecrown.

2. THE VISIBLE AND THE INVISIBLE CHURCH. The one Church ofJesusChristisontheonehandvisibleandontheotherinvisible.Thisisadistinction applied to the Church as it exists on earth. She is calledinvisible, because she is essentially spiritual and cannot, as far as heressential nature is concerned, be discerned by the physical eye, andbecause it is impossible todeterminepreciselywhodoandwhodonotbelong to her. This same Church, however, becomes visible in theprofessionandconductofitsmembers,intheministryoftheWordandtheSacraments,andinherexternalorganizationandgovernment.

3. THE CHURCH AS AN ORGANISM AND THE CHURCH AS ANINSTITUTIONORORGANIZATION.Thisdistinctionappliesonlytothevisible Church. The Church as an institution or organization becomesvisible in the offices, in the administration of the Word and thesacraments, and in a certain form of Church government. But even ifthesewereabsent,theChurchwouldstillbevisibleasanorganism,asacommunion of believers, in their communal life and profession, and intheirjointoppositiontotheworld.

D.DefinitionoftheChurch.IndefiningtheChurchitwillbenecessarytobearinmindthedistinctionbetweenthevisibleandtheinvisibleChurch.(1)Theformermaybedefinedasthecompanyoftheelectwhoarecalledby theSpiritofGod,orbriefer still, as thecommunionofbelievers. (2)Thelatterisabroaderconcept,andmaybedefinedasthecommunityofthose who profess the true religion together with their children. It isimportanttobearinmindthatthesetwoarenotentirelyparallel.SomewhoaremembersoftheinvisibleChurchmayneverbecomemembersofthevisibleorganizationormaybeshutoutfromit;andsomewhobelongtothevisibleChurchmaybeunbelieversandhypocritesandassuchformnopartofthebodyofChrist.

E.TheChurch in theDifferentDispensations.TheChurchexisted fromthemomentthatGodsetenmitybetweentheseedofthewomanandtheseedoftheserpent,butitdidnotalwaysassumethesameform.

1.INTHEPATRIARCHALPERIOD.InthepatriarchalperiodtheChurchwasbestrepresentedinthepioushouseholds,wherethefathersservedaspriests.Therewasatfirstnocollectiveworship,thoughGen.4:26seemsto implyapublic callingupon thenameof theLord.At the timeof thefloodtheChurchwassavedinthefamilyofNoah.Andwhentruereligionwas again on the point of dying out God separated unto Himself thefamilyofAbraham.UptothetimeofMosesthefearofGodwaskeptaliveinthefamilies.

2.INTHEMOSAICPERIOD.AftertheexodusthepeopleofIsraelwereorganized into a nation and also constituted the Church of God. Theywereenrichedwithaceremonialcultusinwhichthereligionofthenationcouldfindexpression.TheChurchhadnoindependentorganization,buthad its organized existence in the State. Israel was a Church-State.Foreignerscouldenter theChurchonlyby joining thenation.Religiousworship was regulated down to theminutest details, was largely ritualand ceremonial, and found its highest expression in the services at thecentralsanctuaryatJerusalem.

3. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT PERIOD. On the day of Pentecost theChurch was divorced from the national life of Israel and obtained anindependent organization. What had up to this time been a national

Churchnowassumedauniversal character.And in order to realize theidealofaworld-wideextension, ithad tobecomeamissionaryChurch,carryingthegospelofsalvationtoallthenationsoftheworld.Moreover,theritualworshipofthepastmadeplaceforamorespiritualworshipinharmonywiththegreaterprivilegesoftheNewTestament.

F. The Attributes of the Church. The attributes of the Church belongprimarilytotheinvisibleChurch,thoughRomanCatholicsascribethemalmostexclusivelytothevisibleChurch.

1. THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. According to Roman Catholics theunity of the Church consists in its imposing world-wide organization,which aims at the inclusion of all nations. It centers especially in thehierarchy.ProtestantsmaintainthattheunityoftheChurchisprimarilyof a spiritual character. It is the unity of a body, themystical body ofJesus Christ, of which all believers are members. This unity expressesitself to a certain extent in Christian profession and conduct, in publicworship,andintheexternalorganizationoftheChurch.

2.THEHOLINESSOFTHECHURCH.RomanCatholicsalsoconceiveofthe holiness of the Church in an external fashion. Instead of the innerholinessofitsmembers,itstressestheceremonialholinessofitsdogmas,itsmoralprecepts, itsworship, and itsdiscipline.Protestants apply theidea of holiness to the members of the Church. They regard these asobjectivelyholyinChrist,assubjectivelyholyinprinciple,sincetheyareinpossessionof thenew life, and as destined for perfect holiness.ThisholinessfindsexternalexpressioninalifedevotedtoGod.

3. THE CATHOLICITY OF THE CHURCH. The Church of Rome laysspecial claim to theattitudeof catholicity inviewof the fact that she isspread over the whole earth, has existed from the beginning andcontinuestoexist,whilesectscomeandgo,andhasagreaternumberofmembersthanallthesectstakentogether.Protestantsstressthefactthatthe invisible Church is the real catholic Church, because it includes allbelieversofallages,hasitsmembersamongallthenationsoftheworld,andexercisesacontrollinginfluenceontheentirelifeofman.Besides these three attributes the Church of Rome also claims theattitudeofapostolicity, sinceshe tracesherorigenback to theapostles,

basesherdoctrineonanapostolictradition,andhasinherbishopsandthePopethelawfulsuccessorsoftheapostles.

G. TheNotes or CharacteristicMarks of the Church. Themarks of theChurch belong to the visible Church and serve to distinguish the truefromthefalse.ReformedChurchesusuallymentionthreemarks,butthethreecanbereducedtoone,namely,faithfuladherenceinteachingandpracticetothestandardofGod'sWord.ThethreenotesoftheChurcharethefollowing:

1.THETRUEPREACHINGOFTHEWORDOFGOD.This is themostimportantmarkoftheChurch,John8:31,32,47;14:23;1John4:1–3;2John9.ThisdoesnotmeanthataChurch'spreachingoftheWordmustbeperfectandabsolutelypure,ifitistoberecognizedasatrueChurch.Suchanideal isnotattainableonearth.Itdoesmean,however, that itspreachingmustbetruetothefundamentalsandmusthaveacontrollinginfluence on faith and practice.Naturally, the Church that excels in itsadherencetotheWordofGodisthebestChurch.

2. THE RIGHT ADMINISTRATION OF THE SACRAMENTS. ThesacramentsshouldneverbedivorcedfromtheWordofGod,astheyareintheChurchofRome,sincetheyareinfactbutavisiblepreachingoftheWord.Theyshouldbeadministeredby lawfulministersof theWord, inaccordance with the divine institution, and only to believers and theirseed.TheiradministrationstandsoutprominentlyasamarkoftheearlyChurch,Matt.28:19;Mark16:16;Acts2:42;1Cor.11:23–30.

3.THEFAITHFULEXERCISEOFDISCIPLINE.Thefaithfulexerciseofdiscipline is quite essential for maintaining purity of doctrine andsafeguarding the holiness of the sacraments. Churches that are lax indisciplinesoonfindthelightofthetrutheclipsed,andthatwhichisholyabused. TheWord ofGod insists onproper discipline in theChurch ofChrist,Matt.18:18;1Cor.5:1–5,13;14:33,40;Rev.2:14,15,20.

QuestionsforReview:WhatisthemeaningoftheScripturewordsfor"church"?Whatdifferentmeanings has the word in the New Testament? How is the Churchdescribedfiguratively?HowdoRomanCatholicsandProtestantsdifferas

totheessenceoftheChurch?Whatisthedifferencebetweenthemilitantand the triumphant Church? To what Church does the distinctionbetween the visible and invisibleChurchapply? Inwhat respects is theChurch called invisible? How do the Church as an organism and theChurchasaninstitutiondiffer?HowcanwedefinetheinvisibleChurch?How the visible Church? What form did the Church assume in thepatriarchalperiod? Inwhat respectdid it change in theMosiacperiod?WhatisthecharacteristicoftheNewTestamentChurch?WhicharetheattributesoftheChurch?DotheybelongtothevisibleortotheinvisibleChurch?How dowe, in distinction from the Catholics, conceive of theunity, the holiness, and the catholicity of the Church? Which are thenotes of the Church? Do they belong to the visible or to the invisibleChurch?HowmustweconceiveofthetruepreachingoftheWord?Whatbelongstotherightadministrationofthesacraments?Whyisdisciplinenecessary?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 157–179; McPherson, ChristianDogmatics, pp. 414–419; Binnie, The Church, pp. 1–18; Morris,Ecclesiology,pp.13–33;Bannerman,TheChurchofChrist,I,pp.5–67.

THEGOVERNMENTOFTHECHURCH

A.DifferentTheoriesRespectingtheGovernmentoftheChurch.

1.QUAKERSANDDARBYITES.QuakersandDarbyitesrejectallChurchgovernment as a matter of principle. They believe that every externalchurchorganizationnecessarilydegeneratesandleadstoresultsthatarecontrarytothespiritofChristianity.FortheWordofGodtheysubstitutespecialrevelations,forwhattheycallthehumanlyinstitutedoffices,thedivinelygiven charisms, and forpublicpreaching,wordsof exhortationpromptedbytheSpirit.

2. THE ERASTIAN SYSTEM. Erastians regard the Church as a societywhich owes its existence and form to regulations enacted by the State.The officers in the Church are merely instructors or preachers of theWord,withoutanyrightorpowertorule,exceptthatwhichtheyderivefrom the civil magistrate. The State governs the Church, exercisesdiscipline, and excommunicates, if necessary. This system ignores theindependenceoftheChurchandtheheadshipofJesusChrist.

3.THEEPISCOPALIANSYSTEM.TheEpiscopaliansholdthatChrist,asthe Head of the Church, has entrusted the government of the Churchdirectly and exclusively to an independent order of bishops, as thesuccessorsoftheapostles.ThecommunityofbelievershasabsolutelynoshareinthegovernmentoftheChurch.Thiswasatonetimethesystemof the Roman Catholic Church, and is now the system in vogue in theChurchofEngland.

4. THEPRESENTROMANCATHOLIC SYSTEM.This is theEpiscopalsystemcarriedtoitslogicalconclusion.Itrecognizesnotonlysuccessorsoftheapostlesinthebishops,butalsoasuccessorofPeter,whohadtheprimacyamongtheapostles.ThePopeishonoredastheinfallibleheadoftheChurch.AstherepresentativeofChristhehastherighttodetermineand regulate the doctrine, the worship, and the government of theChurch.

5.THECONGREGATIONALSYSTEM.This is also called the systemofindependency. In this system each local church or congregation isregarded as a complete church, independent of every other. Thegoverningpowerrestsexclusivelywiththemembersof theChurch.Theofficers are simple functionaries of the local church, having no otherpower than that which is delegated to them by the members of thechurch.ThisisthetheoryofpopulargovernmentintheChurch.

6.THENATIONALCHURCHSYSTEM.ThisproceedsontheassumptionthattheChurchisavoluntaryassociationjustastheState.Theseparatechurches or congregations are merely subdivisions of the one nationalChurch. The State has the right to reform public worship, to decidedisputes respecting doctrine and practice, and to convene synods. Therightsofthelocalchurcharedisregardedaltogether.

B.TheFundamentalPrinciplesoftheReformedorPresbyterianSystem.The general principles of the Reformed system are derived fromScripture,whilemanyofitsdetailsaredeterminedbyhumanwisdomorexpediency.Itsfundamentalprinciplesareasfollows:

1.CHRISTTHEHEADOFTHECHURCHANDTHESOURCEOFALLITSAUTHORITY.ChrististheHeadoftheChurchinatwofoldsense.HeistheHeadoftheChurchinanorganicsense.TheChurchisthebodytowhichHestandsinvitalandorganicrelationship,whichHefillswithHislifeandcontrolsbyHisSpirit,John15:1–8;Eph.1:10,22,23;2:20–22;4:15;5:30;Col.1:18;2:19;3–11.HeisalsotheHeadoftheChurchinthesensethatHeisitsKingwhohasauthorityandruleoverit,Matt.16:18,19;23:8,10;John13:13;1Cor.12:5;Eph.1:20–23;4:4,5,11,12;5:23,24.This is the Headship which comes into consideration here. In thiscapacityChristestablishedtheChurch,madeprovisionforitsordinances,instituted its offices and clothed its officers with authority, and is everpresentintheChurch,speakingandactingthroughitsofficers.

2.CHRISTEXERCISESHISAUTHORTYBYMEANSOFTHEWORD.Christ does not rule the Church by force, but byHis Spirit and by theWord of God as its standard of authority. All believers areunconditionallyboundtoobeythewordoftheKing.AsChrististheonlyKing of the Church, so His word is the only word that is law in the

absolutesense,andthatmustbeobeyedbyall.ItisthewordoftheKingandisthereforebindingontheconscience.AllthosewhohaveruleintheChurchareclothedwith theauthorityofChristandmust submit to thecontrolofHisWord.

3.CHRISTASKINGENDOWEDHISCHURCHWITHPOWER.ChristendowedtheChurchwiththepowerthatisnecessaryforcarryingontheworkwhichHeentrustedtoit.HeinvestsallthemembersoftheChurchwithacertainmeasureofpower,butbestowsaspecialmeasureofitupontheofficersoftheChurch.Theirauthorityisnotdelegatedtothembythepeople,thoughthepeoplechoosethemforoffice.Whiletheyshareintheoriginalpower,theyreceivedirectlyfromChristthatadditionalmeasureof power which is required for their work as officers in the Church ofChrist.

