1991 issue 1 - what calvin says: calvin's view of scripture - counsel of chalcedon

8/12/2019 1991 Issue 1 - What Calvin Says: Calvin's View of Scripture - Counsel of Chalcedon

1/6

What alvin aysy W Gary Cramptoll,Th.D.

Warfield, Calvin and Augustine pp. 82,83; cf . Institutes1:6:1,2).

This Woro also is that sole source of propositional truththrough whichman is to interpret allof heworld. In otherwords, Scripture, as God' W o ~ dis all sufficfent Itis notonly that whichreveals Christ as Savior, itis also the one==========.,.and only guide for the Christian's life Institutes 1:6:1,2).

Scripture

As we have seen in our study of "Calvin the Man," afterhis conversion theReformerdevotedhis life to the studyand exposition of Scripture . e was an advocate of lScriptura; thatis, 'Th.ewhole counsel of God,concerningall things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation,faith, and life, is either expressly set .Q9wnin Scripture, orby good and necessary consequence may be deducedfrom it (WCF 1,6). Calvin's numerous writings-commentaries, sermons, catechisms, etc., fully attest tothis fact. Scripture, to JohnCalvin, is "the WordofGod,"which comes to us from "the mouth of God" Institutes1:7:1,5). And being God's WOl Ii, it is all sufficient forevery good work (2 Timothy 3 :16,17).

Further , we have seen (Calvin on "the Knowledge ofGod") that John Calvin averred that Scripture was necessary for salvation. That is, sin is so pervasive in fallenman that God's general revelation is continually sup

pressed (Romansl:18) .f

men were taught only bygeneral revelation, "they would hold tonothing certain orsolid or clear-cut, but would be so tied to confusedprinciples as to worship an unknown god Institutes1:5:12). Thus, God has given us His Word, as "spectaclesto direct us to the Savior (1:6:1). According to Calvin, theHoly Spirit is the effectual agent (i .e., the subjeCtivefactor) , which united with the Word, as the instrumental,objective factor , gives lightto a sin darkened mind (B.B.

The Counsel of Cbalcedon January 1991 Page 4

Inspiration of Scripture

Calvin maintained that all sixty-six books of he Old andNew Testaments were fully inspired by God, in theoriginal autographs (autograpba) Institutes1:8:10). TheBible is theverbumdei (WordofGod), it doesnotmere y"become" the word of God,as in Neo-orthodoxy.lScripture,says Calvin,was written throughGod's prophetsand apostles, who were mOved along by theHoly Spirit,so that they wrote without error (2 Peter 1 20,21). Thesemen were the, "certain and authentic amanuensesof theHoly Spirit and therefore their writings are to liereceivedas the oracles ofOod" Institutes N:8:9). We havereceived i t [the Bible] from God's oWn mouth by theministry of men...[In the Bible] we hold the unassailabletruth" (1:7:5).

Therefore, Scripture is to be given the same reverencewhich one owes to God Himself, "since it has pr ceededfrom im alone, and there is nothing human [i.e., error]mixed with it" Commentary on 2 Timothy 3:16). TheBible owes its origin to the Triune God (Institutes 1:6:1-3) It s His, "eternal and inviolable truth"; God speaks inHis Word 1:7: 1). n he words of William Wileman,"theWord of God was as sacred to him [Calvin] asifheheardit spoken by the lips ofits Author John Calvin: His Life,His Teaching, And His Influence, p. 124).

This is a high view of n s p i a t i o ~inspiration.


2/6

Organic inspiration maintains that the authors of Scripture were acted upon by theHoly Spirit in an organic way,in accordance with their own personalities, characters,tempennents, gifts and talents. Each author wrote in hisown sty Ie, but all the while it was the Holy Spirit movinghim along to writeinfallible truth 2 Peter 1 20, 21). Thisis Calvin's view.

It is true that the Reformer uses the word dictated(dictare) when referring to the inspiration of Scripture(Commentary on 2 Timothy 3:16). But,asB.B. Warfieldconcludes, thisusage in Calvin speaks totheresult, notthemode, of inspiration; that is, the production of a pureWordofGodfreefromallhurnan admixtures (Op. citpp. 63,64). With this conclusion, EJ Young is incomplete agreement (Thy Word is Truth, pp. 66,67).

