Copyright©MonergismBooks

SelectedWorksofHermanBavinck

EditedbyJohnHendryx

TableofContents

TheOrigin,Essence,andPurposeofMan

DevelopmentoftheDoctrineofPredestination

SupralapsarianismandInfralapsarianism

TheKnowledgeofGod

TheDivineandHumanNatureofChrist

TheFall

Death

TheCovenantofGrace

TheDivineTrinity

TheGreatnessofGod

TheGreatnessandMiserablenessofMan

ThePresentStateoftheWorld

CalvinandCommonGrace

Copyright

TheOrigin,Essence,andPurposeofMan

HermanBavinck

The account of the origin of heaven and earth converges in the firstchapterofGenesisupon the creationofman.The creation of the othercreatures,ofheavenandearth,ofsunandmoonandstars,ofplantsandanimals,isreportedinbriefwords,andthereisnomentionmadeatallofthe creationof the angels.ButwhenScripture comes to the creationofman it lingers long over him, describes not only the fact but also themanner of his creation, and returns to the subject for further broadconsiderationinthesecondchapter.

Thisparticularattentiondevoted to theoriginofmanservesalreadyasevidenceofthefactthatmanisthepurposeandend,theheadandcrownof the whole work of creation. And there are various material detailswhich also illuminate the superior rank and worth of man among thecreatures.

Inthefirstplace,thereisthespecialcounselofGodwhichprecedesthecreationofman.Atthecallingintobeingoftheothercreatures,wereadsimplythatGodspokeandbyHisspeakingbroughtthemintoexistence.ButwhenGodisabouttocreatemanHefirstconferswithHimselfandrouses Himself to make men in His image and likeness. This goes toindicate that especially the creation of man rests on deliberation, onDivinewisdomandgoodnessandomnipotence.Nothingofcoursecameintoexistencebychance.ButthecounselanddecisionofGodisfarmoreclearlymanifest in themakingofman than in thecreationof theothercreatures.

Moreover, in this particular counsel of God, the special emphasis isplacedonthefactthatmaniscreatedaftertheimageandlikenessofGod

andthereforestandsinanentirelydifferentrelationshiptoGodthanallother creatures. It is said of no other creatures, not even of the angels,thattheywere created inGod's image and that they exhibitHis image.They may possess hints and indications of one or several of God'sattributes,butofmanalone it isaffirmed thathe is createdafterGod'simageandinHislikeness.

ScripturefurtheremphasizesthefactthatGodcreated,notoneman,butmen,accordingtoHislikeness.AttheconclusionofGenesis1:27theyaredesignated as male and female. It is not man alone, nor womanexclusively,butbothofthem,andthosetwoininterdependence,whoarethe bearers of the image ofGod. And, according to the blessing that ispronouncedupon them inverse28, theyare such imagebearersnot inand for themselves alone. They are that also in their posterity, andtogetherwiththeirposterity.ThehumanraceineachofitspartsandinitsentiretyisorganicallycreatedintheimageandlikenessofGod.

Finally,Scriptureexpresslymentions that this creationofman inGod'simage must come to expression particularly in his dominion over allliving beings and in the subjection toHim of thewhole earth. Becauseman is the child or offspring of God, he is king of the earth. Beingchildren of God and heirs of the world are two things already closelyrelated to each other, and inseparably related to each other, in thecreation.

The account of the creation of man in the first chapter of Genesis iselaborated and amplified in the second chapter (Gen. 2:4b-25). ThissecondchapterofGenesisissometimesmistakenlydesignatedthesecondcreationstory.Thisiserroneousbecausethecreationofheavenandearthis assumed in this chapter, and is referred to in verse 4b in order tointroduce themanner in which God formedman from the dust of theearth.Thewholeemphasisinthissecondchapterfallsonthecreationofmanandonthewayinwhichthistookplace.ThebigdifferencebetweenthefirstandsecondchapterofGenesiscomesoutinthesedetailswhicharetoldusinthesecondconcerningtheformingofman.

Thefirstchaptertellsofthecreationofheavenandearthandletsthese

lead up to themaking ofman. In this chapterman is the last creaturecalled intoexistencebyGod'somnipotence.Hestandsat theendof theseries of creatures as the lord of nature, the king of the earth. But thesecondchapter, fromGenesis2:4bon,beginswithman,proceeds fromhimas startingpoint, setshimat the centerof things, and thenrelateswhathappened in thecreationofman,howthis tookplace for themanand for the woman, what dwelling place was appointed for him, withwhatvocationhewasentrusted,andwhatpurposeanddestinywashis.Thefirstchapterspeaksofmanastheendorpurposeofthecreation;theseconddealswithhimasthebeginningofhistory.Thecontentofthefirstchaptercanbecomprised in thenamecreation, and thatof the secondchapterinthenameParadise.

There are three particulars which are told us in this second chapterconcerningman's origin, andwhich serve as the elaboration ofwhat iscontainedinthefirstchapter.

In the first place there is a fairly broad treatment of the first dwellingplaceofman.Thefirstchaptersimplystated ingeneral termsthatmanwas created afterGod's image and that hewas appointed lord over thewholeearth.Butitgivesnohintastowhereonthefaceoftheglobemanfirstsawthe lightof lifeandwherehe first lived.Thisweare,however,told in the second chapter. When God had made the heaven and theearth,andwhenHehadcalledthesun,moon,andstars,theplantsandbirds, the animals of the land and those of the water, then no specificplace had yet been set aside as a dwelling for man. Hence God restsbeforeHecreatesmanandpreparesforhimagardenorParadiseinthecountryofEden,eastofPalestine.Thatgardenisarrangedinaparticularway. God lets all kinds of trees come up out of the soil there—treesbeautiful to see and serviceable for food. Two of these trees aredesignatedbyname,thetreeoflifeplantedinthemiddleofthegarden,andalsothetreeoftheknowledgeofgoodandevil.Thegardenwaslaidoutinsuchawaythatariverwhichhaditspointoforiginhigherupinthe territory of Eden flowed through it, and then forked out into fourstreams,thePison,theGihon,theTiger,andtheEuphrates.

Agreatdealoftoilandefforthasinthecourseofthecenturiesgoneintotrying to determine where Eden and the garden of Eden were located.

Variousrepresentationshavebeenputforwardaboutthatoneriverthatcameup inEden and flowed through the garden, about the four riversintowhichthatmajorstreamparted,about thenameof the territoryofEden, and about the garden inside it. But all of these representationshave remained conjectures. None has been established by solid proof.Twointerpretationswould,however,seemtodeservethepreference.Thefirst is the one according to which Eden lay towards the north inArmenia;theotherholdsthatitwasfarthersouth,inBabylonia.Itishardtodecidebetweenthesetwo.ThedetailsgiveninScripturearenolongeradequate todetermine justwhere this territory lay.Butwhenwe recallthat the people who sprang from Adam and Eve, though banned fromEden,neverthelessatfirst lingeredinthatgeneralarea(Gen.4:16),andthatNoah'sarkafterthefloodcametorestonMountArarat(Gen.8:4),andthatthenewmankindafterthefloodspreadoutfromBabelovertheearth (Gen. 11:8-9), then it can hardly be doubted that the cradle ofhumanity stood in that area bounded by Armenia on the North andShinarintheSouth.InmoderntimesscholarshiphascometoreinforcethisteachingofScripture.True,inthepast,historicalinvestigationmadeall sorts of guesses about the original home ofmankind, seeking it, inturn,inallpartsoftheearth,butitismoreandmoreretracingitssteps.Ethnology, the history of civilization, philology all point to Asia as thecontinentwhereoncethecradleofmankindstood.

A second feature to attract attention in Genesis 2 is the probationarycommandgiven toman.Originally this firstmanwas simply called theman(ha-adam)forhewasaloneforawhileandtherewasnoonebesidehim who was like him. It is not until Gen. 4:25 that the name Adamoccurs without the definite article. There the name first becomesindividual.Thisindicatesclearlythatthefirstman,whoforawhilewasthe only human being, was the beginning and origin and head of thehuman race. As such he received a double task to perform: first, tocultivateandpreservethegardenofEden,and,second,toeatfreelyofallthe trees in thegardenexceptof the treeof theknowledgeofgoodandevil.

The first task defines his relationship to the earth, the second hisrelationshiptoheaven.Adamhadtosubduetheearthandhavedominion

overit,andthishemustdoinatwofoldsense:hemustcultivateit,openitup,andsocausetocomeupoutof itall thetreasureswhichGodhasstoredthereforman'suse;andhemustalsowatchoverit,safeguardit,protect it against all evil thatmay threaten it,must, in short, secure itagainst the service of corruption in which the whole of creation nowgroans.

Butmancanfulfillthiscallingoveragainsttheearthonlyifhedoesnotbreak thebondof connectionwhichuniteshimwithheaven, only if hecontinuestobelieveGodatHiswordandtoobeyHiscommandment.Thetwofoldtaskisessentiallythereforeonetask.Adammusthavedominionovertheearth,notbyidlenessandpassivitybutthroughtheworkofhisheadandheartandhand.

Butinordertorule,hemustserve;HemustserveGodwhoishisCreatorand Lawgiver. Work and rest, rule and service, earthly and heavenlyvocation, civilization and religion, culture and cultus, these pairs gotogetherfromtheverybeginning.Theybelongtogetherandtogethertheycompriseinonevocationthegreatandholyandgloriouspurposeofman.Allculture,thatis,allworkwhichmanundertakesinordertosubduetheearth,whetheragriculture,stockbreeding,commerce, industry,science,or therest, isall the fulfillmentofa singleDivinecalling.But ifman isreally tobeandremainsuchhemustproceed independenceonand inobedience to the Word of God. Religion must be the principle whichanimatesthewholeoflifeandwhichsanctifiesitintoaserviceofGod.