4. THE RULING POWER RESIDES PRIMARILY IN THE LOCALCHURCH.TherulingpoweroftheChurchresidesprimarilyinthelocalconsistoriesandisbythesepassedontoclassesandsynods.Everylocalchurchhasa certainmeasureofautonomyor independence,but this isnaturally restricted invariouswaysas soonas it is affiliatedwithotherlocal churches. The interests of the Church in general may not besacrificedtothoseofanylocalchurch.

C. The Officers of the Church. Different kinds of officers may bedistinguishedintheChurch.Averycommondistinctionisthatbetweenextraordinaryandordinaryofficers.

1.EXTRAORDINARYOFFICERS.OfthesetheNewTestamentmentionsthreeclasses:

a.Apostles.Strictlyspeaking,thenameapostleappliesonlytotheTwelvechosenbyJesusandPaul;butitisalsogiventosomeapostolicmen,Acts14:4, 14; 1 Cor. 9:5, 6; 2 Cor. 8:23; Gal. 1:19. The apostles had certainspecialqualifications.They: (1) received their commissiondirectly fromGodorfromJesusChrist,Mark3:14;Gal.1:1;(2)werewitnessesoftheresurrectionofChrist,1Cor.9:1;(3)wereconsciousofbeinginspired,1Cor. 2:13; 1Thess. 4:8 (4) confirmed theirmessagebymiracles, 2Cor.12:12; Heb. 2:4; and (5) were richly blessed as a sign of the divine

approvaloftheirlabors,1Cor.9:1;2Cor.3:2,3;Gal.2:8.

b.Prophets.TheNewTestamentalsospeaksofprophets,Acts11:28;13:1,2; 15:32; 1Cor. 12:10; 13:2; 14:3;Eph.2:20;4:11.TheseweremenwhowerespeciallygiftedtospeakfortheedificationoftheChurch,andwereoccasionally instrumental in revealing mysteries and predicting futureevents.

c. Evangelists. Some New Testament passages make mention ofevangelists, Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim. 4:5. Philip, Mark, Titus, andTimothy belonged to this class. They frequently accompanied andassisted the apostles in their work, preaching, appointing officers, andalsoexercisingdiscipline,Tit.1:5;3:10;1Tim.5:22.

2. ORDINARY OFFICERS. The following classes of ordinary officersshouldbementioned.

a.Elders.Theterm"elders"issometimesusedtodenotetheoldermenofthecommunity,andsometimestodesignateaclassofofficerssomewhatsimilar to thosewho functioned in the synagogue. Frequentmention ismadeof theminthebookofActs,11:30;14:23;15:2,6,22;16:5;20:17;21:18. As a designation of office the name was gradually eclipsed andeven superseded by the name "bishop." The terms are usedinterchangeably inseveralpassages,Acts20:17,28;1Tim.3:1;5:17,19;Tit. 1:5, 7; 1 Pet. 5:1, 2. While both were applied to the same class ofofficers,thename"elder"stressedtheirage,andthename"bishop"theirworkasoverseers.

b.Teachers.Itisclearthattheelderswerenotoriginallyteachers.Therewas no need of separate teachers at first, since there were apostles,prophets,andevangelists.Gradually,however,theteachingfunctionwasconnectedwiththeofficeofelderorbishop,Eph.4:11;1Tim.5:17;2Tim.2:2.Finally,everincreasingheresiesmadethetaskofthosewhosedutyitwastoteachmoreexacting,sothatitrequiredspecialpreparation,2Tim.2:2;Tit.1:9.Thosewhopreparedforthisworkweresetfreefromotherlabours and were supported by the churches. In all probability the"angels"ofthesevenchurchesofAsiaMinorweresuchteachers,Rev.2:1,8,12,18;3:1,7,14.

c.Deacons.TheNewTestamentrepeatedlyspeaksofdeacons,Phil.1:1;1Tim.3:8,10,12.AccordingtotheprevailingopinionActs6:1–6recordsthe institutionof thediaconate.Someareof theopinion,however, thatthesevenmenmentionedtherewereappointedtobeelders;andothersthattheyweresimplyappointedtemporarilyforaspecialfunction.Inallprobability, however, they were the first deacons, though their workassumed a special form which was demanded by the occasion of theirappointment.

3.THEOFFICERS'CALLINGANDINDUCTIONINTOOFFICE. In thediscussionofthesepointswelimitourselvestotheordinaryofficers.

a.TheirCalling.Thecallingoftheofficersistwofold:

(1) Internal calling. This internal calling should not be regarded as asupernatural call by means of special revelation. It consists in certainprovidential indications, such as a strong desire, prompted by love toGod, the special work in the kingdom of God, the conviction that thenecessarygiftsareinsomemeasurepresent,andtheexperiencethatGodispavingtheway.

(2)Externalcalling.Theinternalcallingfinds itsnecessarycomplementintheexternalcallingbytheChurch.Thisexternalcallservestoconfirmtheinternal,andthusgivestherecipienttheassurancethatheiscalledofGod.Theofficersof thechurchhaveaguidinghand in theextensionofthiscall,butdonotignorethevoiceofthepeople,Acts1:15–26;6:2–6;14:23.

b.TheirInductionIntoOffice.Therearetworitesconnectedwiththis:

1) Ordination. This presupposes the calling and examination of thecandidateforoffice.Itisanactoftheclassesorpresbytery,andmaybecalled a public acknowledgement and confirmation of the candidate'scallingtotheministerialoffice.

2)Layingonofhands.Ordination isaccompaniedwiththe layingonofhands.The twowenthand inhand in apostolic times,Acts6:6; 13:3; 1Tim.4:14;5:22.Itsignifiedthatapersonwassetasideforacertainoffice,

andthatsomespecialspiritualgiftwasconferreduponhim.Today it isregardedmerelyasasymbolicalindicationofthefactthatoneissetasidefortheministerialoffice.

D.TheEcclesiasticalAssemblies.

1. THE VARIOUS ECCLESIASTICAL ASSEMBLIES. The ReformedChurcheshaveanumberofgoverningbodies.Theirrelationtoeachotherismarkedbyacarefuljudicialgradation.Theseareknownasconsistory(session), classis (presbytery), and synod. Some Churches have aninterveninglink,knownasparticularsynods,betweenclassesandwhatiscalledthegeneralsynodorthegeneralassembly.Theconsistoryconsistsoftheminister(ministers)andtheeldersofthelocalchurch.Theclassisiscomposedofoneministerandoneelderofeachlocalchurchwithinacertaindistrict.Andthesynodconsistsofanequalnumberofministersandeldersfromeachoneoftheclasses.

2. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE LOCAL CHURCH. In ReformedChurches the government of the local church is of a representativecharacter.Thepeople choose ruling elders as their representatives, andthese togetherwith theminister (s) formacouncilorconsistory for thegovernmentof the church. Indoing this they follow theexampleof theearlyapostolicchurch,Acts11:30;14:23;20:17;Phil.1:1;1Tim.3:1;Tit.1:5,7.Whiletheeldersarechosenbythepeople,theydonotreceivetheirauthorityfromthepeople,butdirectlyfromJesusChrist,theLordoftheChurch.TheyexercisetheirruleinnameoftheKingandareresponsibleonlytoHim.Everylocalchurchisacompletechurch,fullyequippedwithall that is required for the government of the church, and is thereforerelatively independent. It cannot and may not submit to any kind ofgovernment which is imposed upon it fromwithout. At the same timesucha local church canand shouldaffiliatewithother churcheson thebasisofacommonagreement,andeveryaffiliationofthatkindnaturallyinvolves certain limitationsof theoriginal rightsof the local church. InsuchcasesaChurchOrder isusuallydrawnup,whichon theonehandguardstherightsandinterestsofthelocalchurch,butontheotherhandalsothecollectiverightsandinterestsoftheaffiliatedchurches.Mattersof mutual agreement may not be ignored. The local church mayoccasionally be called upon to deny itself for the greater good of the

Churchingeneral.

3. THE MAJOR ASSEMBLIES. The major assemblies are classes andsynods,andthesecallforafewremarks.

a.ScriptureWarrantforMajorAssemblies.Scripturecontainsnoexplicitcommand to the effect that local churches must affiiliate and form anorganic union. The duty of such affiliation would seem to follow,however,fromthespiritualunityoftheChurch,whichcertainlyoughttofind some sort of external expression. Moreover, there are reasons tothink that the church of Jerusalem and that of Antioch consisted ofseveral local congregations. And, finally, Acts 15 acquaints us with thecouncil of Jerusalem, which certainly partook of the nature of amajorassembly.

b. The Representative Character of Major Assemblies. The immediaterepresentatives of the people, who form the consistory, are themselvesrepresented by a limited number in classes, and these, in turn, arerepresented in synods or general as semblies. The more general theassembly is, themoreremote it is fromthepeople;yetnoneof them istoo remote for the expression of the unity of the Church, for themaintenanceofgoodorder,andforthegeneraleffectivenessofitswork.

c.TheMattersFallingUnderTheirJurisdiction.Ecclesiasticalassembliesshouldnaturallydealonlywithchurchmatters,mattersofdoctrineandmorals, of church government anddiscipline, andwhatever pertains tothepreservationofunityandgoodorder in theChurchofJesusChrist.More particularly, they deal with matters which (a) as to their naturebelongtotheprovinceofaminorassembly,butforsomereasoncannotbe settled there; and (b) as to their nature belong to the province of amajorassembly,becausetheypertaintothechurchesingeneral.

d.ThePowerandAuthorityofTheseAssemblies.Themajorassembliesdonotrepresentahigherkindofpowerthanisvestedintheconsistories.Itisthesamekindofpower,butrepresentedinagreatermeasure.Sinceseveral churches are represented, there is naturally an accumulation ofpower. Moreover, the decisions of these assemblies are not merelyadvisory but authoritative, except in cases in which they are explicitly

declared to be only advisory. They are binding on the churches, unlesstheycanbeshowntobecontrarytotheWordofGod.

QuestionsforReview:What is the view of Quakers and Darbyites respecting churchgovernment?What is the Erastian system? The Episcopal system? Thepresent Roman Catholic system? The congregational system? Thenationalchurchsystem?InwhatsenseisChristtheHeadoftheChurch?What is the standard by which He rules?Whom does He endow withpower in the Church? Does original church power reside in theconsistoriesorinthemajorassemblies?WhatextraordinaryofficerswerethereintheearlyChurch?Whatwerethecharacteristicsoftheapostles?What characterizes the New Testament prophets? What were theevangelists mentioned in the Bible?Which were the ordinary officers?Whatothernamewasusedfortheelders?Howdidtheofficeofteachersgraduallyarise?DoesActs6recordtheinstitutionoftheofficeofdeacon?Whatconstitutesinternalcalling?Howistheexternalcallrelatedtotheinternal? What is the significance of ordination? Of the laying on ofhands? What ecclesiastical assemblies do we distinguish? What isrepresentative churchgovernment?Howare the elders chosen? Inhowfaristhelocalchurchindependent?WhatScripturewarrantisthereformajor assemblies? How are they constituted?What matters fall undertheirjurisdiction?Aretheirdecisionsmerelyadvisoryorbinding?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 180–200; McPherson,Presbyterianism, pp. 37–151; Morris, Ecclesiology, pp. 98–151; Binnie,TheChurch,pp.111–146.

THEPOWEROFTHECHURCH

A. The Source of Church Power. Jesus Christ not only founded theChurch,but also endowed itwith thenecessarypoweror authority.Hedid this in His capacity as King of the Church as a spiritualcommonwealth.HegaveuntoHisdisciplespower tobindand to loose,that is, to determine what is forbidden and what is permitted in thesphereofthekingdomoroftheChurch,Matt.16:18,andalsotoforgivesins and to retain them declaratively, or to admit to the kingdom andexcludefromit,John20:23.Thepower,extendedtotheapostles inthefullest degree, is also given to the Church in general, though in a lessabsolute sense. In exercising this power the Church is bound by thestandard of right living and proper conduct transmitted to it in theapostolicWord.Whileacertainmeasureofpowerisgiventothepeopleasawhole,1Cor.5:7,13;6:2–4;12:28,aspecialmeasureofitisbestowedupontheofficers,throughwhomtheChurchmainlyexercisesitspower.These officers receive their authority directly from Christ, though theChurchisinstrumentalinputtingtheminoffice.

B.TheNatureofThisPower.ThepowerwithwhichChrist endowsHisChurchis:

1.ASPIRITUALPOWER.ThatthepoweroftheChurchisspiritualdoesnotmean that it is altogether internal and invisible, since Christ rulesbothbodyandsoul.Theministryofthedeaconshasspecialreferencetotheneedsofthebody.ItisspiritualbecauseitisgivenbytheHolySpirit,Acts20:28,isamanifestationofthepoweroftheSpirit,John20:22,23;1Cor.5:4,pertainsexclusively tomenasbelievers,1Cor.5:12,andcanonlybeexercisedinamoralorspiritualway,2Cor.10:4.AndbecausethepoweroftheChurchisexclusivelyspiritual,itdoesnotresorttoforceinthemaintenanceofgoodorder.

2.AMINISTERIALPOWER.ItisclearfromScripturethatthepowerofthe Church is no independent and sovereign power, Matt. 20:25, 26;23:8,10;2Cor.10:4,5;1Pet.5:3,butaministerialpower,Acts4:29,30;20:24;Rom.1:1,etc.,whichisderivedfromChristandissubordinatetoHis sovereign authority over the Church, Matt. 28:18. It must be

exercised inharmonywith theWordofGod,under thedirectionof theHoly Spirit, and in the name of Jesus Christ, the King of the Church,Rom.10:14,15;Eph.5:23;1Cor.5:4.

C.DifferentBondsofChurchPower.FromthethreefoldofficeofChristitalsofollowsthatthereisathreefoldpoweroftheChurch.