To Calvin, it s not merely the doctrine andJorthe contentof biblical revelation that is inspired; it is the graphe(Scripture) itself. Every word is God-breathed (Commentaryon 2 Timothy 3:16 and2Peter1:20,21). Thisisthe doctrine of plenary, verbal inspiration.

John Murray points out that many have maintained thatCalvin did not hold to a high view of verbal, plenaryinspiration, due to his somewhat cavalier comments onsuch passages as Matthew 27:9; Acts 7:14-16; and Hebrews 11:21 (Calvin On Scripture nd Divine Sovereignty, pp. 11-13). But, says Murray, an overview ofhiswritiogs will show that, In Calvin we have a mass ofperspicuous statement and oflengthened argument to theeffect that Scripture is impregnable and inviolable, and itwould be the resort of desperation to take a few randomcomments, wrench them from the total effect of Calvin'steaching, and build upon them a thesis which would runcounter to his own repeated assertions respectiog theinviolable character of Scripture as the oracle of God andas having nothing human mixe with it (p.31). MurraycitessuchrnenasE.A.Dowey, '1hereisnohintanywherein Calvin's writiogs that the original text contained anyflaws at all, and K.S.Kantzer, [Calvin held to] arigidlyorthodox verbal type of inspiration, to support hisstatement pp. 11,12).

Gordon Clark is in agreement with Murray. In his TheConcept of Biblical Authority, Clark cites Paul Rees asteaching that Calvin as well as Augustine and Luther)was far from orthodox in his view of Scripture. But, notesClark, ' fo cite Calvin as a witness to, a precursor of, oran exponent of a theory of biblical fallibility is unwarranted p. 10).

Likewise, Gregg Singer claims that, There can be nodoubt that Calvin regarded the men who wrote the Bibleas the organs of he Holy Spirit, who guided them to writein such a way that they were without error of any kind. .inhis Institutes, his commentaries and his many writings,there is an abundance of evidence ..[which points to] oneinescapable fact Calvin believed that the Bible is theuniquely inspired Word of God and that, as such, itdiffers

in kind from all other literature (John Calvin: His Rootsnd Fruits, pp. 8,9).

Further, the paucity of documents from the pen of Calvintaking a strong stance on the subject of biblical inerrancyand infallibility have led others to deny what Murray,Clark, and Singer have maintained regarding theRefonner's view of Scripture. Butthis, according to John .Gerstner, is easily explainable. In the sixteenth century,says Gerstner, biblical inerrancy and infallibility wastaken for granted by Roman Catholic and Protestanttheologians alike. In Calvin's day, this doctrine was notin question. Thus, there was little need to write on thesubject (Christian Observer, July 6, 1990, Vol. 168,Number 27, p.lO).

Authority of Scripture

According to Calvin, the authority vested in Scripture isderived from its unique origin (Ronald S. Wallace,Calvin s Doctrine o f he Word and Sacrament, pp. 106-114). The sixty-six books o f Holy Writ are not only thesole authority for the church of Jesus Christ, but they arealso the sole authority for every God-given institution(Institutes 1:7:1,2; II:7:6-17; Commentaryonlsaiah30: I).Singerrnaintains thatit was Calvin's high view of biblicalrevelation by which he could, with full assurance assertthat the Scriptures are the final authority in al areas ofhuman life Op. cit .,p. l0). Andit is the inner testimonyof he Holy Spirit (testimonium Spiritus Sanctiinternum)which authenticates this authority (Institutes 1 :7:1-5).Those who are inwardly taught by the Holy Spirit

acquiesce implicitly in Scripture 1:7:4).

Sin-ce the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit is necessaryto confum the authority of God's Word, Calvin alsorecognizes our need for the Spirit to illuminate it for us.Non-believers can have a certain intellectual understanding of Scripture, but not a genuine spiritual grasp of it(Commentary on James 2:19 and I Corinthians 2:14).