A third particular of this second chapter of Genesis is the gift of thewoman to themanand the institutionofmarriage.Adamhad receivedmuch.Thoughformedoutofthedustoftheearth,hewasneverthelessabeareroftheimageofGod.Hewasplacedinagardenwhichwasaplaceoflovelinessandwasrichlysuppliedwitheverythinggoodtobeholdandtoeat.Hereceivedthepleasanttaskofdressingthegardenandsubduingthe earth, and in this he had to walk in accordance with thecommandment ofGod, to eat freely of every tree except the treeof theknowledgeofgoodandevil.Butnomatterhowrichly favoredandhowgrateful, that first man was not satisfied, not fulfilled. The cause isindicatedtohimbyGodHimself.Itliesinhissolitude.Itisnotgoodfortheman that he should be alone.He is not so constituted, hewas not

createdthatway.Hisnatureinclinestothesocial—hewantscompany.Hemustbeabletoexpresshimself,revealhimself,andgivehimself.Hemustbeabletopourouthisheart,togiveformtohisfeelings.Hemustsharehisawarenesseswithabeingwhocanunderstandhimandcanfeelandlivealongwithhim.Solitudeispoverty,forsakenness,gradualpiningandwastingaway.Howlonesomeitistobealone!

AndHewhocreatedmanthus,withthiskindofneedforexpressionandextension can in the greatness and grace of His power only choose tosupplytheneed.Hecanonlycreateforhimahelpmeetwhogoesalongwith him, is related to him, and suits him as counterpart. The accounttellsusinverses19to21thatGodmadeallthebeastsofthefieldandallthefowlsoftheair,andbroughtthemuntoAdamtoseewhetheramongall those creatures there was not a being who could serve Adam as acompanionandahelper.Thepurposeof these verses isnot to indicatethechronologicalorderinwhichanimalsandmanweremade,butratherto indicate the material order, the rank, the grades of relationship inwhich the two sorts of creatures stand over against each other. Thisrelationship of rank is first indicated in the fact that Adam named theanimals.

Adamthereforeunderstoodallthecreatures,hepenetratedtheirnatures,he could classify and subdivide them, and assign to each of them theplace in the whole of things which was their due. If, accordingly, hediscovered no being among all those creatures who was related tohimself, this was not the consequence of ignorance nor of foolhardyarroganceorpride;rather,itstemmedfromthefactthatthereexistedadifferenceinkindbetweenhimandallothercreatures,adifferencenotofdegreemerelybutofessence.True,thereareallkindsofcorrespondencesbetweenanimalandman:botharephysicalbeings,bothhaveallkindsofneed and desire for food and drink, both propagate offspring, bothpossess the five senses of smell, taste, feeling, sight, and hearing, andboth share the lower activities of cognition, awareness, andperception.Nonetheless, man is different from the animal. He has reason, andunderstanding, and will and in consequence of these he has religion,morality, language, law, science,andart.True,hewas formedfromthedustof theearth,buthe received thebreathof life fromabove.He isa

physical,butalsoaspiritual,rational,andmoralbeing.AndthatiswhyAdamcouldnotfindasinglecreatureamongthemallthatwasrelatedtohimandcouldbehishelper.Hegavethemallnames,butnotoneofthemdeservedtheexalted,royalnameofman.

Then, whenman could not find the thing he sought, then, quite apartfromman's ownwitting andwilling, andwithout contributive effort onhisownpart,Godgavemanthe thinghehimselfcouldnotsupply.Thebestthingscometousasgifts; theyfall intoourlapswithoutlaborandwithoutprice.Wedonot earn themnorachieve them:weget them fornothing.Therichestandmostpreciousgiftwhichcanbegiventomanonearth is woman. And this gift he gets in a deep sleep, when he isunconscious,andwithoutanyeffortofwillorfatigueof thehand.True,the seeking, the looking about, the inquiring, the sense of the needprecedesit.Sodoestheprayer.ButthenGodgrantsthegiftsovereignly,alone,without ourhelp. It is as thoughHe conducts thewoman to themanbyHisownhand.

ThereuponthefirstemotiontomasterAdam,whenhewakesupandseesthewomanbeforehim, is thatofmarvellingandgratitude.Hedoesnotfeelastrangertoher,butrecognizesherimmediatelyassharinghisownnaturewithhim.Hisrecognitionwasliterallyarecognitionofthatwhichhehadfelthemissedandneeded,butwhichhecouldnothimselfsupply.And his marvelling expresses itself in the first marriage hymn orepithalamiumever tobesoundedonthe faceof theearth:"This isnowbone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be calledWoman,becauseshewastakenoutofman."Adamthereforeremains thesourceandheadofthehumanrace.Thewomanisnotmerelycreatedalongsideofhimbutoutofhim(1Cor.11:8).Justasthestuff formakingAdam'sbodywastakenfromtheearth,sothesideofAdamisthebasisofthelifeof Eve. But just as out of the dust of the earth the firstman became alivingbeingthroughthebreathoflifewhichcamefromabove,sooutofAdam'ssidethefirstwomanfirstbecameahumanbeingbythecreativeomnipotenceofGod.SheisoutofAdamandyetisanotherthanAdam.She is related to him and yet is different fromhim. She belongs to thesamekindandyetinthatkindsheoccupiesherownuniqueposition.Sheisdependentandyetsheisfree.SheisafterAdamandoutofAdam,but

owesherexistencetoGodalone.Andsosheserves tohelp theman, tomakehisvocationofsubduingtheearthpossible.Sheishishelper,notasmistressandmuch lessasslave,butasan individual, independent,andfreebeing,whoreceivedherexistencenot fromthemanhut fromGod,who is responsible to God, and who was added to man as a free andunearnedgift.

Thus theScripture reports theoriginofman, of both themale and thefemale. Such is its thought about the institution of marriage and thebeginning of the human race. But in these days a very differentconstruction is put upon these things, and this is done in the name ofscience and allegedly with the authority of science. And as this newconstruction penetrates farther and farther until it reaches even themassesofthepeople,andsinceitisofthegreatestimportanceforaworldand life view, it is necessary to devote our attention to it for a fewmoments,andtosubjectthebasisonwhichitreststoanappraisal.

IfapersonrepudiatestheScripturalaccountof theoriginof thehumanrace,itbecomesnecessaryofcoursetogivesomeotheraccountofit.Manexists,andnoonecanescapeaskingthequestionwherehecamefrom.IfhedoesnotowehisorigintothecreativeomnipotenceofGod,heowesittosomethingelse.Andthennosolutionremainsexcepttosaythatmangradually developed himself out of the antecedent lower beings andworked himself up to his present high position in the order of being.Evolution is, therefore, the magic word which in our times mustsomehow solve all problems about the origin and essence of creatures.Naturally, since the teaching of creation is repudiated, the evolutionistmustacceptthatsomethingorotherexistedinthebeginninginasmuchasnothingcancomefromnothing.Theevolutionist,however,inviewofthisfact,proceedsfromthewhollyarbitraryandimpossibleassumptionthatmatter and energy and motion existed eternally. To this he adds thatbeforeoursolarsystemcameintobeing,theworldconsistedsimplyofachaoticgaseousmass.Thiswasthestartingpointoftheevolutionwhichgradually resulted in ourpresentworld and all of its creatures. It is byevolution that the solar system and the earth came into existence. Byevolution the layers of the earth and theminerals came into being. By

evolution theanimatecame intobeingoutof the inanimate throughanendlessseriesofyears.Byevolutionplants,andanimals,andmencametobe.And inside thepaleof thehuman, itwasagainbyevolution thatsexualdifferentiation,marriage,family,society,state,language,religion,morality, law, science, art and all the other values of civilization in aregularordercameintoexistence.Ifonlyonemayproceedfromthisoneassumptionthatmatterandenergyandmotionexistedeternally,then,itis supposed,oneno longerneeds topostulateaGod.Then theworld isself-explanatory. Science, it is then believed, constitutes God entirelyunnecessary.

Thetheoryofevolutiongoesontodevelopitsideaoftheoriginofmaninthefollowingway.Whentheearthhadcooledoff,andthusbecomefitforthe birth of living creatures, life arose under the circumstances thenextant, very probably in such away that at first inanimate albuminouscombinations formed themselves which, affected by various influences,developedvariousproperties,andthatthesealbuminousentitiesbywayofcombinationandminglingwitheachothergaverisetoprotoplasm,thefirst germ of life. Thence began the biogenetic development, thedevelopmentof livingbeings. Itwas aprocesswhichmayhave takenahundredmillionyearsoftime.

Thisprotoplasmformedthealbuminousnucleusofthecellwhichisnowregardedas thebasicconstituentofall livingbeings,whetherplants,oranimals,ormen.Unicellularprotozoawerethustheearliestorganisms.Accordingtowhethertheseweremobileorimmobile,theydevelopedintimeintoplantsorintoanimals.Amongtheanimalstheinfusoriastandlowest in thescale,butoutof these theregraduallycomeup,bywayofvariousintermediateandtransitionalstages,thehigherkindsofanimals,known as the vertebrate, invertebrate, mollusks and radiate animals.Thereupon the vertebrate animals are again divided into four classes:fishes,amphibians,birds,andmammals.Thisgroup, in turn, isdividedinto three orders: the duck-billed, the marsupials, and the placentateanimals;andthis last isagainsubdividedintotherodents, theungulateanimals, thebeastsofprey,and theprimates.Theprimates in turnareclassifiedassemi-apes,apes,andanthropoids.