1. A DOGMATIC OR TEACHING POWER. The Church has a task inconnectionwiththetruth.TheWordofGodwasgiventotheChurchasapreciousdepositof thetruth,andtheChurch iscommissionedtoguardthe truth, tohand iton faithfully fromgeneration togeneration,and todefenditagainstalltheforcesofunbelief,1Tim.1:3,4;2Tim.1:13;Tit.1:9–11.IthasthefurtherdutyofpreachingtheWordfortheconversionofsinnersandfortheedificationofthesaints,andtoprovidetranslationsof it, so that the work of preaching may be carried on among all thenationsoftheworld,Isa.3:10,11;2Cor.5:20;1Tim.4:13;2Tim.2:15;4:2;Tit.2:1–10.Furthermore,itmustdrawupcreedsandconfessions,inwhichitformulatesitsfaith,sothattheworldmayknowexactlywhatitbelieves.Theneedofsuchcreeds is feltespecially intimesofdefection,whenmanydepartfromthehistoricfaithoftheChurch.Finally,itisalsothedutyoftheChurchtodevelopthetruthbytheologicalstudy.ItowesthistothetruthitselfasarevelationofGod,butalsotothetrainingofitsfutureministers.According toScripture theChurch is indutybound toprovide for and to supervise the training of successive generations ofteachersandpastors,2Tim.2:2.

2.AGOVERNINGPOWER.ThegoverningpoweroftheChurchincludestwoelements:

a.ARegulatingPower. "God isnotaGodofconfusion,butofpeace," 1Cor.14:33.HedesiresthatintheChurch"allthingsbedonedecentlyandinorder,"vs.40.ForthatreasonHehasmadeprovisionfor theproperregulationoftheaffairsoftheChurch.InvirtueofthistheChurchhastheright to carry into effect the laws which Christ has ordained for theChurch.AllthemembersoftheChurchpossessthispowerinameasure,Rom.15:14;Col.3:16;1Thess.5:11,butit isvestedinaspecialsenseinthe officers, John 21:15–17; Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:2. This power alsoincludestherighttodrawupregulationsfortheproperapplicationofthe

law,suchascanonsorChurchOrders.Theseservetostipulatewhocanberecognizedasmembers ingoodstanding,onwhattermspersonsarepermitted to bear office in the Church, how public worship should beconducted, and how discipline should be exercised. While theseregulationsmust be based on general principles found in theWord ofGod, their details will always be dictated in part by considerationsrespecting the special needs, the well-being, and the edification of theChurch.

b.AJudicialPower.TheChurchisindutyboundtoguarditsholinessbytheexerciseofproperdiscipline.ThepowerofdisciplineisbasedonsuchpassagesasMatt.16:19;18:18;John20:23;1Cor.5:2,7,13;2Cor.2:5–7;2Thess.3:14,15;1Tim.1:20;Tit.3:10.ThepurposeofdisciplineintheChurchistwofold.InthefirstplaceitseekstocarryintoeffectthelawofChrist concerning the admission and exclusion ofmembers; and in thesecondplaceitaimsatpromotingthespiritualedificationofthemembersof theChurchbysecuring theirobedience to the lawsofChrist.Bothofthese aims are subservient to a higher end, the maintenance of theholinessoftheChurchofJesusChrist.Iftherearediseasedmembers,theChurchwillfirstofallseektoeffectacure,butifthisprovesimpossible,itwill put away the diseased member for the protection of the othermembers. While all the members of the Church are in duty bound towarn and admonish the wayward, only the officers of the Church canapplyChurch censures.The latter candealwithprivate sins onlywhenthesearebrought to theirattentionaccordingto therulegiven inMatt.18:15–17, but are in duty bound to dealwith public sins evenwhennoformalaccusationisbrought.Thedisciplinaryactionoftheconsistoryhasthree stages: (1) The sinner is restrained from celebrating the Lord'sSupper. This initial action is not published and is followed by severalprivateadmonitions tobring the sinner to repentance. (2)Threepublicannouncements and admonitions. In the first of these the sin ismentionedbutthesinnerisnotnamed.Inthesecondthenameismadeknowninaccordancewiththeadviceoftheclassis.Andinthethirdtheimminentexcommunicationisannounced.(3)Finally,thisisfollowedbytheexcommunicationproper,bywhichoneiscutofffromthefellowshipoftheChurch,Matt.18:17;1Cor.5:13;Tit.3:10.

3. A POWER OR MINISTRY OF MERCY. When Christ sent out Hisapostlesandtheseventydisciples,Henotonlyinstructedthemtopreach,but also gave them power to cast out devils and to cure allmanner ofdiseases, Matt. 10:1, 8; Luke 9:1, 2; 10:9. 17. And among the earlyChristiansthereweresomewhohadthegiftofhealingandcouldperformmiracles, 1 Cor. 12:9, 10, 28, 30;Mark 16:17, 18. The special giftswithwhichtheapostlesandsomeoftheearlybelieverswereendowed,ceasedwhentheperiodofrevelationhadcometoanend.Fromthattimeontheministryofmercywas largely limited to theChurch's care for thepoor.TheLordhinted at this as the task of theChurch inMatt. 26:11;Mark14:7.TheearlyChurchpracticedasortofcommunionofgoods,andthussaw to it thatnoonewanted thenecessities of life,Acts 4:34.Later onsevenmenwereappointedto"servethetables,"thatis,toprovideforanequitabledivisionof thatwhichwasplacedon the tables for theneedy,Acts6:1–6.TheEpistlesrepeatedlymakementionofaclassofdeaconsasofficersintheChurch,Rom.16:1;Phil.1:1;1Tim.3:8–12.Moreover,theNew Testament places great emphasis on the necessity of giving orcollectingforthepoor,Acts11:29;20:35;1Cor.16:1,2;2Cor.9:1,6,7,12–14;Gal. 2:10; 6:10;Eph. 4:28; 1Tim. 5:10, 16; Jas. 1:27; 2:15, 16; 1John3:17.

QuestionsforReview:What is the source of Church power? What power was given to theapostles? Do later officers have this power in the same degree? Is thispowergiventotheofficersonlyoralsotothepeople?Whatisthenatureof the power given to the Church? Why is it called spiritual? Whyministerial?WhatisincludedinthedogmaticpoweroftheChurch?Whyare creeds necessary? What elements are included in the Church'sgoverningpower?Must all Church regulations be baseddirectly on theWordofGod?What is the general purpose ofChurchdiscipline?Whattwospecificpurposesdoesitserve?Whatthreestagesareincludedinthedisciplinary action of the consistory? How are matters of disciplinebroughttoitsattention?WhatwasthenatureoftheministryofmercyintheapostolicChurch?Whatisitsmainfunctionatpresent?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 201–213; McPherson, Christian

Dogmatics, pp. 419–422; Bannerman, The Church, I. pp. 187–275;Morris,Ecclesiology,pp.143–151.

THEMEANSOFGRACE

THEWORDASAMEANSOFGRACE

A. The Word of God the Most Important Means of Grace. The term"means of grace" is sometimes used in a very general sense to denotewhatsoevermayministertothespiritualwelfareofbelievers,suchastheChurch,thepreachingoftheWord,thesacraments,thesabbathprayer,etc. It is generally employed in amore restricted sense, however, as adesignation of theWord of God and the sacraments. Strictly speaking,onlythesetwocanberegardedasmeansofgrace.WhenwespeakoftheWord as ameans of grace, we do not think of the personalWord (thesecondperson in theTrinity, John 1:1 ff), nor of theword of power bywhichallthingswerecreatedandaremaintained,Ps.33:6;Heb.1:3,norof any kind of revelation such as the prophets received; but veryspecificallyoftheWordofGodasitiscontainedinScriptureandasitispreached to theChurch. It is theword ofGod's grace, and as such themostimportantmeansofgrace.WhiletheemphasisfallsontheWordasitispreachedinthenameofGod,itmayalsobebroughttomeninotherways: in the home and in the school, by means of conversation andliterature.WhilethesacramentscanonlybeadministeredintheChurchbyalawfulminister,theWordofGodcanbecarriedoutintotheworldbyallbelieversandoperateinmanydifferentways.

B. The Relation of the Word to the Spirit. There has always been adifferenceofopinionastotherelationbetweentheoperationoftheWord

and that of the Holy Spirit. Pelagians and Rationalists regard theintellectual andmoral operation of theWord as quite sufficient for theproductionofthenewlife,andfeelnoneedofanadditionaloperationoftheHolySpirit.Antinomians,ontheotherhand,expecteverythingfromtheoperationoftheHolySpirit.Theystresstheimportanceoftheinnerwordortheinnerlight,anddonotregardtheexternalWordasnecessaryat all. As amatter of fact, however, theWord alone is not sufficient towork faith and conversion, andwhile theHoly Spirit can,He does notordinarily work without the Word. In the application of the work ofredemption the two work together, the Spirit using the Word as Hisinstrument. Thepreaching of theWorddoesnot yield the desired fruituntilitismadeeffectivebytheHolySpirit.

C.TheTwoPartsof theWordasaMeansofGrace.Wedistinguishtwoparts in theWordofGodasameansofgrace,namely, the lawand thegospel.

1. THEDISTINCTIONBETWEENTHE LAWANDTHEGOSPEL. Thelawandthegospelshouldnotberepresentedasabsoluteopposites,asissometimes done in the present day. Theywho do this contemplate thelawastheconditionofthecovenantofworksandusuallyfailtorecognizeitsotheraspects.Andifthelawisregardedmerelyastheconditionofthecovenant of works—a broken covenant—it naturally cannot now be ameansofgrace.Whenwespeakofthelawasameansofgrace,wethinkof it as thenecessary expression ofGod's character andwill, andmoreparticularly of it as it ismade subservient to the covenant of grace. Assuch it is closely linkedupand is evenpermeatedwith thepromisesofGod. It is possible to speak of the gospel in the law. In the gospel thepromisesofGodarenaturallyintheforeground,butthisdoesnotmeanthat therearenodemands in connectionwith thegospel,nor that theywholiveinthegospeldispensationareineveryrespectfreefromthelaw.Thelawrequiresthatweshallbelievethegospel,andthegospelaimsatthefulfillmentofthelawinourlives.ClearlythelawisheldhighalsointheNewTestament,Matt.5:17–19;Rom.13:10;Eph.6:2;Jas.2:8–11;1John3:4;5:3.

2. THE FUNCTION OF THE LAW. The law serves the purpose ofcommon grace in the world at large by restraining sin and promoting

righteousness.However,thisisnotitsspecficuseasameansofgrace,forthe"meansofgrace"aremeansofspecialgrace.Inthiscapacitythelawfirst of all serves the purpose of bringingman under conviction of sin,Rom.3:20,makinghimconsciousofhisinabilitytomeetthedemandsofthe law,andbecominghis tutor to leadhim toChrist,Gal.3:24. In thesecondplaceitisalsoaruleoflifeforbelievers,remindingthemoftheirdutiesandleadingtheminthewayof lifeandsalvation.ThisuseofthelawisdeniedbytheAntinomians.

3.THEFUNCTIONOFTHEGOSPEL.Thelaw,conceivedpurelyaslaw,canonlypointawayfromitself,and inconnectionwiththepromisesofthe Old Testament points to the coming Redeemer as the way ofsalvation. The gospel is a clear representation of the way of salvationrevealed inJesusChrist. Itexhorts thesinnertocometoChrist in faithandrepentance,andpromisesthosewhotrulyrepentandbelievealltheblessingsofsalvationinthepresentandinthefuture.ItisthepowerofGoduntosalvationforeveryonethatbelieveth.

QuestionsforReview:Whatisthemeaningoftheterm"meansofgrace"?Whatdowemeanby"the Word of God" as a means of grace? Why is the Word the mostimportant means? How do Pelagians and Rationalists conceive of therelation between the Word and the Spirit? What position do theAntinomians take on this point?What is the proper conception of thisrelation? Are the law and the gospel absolute opposites? Are believersfree fromthe law ineveryrespect?What is the functionof the lawasameansofgrace?Whatisthefunctionofthegospel?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 214–223; McPherson, ChristianDogmatics,pp.422–427;Binnie,TheChurch,pp.61–67.

THESACRAMENTSINGENERAL

A.RelationBetweentheWordandtheSacraments.TheWordofGodcanexist and is also complete as ameans of gracewithout the sacraments,butthesacramentscannotexistandarenotcompletewithouttheWord.ThismustbemaintainedoveragainsttheRomanCatholics,whoproceedon the assumption that the sacraments contain all that isnecessary forthesalvationofsinners.Thesacramentsareaspecialaidforman,sincetheyaddresstheeyewhichismoresensuousthantheearandthereforedeepentheimpressionmade.TheWordandthesacramentsagreeinthatbothhaveGodfortheirauthorandChristastheircentralcontent,andintheir appropriation by faith. At the same time they differ in someimportant points: (1) the Word is absolutely necessary, while thesacramentsarenot;(2)theWordisintendedtobegetandtostrengthenfaith,whilethesacramentscanonlystrengthenit;and(3)theWordgoesout into all the world, while the sacraments are administered only tothosewhoareinthecovenant.

B.OriginandMeaningoftheWord"Sacraments."Theword"sacrament"isnotfoundintheBible.ItisderivedfromtheLatinsacramentum,whichoriginallydenotedasumofmoneydepositedbytwopartiesinalawsuit.After the decision of the court thewinner'smoneywas returned,whilethat of the loser was forfeited as a sort of offering to the gods. ThetransitiontotheChristianuseofthetermisprobablytobesought(1)initsmilitaryuse todenote theoathbywhicha soldier solemnlypledgedobediencetohiscommander;and(2)intheVulgate'suseofittotranslatethe Greek word for mystery. The sacraments were regarded as bothpledges of obedience and mysteries. The following definition may begiven of a sacrament: A sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted byChrist, in which by sensible signs the grace of God in Christ isrepresented, sealed, andapplied tobelievers, and they, in turn, expresstheirfaithandobediencetoGod.