Calvin did not adhere to any form of extra-biblical specialrevelation (i.e., prophecy, tongues, etc.) .2 That is, thecanon was closed at the end of the apostolic age, so that

The Counsel of Chalcedon Janul\ ry 1991 Page 5


3/6

God now speaks authQritatively in His written Wordalone. (The canonicity, as well as the authority, ofScripture depends on divine inspiration.) The NewTestament docUIfients are the limits of revelation(CommentaryonIPeter 1:25). Writes Calvin, God willnotspeakintennitten1y through some and through others;nor will He add prophecies to prophecies, or revelationsto revelations. Rather, He has so fulfilled all functions of

teaching in His on that we must regard this as the finaland eternal testimony from Him. In this way, the wholeNew Testamenttime, from the point that Christ appearedto us with the preaching of His gospel even to the Day ofJudgment, is designated by ' the last hour' ...'the lasttimes' ... 'the last days.' This is done that, content with theperfection of Christ ' s teaching, we may learn not tofashion anything new for ourselves beyond this or toadmit anything cohtrived by others (Institutes IV 8:7).

Calvinist scholar Ronald Wallace concludes that theReformer held to a closed canon. The Charismatic camp

cannot claim the Genevan. His basic position was thatGod does not reveal Himself to man (in special revelation) apart from Scripture. According to Calvin, Wecarmotexpectrevelation tocome through heavenlyoraclesor private communications or visions or irregular signs,since the days forsuchmodes of communication are longpast (Wallace, Op cit., p.99).

God speaks in Scriptun.In it He opens His sacredmouth ....Thedivinily inheresin t le Scripture nd it here-fore exhibitstheplainest evidence that it is God's Word.When we bring soondmindsit compels our submissionand obedience. nd ourconcluswn must be that thisis but tuUJIher way of sayingthatScripture is by ts notundiVinelyauthoriJative." JobnMurray

John Murray aptly sums up Calvin's view of biblicalauthority as follows, The sum of this is clear. GodspeaksinScripture. In it He opens His sacred mouth. InScripture the majesty of God confronts us. The divinityinheres in the Scripture and it therefore exhibits theplainest evidence that it is God's Word. When we bringsOundminds it compels our submission and obedience .And our conclusion must be that this is but another way

The Counsel of Cbalcedon January 1991 Page Ii

of saying that Scripture is by its nature divinely authoritative Op. cit., p. 50).

The Word Preached

For John Calvin,the preaching of the Word out of themouth of God's ministers, is, when properly spoken, to beconsidered as nothing less than the Word coming out of

the mouth of God, because He, employs [such] men asHis ministers (Commentary on Isaiah 55:11). In thissense, the Word of God is not distinguished from theword of he prophet (Commentary on Haggai 1:12). I tis,ofcourse,theSpiritunitedwiththeWordthatempowersthe preaching. All power of action ..resides in theSpirit .and thus all powerougbt to be entirely referred toGod alone (Commentary on Ezekie12:2).

When the Word is biblically preached, it is a sign of thepresence of God and the instrument .of Christ's rule(Wallace, Op. cit., pp. 84-87). The Spirit continues to

speak through His word in this God-ordained function.TheLordapproachesHis people through thepreaching ofScripture (Commentary on Isaiah 50:2). God has ordainedHis Word as the instrument by which Jesus Christ,with all His graces, is dispensed to us (cited in Wallace,Op cit., p. 85).

Further, says the Reformer, the gospel is the sceptre forChrist's Kingdom; He rules His church by means of it(Commentary on Hosea 1:11). Moreover, it is also themeans by which Christ intends the reconciliation of thewhole world; that is, the restoration of all things, in Christ

(Commentary on Isaiah 51:16).

According to Calvin, when the Word of God is preachedit has a two-fold effect: it either softens or hardens theheart (Wallace, Op cit., pp. 93-95). I t always accomplishes its purpose. As the Word is efficacious for thesalvation of believers, so it is abundantly efficacious forthe condemning of the wicked Commentary on Isaiah55:11).

The Interpretation of Scripture

With this in mind, it should be no surprise to leam that

Calvin considered sound exegesis, i .e., faithful biblicalinterpretation, as imperative. He was a scholar of extraordinary measure; he was well read in n fields. He used,the best tools and method of scholarship available at his

time (Donald McKim, Readings In Calvin's Theology,edited by Donald McKim, pp .64,65). In the words ofJohn Murray, Calvin was theexegeteoftheReformationand in the first tank of biblical exegetes of all time (Collected Writings, Vol. I, p. 308). Singer callshim the


4/6

prince of expositors Op. cit, p. vi).