When we compare the physical organism of man with that of these

variousanimals,wediscover,accordingtotheevolutionist, thatman, inanorderofincreasingresemblance,isclosest inkindtothevertebrates,the mammals, the placentate animals, and the primates, and that heresemblesmostcloselyofall theanthropoids, representedby theorangandthegibboninAsia,andbythegorillaandthechimpanzeeinAfrica.Thesearethereforetoberegardedastheclosestrelativesofman.True,theydifferfrommaninsize,shape,andthelike,buttheyarealtogetherlikehimintheirbasicphysicalstructure.Allthesame,mandidnotcomefromoneofthosekindsofapesnowextant,butfromananthropoidlongsince extinct. Apes and men are according to this theory of evolutionbloodrelatives,belongtothesamerace,thoughtheyaretoberegardedratherasnephewsandniecesthanasbrothersandsisters.

Suchistheideaofthetheoryofevolution.Such,accordingtoit,wasthecourse of events. But the evolutionist also felt called upon to saysomethingaboutthewayinwhichallthistookplace.Itwaseasyenoughto say that plants and animals andmen had formed an unbroken andrising series of beings. But the evolutionist felt that he ought to dosomethingtowardsdemonstratingthatsuchadevelopmentwasactuallypossible, that an ape, for instance, could gradually come to be a man.CharlesDarwinin1859attemptedsuchademonstration.Henoticedthatplantsandanimals—rosesanddoves,forexample—couldbyartificiallyassistednaturalselectionbebroughttoexhibitsignificantmodifications.Thus he hit upon the idea that in nature, too, such a natural selectionmight have been operative, a selection not artificially controlled byhuman intervention, but unconscious, arbitrary, natural. With thisthoughtalightdawnedonhim.Forbyacceptingsuchatheoryofnaturalselection he supposed himself in a position to explain how plants andanimals gradually undergo changes, how they can overcome defects intheir organization and can achieve advantages, and that in such a waythey constantly equip themselvesbetter for successful competitionwithothers in the struggle for existence. For, according to Darwin, life isalways and everywhere in the whole creation just that: a struggle forexistence. Superficially observed, it may seem that there is peace innature,butthisisadeceptiveappearance.Rather,thereisthatconstantstruggleforlifeandthenecessariesforlife,fortheearthistoosmallandtoomeagertosupplyallthebeingsthatarebornintoitwiththerequisite

foods. Hence millions of organisms perish because of need; only thestrongest survive. And these strongest ones, who are superior to theothersbecauseofsomepropertytheyhavedeveloped,graduallytransfertheiracquired,advantageouscharacteristicstotheirposterity.

Hencethereisprogressandeverhigherdevelopment.Naturalselection,the struggle for existence, and the transfer of old and newly acquiredcharacteristics explain, according to Darwin, the appearance of newspecies,andalsothetransitionfromanimaltoman.

Inevaluatingthistheoryofevolutionitisnecessaryaboveall tomakeasharp distinction between the facts to which it appeals and thephilosophicalviewwithwhichit looksat them.Thefactscomedowntothis:thatmansharesallkindsofcharacteristicswithotherlivingbeings,more particularly with the higher animals, and among these in turnespecially with the apes. Naturally, these facts were for the most partknownbeforeDarwinalso,forthecorrespondenceinphysicalstructure,intheseveralorgansofthebodyandintheiractivities,inthefivesenses,intheperceptionsandawarenesses,andthelike,issomethingwhichallwho look may see, and simply is not susceptible to denial. But thesciencesofanatomy,biology,andphysiology,andalsothatofpsychology,have in recent times investigated those corresponding characteristicsmuch more thoroughly than was done before. The characteristics ofresemblance have accordingly increased in number and importance.Therewereothersciencestoowhichcontributedtheirparttoconfirmingandextendingthesesimilaritiesbetweenmanandanimal.Thescienceofembryology,forinstance,indicatedthatahumanbeinginitsbeginningsin thewomb resembles a fish, an amphibian, and the lowermammals.Paleontology, which busies itself with the study of conditions andcircumstancesinancienttimes,discoveredremnantsofhumanbeings—skeletons,bones,skulls,tools,ornaments,andthelike—whichpointedtothefactthatcenturiesagosomepeopleinsomepartsoftheearthlivedina very simple way. And ethnology taught that there were tribes andpeopleswhowerewidely separatedbothspirituallyandphysically fromthecivilizednations.

When these facts, brought together fromvarious sides, became known,

philosophy soon busied itself with combining them into an hypothesis,thehypothesisofthegradualevolutionofallthings,andspecificallyalsoofman.Thishypothesisdidnotcomeupafterthefactswerediscoverednor because of them, but existed a long time ago, was sponsored by anumberofphilosophers,andwasnowappliedtothefacts,someofwhichwerenewlydiscovered.Theoldhypothesis,theoldtheory,nowcametorest,itwassupposed,onthefirmlyfoundedfacts.Asortofhurrahwentupbecauseof the fact thatnowall the riddlesof theworld, except thatone of the eternalmatter and energy, were solved and all secretswerediscovered. But hardly had this proud edifice of the evolutionaryphilosophy been built when the attack upon it began and it started tocrumble.Darwinism, says a distinguished philosopher, came up in the1860's, staged its triumphal procession in the 1870's, was thereuponquestionedbysomefewinthe1890's,andsincetheturnof thecenturyhasbeenstronglyattackedbymany.

Thefirstandsharpestoftheattackswaslaunchedagainstthemannerinwhich,accordingtoDarwin,theseveralspecieshadcomeintoexistence.The struggle for existence and natural selection did not suffice as anexplanation.True,thereisoftenafiercestruggleintheplantandanimalworlds,andthisstrugglehasasignificant influenceontheirnatureandexistence.Butithasbynomeansbeenprovedthatthisstrugglecancausenewspeciestocomeintobeing.Thestruggleforexistencecancontributeto the strengthening of tendencies and abilities, of organs andpotentialities,bywayofexerciseandeffort.Itcandevelopwhatispresentalready,butitcannotbringintobeingwhatdoesnotexist.Besides, it isanexaggeration,asanyoneknowsfromhisownexperience, tosaythatalwaysandeverywherenothingexistsexceptstruggle.

Thereismorethanhatredandanimosityintheworld.Thereisalsoloveand cooperation andhelp.Thedoctrine that there is nothing anywherebutwarfareonthepartofallagainstallisjustasone-sidedastheidyllicviewoftheeighteenthcenturythateverywhereinnaturethereisrestandpeace.There is room formanyat thebig tableofnature, and theearthwhich God gave as a dwelling place for man, is inexhaustibly rich.Consequently, there are many facts and manifestations which havenothing to do with a struggle for existence. Nobody, for instance, can

pointoutwhatthecolorsandfiguresofthesnail'sskin,theblackcoloroftheunderbelly inmanyvertebrateanimals, thegrayingof thehairwithincreasingage,or thereddeningof the leaves in theautumnhave todowith the struggle for existence. Nor is it true that in this struggle thestrongest types always and exclusively win the victory, and that theweakest are always defeated. A so-called coincidence, a fortunate orunfortunatecircumstance,oftenmocksallsuchcalculations.Sometimesastrongpersonistakenawayinthestrengthofhisyears,andsometimesaphysicallyweakmanorwomanreachesaripeoldage.

SuchconsiderationsledaDutchscholartosubstituteanothertheoryforthatofDarwin'snatural selection, thatofmutation, according towhichthe change of species did not take place regularly and gradually, butsuddenly sometimes, and by leaps or jumps. But in this matter thequestioniswhetherthesechangesreallyrepresentnewspeciesorsimplymodifications in the species already extant. And the answer to thatquestionhingesagainonjustwhatonemeansbyspecies.

Notonlythestruggleforexistence,naturalselection,andthesurvivalofthefittesthaveloststatusinthiscentury,butalsotheideaofthetransferof acquired characteristics. The transfer of natural, inheritedcharacteristicsfromparentstochildrenfromthenatureofthecasetendsrather to plead against than forDarwinism, inasmuch as it implies theconstancyofspecies.Centuriesonendmenbegetmenandnothingelse.Concerning the transfer of acquired as distinguished from inheritedcharacteristics there is now somuchdifference of opinion that nothingcanbesaidabout itwithcertainty.Thismuch,however, is certain, thatacquiredcharacteristicsveryoftenarenot transferredby theparents tothechildren.Circumcision,forinstance,waspractisedbysomepeopleforcenturies, and yet left no traces in the children after all that while.Transfer by inheritance takes place only inside certain boundaries anddoes not effect any change of kind or species. If the modification isartificiallyinduced,itmustalsobeartificiallymaintainedorelseitislostagain. Darwinism, in short, cannot explain either heredity or change.Both are facts whose existence is not denied, but their connection andrelationshipstillliebeyondthepaleofourknowledge.

Moreandmore, therefore,Darwinismproper, that is,Darwinism in the

narrowersense,namely,theefforttoexplainchangeofspecies intermsof the struggle for existence, natural selection, and the transfer ofacquired characteristics was abandoned by the men of science. ThepredictionofoneofthefirstandmosteminentofopponentsofDarwin'stheorywas literally fulfilled: namely, that this theory for explaining themysteriesoflifewouldnotlasttilleventheendofthenineteenthcentury.But more important is the fact that criticism has not been directedagainstDarwin's theory alone but against the theory of evolution itselfalso.Naturally,factsremainfactsandmaynotbeignored.Buttheoryissomething else, something built upon the facts by thought. And whatbecamemoreandmoreevidentwasthatthetheoryofevolutiondidnotfitthefactsbutwaseveninconflictwiththem.