C. The Component Parts of the Sacraments. Three parts must bedistinguishedinthesacraments:

1. THE OUTWARD AND VISIBLE SIGN. Each one of the sacraments

contains an external element, namely, the water in baptism, and thebread and wine in the Lord's Supper. Where these elements areadministeredandappropriated,therewehavetheentireexternalmatterofthesacrament.Thisissometimescalledthesacramentas,forinstance,whenunbelieversaresaidtoreceivethesacrament;butitisnotthewholeofthesacrament,noreventhemostimportantpartofit.

2. THE INWARD SPIRITUAL GRACE SIGNIFIED. A sign naturallypoints to something that is signified, and this constitutes the internalmatterof the sacrament.This is variously indicated inScripture, as thecovenantof grace,Gen. 17:11, the righteousnessof faith,Rom.4:11, theforgiveness of sins,Mark 1:4;Matt. 26:28, faith and repentance,Mark1:4; 16:16, communionwithChrist inHisdeathandresurrection,Rom.6:3,4;Col.2:11,12.

3.THEUNIONBETWEENTHESIGNANDTHETHINGSIGNIFIED.Itis this union between the sign and the thing signified that reallyconstitutestheessenceofthesacrament.Thisshouldnotbeconceivedasphysical,asiftheexternalmatternaturallyincludedtheinternal(RomanCatholic),norlocal,asifbothwerepresentinthesamespace(Lutheran),butspiritual,sothat,wherethesacramentisreceivedinfaith,thegraceofGodaccompaniesit.

D.TheNecessityoftheSacraments.RomanCatholicsholdthatbaptismisabsolutelynecessaryuntosalvation,andthatthesacramentofpenanceis equally necessary for those who have committed a mortal sin afterbaptism; but that confirmation, the eucharist, and extreme unction arenecessaryonlyinthesensethattheyhavebeencommandedandareveryhelpful.Protestants,however,donotregardthesacramentsasabsolutelynecessary unto salvation, but yet as binding in virtue of the divineprecept.Wilfulneglectoftheiruseresultsinthedestructionofthesoul,justasallwilfulandpersistentdisobediencetoGoddoes.

E. The Old andNew Testament Sacraments Compared. The Church ofRomeclaimsthatthereisanessentialdifferencebetweenthesacramentsof the Old and those of the New Testament. Itmaintains that the OldTestament sacraments were merely typical, did not affect the spiritualcondition, but only the legal standing of the recipient, and were

dependent for their operationon the faith of thosewho received them;and that the New Testament sacraments merely in virtue of thesacramentalaction(exopereoperato)workspiritualgrace intheheartsof the recipients. As a matter of fact, however, there is no essentialdifferencebetweenthetwosetsofsacraments.ThismaybeinferredfromsuchpassagesasRom.4:11;1Cor.5:7;10:1–4;Col.2:11.Atthesametimetherearecertainpointsofdifference:(1)TheOldTestamentsacramentshadanationalaspectinadditiontotheirspiritualsignificance.(2)Theypointed forward toChrist andwere seals of a grace that still had to bemerited,while theNewTestament sacramentspointback toChristandHis completed sacrifice of redemption. (3) In harmonywith the wholeOldTestamentdispensationtheydidnotconveytotherecipientasrichameasureofspiritualgraceasdothesacramentsoftheNewTestament.

F. The Number of the Sacraments. During the old dispensation therewere just two sacraments, namely, circumcision and passover.Circumcisionwaspracticedamongothernationsasameasureofhealth,but among Israel it became a sacrament of the covenant of grace,symbolizing the cutting away of sin. In the time ofMoses the passoverwas added to it, which symbolized and typified the deliverance of thepeopleofGod.Bothwerebloodysacramentsandthusharmonizedwiththe sacrificial system of the Old Testament. The Church of the NewTestament also has two sacraments, namely, baptism and the Lord'sSupper. In harmony with the new dispensation as a whole, they areunbloody sacraments. After Christ has broughtHis perfect sacrifice onthecrossnomoresheddingofbloodisneeded.TheChurchofRomehasenlargedthenumberofsacramentstoseveninanentirelyunwarrantedmanner by adding confirmation, penance, orders, matrimony, andextremeunction.

QuestionsforReview:Howare the sacraments related to theWord? Inwhat respectsdo theydiffer as means of grace? What is the original meaning of the word"sacrament"? How did it acquire its present meaning? What is asacrament?Whatare thecomponentpartsofa sacrament?What is thesign in each one of the sacraments? What is signified in each? Howshould we conceive of the relation between the sign and the thing

signified? How do Roman Catholics and Protestants differ as to thenecessity of the sacraments? In what respect did the Old Testamentsacraments differ from those of the New? Which are the sevensacramentsoftheChurchofRome?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 224–231; McPherson, ChristianDogmatics,pp.427–431;Binnie,TheChurch,pp.68–71;Hodge,OutlinesofTheology,pp.588–602;Candlish,TheSacraments,pp.11–44.

CHRISTIANBAPTISM

A. The Institution of Christian Baptism. Christ instituted baptism aftertheresurrection,thatis,afterHehadfinishedHisatoningwork.HediditwiththefulnessofHismediatorialauthorityandmadeitbindingforallfollowingages.Allthosewhoweremadedisciplesweretobebaptizedasa sign that they had entered a new relationship. The apostles wereinstructedtobaptize"in(into)thenameoftheFatherandoftheSonandoftheHolySpirit."Thisdoesnotmeanthattheyweretobaptizethenewconvertson theauthorityof the triuneGod,butrather that theyhad tobaptizetheminrelationtoHim.BaptismwastobeexpressiveofthefactthattheyhadenteredintoanewrelationshiptoGodthroughfaith.WhileChristdidnot intend toprescribea formula forbaptism, in later times,when theChurch felt theneedofa formula, it could findnobetteronethanthatcontainedinthewordsoftheinstitution.Itwasalreadyinuseinthebeginningofthesecondcentury.

B. The Proper Mode of Baptism. Baptists maintain that dipping orimmersion, followed by emersion, is the only propermode of baptism,

sincethisritemustsymbolizethespiritualdeathandresurrectionofthebeliever.Twoquestionsariseatthispoint:(1)Whatistheessentialthinginthesymbolismofbaptism?and(2)Isimmersiontheonlypropermodeofbaptism?

1. WHAT IS THE ESSENTIAL THING IN THE SYMBOLISM OFBAPTISM? According to Baptists the essential thing in baptism isimmersion.Baptisminanyotherformisnotbaptismatall, fortherealbaptismalideaisexpressedinthegoingdownintoandthecomingupoutofthewater.Itisadmittedthatsuchanimmersionalsoinvolvesacertainpurification, but this is regarded as purely accidental. Their opinion isbasedonMark10:38,39;Luke12:50;Rom.6:3,4;Col.2:12,but thesepassagesdonotprovethepoint.Scriptureclearlyrepresentsthe ideaofpurificationastheessentialthinginthesymbolismofbaptism.Thiswasthe pertinent thing in all the Old Testament washings, Ps. 51:7; Ezek.36:25, and also in the baptism of John and Jesus, John 3:25, 26. It isperfectlyevidentfromseveralpassagesthatbaptismsymbolizesspiritualcleansing or purification, Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Cor. 6:11; Tit. 3:5; Heb.10:22;1Pet.3:21.Thisisthepointonwhichalltheemphasisisplaced.

2. IS IMMERSION THE ONLY PROPER MODE OF BAPTISM? Inopposition to the Baptists, who regard immersion as the only propermodeofbaptism,wemaintainthatthemodeisquiteimmaterial,aslongasthefundamentalideaofpurificationfindsexpressionintherite.Jesusdidnotprescribeacertainmodeofbaptism,andtheBibleneverstressesanyparticularmode.Theword employedbyJesusdoesnotnecessarilymean "to immerse," but may also mean "to purify by washing." It ispossibleandevenprobablethatsomeofthecasesmentionedintheBiblewerecasesofbaptismbyimmersion,thoughthisisnotabsolutelycertainina single case.From theearliest times itwas customary tobaptizebysprinkling and pouring as well as by immersion. Purification wasfrequently, ifnotgenerallyeffectedby sprinklingduringOldTestamenttimes,Num.8:7; 19:13, 18, 19,20;Ps. 51:7;Ezek.36:25;Heb.9:10, 13.The baptismwith the Spirit certainly did not take place by immersion,Matt.3:11;1Cor.3:11;nordidthebaptismsmentionedinLuke11:37,38;12:50; 1 Cor. 10:1, 2. It is not likely that themultitudes that flocked toJohn the Baptist, nor that the three thousand converts of the day of

Pentecost were baptized by immersion. Neither does it seem that thismodewasfollowedinthecasesmentionedinActs9:18;10:47;16:33.34.Spiritual renewal issometimessaid tohavebeeneffectedbysprinkling,Ezek.36:25;Heb.10:22.

C.TheLawfulAdministratorsofBaptism.Protestantsgenerallyproceedon the assumption that the administrationof theWordand that of thesacramentsbelong together, and that thereforeonly theministerof thegospelisthelawfuladministratorofbaptism.Moreover,theyholdthatitshouldbeadministeredinthepublicgatheringofbelievers.Usuallytheyregard a baptism legitimatewhich is administeredby a duly accreditedminister and in thenameof the triuneGod.RomanCatholics considerbaptismabsolutelynecessaryuntosalvation;andbecause theyregard itas cruel to make the salvation of anyone dependent on the accidentalpresence or absence of a priest, they also permit baptism by others,particularlybymidwives,incasesofnecessity.

D. The Proper Subjects of Baptism. There are two classes to whombaptismisapplied,namely,adultsandinfants.

1. ADULT BAPTISM. Baptism is intended for believers and their seed.WhenJesusgaveHisdisciplesthegreatcommission,instructingthemtomake disciples of all nations and to baptize them in the name of thetriuneGod,Heundoubtedlyhadinmindprimarilythebaptismofadults,for it was only with these that they could begin in their missionarylabours.His instructionalso implies, though itdoesnotexplicitly state,that inthecaseofadultsbaptismhadtobeprecededbyaprofessionoffaith,Mark16:16.OnthedayofPentecostthosethatreceivedthewordofPeterwerebaptized,Acts2:41.Inthecaseoftheeunuch,Acts8:37(notfoundinsomeMSS.),andofthejailoratPhilippibaptismwasprecededby faith. Hence it is entirely proper that the Church should require aprofessionoffaithofalladultsseekingbaptism.Whensuchaprofessionismade,thisisacceptedbytheChurchatitsfacevalue,unlesstherearegoodreasonstodoubt itsveracity.Itdoesnotbelongtoherprovincetopry into thesecretsof theheartandthus topasson thegenuinenessofsuchaprofession.Theresponsibilityrestsonthepersonwhomakesit.

2. INFANT BAPTISM. While there is general agreement as to the

legitimacyof thebaptismofadultbelievers, there isno suchunanimityrespecting the lawfulness of baptizing their children.TheBaptists denythat these are entitled to baptism. In connection with the baptism ofinfantsseveralpointsdeserveconsideration.

a.TheScripturalBasisforInfantBaptism.ThereisnoexplicitcommandinScripturetobaptizechildren;noristhereasingleinstanceinwhichweareplainlytoldthatchildrenwerebaptized.Butthisdoesnotnecessarilymake infant baptismun-Biblical. The Scriptural basis for it is found inthefollowing:

1)ThecovenantmadewithAbrahamwasprimarilyaspiritualcovenant,though it also had a national aspect, and of this spiritual covenantcircumcisionwasasignandseal.ThespiritualnatureofthecovenantisprovedbytheinterpretationofitspromisesintheNewTestament,Rom.4:16–18;2Cor.6:16–18;Gal.3:8,9,14,16;Heb.8:10;11:9,10,13,andbythespiritualsignificanceascribedtocircumcisionDeut.10:16;30:6;Jer.4:4;9:25,26;Acts15:1;Rom.2:26–29;4:11;Phil.3:2;Gal.3:8.

2)Thiscovenant isstill in forceand isessentially thesameas the"newcovenant"ofthepresentdispensation.PaularguesinRom.4:13–18andGal. 3:15–18 that the covenant was not changed nor abrogated by thegivingof the law, thatChristand thosewhoareofChristconstitute theseed to which the promise applies, and that therefore New Testamentbelievers are heirs according to promise. And the writer of Hebrewsspeaksofthecovenantasimmutable,Heb.6:13–18.

3) Children shared in the blessings of the covenant, and thereforereceivedcircumcisionasitssignandseal.Infantswerepresentwheneverthecovenantwasrenewed,Deut.29:10–13;Josh.8:35;2Chron.20:13,andwerereckonedaspartofthecongregationofIsrael,2Chron.20:13;Joel 2:16. And in view of the rich promises in the Old Testament, Isa.54:13; Jer. 31:34; Joel 2:28, it is inconceivable that they would beexcludedintheNewTestament.

4)In theNewTestamentbaptism is substituted as the sign and seal ofentrance into the covenant of grace.Circumcisionwasdone away,Acts15:1,2;21:21;Gal.2:3–5;5:2–6;6:12,13,15,andifbaptismdidnottake

its place, then there is no initiatory rite at present. But Christ clearlyinstituted it as such, Matt. 28:19, 20; Mark 16:15, 16. It agrees withcircumcision in spiritualmeaning as denoting the removal of sin, Acts2:38;1Pet.3:21;Tit.3:5.Moreover, it is linkedupwith thepromise inActs2:39.Finally,Col.2:11, 12clearlyproceedson theassumption thatbaptism has taken the place of circumcision. The exclusion of NewTestament children would require an unequivocal statement to thateffect,butquitethecontraryisfound,Acts2:39;Matt.19:14;1Cor.7:14.