The way one seeks od is by giving himself to a seriousstudy (i.e., biblical interpretation will lead one into adeeper relationship with Jesus Christ. The Scripturesshould be read with the aim of finding Christ in them(Commentary on John 5:39). W b e n t h ~ B i b l e i s f a . t h f u l l yinterpreted, the Spirit so works, that Scripture comes alive

and shows forth Christ (Institutes 1:9:3 . (It will beremembered that only the Christian can have a genuine,spiritual understanding of the Word of God.)

Calvin relied heavily on both Augustine and JohnChrysostom in his studies . The former was by far themost influential on the Genevan (e.g ., he quotes Augustine overfour hundred times in the Institutes alone). Hereferred to him as the most biblical of all of the fathers(Singer, Op.cit.,p. 7). Along with Augustine, Calvin wasdevoted to the basic hermeneutical principle of theanalogy of faith ; that is, Scripture is its own best inter

preter(CommentaryonRomans l2:6;Institutes N:27:32).

Yet, Calvin takes issue with his mentor Augustine inopposing any form of allegorical interpretation. Heavoided speculative theology altogether. tone point hewrites, the Bible was ndt given to us to satisfy ourfoolishcuriosity and pride. Yet Paul says it is useful. For what?To instruct us in sound doctrine, to comfort us, to inspireus, and to m ke us able to perform every good work. fanyone asks us what constructive power we expect toreceive from it, the answer can be given in one sentence,that through it we leam to place our trust in God and to

walk in fear of Him (cited in McKim, Op. cit., p. 66).Further, in his Commentary on Romans 9:14, he states,When theLordclosesHis holy mouth, letus also stop the

way, that we may not go further.

In all of his exegesis Calvin had a genuine desire to edifythe church. In his Dedicatory to the exposition of theminor prophets he writes, I f God has endued me withany aptness for the interpretation of Scripture, I am fullypersuaded thatlhave faithfully and carefully endeavouredto exclude from it all barren refinements, however plausible and fitted to please the ear, and to preserve genuine

simplicity, adapted solidly to edify the children of God,who, being not content with the shell, wish to penetrate tothe kernel (cited in Murray, Op. cit., pp. 309,310).

As to his own ministry of the Word, John Calvin was anarduous laborer. In addition to his preaching each andevery Lord's Day, he preached each day of every alternate week. He gave three expository lectures every week;he preached each Thursday in the university, and gave a

public exposition every Friday. This, of course; was inaddition to his writing ministry, which was exhaustive.The man seemingly possessed an indefatigable industry(Wileman, Op. cit., p. 93 .

'The Scripturesshould e re d

with the aim o f.finding Christ

in them.

Scripture As A Means f Grace

Calvin, along with the entirety of Reformed Theology,considered the Scriptures, along with the sacraments (andprayer), s a means of grace (Institutes Introduction XIT .The means of grace are those means by which the Spiritof od ministers to the saints, building them up in thefaith. These means, according to Calvin, are indispensable to the sanctification of the Christian. Says RonaldWallace, in Calvin's theology, The Word and the sacra-ments are the means whereby, through the Spirit, themembers of the church are consecrated to fulfill theirroyal priesthood. .Moreover, the sacraments, along withthe Word, assist in enabling us to offer ourselves as a

living sacrifice to God (Calvin s Doctrine of he Chris-tianLife, pp. 208-210).

The Word of od functions in this way in that it is the,spiritual food of he soul, which must not be neglected;

in the Word Christians see the face of Christ, and arerenewed lnstitutesN :l:5). God comes to meet with Hissaints in His Word; it is through the word that theblessings ofGod'spromisesflowtothe elect(Commentaryon Psalms 18:31; 81:14; and 119:65).

Christian man, says Calvin, loves the Word of God. It is

an, unfeigned love of God's law [which] is certainevidence of adoption, since such love is the worlc of theHoly Spirit. One who despises the Word reveals ahardened heart; to despise the Word is tantamount todespisingGodHimself(CommentaryonPsaJrns 119:159;95 :8). When the law of God is written in the heart by theSpirit, that law will rule the individual. His life will beconformed to God's Word through the process of sanctification (Commentary onJeremil\h 31:33).