Geology,forinstance,revealedthatthelowerandhighersortsofanimalsdo not follow each other in sequence but as a matter of fact existedalongside of each other ages ago. Paleontology did not come upwith asinglepieceofconclusiveevidencefortheexistenceoftransitionaltypesbetweentheseveralspeciesoforganicbeings.Still,accordingtoDarwin'stheoryofextremelygradualevolutionbywayofextremelysmallchanges,these types should have been present in quantity. Even the ardentlysought after and energetically pursued intermediary type betweenmanand the apewasnotdiscovered.Embryology, it is true, does point to acertainexternalsimilaritybetweenthevariousstagesinthedevelopmentoftheembryoofmanandthatofotheranimalbodies.Butthissimilarityis external for the simple reason that froman animal embryo ahumanbeing is never born, nor an animal from a human embryo. In otherwords, man and animal go in different directions from conception on,even though the internal differences cannot then be perceived. Biologyhas up to this time offered so little support to the proposition that lifegenerated itself thatmanynowaccept the impossibility of that and arereturning to the idea of a special life force or energy. Physics andchemistry, inproportion to the extent towhich theyhavepressed theirinvestigations, have found more and more secrets and marvels in theworld of the infinitely small, and have caused many to return to thethoughtthatthebasicconstituentsofthingsarenotmaterialentitiesbutforces.And—tomentionnofurtherevidences—all theeffortsthathavebeen put forth to explain consciousness, freedom of the will, reason,

conscience, language, religion,morality, and all suchmanifestations, asbeingsolelytheproductofevolutionhavenotbeencrownedwithsuccess.The origins of all these manifestations, like those of all other things,remainshroudedindarknessforscience.

Foritisimportanttonotefinallythatwhenmanmakeshisappearanceinhistoryheisalreadymanaccordingtobodyandsoul,andheisalreadyinpossession, everywhere and at all times, of all those humancharacteristicsandactivitieswhoseorigins science is trying todiscover.Nowherecanhumanbeingsbe foundwhodonothave reasonandwill,rationalityandconscience, thoughtandlanguage,religionandmorality,the institutions of marriage and the family, and the like. Now if all ofthesecharacteristicsandmanifestationshavegraduallyevolved,suchanevolutionmusthavetakenplaceinprehistorictimes,thatis, intimesofwhichweknownothingdirectly,andaboutwhichwemakesurmisesonlyonthebasisofafewfactsperceivedinlatertimes.Anyscience,therefore,whichwants toburrowthroughto thatprehistoric timeandtodiscovertheoriginsofthingsthere,mustfromthenatureofthecasetakerecourseto guesses, surmises, and suppositions. There is no possibility here forevidenceorproofinthestrictsense.Thedoctrineofevolutiongenerallyand that of the descent of man from the animal particularly are notsupported in the least by facts supplied by historic times. Of all theelementsonwhichsuchtheoriesarebuiltnothingremainsintheendbuta philosophical world-view which wants to explain all things and allmanifestations in terms of the things and manifestations themselves,leavingGod out of account. One of the proponents of the evolutionaryview admitted it bluntly: the choice is between evolutionary descent ormiracle;sincemiracleisabsolutelyimpossiblewearecompelledtotakethefirstposition.Andsuchanadmissiondemonstratesthatthetheoryofthe descent of man from lower animal forms does not rest on carefulscientific investigation but is rather the postulate of a materialistic orpantheisticphilosophy.

Theideaoftheoriginofmanisverycloselyrelatedtothatoftheessenceofman.Manynowadaystalkdifferently,sayingthatmanandtheworld,irrespectiveofwhatwas theiroriginand theirdevelopment in thepast,

arewhattheyarenowandwillremainsuch.

This position is of course entirely correct: reality remains the same,irrespectiveofwhetherweformatrueorafalseideaofit.Butthesameholdsofcourseconcerningtheoriginofthings.Eventhoughweimaginethattheworldandmankindcameintobeinginsomeparticularfashion—gradually, say, during the course of centuries, by all sorts ofinfinitesimally small changes through self-generation—such asuppositiondoesnot,ofcourse,changetheactualorigin.Theworldcameintobeinginthewaythatitdid,andnotinthewaywewishitorsupposeit.Butthe ideawehaveof theoriginof things is inseparablyconnectedwiththeideawehaveoftheessenceofthings.

Ifthefirstiswrong,thesecondcannotberight.Ifwethinkthattheearthand all the realms of nature, that all creatures and particularly alsohumanbeings,cameintobeingwithoutGodsolelythroughtheevolutionofenergieswhichareresidualintheworld,suchanideamustnecessarilyhave a most significant influence on our conception of the essence ofworldandman.

True, the world and man will remain themselves irrespective of ourinterpretation;butforustheybecomedifferent,theyincreaseordecreaseinworthandsignificanceaccordingaswethinkoftheiroriginandtheircomingintoexistence.

Thisissoevidentthatitrequiresnoamplerilluminationorconfirmation.Butbecausethenotionthatwecanthinkwhatwepleaseabouttheoriginofthings,inasmuchaswhatwethinkoftheiressenceisunaffectedbyit,is a notion which comes back again and again—for example, in thedoctrineofScripture,thereligionofIsrael,thepersonofChrist,religion,morality, and the like—it may be useful now, in consideration of theessenceofman,toindicatethefalsityofthatnotiononcemore.Itisnotdifficult todoso.For ifmanhasgraduallyevolvedhimself,sotospeak,withoutGodandsolely throughblindlyoperativenatural forces, thenitfollows naturally enough that man cannot differ essentially from theanimal,andthat,inhishighestdevelopmentalso,heremainsananimal.Forasouldistinguishedfromthebody,formoralfreedomandpersonalimmortality, there is thenno roomat all.And religion, truth,morality,

andbeautythenlosetheirproper(absolute)character.

These consequences are not something which we impose on theproponents of the theory of evolution but something ratherwhich theythemselves deduce from it. Darwin, for instance, himself says that ourunmarriedwomen, if theywere educatedunder the same conditions ashoneybeesare,wouldthinkitasacreddutytokilltheirbrothersevenasthe working bees do, and mothers would try to murder their fertiledaughters without anybody caring to intervene. According to Darwin,therefore,thewholeofthemorallawisaproductofcircumstances,andconsequentlyitchangesasthecircumstanceschange.Goodandevil,evenas truth and falsehood, are therefore relative terms, and theirmeaningandworthare,likefashions,subjecttothechangesoftimeandplace.So,too,accordingtoothers,religionwasbutatemporaryaid,somethingofwhichman inhis inadequacy for the struggle againstnaturemadeuse,andwhichnowtoocanserveasanopiateforthepeople,butsomethingwhichonthelongrunwillnaturallydieoutanddisappearwhenmanhascomeintohisfullfreedom.Sinandtransgression,felonyandmurderdonotconstitutemanguiltybutareafter-effectsof theuncivilizedstate inwhichmanformerlylived,andtheydecreaseinproportiontotheextentthatmandevelopsandsocietyimproves.Criminalsare,accordingly,toheregardedaschildren,animals,orinsanetypes,andshouldbedealtwithaccordingly.Prisonsshouldgivewaytoreformatories.Inshort,ifmanisnotofDivinebutofanimaloriginandhasgradually"evolved"himselfheowes everything to himself alone, and is his own lawgiver,master,andlord.Alltheseinferencesfromthe(materialisticorpantheistic)theoryofevolutioncometoexpressionveryclearlyincontemporaryscienceaswellasincontemporaryliterature,art,andpracticalpolity.

Reality, however, teaches something quite different. Man can makehimselfbelieve, ifhewants to, thathehasdoneeverythinghimselfandthatheisboundbynothing.Butineveryrespectheremainsadependentcreature. He cannot do as he pleases. In his physical existence, heremainsbound to the laws laid down for respiration, the circulation ofthe blood, digestion, and procreation. And if he runs counter to theselawsandpaysnoattentiontothem,heinjureshishealthandundermineshisownlife.Thesameistrueofthelifeofhissoulandspirit.Mancannot

think as he pleases, but is bound to laws which he has not himselfthought out and laid down, but which are implied in the very act ofthinkingandcometoexpressioninit.Ifhedoesnotholdtothoselawsofthought,hesnareshimselfinthenetoferrorandfalsehood.Norcanmanwillandactashepleases.Hiswill isunderthedisciplineofreasonandconscience; ifhedisregards thisdisciplineanddegradeshiswillingandacting to the level of arbitrariness and caprice, then there is sure to beself-reproachandself-indictment, regret and remorse, thegnawingandthecompunctionoftheconscience.

Thelifeofthesoul,therefore,nolessthanthelifeofthebody,isbuiltonsomething other than caprice or accident. It is not a condition oflawlessness and anarchy but is from all sides and in all its activitiesdeterminedbylaws.Itissubjecttolawsoftruthandgoodnessandbeautyandsoitdemonstratesthatithasnotgenerateditself.Inshort,manhasfromtheverybeginninghisownnatureandhisownessenceandthesehecannot violatewith impunity. And somuch stronger is nature in thesematters than theory that the adherents of the doctrine of evolutionthemselves keep talking of a human nature, of immutable humanattributes, of laws of thought and ethics prescribed forman, and of aninborn religious sense.Thus the ideaof the essenceofman comes intoconflictwiththeideaofhisorigin.

InScripture,however,thereisperfectagreementbetweenthetwoideas.There the essence of man corresponds to his origin. Because man,althoughhewasformedfromthedustoftheearthaccordingtothebody,receivedthebreathof lifefromabove,andwascreatedbyGodHimself,heisauniquebeing,hashisownnature.Theessenceofhisbeingisthis:heexhibitstheimageofGodandHislikeness.

ThisimageofGoddistinguishesmanfromboththeanimalandtheangel.Hehastraitsincommonwithboth,buthediffersfrombothinhavinghisownuniquenature.