5) There are reasons to believe that even in the apostolic age childrenwere sometimes baptized alongwith their parents. The language of theNewTestamentisperfectlyconsistentwithacontinuationoftheformerstateofthings,Matt.19:14;Acts2:39;1Cor.7:14.Wholehouseholdswererepeatedly baptized, and this is represented as something perfectlynormal. It isbutnatural toassume that therewere children in someofthese households. We know that in the second century children werebaptized.

6)Itistruethatthereisnoexplicitcommandtobaptizechildren,noranyclear example of infant baptism in the New Testament; but neither isthere any explicit warrant for the practice of the Baptists. We are nottaught, either by word or example, that persons born and reared inChristian familiesmaynotbebaptizeduntil theyhavecometoyearsofdiscretionandhaveprofessedtheirfaithinChrist.

b.TheGroundforInfantBaptism.Thequestionisraisedonwhatgroundchildrenofbelieversarebaptized.Atwofoldanswerhasbeengiventothisquestion inReformedcircles.Somehave said that theyarebaptizedonthebasisofapresumptiveregeneration.Theywhotakethispositiondonotpretendtoknowthattheinfantsofferedforbaptismareregenerated,but proceed on the assumption that they are, and baptize them on thestrength of that assumption. They regard these children as regenerateduntiltheygiveevidenceofanunregeneratedheart.Othershavetakentheposition that children are baptized on the ground of the all-comprehensivepromiseofGodinthecovenant,whichalso includesthepromiseofregeneration.Thiswouldseemtobetheonlytenableposition.The covenant and the covenant promise afford the only certain andobjective ground for the baptism of infants. Children of believers are

baptized,because theyare in thecovenant, irrespectiveof thequestion,whethertheyarealreadyregeneratedornot.

c.InfantBaptism as aMeans ofGrace. If the sacraments serve only tostrengthenthegraceofGodthatispresentintheheart,thenthequestionnaturallyarises,howmustweconceiveof theoperationofbaptismasameansofgrace in thecaseof infants.Here thedoctrineofpresumptiveregeneration affords an answer. If children are supposed to beregenerated, when they are baptized, then it may be assumed that thebeginnings of grace present in the heart are strengthened in somemystical way. But it is not necessary to assume that the operation ofbaptism as a means of grace is limited to the very moment of itsadministration. Itmay be instrumental in strengthening faith later on,whenthesignificanceofbaptismisclearlyunderstood.

QuestionsforReview:WhendidChristinstitutebaptism?Whatisthemeaningofthewords,"in(into) the name of the Father and of the Son and of theHoly Spirit"?WerethewordsofChristintendedasaformula?WhatdoBaptistsregardastheessentialthinginthesymbolismofbaptism?Whatistheessentialthing in it? Did Christ prescribe a certain mode of baptism? Can thenecessity of immersion be proved from Scripture?Who are the properadministratorsofbaptism?WhatpositiondoesRometakeonthispointand why? What is the condition of adult baptism? How can infantbaptismbeproved fromScripture?Whatdifferentviewsare thereas tothegroundofinfantbaptism?Whichshouldbepreferredandwhy?Howdoesbaptismworkasameansofgrace?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 232–251; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.601–630;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.431–436;Binnie,TheChurch,pp.71–76;Candlish,TheSacraments,pp.47–83.

THELORD'SSUPPER

A.Institutionof theLord'sSupper.Thereare fourdifferentaccountsofthe institution of the Lord's Supper, namely, inMatt. 26:26–29;Mark14:22–25; Luke 22:19, 20; 1 Cor. 11:23–25. The new sacrament waslinkedupwith the central element in thepaschalmeal. Thebread thatwas eatenwith the lambwas consecrated to anewuse, and sowas thewineofthethirdcupor"thecupofblessing."WhentherealLambofGodwasslain,thebloodysacramentmadeplaceforanunbloodyonewhich,likeit,hadnourishingproperties.Thepassover,whichwasasymbolwithanationalflavor,wasreplacedbyonethatcarriedwithitnoimplicationsof nationalism. The broken bread and the wine symbolize the Lord'sbrokenbodyandshedblood.Thephysical eatinganddrinkingof theseelementsareindicativeofaspiritualappropriationofthebodyandbloodof the Lord, that is, of the fruits of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on thecross, andarea constantmemorialof the redemptiveworkof theLorduntilthegreatdayofHisreturn.

B.TheThingsSignifiedandSealedintheLord'sSupper.

1.THETHINGSSIGNIFIED.Sacramentsalwaysrepresentoneormorespiritualtruthsbymeansofoutwardsigns.ThesignintheLord'sSupperincludes not only the visible elements of bread and wine, but also theappropriationofthesebyeatinganddrinking.Severalthingsaresignifiedin theLord'sSupper: (a) It is a symbolical representationof theLord'sdeath, 1 Cor. 11:26. (b) It symbolizes the believer's participation in thecrucified Christ. (c) It represents the effect of this spiritual eating anddrinkingasgivinglife,strength,andjoytothesoul.And(d)Itisasymbolof the union of believerswith one another asmembers of themysticalbodyofJesusChrist.

2.THETHINGSSEALED.TheLord'sSupperisnotonlyasignbutalsoaseal. These two aspects of the sacrament are closely related. Thesacramentasasignorwithallthatitsignifiesconstitutesaseal.Thesealisattachedto the thingsignifiedand isapledgeof itsrealization. (a) It

seals to the participant the great love of Christ revealed in His self-surrender to a bitter and shameful death. (b) It gives the believingpartaker of the sacrament the assurance that all the promises of thecovenantandalltherichesofthegospelofferarehis.(c)Itevenassuresthebelievingparticipant that theblessingsof salvationarehis inactualpossession.And(d) it isabadgeofprofessiononthepartof thosewhopartake of the sacrament in faith. They profess their faith in Christ astheir Saviour, and their allegiance to Him as their King, and solemnlypledgealifeofobediencetoHisdivinecommandments.

C.TheQuestionoftheRealPresenceintheLord'sSupper.ThequestionastothenatureofthepresenceofChristintheLord'sSupperisonethathas long been debated, and one on which there is still considerabledifferenceofopinion.Therearefourviewsthatcomeintoconsiderationhere.

1.THEVIEWOFROME.TheChurchofRomeconceivesofthepresenceofChristinthesacramentinaphysicalsense.Itmaintainsthat,whenthepriestutterstheformula,"thisismybody,"breadandwinechangeintothe body and blood of Christ. This view is based primarily on a literalinterpretationofthewordsoftheinstitution,"thisismybody."Inanswerto the objection that even after the pronunciation of the formula theelements still taste like bread and wine, Rome avers that, while thesubstance of bread andwine are changed, their attributes remain.Thisviewisopentoseveralobjections:(a)Jesusstoodbeforethedisciplesinthebodyandthereforecouldnotverywellsay thatHehadHisbody inHis hand. (b) Scripture speaks of the bread as bread even after thesupposedchangehastakenplace,1Cor.10:17;11:26–28.(c)Achangeofthesubstanceofathingwithoutacorrespondingchangeofattributes isanimpossibility.(d)Itiscontrarytocommonsensetobelievethatwhatlooksandsmellsandtasteslikebreadandwineisindeedfleshandblood.

2.THELUTHERANVIEW.LutherrejectedtheRomanCatholicdoctrineof transsubstantiation and substituted for it the doctrine ofconsubstantiation. This avers that, while bread and wine remain whattheyare,thewholepersonofChrist,bodyandblood,ispresentin,under,andalongwiththeelements.WhenChristhadthebreadinHishand,HeheldHisbodyalongwithit,andthereforecouldsay,"thisismybody."On

thisvieweveryonewhoreceivesthebreadalsoreceivesthebody,whetherhe be a believer or not. This is no great improvement on the RomanCatholic doctrine. It really makes the words of Jesus mean, thisaccompanies my body, which is a very unnatural interpretation.Moreover,itisburdenedwiththeimpossiblenotionoftheubiquityoftheLord'sglorifiedhumannature, for itrepresentsChristas locallypresentwherevertheLord'sSupperisadministered.

3.THEZWINGLIANVIEW.ZwinglideniedthebodilypresenceofChristin the Lord's Supper, but at the same time believed that the truecommunicant conceived of Him as present in a spiritual manner. Hestressed the significance of the Lord's Supper as a memorial of whatChrist did for sinners and as an act of profession on the part of theparticipant.Itishardlycorrect,however,tosaythatthisisallitmeantfortheSwissreformer.SomeofhisstatementspointtoadeepersignificanceofthesacramentandregarditasasealorpledgeofwhatGoddoesforthebelieverinChrist.Yethedoesnotdojusticetothisidea.TheimpressionremainsthatforhimtheLord'sSupperismainlyameresignorsymbol,amemorialof thedeathofChrist,andanactofprofessiononthepartofthebeliever.Thereisanevidenttendencytoexcludethemysticalelementfromthesacramentaltogether.

4. THEREFORMEDVIEW. Calvin took exception to Zwingli's view aswell as to the Roman Catholic and Lutheran views. His conceptionrepresentsameanbetweenthetwo.InsteadofthephysicalandlocalhetaughtthespiritualpresenceofChristintheLord'sSupper.IndistinctionfromZwinglihestressedthedeepersignificanceofthesacramentandthemysticalcommunionwhichthebelieverenjoysinit.Moreover,hesawinitasealandpledgeofwhatGoddid for thebelievingparticipantratherthan a pledge of the believer's consecration to God. The virtues andeffects of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross are present and actuallyconveyedtotheworthyreceivedbythepoweroftheHolySpirit.

D. The Efficacy of the Lord's Supper as aMeans of Grace. The Lord'sSupperwasinstitutedforbelieversonly,andthereforedoesnotservethepurpose of beginning the work of grace in the heart, but only ofstrengthening it. The grace that is received in the sacrament does notdifferinkindfromthatwhichisreceivedthroughtheinstrumentalityof

theWord.The sacramentmerely adds to the effectiveness of theWordandtothemeasureofthegracereceived.ItisthegraceofanevercloserfellowshipwithChrist, of spiritualnourishment andquickening, andofan ever increasing assurance of salvation. According to the RomanCatholics,andalsomanyAnglicansandLutherans,allthosewhopartakeof the Lord's Supper by that very act also receive the grace signified,exceptwhen theyputanobstacle in theway.Thegraciousoperationofthesacramentdoesnotdependinanywayonthefaithof therecipient.AccordingtotheReformedconception,however,onlythosewhopartakeofthesacramentinfaithreceivethegracethatissignifiedbytheexternalelements.

E. The Person for whom the Lord's Supper is Designed. The Lord'sSupperwasnotinstitutedforallindiscriminately,butonlyforthosewhocanactivelyexercisefaith,andwhoareabletoprovethemselvesastoacorrectestimationofthespiritualsignificanceoftheLord'sSupper.Thismeansthatchildrenwhohavenotyetcometoyearsofdiscretionarenotfit to partake of this sacrament.And even true believers are entitled toparticipationinitonlywhentheirconductisnotinflagrantoppositiontotheirprofession.Hence theapostlePaul insistson thenecessityof self-examination, 1 Cor. 11:28–32. Unbelievers are naturally excluded fromthe table of the Lord, and professing Christians cannot be admitted, iftheyconsciouslyandpersistentlydepartfromthetruthorleadoffensivelives.

QuestionsforReview:WheredowefindaccountsoftheinstitutionoftheLord'sSupper?Howdoes the Lord's Supper differ from the passover?What belongs to thesignintheLord'sSupper?Whatdoesthissacramentsignify?Whatdoesitseal?WhatistheRomanCatholicviewofthepresenceofChristintheLord'sSupper?HowdotheLutheransconceiveofit?Whatobjectionsarethere to these views? What is the Zwinglian conception of the Lord'sSupper? What objections are there to this view? How does Calvin'sconceptiondiffer from it?Howdoeshe conceiveof thepresenceof theLord in the sacrament?Does the grace received through the sacramentdiffer from that received through theWord?Does the reception of thisgracedependinanywayonthefaithoftherecipent?Forwhomwasthe

Lord'sSupperinstituted?WhoshouldbeexcludedfromthetableoftheLord?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 252–267; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.631–650;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.436–441;Binnie,TheChurch,pp.76–82;Candlish,TheSacraments,pp.87–129.

THEDOCTRINEOFTHELASTTHINGS

INDIVIDUALESCHATOLOGY

PHYSICALDEATH

A.TheNatureofPhysicalDeath.Physicaldeathisvariouslyrepresentedin Scripture. It is spoken of as the death of the body, as distinguishedfromthatofthesoul,Matt.10:28;Luke12:4,astheterminationorlossofanimallife,Luke6:9;John12:25,andasaseparationofbodyandsoul,Eccl. 12:7; Jas. 2:26. On the basis of these Scripture representations itmay be described as a termination of physical life by the separation ofbodyand soul. It isneveranannihilation, though some sects representthedeathofthewickedassuch.Deathisnotacessationofexistence,butaseveranceofthenaturalrelationsoflife.

B.TheConnectionBetweenSinandDeath.PelagiansandSociniansteachthatmanwascreatedmortal,notmerelyinthesensethathecouldfallaprey to death, but in the sense that he was subject to the law ofdissolution,andwasthereforedestinedtodie.Butthisiscertainlynotinharmony with the teachings of Scripture, for these positively point todeathassomethingintroducedintotheworldofhumanitybysinandasa

punishmentforsin,Gen.2:17;3:19;Rom.5:12,17;6:23;1Cor.15:21;Jas.1:15.Deathisnotrepresentedassomethingnaturalinthelifeofman,butvery decidedly as something foreign and hostile to human life. It is anexpression of divine anger, Ps. 90:7, 11, a judgment, Rom. 1:32, acondemnation,Rom.5:16,andacurse,Gal.3:13,anditfillstheheartsofmenwithdreadandfear.Theentranceofsinintotheworldbroughtwithit thereignofdeath.Instrict justiceGodmighthave imposeddeathonmaninthefullestsenseofthewordimmediatelyafterhistransgression,Gen.2:17.ButbyHiscommongraceHerestrained theoperationofsinanddeath,andbyHisspecialgrace inChristJesusHeconqueredthesehostileforces,Rom.5:17;1Cor.15:45;2Tim.1:10;Heb.2:14;Rev.1:18;20:14.