The Counsel of Chalcedon January 1991 Page 7


5/6

The Law Of God

Historically, Reformed Theology has not greatly dichotomized the law and the gospel cf. WCF XIX; 7).Neither does the GenevaReformer. Law without gospelis merely a dead letter, but there is no gospel without thelaw that reveals one's need for the gr ce of God in Christ

Commentary on 2 Corinthians 3:4-18).In his Institutes, and other writings, Calvin adopted thetraditional three categories of he law: moral (II:8:1-59),civil or case (ll :7:10,11; IV:20:14,15), and ceremonial(ll:7: 1 2,16,17). Hisoverall teaching confmns that themoral law (i.e.; the ten commandments and the generalequity of he case law of Israel) was continually bindingon all mankind. Here he would have been in basicagreement with the Westminster Confession o Faith(XIX, 4,5), "To them [thepeople ofIsrael] also, as a bodypolitick, He [God] gave sundry judicial laws, which

expired together with the state of hat people, not obligingany other now, further than the general equity thereofmayrequire .Themorallawdothforeverbindall,aswelljustified persons as others, to the obediencethereof .Neither doth Christ in the gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation."

Calvin, for example, was convinced that the civil magistrate was to enforce both tables of he Decalogue. Not todo so was to disobey the God of the law .The state wasto prevent open idolatry, swearing and cursing, illicitforms of dance, and Sabbath disobedience, as well as

promote proper marital relationships, sanctity of human. ife, etc. It was to work toward that holy commonwealthwhich Godintendedtoestablishonearth(Singer,Op. cit.,pp.62-64; see also Frank Roberts, To ll Generations,p.165).

That Calvin was a strong advocate of the Mosaic judiciallaw is related by Phillip Schaff, "Calvin's plea for therightanddutyoftheChristianmagistratetopuIiishheresyby death, standsor falls with his theocratic theoryand thebinding authority oftheMosaic code. His argumentsarechiefly drawn from the Jewish law against idolatry andblasphemy, and from the examples of the pious kings ofIsrael" History O/The Christian Church, Vol. vm, p.792). In his Sermons on Deuteronomy, Calvin's strongadherence to the binding nature of the general equity ofthe Mosaic law code is abundantly obvious.)

Some scholars have denied Calvin's strong adherence tothe Mosaic laws in matters of the civil magistrate due toseveral statementsthathemakes intheInstitutes (IV:20:14-

The Counsel of Chalcedon January 1991 Page 8

21), which wouldseemingly denywhathas beenstatedinthis article. But investigation of this section willrevealt h a t w h a t C a l v i n i s o p p o s e d t o , i s n o t t h e

responsibility to obey God's law as its standard, buttheview of the Anabaptists that one had the right to rebel Iagainst any government which did not perfectly follow the biblical patternforcivillaw. That this isCalvin' point

is clear fromthePrefatory AddresstoFrancis I at the verybeginningofthelnstitutes. Christianity,saystheRefonner,is not a subversive, revolutionary religion.

The ceremouiallaw, by the coming of ChriSt, was abrogated in use, but not in essence. That is, ''Christ by Hiscoming has terminated them[theceremoniesj,buthasnotdeprivedthemofanythingoftheirsanctity;rather,Hehasapproved and honored i t Just as the ceremonieswouldhave provided the people of the Old Covenant with anemptyshowifthepowerofChrist'sdeathandresurrectionhad not beendisplayed therein; so, if hey had notceased,

we would be unable today to discern for what purposethey were established" Institutes 11:7:16).

Calvin also taught that the law of God had a three-foldpurpose:

1) Pedagogical Institutes ll:7:(i-9): the law shows therighteousnessof God and disclosesthe sinfulnessof man,leading him O seek God's forgiveness.