Theanimals,too,ofcourse,werecreatedbyGod.Theydidnotcomeintobeingof theirownaccordbutwere called intoexistencebyaparticularword of the power of God. Besides, they were immediately created in

variouskinds,evenastheplantswere.Allmenaredescendedfromoneparentalpairandthusconstituteonegenerationorrace.Thisisnottrueof the animals; they have, so to speak, various ancestors. Hence it isremarkablethatzoologyuptothistimehasnotyetsucceededintracingallanimalsbacktoonetype.Itbeginsbyatoncedesignatingsomesevenorsomefourmajorgroupingsorbasictypes.

Presumably it is therefore true that most of the animal types are notdistributedover thewholeearth,but live inparticularareas.The fishesliveinthewater,thebirdsintheair,andthelandanimalsforthemostpart are limited to definite territories: the polar bear, for instance, isfound only in the far north, and the duck-billed platypus only inAustralia.AndsoinGenesisitisspecificallystatedthatGodcreatedtheplants(1:11)andalsotheanimalsaftertheirkind—that is,accordingtotypes. Naturally, this does not mean to say that the types which wereoriginally createdbyGodwere exactly those intowhich science, thatofLinnaeus,say,nowclassifies them.Forone thingourclassificationsarealwaysliabletoerrorbecauseourzoologyisstilldefectiveandinclinedtoregardvariantsastypesandviceversa.Theartificial,scientificconceptofananimal type is verydifficult to establish and is always verydifferentfrom the natural concept of type forwhichwe are always still seeking.Moreover,inthecourseofcenturiesagreatmanyanimalkindshavediedout or been destroyed. From the remains, whether whole or blasted,which we have of some of them, it is evident that various kinds ofanimals,suchasthemammoth,forinstance,whichnolongerexists,onceabounded in quantity. And in the third place it should be rememberedthatasaresultofvariousinfluencesbigmodificationsandchangeshavetaken place in the animal world which often make it difficult or evenimpossibleforustotracethembacktoanoriginaltype.

Further, it is remarkable that in the creation of the animals even as inthatoftheplantsthesewereindeedcalledintobeingbyaparticularactofDivine power, but that in this act nature also performed a mediateservice.Lettheearthbringforthgrass,wereadinGenesis1:11,theherbyielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit, and itwas so (verse 12).The report is the same in Gen. 1:20: Let the waters bring forthabundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly

abovetheearth,anditwasso(verse21).Againinverse24:Lettheearthbring forth the livingcreatureafterhiskind, cattle, andcreeping thing,andbeastoftheearthafterhiskind,anditwasso.Thusineachinstance,nature isusedbyGodasan instrument. It is theearthwhich,althoughnaturallyconditionedandequipped for itbyGod,brings forthall thosecreaturesintheirbountifuldifferentiationofkind.

This peculiar origin of animals sheds some light, too, on their nature.Thisorigindemonstratesthattheanimalsaremuchmorecloselyrelatedto the earth and to nature than man is. True, the animals are livingbeings,andassuchtheyaredistinguishedfromtheinorganic,inanimatecreatures.Hence,too,theyareoftencalledlivingsouls(Gen.1:20,21,and24).Inthegeneralsenseofaprincipleoflifetheanimalstoohaveasoul.1Butthislivingprincipleofthesoulintheanimalisstillsocloselyboundto nature and to themetabolism ofmatter that it cannot arrive at anyindependenceor freedom, and it cannot existwhen separated from themetabolismorcirculationofmatter.Atdeath, therefore, thesoulof theanimal dies. From this it follows that the animals, at least the higheranimals, do have the same sense organs asman, and can sense things(hear,see,smell,taste,andfeel).Theycanformimagesorpictures,andrelatetheseimagestoeachother.Butanimalsdonothavereason,cannotseparate the image from the particular, individual, and concrete thing.They cannot metamorphose the images nor raise them into concepts,cannot relate the concepts and so form judgments, cannot makeinferencesfromthe judgmentsnorarriveatdecisions,andcannotcarryoutthedecisionsbyanactofthewill.Animalshavesensations, images,and combinations of images; they have instincts, desires, passions. Buttheylackthehigherformsofdesireandknowledgewhicharepeculiartoman; they have no reason and they have no will. All this comes toexpression in the fact that animals do not have language, religion,morality, and the sense of beauty; they have no ideas of God, of theinvisiblethings,ofthetrue,thegood,andthebeautiful.

Thusmanisraisedhighabovetheanimalplane.Betweenthetwothereisnotagradualtransitionbutagreatgulf.Thatwhichconstitutestheverynatureofman,hispeculiaressence,namelyhis reasonandhiswill,histhoughtandlanguage,hisreligionandmorality,andthelike,arealiento

theanimal.Thereforetheanimalcannotunderstandmanalthoughmancanunderstandtheanimal.Nowadaysthescienceofpsychologytriestoexplainthesoulofmanintermsofthesouloftheanimal,butthis is toreversetherightorder.Thesoulofmanisthekeyforgettingatthesoulof the animal. The animal lackswhatman has, butman has all that ispeculiartotheanimal.

Thisisnottosaythatnow,too,manknowsthenatureofanimalsthroughand through.Thewholeworld is formanaproblemwhose solutionheseeksafterandcanseekafter,andsotooeveryanimalisalivingmystery.Thesignificanceof theanimalbynomeansconsistsof the fact that theanimal is useful toman, providing himwith food and shelter, clothingand ornament. Much more is contained in the subduing and havingdominion over the earth than that man should, in greed and egotism,freelyturneverythingtohisadvantage.Theanimalworldhassignificancealso for our science and art, our religion and morality. God hassomething, hasmuch, to tell us in the animal.His thoughts andwordsspeaktousoutof thewholeworld,evenoutof theworldofplantsandanimals. When botany and zoology trace out these thoughts, thesesciences,as,indeed,thenaturalsciencesingeneral,areglorioussciences,whichnoman, certainlynoChristian,maydespise.Moreover,howrichtheanimalworld is inmoralsignificanceforman!Theanimalpointstotheboundarybeneath,abovewhichmanmust raisehimself,and to thelevelofwhichhemustneversink.Mancanbecomeananimaland lessthan an animal if he dulls the light of reason, breaks the bond withheaven, and seeks to satisfy all his desire in the earth. Animals aresymbols of our virtues and our vices: the dog shows us the image ofloyalty,thespiderofindustry,thelionofcourage,thesheepofinnocence,thedoveof integrity, thehartof thesoul thirsting forGod;and, just sotoo, the fox is the image of cunning, the worm of misery, the tiger ofcruelty, the swine of baseness, the snake of devilish guile, and the ape,whomostnearlyresemblestheformofman,declareswhatanimpressivephysical organization amounts to without spirit, the spirit that is fromabove.Intheapemanseeshisowncaricature.

JustasmandiffersbytheimageofGodfromtheanimalsbelowhim,he

is distinguished by it also from the angels above him. The existence ofsuch beings as angels cannot, apart from Scripture, be proved byscientific argument. Science knows nothing about them, cannotdemonstrate that they exist, and cannot demonstrate that they do notexist.

Butitisremarkablethatabeliefintheexistenceofbeingswhoareabovemanoccursamongallpeoplesand inall religions, and thatmen,whenthey have rejected the testimony of the Scriptures concerning theexistenceofangels,nevertheless,inallsortofsuperstitiousforms,comeback to a belief in the existence of supramundane beings. Our presentgenerationabundantlyprovesthis.Angelsanddevilsareno longerheldto exist and in their stead a belief has arisen inmany circles in latentforces,mysteriousnaturalpowers,ghosts,apparitions,visitationsof thedeceased,animatedstars,inhabitedplanets,Marsmen,livingatoms,andthe like. Interesting in connection with all these ancient and newmanifestationsisthepositionwhichtheHolyScripturehasoveragainstthem.irrespectiveofwhetherfalsehoodortruthliesatthebasisofthem,Scriptureforbidsallfortunetelling,2sorcery,3astrology,4necromancy,5enchantmentor theconsultingoforacles,6all conjuringandwizardry,7and the like, and so makes an end of all superstition as well as of allunbelief. Christianity and superstition are sworn foes. There is noscience, enlightenment, or civilization that can safeguard againstsuperstition;onlythewordofGodcanprotectusfromit.Scripturemakesman most profoundly dependent upon God, but precisely in so doingemancipates him from every creature. It puts man into a rightrelationshipwithnatureandsomakesatruenaturalsciencepossible.

But the Scriptures do teach that there are angels, not the mythicalcreations of the human imagination, not the personifications ofmysterious forces, not the deceased who have now climbed to higherlevels,butspiritualbeings,createdbyGod,subjecttoHiswill,andcalledto His service. They are beings, therefore, of whom, in the light ofScripture, we can form a definite idea, and such as have nothing incommon with the mythological figures of the Pagan religions. Inknowledge they are raised high above man,8 and in power,9 but theywereneverthelessmadebythesameGodandthesameWord(John1:3

andCol.1:16),andtheyhavethesamereasonandthesamemoralnature,so that, for instance, it is said of the good angels that they obeyGod'svoiceanddoHispleasure(Ps.103:20-21),andoftheevilangelsthattheydonotstand in the truth (John8:44), that they leadastray (Eph.6:11),andthattheysin(2Peter2:4).