C.TheSignificanceoftheDeathofBelievers.TheBiblespeaksofphysicaldeathasapunishment,as"thewagesofsin."Sincebelieversaresetfreefromtheguiltofsin,thequestionnaturallyarises,Whymusttheydie?Itisevidentthatdeathcannotbeapunishmentforthem,sincetheyarenomore under condemnation. Why then does God cause them to passthrough the harrowing experience of death? In their case death mustevidentlyberegardedastheculminationofthechastisementswhichGodhas ordained for the sanctification of His people. The very thought ofdeath, bereavement through death, the feeling that sicknesses andsufferingsareharbingersofdeath,andtheconsciousnessoftheapproachof death,—these all have a very beneficial effect on the people of God.They serve to humble the proud, to mortify the flesh, to checkworldliness,andtofosterspiritual-mindedness.

QuestionsforReview:How is physical death represented in Scripture? How may it bedescribed?Whoteachthatmanwascreatedmortal,thatis,subjecttothelawofdeath?Howcanitbeprovedthatdeathisnotsomethingnaturalinthe life of man? What is the connection between sin and death? Isphysicaldeathapunishmentforbelievers?Whatpurposedoesitserveintheircase?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof,ReformedDogmatics,II,pp.276–280;Dahle,LifeAfterDeath,pp.24–58;Mackintosh,ImmortalityandtheFuture,pp.149–152.

THEINTERMEDIATESTATE

Thereisagreatdealofdifferenceofopinionrespectingtheconditionofman in the period between the death of the individual and the generalresurrection.Themostimportanttheoriescallforabriefdiscussion.

A.TheModernIdeaofMan'sExistenceinSheol-Hades.Theideaisveryprevalentatpresentthatatdeathboththepiousandthewickeddescendintoanintermediateplace,whichtheOldTestamentcallssheolandtheNewTestamenthades.Thisunderworldisnotaplaceofpunishmentnorofreward,butaplacewhereallsharethesamefate.Itisadrearyabode,where the dead are doomed to an existence that is merely a dreamyreflection of life on earth. It is a place of weakened consciousness, ofslumbrousinactivity,wherelifehaslostitsinterestsandthejoysoflivingareturnedintosadness.Buttheideaofsuchaseparatelocality,whichisneither heaven nor hell, in which all the dead are gathered andwheretheyremain,eitherpermanentlyoruntilsomegeneralresurrection,isanideathatmayhavebeenmoreorlesscurrentinpopularthoughtandmayhave given rise to some figurativedescriptionsof the state of thedead,butcertainlyisnotapartofthepositiveteachingsofScripture.Thetermssheol and hades are evidently not always used in the same sense inScripture.Ifitalwaysdenotestheplacetowhichboththepiousandthewickeddescend,howcanthedescentofthewickedintosheolbeheldupasawarning,asitisinseveralplaces,Job21:13;Ps.9:17;Prov.5:5;7:27;9:18; 15:24; 23:14? And how can Scripture speak of God's anger asburning there, Deut. 32:22? In view of such passages as thesewemayproceedontheassumptionthatthesetermssometimesservetodesignatetheplaceofpunishmentforthewicked.It isperfectlyevident,however,

thattheydonotalwayshavethismeaning,sincetheBiblealsospeaksofthe pious as going down into or as being in sheol. In several instancestheydonotdenoteaplaceatall,butsimplyservetodesignatethestateorconditionofdeath,thestateoftheseparationofbodyandsoul.Thisstateissometimesfigurativelyrepresentedastheplacewhitherallthedeadgo,betheygreatorsmall,richorpoor,piousorwicked.Theyareallalikeinthestateofdeath.Thefollowingaresomeofthepassagesinwhichsheoland hades refer to the condition or the state of death rather than to aplace: Job 14:13, 14; 17:13, 14;Ps.89:48;Hos. 13:14; 1Cor. 15:55;Rev.1:18; 6:8. Finally, there are also passages in which sheol and hadesdesignatethegrave,thoughitisnotalwayseasytodetermine,whetherinanyparticularplacethewordsrefertothegraveortothestateofdeath,Gen.42:38;44:29,31;Num.16:30,33;John17:13;Ps.16:10;49:14,15.

B.TheDoctrineofPurgatory,of theLimbusPatrumandof theLimbusInfantum.

1.PURGATORY.AccordingtotheChurchofRomethesoulsofthosewhoareperfectatdeathareatonceadmittedtoheavenorthebeatificvisionofGod,Matt.25:46;Phil.1:23,butthosewhoarenotperfectlycleansed,but are still burdened with the guilt of venial sins—and this is thecondition of most believers at death—must undergo a process ofcleansingbeforetheycanenterintothesupremeblessednessandjoysofheaven. This purification takes place in purgatory, where the souls areoppressedwithasenseofdeprivation,butalsosufferpositivepains.Thelengthoftheirstayinpurgatoryaswellastheintensityoftheirsufferingsvaries according to the need of individual cases. The time can beshortenedandthesufferingalleviatedbytheprayersandthegoodworksof the faithful and especially by the sacrifice of the Mass. The mainsupport for this doctrine is found in 2 Macc. 12:42–45, though it issupposed to be favored also by Isa. 4:4;Mic. 7:8; Zech. 9:11;Mal. 3:2;Matt. 12:32; 1 Cor. 3:13–15; 15:29. However, these passages do notsupportitatall.

2.LIMBUSPATRUM.TheLimbusPatrumistheplacewhere,accordingtotheRomanCatholicChurch,thesoulsoftheOldTestamentsaintsweredetained inastateofexpectationuntil theLord's resurrection fromthedead.AfterHisdeathChristwentdownintothispartofhades,released

thesesaints,andcarriedthemintriumphtoheaven.

3.LIMBUSINFANTUM.RomanCatholicsspeakoftheLimbusInfantumas the abode of the souls of un-baptized children, irrespective of theirdescent fromheathenor fromChristianparents.These children cannotbeadmittedtoheaven,cannotenterthekingdomofGod,John3:5.TheyremainintheLimbusInfantumwithoutanyhopeofdeliverance.Thereisnounanimousopinionastotheirexactcondition.Theprevailingopinionisthattheysuffernopositivepunishment,butaresimplyexcludedfromthe blessings of heaven. They know and love God by the use of theirnaturalpowers,andhavefullnaturalhappiness.

C. The Doctrine of the Sleep of the Soul. Certain sects in the earlyChristian centuries, in the Middle Ages, and also at the time of theReformation, advocated the notion that, after death, the soul indeedcontinuestoexist,butinastateofunconsciousreposeorsleep.ThisviewisalsoheldbytheIrvingitesinEnglandandbytheRussellitesofourowncountry.Ithasapeculiarfascinationforthosewhofindithardtobelieveinacontinuanceofconsciousnessapartfromthebrain.Scripturesupportforitisfoundespeciallyinpassagesthatrepresentdeathasasleep,Matt.9:24; Acts 7:60; 1 Cor. 15:51; 1 Thess. 4:13, and in those that seem toassert that the dead are unconscious, Ps. 6:5; 30:9; 115:17; 146:4;Eccl.9:10;Isa.38:18,19.Itshouldbenoted,however,thattheBibleneversaysthat the soul falls asleep,nor that thebodydoes so,butonly thedyingperson. And this Scriptural representation is simply based on thesimilarity between a dead body and a body asleep. Moreover, thepassages which seem to teach that the dead are unconscious clearlyintendtostressonlythefactthatinthestateofdeathmancannomoretakenoticeofnorshareintheactivitiesofthispresentworld.TheBiblerepresentsbelieversasenjoyingaconsciouslifeincommunionwithGodand with Jesus Christ immediately after death, Luke 16:19–31; 23:43;Acts7:59;2Cor.5:8;Phil.1:23;Rev.6:9;7:9;20:4.

D. The Doctrine of Annihilation and of Conditional Immortality.According to these doctrines there is no conscious existence, if anyexistenceatall,ofthewickedafterdeath.Thesetwoviewsagreeintheirconceptionoftheultimateconditionofthewicked,butdifferinacoupleof fundamental points. Annihilationism teaches that man was created

immortal,butthattheywhocontinueinsinarebyapositiveactofGoddeprived of the gift of immortality and ultimately destroyed or—whatamounts to practically the same thing—bereft forever of consciousness.According to the doctrine of conditional immortality, however,immortality is not a natural endowment of man, but a gift of God inChrist to those that believe. The person that does not accept Christ isultimatelyannihilatedor losesall consciousness.Someof theadvocatesofthesedoctrinesteachalimiteddurationofconscioussufferingforthewickedafterdeath.Thesedoctrinesarebasedprimarilyonthe fact thattheBiblerepresentseternallifeasagiftofGodtothosewhoareinChristJesus, John 10:27, 28; 17:3; Rom. 2:7; 6:22; Gal. 6:8, and threatenssinnerswith"death"and"destruction,"assertingthattheywill"perish,"termswhicharetakentomeanthattheywillbereducedtonon-existence.Theseargumentsarenotconclusive.EternallifeisindeedagiftofGodinJesus Christ, but this is something far greater and richer than bareimmortality.Moreover, it isarbitrary toassume that the terms"death,""destruction," and "perish" denote annihilation. The Bible teaches thatsinners aswell as saintswill continue to exist forever,Eccl. 12:7;Matt.25:46;Rom.2:8–10;Rev.14:11;20:10,andthattherewillbedegreesinthepunishmentof thewicked,Luke12:47,48;Rom.2:12.Extinctionofeither being or consciousness precludes the possibility of such degrees.Moreover, annihilation can hardly be called a punishment, for thisimplies a consciousness of ill desert and pain. People who have growntiredoflifeoftenconsiderextinctionofbeingasaverydesirablething

E.TheDoctrineofaSecondProbation.Severalscholarsadoptthetheorythat in the intermediate state those who died in their sins will haveanother opportunity to accept Christ in repentance and faith untosalvation. According to them the eternal state of man will not beirrevocably fixed until the day of judgment. The salvation ofmanywilldepend on their decision between death and the resurrection. NomanwillperishwithouthavingbeenofferedafavorableopportunitytoknowandtoacceptJesus.One iscondemnedonly for theobstinaterefusal toacceptthesalvationthatisofferedinChristJesus.TheadvocatesofthistheoryappealtosuchpassagesasEph.4:8,9;1Cor.15:24–28;Phil.2:9–11;Col.1:19,20;Matt.12:31,32;and1Pet.3:19;4:6.Butthesepassagesfail to carry conviction. Moreover, Scripture represents the state of

unbelieversafterdeathasa fixed state,Eccl. 11:3;Luke 16:19–31;John8:21, 24; 2Pet. 2:4, 9; Jude 7, 13. It also invariably speaks of the finaljudgment as determined by the things that are done in the flesh, andneverrepresentsthisasdependentinanywayonwhattranspiresintheintermediatestate,Matt.7:22,23;10:32,33;25:34–46;Luke12:47,48;2Cor.5:9,10;Gal.6:7,8;2Thess.1:8;Heb.9:27.

QuestionsforReview:Whatisthemodernideaofsheolandhades?Whatobjectionsaretheretothistheory?WhatistheScripturalmeaningoftheseterms?Whatisthedifference between the doctrine of annihilationism and the doctrine ofconditional immortality?What is thesupposedScripturebasis forthesedoctrines? What objections are there to them? What is the RomanCatholicdoctrineofpurgatory?IsthereanyScripturalbasisforit?Whatismeantby theLimbusPatrumandtheLimbusInfantum?What is thedoctrine of the sleep of the soul?Onwhat Scriptural data does it rest?What objections are there to it? What is the doctrine of a secondprobation?IsthereanyScripturegroundforit?Whatobjectionsaretheretothisview?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 291–308; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology, pp. 548–558; Mackintosh, Immortality and the Future, pp.152–163;Shedd,DoctrineofEndlessPunishment,pp.12–74;Morris,IsThereSalvationAfterDeath?;Hovey,Eschatology,pp.79–145.

GENERALESCHATOLOGY

THESECONDCOMINGOFCHRIST

TheNewTestamentclearlyteachesthatthefirstcomingoftheLordwillbefollowedbyasecond.JesusHimselfreferredtoHisreturnmorethanonce,Matt.24:30;25:19,31;26:64;John14:3;angelscalledattentiontoitat the timeof theascension,Acts1:11;and theapostlesspeakof it innumerous passages of their epistles, Acts 3:20, 21; Phil. 3:20; 1 Thess.4:15,16;2Thess.1:7,10;Tit.2:13;Heb.9:28.

A.GreatEventsPrecedingtheSecondComing.SeveralimportanteventsmusttranspirebeforethereturnoftheLord.

1. THE CALLING OF THE GENTILES. Several passages of the NewTestament point to the fact that the gospel of the kingdom must bepreachedtoallnationsbeforethereturnoftheLord,Matt.24:14;Mark13:10; Rom. 11:25. This does not merely mean that at least onemissionarymustbe sent toeachoneof thenations.Butneitherdoes itmean that the gospel must be preached to every individual of all thenations of the world. The passages referred to simply require that thenationsasnationsbethoroughlyevangelized,sothatthegospelbecomesapowerinthelifeofthepeople,asignthatcallsfordecision.