2) Political(l1:7:10,11): thelawrestrainssin,sinners,andcriminals, and is to be used to protect the community.

against unjust mert

3) Pattern (11:7:12,13): the law is a pattern for life. Itadmonishes Christian man to seek and obey his God.This third use of the law (tertius usus Jegus) is theprincipal use in Calvin's theology. Itnot only reveals thecharacter of God (II:8:51), it also sets forth His will(II:8:59). In he law, God, "lays down what fie demandsfrom us, and, n short, everything necessary to beknown(CommentaryonIsaiah 8:20). It is, "the everlasting Ildunchangeable rule to live by Institutes 11:7:13).

Endnotes

1) Neo-orthodoxy maintains that the Bible merely"contains" theWord of God; it is not The WordofGod."Karl Barth and Emil Brunner, two champions of Neoorthodoxy,forexarnple, taughtthattheonly truerevelationof God to man is Jesus Christ, and when the words ofScripture reveal Christ to the reader, then the BiblebecomesGod'sWord, Accordingto Barth and Brunner,


6/6

itwas belowGod,whois "wholly other," tocommunicatethe transcendentalChrist through lowly, logical propositions on a printed page. Thus, Godreveals events tous inthe Bible, but not the meaning of the events. Theunderstandingof the meaning is a subjective enterprise.Neo-orthodoxy, then, incIaimingthatrevelationis merely

Il eV mt (i.e., something that happens), denies that theBible gives us propositional revelation (see Robert L

Reymond, Introductory StudiesIn

Contemporary Theology, pp.91ff; Ronald H. Nash, The Word OfGod andthe Mind o Man pp. 35ff.).

Fu.r1her, in Neo-orthodox theology, the Bible containserrors. It was written by fallen men and is full oflogical

this modern view [Neo-orthodoxy] and that...ofCaivinCalvin would have reacted with all his being against thisfalse idea that the Bible and the Word of God are not tobe identified" [Op cit. p. 232].)

2. Reformed theology in general has always maintainedthat the extraordinary gifts of the f:rrst century church(apostles, prophets, Eph. 2:20) and the miraculous wordgifts which accompanied them (prophecy, tongues, etc.)passed away with the close of the canon (cf. I Cor. 13:8-13; WCF 1,1,2; Sinclair Fetguson, John Owen On TheChristian Life pp. 204-210). n

paradoxes; (as distinguished from rhetorical paradoxes; ~cf.Mt 10:39;2Cor. 6:9,10) andJorconfradictions.Brunnergoes so far at one point to claim that contradiction is thehallmark of religions truth (cited in John Gerstner,Jonatiuln Edwards: A Mini-Theology p. 24). Thus, it iscaJIed the "Theology of Paradox" (R.V. Schnucker,

EvangelicalDictionaryofTheology edited by WalterA.

Elwell, pp. 754-756, 827).

According to the Geneva Reformer, nothing could bemore nonsensical. Calvin maintained, along with allorthodoxy, that the Bible teaches propositional truth.Propositionsare logical, understandable combinations ofwords which objectively teach something. Thetruth ofScripture is not "in between" or "above" the words, oronly in themind (subjectively)of the interpreter. Neitherare the words only or secretly symbolic, merely intimating some highet truth. Rathet, God's truth lies in the

logical organization of the words themselves. His truthcomes via our logical analysis of these propositionsaccording to the common rules of grammar. Thus, theBibledoes not contain logical paradoxes. (Calvin wouldagree with Calvinist Gordon Clark where the latter saysthat, "a paradox is a charley-horse between the ears thatcan be eliminated by rational massage" [ The Atonement,p.32].)

This also r l ~ to the events of history, and theirmeaning. That is, not only does the Bible teach us thatcertain eventsoccurred in history, but it also tells us what

those events mean. The interpretation is not subjective;Godreveals the meaning to the reader, in His Word, in apropositionaJIytruemannet. That this is Calvin' s view ofScriptureis irrefutable Jnstitutes1:6-10; Commentary on2 Timothy 3:16). (In the opinionof this author, the claimsofWilhelmNiesel that Calvinwasbasically Neo-orthodoxin his view of Scripture are unfounded [The Theology oCalvin pp. 22ff.] EJ Young concurs: "How different is

The CoUDSelof Cbalcedon January 1991 Page 9

1991 issue 1 - what calvin says: calvin's view of scripture - counsel of chalcedon

Documents