But, in spite of this correspondence between them, there exists a bigdifferencebetweenangelsandmen.Itconsists, in the firstplace,of thefactthattheangelsdonothavesoulandbody,butarepurespirits(Heb.1:14).True,atthetimeoftheirrevelationtheyoftenappearedinphysicalforms,but theseveral forms inwhich theyappeared10point to the factthattheseassumedformsofmanifestationweretemporaryandthattheychanged in accordance with the nature of the mission. Never are theangelscalledsouls,livingsouls,astheanimalsareandasmanis.Forsoulandspiritdiffer fromeachother in this respect that the soul, too, isbynature spiritual, immaterial, invisible, and, even inman is a spirituallyindependententitythoughitisalwaysaspiritualpowerorspiritualentitywhich is oriented to a body, suits a body, and without such a body isincompleteandimperfect.Thesoulisaspiritdesignedforaphysicallife.Suchasoulispropertoanimalsandparticularlytoman.Whenmanloseshis body in death, he continues to exist, but in an impoverished andbereftcondition,sothattheresurrectiononthelastdayisarestorationofthe lack. But the angels are not souls. They were never intended for abodilylifeandwerenotgivenearthbutheavenasadwellingplace.Theyare pure spirits. This gives them great advantages over man, for theystandhigherinknowledgeandpower,standinamuchfreerrelationshipto time and space thanmen do, canmove about more freely, and arethereforeexceptionallywelladaptedtocarryingoutGod'scommandsonearth.

But—and this is the seconddistinctionbetweenmen and angels—thoseadvantageshavetheiroppositeside.Becausetheangelsarepurespirits,they all stand in a relatively loose relationship with reference to eachother.Theywerealloriginallycreated togetherand theyall continue tolivealongsideeachother.Theydonotformoneorganicwhole,oneraceorgeneration.True, there is anatural order among them.According toScripturethereareathousandtimesathousandangels,11andtheseare

divided into classes: cherubims (Gen. 3:24), seraphims (Isa. 6), andthrones,dominions,principalities, andpowers (Eph. 1:21andCol. 1:16;2:10).Andthereisfurtherdistinctionofrankwithinthegroups:MichaelandGabrielhaveaspecialplaceamongthem.12Nevertheless,theydonotconstituteonerace,arenotbloodrelatives,didnotbegeteachother.Itispossible to speak of a mankind but not of an angelkind. When Christassumed the human nature He was immediately related to all men,relatedbyblood,andHewastheirbrotheraccordingtotheflesh.Buttheangels livenexttoeachother,eachoneaccountableforhimselfandnotfortheothers,sothataportionofthemcouldfallandaportionremainfaithfultoGod.

The third distinction betweenman and angel is related' to the second.Because the angels are spirits and arenot related to the earth,becausetheyarenotrelatedbyblood,anddonotknowsuchdistinctionsasfatherandmother,parentsandchildren,brothersandsisters,thereforethereisa whole world of relationships and connections, ideas and emotions,desiresanddutiesofwhichtheangelsknownothing.Theymaybemorepowerful thanmen, but they are not so versatile. They stand in fewerrelationships, and in riches and depth of the emotional lifeman is farsuperior to theangel.True, Jesus says inMatthew22:30 thatmarriagewillendwiththisdispensation,butneverthelessthesexualrelationshipsonearthhave toasignificantextent increased thespiritual treasuresofmankind,andintheresurrection,too,thesetreasureswillnotbelostbutwillbepreservedintoeternity.

If toall thisweaddtheconsiderationthat therichest revelationofGodwhichHehasgivenusisrevealedtousinthenameoftheFather,andinthenameoftheSon—whobecamelikeuntousandisourprophet,priest,andking—and in thenameof theHolySpiritwho is pouredout in thechurchandwhocausesGodHimselftodwellinus,thenwefeelthatnottheangel,butman,wascreatedaftertheimageofGod.AngelsexperienceHispower, andwisdom, and goodness, but humanbeings share inHiseternalmercies.God is theirLord, butHe isnot theirFather;Christ istheirHead,butHeisnottheirReconcilerandSavior; theHolySpirit istheirSenderandGuidebutHenever testifieswiththeir spirit that theyarechildrenandheirsofGod,andjoint-heirswithChrist.Hencetheeyes

of the angels are cast upon the earth, for thereGod's richest grace hasappeared, there the struggle between heaven and earth is fought out,there the church is formed into the body of the Son, and there theconclusiveblowwillsomedaybestruckandthefinaltriumphofGodbeachieved. Hence it is that they desire to look into the mysteries ofsalvationbeingrevealedonearthandto learntoknowfromthechurchthemanifoldwisdomofGod(Eph.3:10and1Peter1:12).

Angels,accordingly,standinnumerousrelationshipswithus,andweinmany-sidedrelationshipwiththem.BeliefintheexistenceandactivityofangelsisnotofthesameworthasthebeliefwithwhichwetrustinGodandlove,fear,andhonorHimwithourwholeheart.Wemaynotputourtrustinanycreatureorinanyangel;wemaynotworshiptheangelsorinanywaygivethemreligioushonor.13Infact, there is inScripturenotasingle word about any guardian angel, appointed to serve each humanbeinginparticular,oraboutanyintercessiononthepartoftheangelsinourbehalf.Butthisdoesnotmeanthatbelievinginangelsisindifferentor worthless. On the contrary, at the time when revelation came intobeing,theyplayedanimportantrole.InthelifeofChristtheyappearedatallturningpointsofHiscareer,andtheywillonedaybemanifestedwithHimuponthecloudsofheaven.Andalwaystheyareministeringspiritssentouttoministerforthemwhoshallbeheirsofsalvation(Heb.1:14).They rejoice in the repentance of the sinner (Luke 15:10). They watchoverthefaithful(Ps.34:7and91:11),protectthelittleones(Matt.18:10),followthechurchinitscareerthroughhistory(Eph.3:10),andbearthechildrenofGodintoAbraham'sbosom(Luke16:22).

Thereforeweare to thinkof themwith respectand speakof themwithhonor.Wearetogivethemjoybyourrepentance.Wearetofollowtheirexample in theserviceofGodand inobedience toHisword.Weare toshowtheminourownheartsandlivesandinthewholeofthechurchthemanifold wisdom of God. We are to remember their fellowship andtogether with them declare the mighty works of God. Thus there isdifference between men and angels, but there is no conflict;differentiation but also unity; distinction but also fellowship.When wearriveatMountZion,thecityofthelivingGod,theheavenlyJerusalem,thenwecomealsotothemanythousandsofangelsandrebindthetieof

unity and love that was broken by sin (Heb. 12:22). Both they and wehaveourownplaceintherichcreationofGodandachieveourpeculiarfunctionthere.Angelsarethesons,themightyheroes,thepowerfulhostsofGod.Menwerecreated inHis imageandareGod'sgeneration.TheyareHisrace.

If the imageofGod is thedistinguishing earmarkofman,weowe it toourselvestogetaclearideaofthecontentofit.

WereadinGenesis1:26thatGodcreatedmaninHisimageandafterHislikeness in order that man should have dominion over all creatures,particularlyoverall livingcreatures.Three thingsdeserveconsiderationin that. In the first place, the correspondencebetweenGod andman isexpressedintwowords:imageandlikeness.Thesetwowordsarenot,asmanyhavesupposed,materiallydifferent,differentincontent,butservetoamplifyandsupporteachother.Togethertheyservetostatethatmanisnotanunsuccessfulportrait,orasomewhatsimilarone,butthatheisaperfect and totally corresponding image of God. Such as man is inminiature.suchisGodinthelarge,theinfinitelylargeoutline,formanissuchasGodis.ManstandsinfinitelyfarbeneathGodandisneverthelessrelatedtoHim.Ascreatureman isabsolutelydependentuponGodandyetasmanheisafreeandindependentbeing.Limitationandfreedom,dependence and independence, immeasurable distance and intimaterelation over against God, these have been combined in anincomprehensiblewayinthehumanbeing.HowameancreaturecanatthesametimebetheimageofGod—thatgoesfarbeyondourgrasp.

In the second place,we are told inGenesis 1:26 thatGod createdmen(the term is plural) inHis image and afterHis likeness. From the verybeginningtheintentionwasthatGodwouldnotcreateoneman,butmen,in his image. Therefore He immediately created man as man andwoman, the two of them not in separation from each other but inrelationship and fellowshipwith each other (verse 27).Not in themanalone, nor in the woman alone, but in both together, and in each in aspecialway,theimageofGodisexpressed.

Thecontraryissometimesaffirmedonthegroundthat in1Corinthians11:7PaulsaysthatmanistheimageandgloryofGodandthatwomanis

thegloryofman.ThistextisfrequentlyabusedsoastodenytheimageofGodtothewomanandtodebaseherfarbelowtheleveloftheman.ButPaulistherenotspeakingofmanandwomanconsideredapartfromeachotherbutabouttheirrelationshipinmarriage.Andthenhesaysthatitisthemanandnotthewomanwhoisthehead.Andhededucesthis fromthe fact that theman is not from thewoman, but thewoman from theman.Themanwascreatedfirst,wasfirstmadeintheimageofGod,andtohimGodfirstrevealedHisglory.Andifthewomansharesinallthis,this takesplacemediately, fromand through theman.Shereceived theimage of God, but after man, in dependence upon him, by way of hismediation. Hence man is the image and glory of God directly andoriginally;thewomanistheimageandgloryofGodinaderivedwayinthat his is the glory ofman.Whatwe read of thismatter inGenesis 2must be added to what we read of it in Genesis 1. The way in whichwomanis created inGenesis2 is theway alongwhich she receives theimage of God as well as the man (Gen. 1:27). In this is contained thefurther truth that the image of God rests in a number of people, withdifferentiation of race, talent, and powers—in short in mankind —andfurtherthatthisimagewillachieveitsfullunfoldinginthenewhumanitywhichisthechurchofChrist.