2.THECONVERSIONOFISRAEL.BoththeOldandtheNewTestamentspeakofa futureconversionof Israel,Zech.12:10;13:1;2Cor.3:15,16;Rom.11:25–29.ThepassageinRomans11seemstoconnectthiswiththeendoftime.SomeinferfromthesepassagesthatIsraelasawhole,Israelasanation,willfinallyturntotheLord.Butthisinterpretationisratherdubious.It isaverystrikingfact thatJesusdidspeakof thechildrenofthekingdomasbeingcastout,Matt.8:11,12,andofthekingdomasbeingtaken away from them, Matt. 21:43, but never speaks of their beingrestoredtotheirformerposition.ThisisnotevennecessarilyimpliedinMatt. 19:28 and Luke 21:24. It may be thought that Rom. 11:11–32certainlyteachestheconversionofthenation.Inviewoftheconnectionitismorelikely,however,thattheexpression"allIsrael"inverse26simplymeans the full number of the elect out of the ancient covenant people.Thewholepassagedoesseemtoteachthat intheend largenumbersofIsraelwillturntotheLord.

3.THECOMINGOFANTICHRIST.TheBiblepredictstherevelationofantichrist, the man of sin, who sets himself up in opposition to Jesus

Christ, but will be slain by the breath of the Lord at the time of Hisreturn, 2 Thess. 2:3–10. Scripture speaks of antichrists in the plural, 1John2:18("falseChrists,"Matt.24:24),ofthespiritofantichrist,1John4:3,andofantichrist in thesingular, 1John2:22;2John7,alsocalledthemanofsin,2Thess.2:3.Theexplanationforthisliesinthefactthatthe spirit of antichrist, of opposition to Jesus Christ, was alreadyapparentinthedaysoftheapostlesintheeffortsofthosewhowerebenton destroying the work of Christ, Apparently, however, this oppositionwillfinallyreachitsclimaxintheappearanceofasingleindividual,whowill oppose and exalt himself "against all that is called God or that isworshipped;sothathesittethinthetempleofGod,settinghimselfforthasGod."

4.SIGNSANDWONDERS.SeveralsignsarespokenofasharbingersoftheendoftheworldandofthecomingofChrist.Scripturespeaks(a)ofwars, famines, and earthquakes in divers places, which are called thebeginningoftravail,tobefollowedbytherebirthoftheuniverse;(b)ofthe great tribulation during which some of the righteous will sufferpersecutionandmartyrdom for the sakeofChrist; (c) of the comingoffalse prophets and false Christs, whowill leadmany astray; and (d) offearful portents in heaven, when the powers of the heavens will beshaken,Matt.24:29,30;Mark13:24,25;Luke21:25,26.

B.TheSecondComing Itself.After the signs justmentioned theSonofManwillbeseencomingonthecloudsofheaven.

1.THETIMEOFTHESECONDCOMING.Premillenariansbelieve thatthecomingofChristisimminent,whichmeansthatitmaynowoccuratanytime.Scriptureteachesus,however,thatthethingsmentionedintheprecedingmusttranspirebeforetheLord'sreturn,Matt.24:14;2Thess.2:2,3;2Pet.3:9.Thisshouldbeborne inmind in thereadingof thosepassageswhichspeakof thecomingofChristorof the lastdayasnear,Matt. 16:28; 24:34;Heb. 10:25; Jas. 5:9; 1 Pet. 4:5; 1 John 2:18. FromGod'spointofviewthecomingoftheLordisalwaysnear.Moreover,theapostlesconsidered itasnear,becausePentecostmarked thebeginningofthelastdays,thatis,ofthelastdispensation.Besides,whentheyspeakof theLord'scomingasnear, theydonotalwayshave inmindthe finalcoming, but may refer to some preliminary coming, such as at the

destructionofJerusalem.

2.THEMANNEROFTHESECONDCOMING.ThecomingofChristwillbe:

a.APersonalComing.ManyRationalists and liberal theologians of thepresent day deny the personal return of Jesus Christ. They give afigurative interpretation to the glowing descriptions of the secondcoming,andtakethemtomeanthatthereligiousprinciplesofChristwillgraduallypermeatesociety.Butthisdoesnotdojusticetosuchpassagesas Acts 1:11; 3:20, 21;Matt. 24:44; 1 Cor. 15:23; Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:4; 1Thess.2:19;3:13;4:15–17;2Tim.4:8;Tit.2:13;Heb.9:28.

b.APhysicalComing.SomemaintainthattheLordhasalreadyreturned.They identify the second coming of Christ withHis return in theHolySpiritonthedayofPentecost,John14:18,23.Butthiscomingisclearlynot the same as the predicted second coming of Christ, for this is stillspokenofasfutureafterthepentecostalcoming.Moreover,thefollowingpassagesprove that the secondcomingwillbephysical,Acts 1:11;3:20,21;Heb.9:28;Rev.1:7.

c. A Visible Coming. It may be said that, if the Lord's return will bephysical, it will also be visible. And Scripture leaves no doubt on thispoint,Matt.24:30;26:64;Mark13:26;Luke21:27;Acts1:11;Col.3:4;Tit.2:13Heb.9:28;Rev. 1:7.Russellitesaremistakenwhen theyclaim thattheLordreturnedinvisiblyin1914andnowdwellsintheair.

d. A Sudden Coming. Though several signs will precede the secondcoming, yet it will be unexpected and take people by surprise, Matt.24:37–44;25:1–12;Mark13:33–37;1Thess.5:2,3;Rev.3:3;16:15.Thisisnotcontradictory, for thepredictedsignsarenotofsuchakindas todesignatetheexacttime.

e.AGloriousandTriumphantComing.ChristwillnotreturninthebodyofHishumiliationbut inglory,Heb.9:28.ThecloudsofheavenwillbeHis chariot, Matt. 24:30, the angels His bodyguard, 2 Thess. 1:7, thearchangelsHisheralds,1Thess.4:16,andthesaintsofGodHisgloriousretinue, 1Thess.3:13;2Thess. 1:10.Hewill comeasKingofkingsand

Lordoflords,triumphantoveralltheforcesofevil,Rev.19:11–16.

3.THEPURPOSEOFTHESECONDCOMING.Christwillreturnattheendoftheworldforthepurposeofintroducingthefutureage,theeternalstateof things,andHewilldo thisby inauguratingandcompleting twomighty events, namely, the resurrection of the dead and the finaljudgment,Matt. 13:49,50;16:27;24:3;25:14–30;Luke9:26;19:15,26,27;John5:25–29;Acts17:31;Rom.2:3–16;1Cor.4:5;15:23;2Cor.5:10;Phil.3:20,21;1Thess.4:13–17;2Thess.1:7–10;2:7,8;2Tim.4:1,8;2Pet.3:10–13;Jude14,15;Rev.20:11–15;22:12.

QuestionsforReview:WhatgreateventwillprecedethesecondcomingofChrist?Whatdoesitmeanthatthegospelmustbepreachedtoallnationsfirst?Howshouldwe understand the predicted conversion of Israel? What can be saidagainsttheideathatIsraelasanationwillbeconverted?WhatdoestheBiblemeanwhenitspeaksofAntichrist?InhowfarisitpossibletospeakofAntichristaspresent?Inwhatsenseishestillfuture?WhatsignswillprecedethesecondcomingofChrist?IstheLord'sreturnimminent?Inhow far can it be regarded as near?Who deny the personal coming ofChristandwhatcanbesaid in favorof it?Howdo theyconceiveof thesecondcomingwhoregarditasapastevent?Howcanitbeprovedthatthe second coming will be physical and visible?How can it be suddenwhenitwillbeprecededbyseveralsigns?Whatwillconstitutethegloryofthesecondcoming?WhatisthepurposeoftheLord'sreturn?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 309–318; McPherson, ChristianDogmatics, pp. 446–449; Dahle, Life After Death, pp. 268–390;Snowden,TheComingoftheLord,pp.123–155.

THEMILLENNIUMANDTHERESURRECTION

A. TheQuestion of theMillennium. On the basis of Rev. 20:1–6 somebelieve that there will be a millennial kingdom of Jesus Christ, eitherbeforeorafterHissecondcoming.Others,however,denythatScripturewarrantstheexpectationofsuchamillennialkingdominanysenseoftheword.Consequently,therearethreetheorieswithrespecttothismatter,namely, the a-millennial, the post millennial, and the pre-millennialtheory. The first is purely negative and therefore does not call for anyseparatediscussion. It is the viewadopted in thiswork, andholds thatthesecondcomingofChrist,thegeneralresurrectionofthedead,andthefinal judgment all synchronize; and that therefore the present spiritualkingdom of God passes right over into the eternal kingdom of JesusChrist.Theothertwoviewscallforabriefdiscussion.

1. POST-MILLENNIALISM. Post-millennialism teaches that the secondcomingofChristwillfollowthemillennium.Themillenniumisexpectedduring the gospel dispensation, inwhichwe are now living, and at thecloseofwhichChristwillappear.

a. Two Kinds of Post-Millennialism. Some conservative scholars, bothpastandpresent,areoftheopinionthatthegospel,whichwillgraduallypermeate the entireworld,will in the endbecomemuchmoreeffectivethanitisatpresentandwillusherinaperiodofrichspiritualblessings,whichwillbefollowedbyabriefapostasy,aterriblefinalconflictwiththeforces of evil, and thereafter by the simultaneous occurrence of theadventofChrist,thegeneralresurrection,andthefinaljudgment.Agreatdeal of present-day post-millennialism, however, is of an entirelydifferenttype.ItdoesnotbelievethatthepreachingofthegospelandtheaccompanyingworkoftheHolySpiritwillbringthemillennium,butthatthiswill be the grand result of a perfectly natural process of evolution.Manhimselfwillusherinthenewerabyeducation,improvedlegislation,andsocialreforms.

b. Objections to Post-Millennialism. The fundamental idea of thisdoctrine,namely, that thewholeworldwill graduallybewon forChrist

andwillinthemainbeChristianwhenChristreturns,isnotinharmonywiththeScripturalrepresentationoftheendoftheages,Matt.24:6–14,21, 22; Luke 18:8; 21:25–28; 2 Thess. 2:3–12; 2 Tim. 3:1–13; Rev. 13.SomePost-MillennialistsfeelthisandthereforeintroducetheideaofanapostasyandatribulationjustprevioustothereturnofChrist,buttheyminimizetheseandrepresent themaseventswhichhave littleeffectonthe main course of religious life. Moreover, the related idea, rathercommoninpost-millennialrepresentations,thatthepresentagewillnotendwithagreatandsuddenchange,butwillpassalmost imperceptiblyintothecomingage,isalsocontrarytoScripture,Matt.24:29–31,35–44;Heb.12:26,27;2Pet.3:10–13.Therewillbeacrisissogreatthatitcanbecalled"theregeneration,"Matt.19:28.Finally,themodernideathatman,byeducation,legislation,andsocialreform,willbringintheperfectreignofChrist,iscontrarytoallthattheBibleteachesonthispoint.Thefuturekingdom cannot be established by natural, but only by supernaturalmeans.

2. PRE-MILLENNIALISM. Pre-millennialism holds that Christ, at Hisreturn, will raise up all the righteous dead, will convert the Jews andbringthembacktotheHolyLand,willre-establishthenationalkingdomof the Jews in unprecedented glory and power, and will then rule thiskingdomwithHissaintsforathousandyears.

a. The Pre-Millennial Scheme. According to Pre-millenarians the OldTestamentprophetspredictthegloriousre-establishmentofthekingdomof David in the days of the Messiah. Christ intended to establish thekingdomwhenHewasonearth,butbecausetheJewsrefusedtorepent,postponed it to the time of His return.Meanwhile He established HisChurch,whichisgatheredoutofJewsandgentiles.Thegospelwillproveinsufficient,however,toconvertmenonalargescale.Finally,Christwillappearintheair,raiseupallthedeadsaints,andsnatchthemawaywiththelivingbelieverstocelebratetheweddingoftheLamb.Therewillbeaperiodof tribulationontheearth,duringwhichIsraelwillbeconvertedandbroughtbacktotheHolyLand.AttheendoftheperiodoftribulationChristwillcomedowntoearthandjudgethenations.Thesheepandthegoats are separated, Satan is bound for a thousand years, antichrist isdestroyed, the tribulation saints are raised up, and the millennium is

usheredin.ThekingdomnowestablishedisakingdomoftheJewswithworld-wide dominion. Christ andHis saints rule at Jerusalem, and thetempleand itssacrificialworship isrestored.Theworld isnowspeedilyconverted.After themillennium follows the final battlewith Satan andhishosts,afterwhichSataniscast intothebottomlesspit.Thenfollowsthe resurrection of the unbelievers and the final judgment at the greatwhite throne. The Church is transferred to heaven, and Israel remainsforeveronearth.

b. Objections to Pre-Millennialism. This theory is based on anunwarranted literalisminthe interpretationof theprophetsandfails totake account of the spiritual interpretation suggested by the NewTestament. It makes the kingdom of God an earthly and nationalkingdom,whiletheNewTestamentclearlyrepresentsitasspiritualanduniversal. It goes contrary to those passages of Scripture which clearlyrepresentthekingdomasapresentreality,Matt.11:12;12:28;Luke17:21;John18:36,37;Col.1:13.WhiletheBiblespeaksoftheresurrectionofthejust and the unjust in a single breath, Dan. 12:2; John 5:28, 29; Acts24:15,andrepresentstheresurrectionoftherighteousasoccurringatthelastday,John6:39,40,44,54;11:24,itseparatestheresurrectionoftherighteous from that of the wicked by a period of a thousand years.Contrary to Scripture, it speaks of three (four) resurrections and fourjudgments.Itfailstoexplainhowglorifiedsaintsandsinnersinthefleshcanliveandassociatetogetherinaworldinwhichsinanddeatharestillrampant.Finally,iterroneouslyseeksitsmainsupportinapassage(Rev.20:1–6) which represents a scene in heaven and makes no mentionwhateveroftheJews,ofanearthlyandnationalkingdom,norofthelandofPalestine.

B.TheResurrection.ScriptureteachesusthatatthereturnofChristthedeadwillberaisedup.