In the third place, Genesis 1:26 teaches us that God had a purpose increatingmaninHisimage:namely,thatmanshouldhavedominionoverall livingcreaturesandthatheshouldmultiplyandspreadoutover theworld, subduing it. If now we comprehend the force of this subduingunderthetermculture,nowgenerallyusedforit,wecansaythatcultureinthebroadestsenseisthepurposeforwhichGodcreatedmanafterHisimage. So little are cultus and culture, religion and civilization,Christianity and humanity in conflict with each other that it would betruertosayGod'simagehadbeengrantedtomansothathemightinhisdominion over the whole earth bring it into manifestation. And thisdominionoftheearthincludesnotonlythemostancientcallingsofmen,suchashuntingandfishing,agricultureandstock-raising,butalsotradeand commerce, finance and credit, the exploitation of mines andmountains, and science and art. Such culture does not have its end inman,butinmanwhoistheimageofGodandwhostampstheimprintofhisspirituponallthathedoes,itreturnstoGod,whoistheFirstandthe

Last.

ThecontentormeaningoftheimageofGodisunfoldedfurtherinlaterrevelation.Forinstance,itisremarkablethataftertheFall,too,manstillcontinuedtobecalledtheimageofGod.

InGenesis5:1-3weareremindedoncemorethatGodcreatedman,manandwomantogether, inHis image,and thatHeblessed them,and thatAdamthusbegotasoninhisownlikeness,afterhisimage.InGenesis9:6the shedding ofman's blood is forbidden for the reason thatmanwasmadeintheimageofGod.ThepoetofthebeautifuleighthpsalmsingsofthegloryandmajestyoftheLordwhichrevealsitselfinheavenandearth,andmostsplendidlyofallininsignificantmanandhisdominionoveralltheworks ofGod's hands.WhenPaul spoke to theAtheniansonMars'Hill, he quoted one of their poets approvingly: For we are also Hisoffspring(Acts17:28).InJames3:9theApostlebywayofdemonstratingthe evil of the tonguemakes use of this contrast: that with it we blessGod,eventheFather,andwith itwecursemenwhoaremadeafterthesimilitudeofGod.AndScripturenotonly calls fallenman the image ofGod,butitkeepsonregardinganddealingwithhimassuchthroughout.It constantly looks upon man as a reasonable, moral being who isresponsibletoGodforallhisthoughtsanddeedsandwordsandisboundtoHisservice.

Alongsideofthisrepresentation,however,wefindtheideathatthroughsinmanhas lost the imageofGod.True,wearenotanywhere told thisdirectlyinsomanywords.ButitissomethingthatcanclearlybededucedfromthewholeteachingofScriptureconcerningsinfulman.Afterall,sin—as we shall consider more specifically later has robbed man ofinnocence, righteousness, and holiness, has corrupted his heart,darkened his understanding, inclined his will to evil, turned hisinclinationsright-about-face,andplacedhisbodyandallitsmembersinthe service of unrighteousness. Accordingly man must be changed,reborn, justified, cleansed, and sanctified. He can share in all thesebenefits only in the fellowshipwith Christ who is the Image of God (2Cor.4:4andCol.1:15)andtowhoseimagewemustbeconformed(Rom.8:29).Thenewman,accordingly,whoisputinthefellowshipwithChrist

through faith, is created in accordance with God's will in truerighteousness and holiness (Eph. 4:24) and is constantly renewed inknowledge after the image of Him that created him (Col. 3:10). Theknowledge, righteousness, and holiness, which the believer obtainsthroughthe fellowshipwithChrist,have theirorigin, andexample, andfinal purpose in God and they causeman again to share in theDivinenature(2Peter1:4).

It is upon this teaching of Holy Scripture that the distinction usuallymadeinReformedtheologybetweentheimageofGodinthebroaderandthe narrower sense is based. If, on the one hand, after his fall anddisobedience,mancontinuestobecalledtheimageandoffspringofGod,and, on the otherhand, those virtues bywhichhe especially resemblesGod have been lost through sin and can only be restored again in thefellowshipwithChrist, then these twopropositionsarecompatiblewitheachotheronlyiftheimageofGodcomprisessomethingmorethanthevirtues of knowledge, righteousness, and holiness. The Reformedtheologians recognized this, and over against the Lutheran and theRomantheologianstheymaintainedit.

TheLutheransdonotmakethedistinctionbetweentheimageofGodinthe broader and in the narrower sense. Or, if they do make thedistinction,theydonotattachmuchimportancetoitnorunderstanditssignificance.ForthemtheimageofGodisnothingmoreorlessthantheoriginal righteousness, that is, the virtues of knowledge, righteousness,andholiness.TheyrecognizetheimageofGodonlyinthenarrowersenseanddonotappreciatetheneedofrelatingthisimageofGodtothewholehumannature.Thusthereligio-moral lifeofmanisheldtobeaspecialandisolatedarea.Itisnotrelatedto,anditexercisesnoinfluenceupon,the work to which man is called in state and society, and in art andscience.OncetheLutheranChristiansharesintheforgivenessofsinsandthefellowshipwithGod through faith,hehas enough.He rests in that,and enjoys it, and does not concern himself to relate this spiritual life,backwards, to the counsel and election of God, and, forwards, to thewholeearthlycallingofman.

Fromthis,intheotherdirection,itfollowsthatman,whenthroughsinhehas lost theoriginal righteousness, isbereftof thewhole imageofGod.

Nothingofitislefthim,notevensmallremains:andsohisrationalandmoralnature,whichisstillhis,isunderestimatedandmaligned.

TheRomanCatholics,onthecontrary,domakeadistinctionbetweentheimageofGod in thebroader andnarrower sense, although theydonotusuallyemploythesewordsforit.Andthey,too,areconcernedtofindarelationshipbetweenthetwo.But for themthisrelationship isexternal,notinternal;itisartificial,notreal;mechanical,notorganic.TheRomanspresent thematter as thoughman is conceivablewithout the virtues ofknowledge, righteousness, and holiness (the image of God in thenarrowersense)andcaninrealityalsoexistthus.Inthatevent,too,manstillhassomereligiousandmorallifebutonlyinsuchakindandtosuchadegreeascancomefromnaturalreligionandnaturalmorality. It isareligionandmoralitywhich,asitwere,remainslimitedtothisearth,andit can never pave the way for him to heavenly blessedness and theimmediatevisionofGod.Besides,although intheabstract it ispossiblethat suchanaturalpersoncan,withoutpossessing the imageofGod inthe narrower sense, fulfill the duties of natural religion and of naturalmorallaw,still,asamatteroffact,thisisverydifficultinasmuchasmanis amaterial, physical, and sensuous person. After all, desire is alwayscharacteristicofthissensuousnatureofman.Suchlustordesiremaynotin itself be sin but it certainly is a tempting occasion for sin. For, bynature, thissensuouscharacter,beingphysical, isopposed to thespirit,andconstitutesathreattoitalways.Thethreatisthatreasonandwillwillbeovercomebythepoweroftheflesh.

Forthesetworeasons,accordingtoRomanCatholicthought,GodinHissovereignfavorhasaddedtheimageofGodinthenarrowersensetothenaturalman.Hecouldhavecreatedmanwithoutthisimage.ButbecauseHeforesawthatmanwouldthenveryeasilyfallpreytofleshlydesire,andalsobecauseHewantedtoraisemantoahigherstateofblessednessthanis possible here on earth, that is, to the heavenly glory, and to theimmediate presence of Himself, therefore God added originalrighteousnesstothenaturalmanandsoliftedhimfromhisnaturalstatetoahigherandsupernaturalvantagepoint.Thusatwo-foldpurposewasachieved. In the first place,man could now,whatwith the help of thissupernatural addition, easily control the desire which flesh is naturally

heir to; and, in the second place, by fulfilling the supernatural dutiesprescribedforhimbytheoriginalrighteousness(theimageofGodinthenarrower sense), man could now achieve a supernatural salvationcorresponding to his further endowment. Thus the supernaturaladdendumoforiginalrighteousnessservestwopurposesfortheRomanCatholic:itservesasarestraintupontheflesh,anditclearsthewayformeritstoheaven.

The Reformed theologians take their own point of view between theRoman Catholic and Lutheran positions. According to Scripture, theimageofGodislargerandmoreinclusivethantheoriginalrighteousness.For,althoughthisoriginalrighteousnesshasbeenlostthroughsin,mancontinues to carry the name of the image and offspring of God. Thereremain in him some small remains of the image of God according towhich hewas originally created. That original righteousness could not,therefore,havebeenanendowment,separateandindependent,andquiteunrelated to human nature generally. It is not true that man at firstexisted, be it in thought only or in actuality also, as a purely naturalbeing, towhom,then,originalrighteousnesswas latersuperaddedfromabove. Rather, in thought and creation both, man was one with thatoriginal righteousness. The idea of man includes the idea of suchrighteousness.Withoutitmancanneitherbeconceivedofnorexist.TheimageofGodinthenarrowersenseisintegrallyrelatedwiththatimageinthebroadersense.ItisnotaccuratetosaythatmanbearstheimageofGodmerely:heisthatimageofGod.TheimageofGodisidenticalwithman,isasinclusiveasthehumanityofman.Totheextentthat,eveninthe state of sin, man remained man, to that extent he has preservedremnants of the image of God; and to the extent that he has lost theimageofGod, to that extenthehas ceased tobeman, trueandperfectman.

Afterall,theimageofGodinthenarrowersenseisnothingotherthanthespiritualwholenessorhealthofman.Whenahumanbeingbecomessickinbodyandsoul,evenwhenhebecomesinsaneinmind,hecontinuestobe a human being. But he has then lost something that belongs to theharmonyofman,andhasreceivedsomethinginitssteadwhichconflictswiththatharmony.Justso,whenthroughsinmanhas lost theoriginal

righteousness,hecontinuestobeman,buthehaslostsomethingthatisinseparable from the idea of man and has received something insteadthatisalientothatidea.Hence,man,wholosttheimageofGod,didnotbecomesomethingotherthanman:hepreservedhisrationalandmoralnature. The thing that he lost was not something which really did notbelongtohisnature in the firstplaceandwhathereceived insteadwassomethingthatseizeduponandcorruptedhiswholenature.Justastheoriginalrighteousnesswasman'sspiritualwholenessandhealth,sosinishisspiritualdisease.Sinismoralcorruption,spiritualdeath,deathinsinsandtransgressions,asScripturedescribesit.