1.SCRIPTUREPROOFFORTHERESURRECTION.ItissometimessaidthattheOldTestamentcontainsnoprooffortheresurrectionofthedead;but this is hardly correct. Christ finds proof for it in Ex. 3:6, cf.Matt.22:31, 32. It is implied in the passages that speak of deliverance fromsheol, Ps. 49:15; 73:24, 25; Prov. 23:14, and is expressly taught in Isa.26:19,and inDan. 12:2.TheNewTestament,however, containsclearer

andmoreabundantproof.JesusarguestheresurrectionofthedeadoveragainstthedenialoftheSadducees,Matt.22:23–33,andteachesitveryclearlyinJohn5:25–29;6:39,40,44;11:24,25;14:3;17:24.TheclassicalpassageoftheNewTestamentis1Cor.15.Otherimportantpassagesare1Thess.4:13–17;2Cor.5:1–10;andRev.20:13.

2.THECHARACTEROFTHERESURRECTION.TheresurrectiontaughtinScriptureis:

a.ABodilyResurrection.ThereweresomeinthedaysofPaul,andtherearemanytoday,whobelieveonlyinaspiritualresurrection.ButtheBibleclearlyteachesaresurrectionofthebody.Christiscalled"thefirstfruits"oftheresurrection,and"thefirstborn"ofthedead.Thisimpliesthattheresurrection of His people will be like His, and this was a bodilyresurrection.Moreover, the redemption in Christ is said to include thebody,Rom.8:23;1Cor.6:13–20.Finally,theresurrectionofthebodyisclearlytaughtinRom.8:11;andin1Cor.15.InthischapterPaularguesthatthebodyoftheresurrectionwillbeidenticalwiththebodythatwasdepositedintheearth,thoughitwillhaveundergoneimportantchanges.

b. A Resurrection of Both the Just and the Unjust. Some present-daysects deny the resurrection of the ungodly. The Adventists and theRussellitesbothbelieveintheirtotalextinction.ItissometimessaidthatScripturedoesnotteachtheresurrectionofthewicked,butthisisclearlyerroneous, Dan. 12:2; John 5:28, 29; Acts 24:15, though it must beadmitted that their resurrection does not stand out prominently inScripture.

c. A Resurrection of Unequal Import for the Just and the Unjust. Theresurrectionof the just isanactofdeliveranceandofglorification.Thebody israised fromthegraveandre-unitedwith thesoul,but thegreatpointintheirresurrectionisthattheirbodiesarenowendowedwithalifethatisgloriousandblessed.Thistransformationiswantinginthecaseofthe wicked. In their case the re-union of body and soul issues in theextremepenaltyofdeath.

3.THETIMEOFTHERESURRECTION.

a. Scripture Indications as to the Time. According to Scripture theresurrectioncoincideswiththereturnofChrist,andwiththeendoftheworld, and immediately precedes the final judgment. Notice how it isconnectedwiththesecondcomingofChrist,1Cor.15:23;Phil.3:20,21;1Thess.4:16;withthelastday,John6:39,40,44,54;11:24,andwiththefinaljudgment,John5:27–29;Rev.20:11–15.

b.TheTheoryofaDoubleResurrection.Pre-millenariansbelievethattheresurrection of the righteous and of the wicked are separated by athousandyears.Theybasetheircontentionespeciallyon1Cor.15:23–28;1Thess.4:13–18;andRev.20:4–6.Butnoneofthesepassagesprovethepoint.Thefirstdoesnotspeakoftheresurrectionofthewickedatall.ThesecondmerelysaysthatthedeadinChristshallberaisedupbeforethelivingsaintsarecaughtupintheclouds.Andthethirddoesnotevenrefertoabodilyresurrection.WhenevertheBiblementionstheresurrectionofthejustandtheunjusttogetheritdoesnotgivetheslightesthintthatthetwoaretobeseparatedbyalongperiodoftime.Itclearlyteachesthattheresurrectionoftherighteous,too,willbeatthelastday,John6:39,40,44,54;11:24.

QuestionsforReview:Whatisthedifferencebetweena-millennialism,post-millennialism,andpre-millennialism? What is the view of post-millennialism? What twokindsofpost-millennialismshouldwedistinguish?Whatobjectionsaretheretothistheory?Whatisingeneralthepre-millenarianview?HowdoPre-millenarians conceive of the course of events? What are theobjections to pre-millennialism? How can the resurrection be provedfromtheOldTestament?WhatproofdoestheNewTestamentcontain?How can the resurrection of the body be proved from the NewTestament?Whodenytheresurrectionofthewicked?WhatBibleproofistherefortheirresurrection?Howdoestheresurrectionofthejustdifferfromthatoftheunjust?WhatdoesScripturetellusrespectingthetimeofthe resurrection? On what passages do pre-millenarians base theirdoctrineofadoubleresurrection?Whatcanbesaidagainstthistheory?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 319–337; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.559–573;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.446–454;

Hovey,BiblicalEschatology,pp.23–78;Milligan.TheResurrectionoftheDead.

THELASTJUDGMENTANDTHEFINALSTATE

A.TheLastJudgment.Thedoctrineoftheresurrectionleadsrightontothat of the last judgment. It is one of the deepest convictions of thehumanheartandonethatisnotlimitedtoChristianity,thatallmenwillbejudgedinthefuture.TheBibleteachesthecomingofafinaljudgmentinnouncertainterms.TheOldTestamentalreadyspeaksofit,Ps.96:13;Eccl.3:17;12:14,andtheNewTestamentmakesitevenmoreprominent,Matt. 11:22; 16:27;25:31–46;Acts 17:31;Rom.2:5–10, 16; 14:12; 1Cor.4:5;2Cor.5:10;2Tim.4:1;Heb.9:27;1Pet.4:5;Rev.20:11–14.

1.THEJUDGEANDHISASSISTANTS.Christ,as theMediator,willbetheJudge,Matt.25:31,32;John5:27;Acts10:42;17:31;Phil.2:10;2Tim.4:1.ThishonorwasconferredonChristasarewardforHisatoningwork,andconstitutesapartofHisexaltation.TheangelswillassistHiminthisgreatwork.Matt,13:41,42;24:31;25:31.EvidentlythesaintswillalsoinsomesenseshareinthejudicialworkofChrist,Ps.149:5–9;1Cor.6:2,3;Rev.20:4,thoughitisnotpossibletodeterminepreciselywhatparttheywilltake.

2. THE PARTIES THAT WILL BE JUDGED. Scripture contains clearindications of at least two parties that will be judged. It is perfectlyevidentthateveryindividualofthehumanracewillhavetoappearbeforethejudgment-seat,Eccl.12:14;Ps.50:4–6;Matt.12:36,37;25:32;Rom.14:10;2Cor.5:10;Rev.20:12.Somemaintainthattherighteouswillbe

excepted, since their sins are already pardoned, but this is contrary tosuchpassagesasMatt. 13:30,40–43,49;25:31–46. It isalsoclear thatSatanandhisdemonswillbe judged,Matt.8:29;1Cor.6:3;2Pet.2:4;Jude6.Whetherthegoodangelswillalsobesubjecttothefinaljudgmentisnotsoeasytodetermine,thoughsomewouldinferthisfrom1Cor.6:4.They are represented only as ministers of God in connection with theworkofjudgment,Matt.13:30,41;25:31;2Thess.1:7,8.

3. THE TIMEOF THE JUDGMENT. Since the last judgment will be ajudgmentpassedonthewholelifeofeveryman,itwillnaturallybeattheendoftheworld,andwillfollowimmediatelyaftertheresurrectionofthedead,John5:28,29;Rev.20:12,13.Thedurationofthejudgmentcannotbedeterminedprecisely.Scripturespeaksof"thedayofjudgment,"Matt.11:22; 12:36, and "the day of wrath," Rom. 2:5. It is necessary to inferfrom these and other similar passages that it will be a day of exactlytwenty-fourhours.Atthesametimethereisnowarranttoconceiveofthedayofjudgmentasadayofathousandyears,asthePre-millenariansdo.

4.THESTANDARDOFJUDGMENT.ThestandardbywhichsaintsandsinnerswillbejudgedwillevidentlybetherevealedwillofGod.Gentileswillbejudgedbythelawofnature,JewsbytheOldTestamentrevelation,andNewTestamentbelieversbythisrevelationplustherequirementsofthegospel.Godwillgive toeverymanhisdue.Therewillbedegrees inthepunishmentsofthewickedaswellasintherewardsoftherighteous,Matt.11:22,24;Luke12:47,48;20:47;Dan.12:3;2Cor.9:6.

B.TheFinalState.

1. THE FINAL STATE OF THE WICKED. Three points call forconsiderationhere:

a.ThePlace toWhichThey areConsigned.Theplace of punishment isusuallycalled"hell."Somedenythathellisaplaceandregarditmerelyasasubjectivecondition,inwhichmanmayfindhimselfevennow,andwhichmaybecomepermanentinthefuture.ButtheBiblecertainlyuseslocaltermsrightalong.Itspeaksofa"furnaceoffire,"Matt.13:42,of"alakeof fire,"Rev.20:14, 15of a "prison," and "abyss," and "tartarus," 1Pet.3:19;Luke8:31;2Pet.2:4,allofwhicharelocalterms.

b.The State inWhichTheyWill Exist. It is impossible to say preciselywhatwillconstitute thepunishmentof thewicked.Positively, itmaybesaidthattheywillbetotallydeprivedofthedivinefavor,willexperienceanendlessdisturbanceoflife,willsufferpositivepainsinbodyandsoul,andwillbesubjecttopangsofconscience,anguish,despair,andweepingandgnashingofteeth,Matt.8:12;13:50;Mark9:47,48;Luke16:23,28;Rev.14:10;21:8.Therewillbedegreesintheirpunishment,Matt.11:22,24; Luke 12:47, 48; 20:47. It will be commensurate with their sinningagainstthelightwhichtheyhadreceived.

c. The Duration of Their Punishment. Some deny the eternity of thefuture punishment. They maintain that the Scriptural words for"everlasting"and"eternal"maysimplydenotealongperiodoftime.Itistruethatthesewordsdohavealimitedmeaninginsomeinstances,butinsuch cases this is generally quite evident from the context. Moreover,therearepositive reasons to think that thesewordsdonothave suchalimited meaning, when they serve to designate the duration of futurepunishment.InMatt.25:46thesameworddescribesthedurationofthebliss of the saints and the penalty of the wicked. If the latter is notunending,neitheristheformer,andyettheeverlastingblessednessofthesaints isnotdoubted.Finally,otherexpressionsareused,whichdonotadmit of a limited interpretation. The fire of hell is an "unquenchablefire,"Mark9:43,thewormofthewicked"diethnot,"Mark9:48;andthegulfthatseparatessaintsandsinnersisfixedandimpassable,Luke16:26.

2.THEFINALSTATEOFTHERIGHTEOUS.

a.TheNewCreation.Thefinalstateofbelieverswillbeprecededbythepassing of the present world and the establishment of a new creation,Matt.19:28speaksof"theregeneration,"andActs3:21ofthe"restorationofall things."Heavenandearthwillpassaway,Heb.12:27;2Pet.3:13,andanewcreationwilltakeitsplace,Rev.21:1.Thefuturecreationwillnot be an entirely new creation, but rather a renewal of the presentcreation,Ps.102:26,27;Heb.12:26–28.

b.TheEternalAbodeoftheRighteous.Manyconceiveofheavenalsoasaconditionwhichmenmay enjoy in the present andwhichwill becomepermanentinthefuture.ButtheBibleteachesustothinkofheavenasa

place. It is the house of our Father with many mansions, John 14:2.Believerswill bewithin,while unbelievers arewithout,Matt. 22:12, 13;25:10–12.Therighteouswillnotonlyinheritheaven,buttheentirenewcreation,Matt.5:5;Rev.21:1–3.

c.TheNatureofTheirReward.Therewardoftherighteousisdescribedaseternallife,thatis,notmerelyanendlesslife,butlifeinallitsfulness,withoutanyof the imperfectionsanddisturbancesof thepresent,Matt.25:46;Rom.2:7.The fulness of this life is enjoyed in communionwithGod,which is really the essenceof eternal life,Rev.21:3.While allwillenjoy perfect bliss, yet there will be degrees also in the blessedness ofheaven,Dan.12:3;2Cor.9:6.

QuestionsforReview:What Scripture proof is there for the last judgment? Who will be theJudge?Whowill assistHim in thework?What partieswill be judged?Whenwillthelastjudgmentbe?Howlongwillitlast?Bywhatstandardwillmenbejudged?Howcanweprovethathellisaplace?Inwhatwillthe punishment of the wicked consist? How can we prove that theirpunishmentwillbeunending?Will thenewcreationbeanentirelynewcreation?Whatproofistherethatheavenisaplace?Whatistherewardoftherighteous?

ReferencesforFurtherStudy:Berkhof, Reformed Dogmatics, II, pp. 338–348; Hodge, Outlines ofTheology,pp.573–587;McPherson,ChristianDogmatics,pp.454–460;Hovey,BiblicalEschatology,pp.144–176.

MONERGISMBOOKS

ManualofChristianDoctrinebyLouisBerkhof,Copyright©2018

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American CopyrightConventions.Bypaymentoftherequiredfees,youhavebeengrantedthenon-exclusive,non-transferablerighttoaccessandreadthetextofthise-book on-screen. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted,downloaded,decompiled,reverseengineered,orstoredinorintroducedintoanyinformationstorageandretrievalsystem,inanyformorbyanymeans, whether electronic or mechanical, now known or hereinafterinvented,withouttheexpresswrittenpermissionofMonergismBooks.

ePuband.mobiEditionsOctober2018Requestsfor informationshouldbeaddressedto:MonergismBooks,POBox491,WestLinn,OR97068