Such a conception of the image of God permits the whole teaching ofHolyScripturetocomeintoitsown.Itisaconceptionwhichatoneandthe same time maintains the relationship and the distinction betweennatureandgrace,creationandredemption.Gratefullyandeloquentlythisconception acknowledges the grace of God which, after the fall, too,permittedmantoremainmanandcontinuedtoregardhimanddealwithhimasarational,moral,andresponsiblebeing.Andatthesametime,itholds that man, bereft of the image of God, is wholly corrupted andinclinedtoallevil.Lifeandhistoryareavailabletoconfirmthis.Forevenin its lowest, deepest fall, human nature yet remained human nature.And, no matter what acme of achievement man may accomplish, heremains small and weak, guilty and impure. Only the image of Godconstitutesmantrueandperfectman.

If,now,wetrybrieflytosurveythecontentoftheimageofGod,thefirstthing that comes up for attention is man's spiritual nature. He is aphysical,butheisalsoaspiritualbeing.Hehasasoulwhich,inessence,is a spirit. This is evident from what the Holy Scripture teachesconcerning the origin, essence, and duration of the human soul. As tothat origin, we read concerning Adam that he, unlike the animals,receivedabreathof lifefromabove(Gen.2:7)andinasensethisholdsfor allmen.For it isGodwhogives everymanhis spirit (Eccles. 12:7),who forms the spirit of man within him (Zechariah 12:1), and who,therefore, in distinction from the fathers of the flesh, can be called theFather of spirits (Heb. 12:9). This special origin of the human soul

determinesitsessencealso.True,Scriptureseveraltimesascribesasoultoanimals(Genesis2:19and9:4,andelsewhere)but in these instancesthereference,assometranslationsalsohaveit,istoaprincipleoflifeinthegeneralsense.Manhasadifferentandahighersoul,asoulwhichinvery essence is spiritual in kind. This is evident from the fact thatScripturedoesascribeapeculiar spirit tomanbutnever to theanimal.Animalsdohaveaspirit in the sense that as creatures theyare createdandsustainedbytheSpiritofGod(Ps.104:30)buttheydonot,eachofthem, have their own, independent spirit. Man has.14 Because of itsspiritualnaturethesoulofmanisimmortal;itdoesnotasintheanimalsdiewhen the body dies, but it returns toGodwho has given the spirit(Eccles.12:7).Itcannot,likethebody,bekilledbymen(Matt.10:28).Asspirititcontinuestoexist(Heb.12:9and1Peter3:19).

Thisspiritualityofthesoulraisesmanabovetheplaneoftheanimal,andgiveshimapointofresemblancewiththeangels.True,hebelongstothesensuousworld,beingearthlyof theearth,butbyvirtueofhisspirithefartranscendstheearth,andhewalkswithroyalfreedomintherealmofspirits.ByhisspiritualnaturemanisrelatedtoGodwhoisSpirit(John4:24)andwhodwellsineternity(Isa.57:15).

In the second place, the image of God is revealed in the abilities andpowerswithwhichthespiritofmanhasbeenendowed.Itistruethatthehigher animals can by sensation form images and relate these to eachother, but they can do no more. Man, on the contrary, raises himselfabovethelevelofimagesandenterstherealmofconceptsandideas.Bymeans of thought, which cannot be understood as a movement of thebrain but must be regarded as a spiritual activity, man deduces thegeneral from theparticular, rises from the levelof thevisible to thatoftheinvisiblethings,formsideasofthetrue,thegood,andthebeautiful,and he learns to know God's eternal power and Godhead from God'screatures.Bymeansofhiswilling,whichmustalsobedistinguishedfromhis sinful desire, he emancipates himself from the material world andreachesoutforinvisibleandsuprasensuousrealities.Hisemotionsevenarebynomeans set inmotionmerelybyuseful andpleasurable thingsinside thematerial world but are roused and stimulated also by ideal,spiritualgoodswhicharequite insusceptibletoarithmeticalcalculation.

Alloftheseabilitiesandactivitieshavetheirpointofdepartureandtheircenter in the self-consciousness by which man knows himself and bymeans ofwhichman bears within himself an ineradicable sense of hisown existence and of the peculiarity of his rational and moral nature.Besides, all these particular abilities express themselves outwardly inlanguage and religion, in morality and law, in science and art,—all ofthem,of course, aswell asmanyothers, peculiar tomanandnot tobefoundintheanimalworldatall.

All these abilities andactivities are characteristicsof the imageofGod.ForGod, according to the revelation of nature and Scripture, is not anunconscious, blind force, but a personal, self-conscious, knowing, andwillingbeing.Evenemotions,dispositions, andpassions suchaswrath,jealousy, compassion, mercy, love, and the like, are without hesitancyascribed to God in the Scriptures, not somuch as emotions whichHeHimselfpassivelyundergoes,butasactivitiesofHisalmighty,holy,andlovingbeing.ScripturecouldnotspeakinthishumanwayaboutGodifinallhisabilitiesandactivities,manwerenotcreatedintheimageofGod.

Thesameholdstrue,inthethirdplace,ofthebodyofman.EventhebodyisnotexcludedfromtheimageofGod.True,ScriptureexpresslysaysthatGod is Spirit (John 4:24), and it nowhere ascribes a body to Him.Nevertheless, God is the creator also of the body and of the wholesensuous world. All things, material things too, have their origin andtheirexistence in theWord thatwaswithGod(John1:3andCol. 1:15),andthereforerestinthought,inspirit.Moreover,thebody,althoughitisnotthecauseofallthoseactivitiesofthespirit,istheinstrumentofthem.Itisnottheearwhichhearsbutthespiritofmanwhichhearsthroughtheear.

Henceallthoseactivitieswhichweaccomplishbymeansofthebody,andeventhephysicalorgansbywhichweaccomplishthem,canbeascribedtoGod.ScripturespeaksofHishandsandfeet,ofHiseyesandears,andofsomuchmore,inordertoindicatethatallthatmancanachievebywayofthebodyis,inanoriginalandperfectway,duetoGod.Hethatplantedthe ear, shall He not hear? He that formed the eye, shall He not see?(Psalm94:9).To the extent, therefore, that thebody serves as tool andinstrumentofthespirit,itexhibitsacertainresemblanceto,andgivesus

somenotionof,thewayinwhichGodisbusyintheworld.

AllthisbelongstotheimageofGodinthebroadersense.Butthelikenessof God and man comes out much more strongly in the originalrighteousnesswithwhichthefirstmanwasendowedandwhichiscalledthe image of God in the narrower sense. When Scripture puts theemphasis on this original righteousness, it thereby declares that whatmattersmostintheimageofGodisnotthatitexistsbutwhatitis.Themainthingisnotthatwethinkandhateandloveandwill.Thelikenessofman and God gets its significance fromwhat we think and will, fromwhattheobjectofourhatredandloveis.Thepowersofreasonandwill,ofinclinationandaversion,weregiventomanpreciselyforthispurposethatheshouldusethemintherightway—thatis,accordingtoGod'swillandtoHisglory.Thedevils,too,haveretainedthepowersofthoughtandwill,buttheyputthesesolelyintotheserviceoftheirhatredandenmityagainstGod.Eventhebelief inGod'sexistence,whichinitself isagoodthing, gives the devils nothing but trembling, and the fear of Hisjudgment (James 2:19). Concerning the Jews, who called themselveschildrenofAbrahamandnamedGodtheirFather,Jesusoncesaidthat,ifthiswereso, theywoulddotheworksofAbrahamandwould loveHimwhomGodhadsent.ButbecausetheyweredoingpreciselytheoppositeandsoughttokillJesus,theybetrayedthattheywerereallyofthefatherthedevilandwantedtodohiswill(John8:39-44).ThedesireswhichtheJewsfostered,andtheworkswhichtheydid,constitutedthemdespitealltheirkeendiscriminationandenergylikeuntothedevil.Andso,too,thehuman likeness to God comes out not chiefly in the fact that manpossesses reason and understanding, heart and will. It expresses itselfprincipally in pure knowledge and perfect righteousness and holiness,whichtogetherconstitutetheimage

ofGod in the narrower sense, andwithwhichmanwas privileged andadornedathiscreation.

Theknowledgewhichwasgiventothefirstmandidnotconsistofthefactthat he knew everything and had nothing further to learn about God,himself, and the world. Even the knowledge of the angels and of thesaintsissusceptibletogrowth.SowastheknowledgeofChristonearth

uptotheendofHislife.ThatoriginalknowledgeofthefirstmanimpliesratherthatAdam received an adequate knowledge forhis circumstanceandcallingandthatthisknowledgewaspureknowledge.Helovedtruthwith hiswhole soul. The lie,with all of its calamitous consequences oferror,doubt,unbelief,anduncertainty,hadnotyet foundaplace inhisheart.Hestoodinthetruth,andhesawandappreciatedeverythingasitreallywas.

Thefruitofsuchknowledgeofthetruthwasrighteousnessandholiness.Holinessmeansthatthefirstmanwascreatedfreeofalltaintofsin.Hisnaturewas unspoiled.No evil thought, deliberation, or desire came upoutofhisheart.Hewasnotinnocentorsimple,butheknewGod,andheknewthelawofGodthatwaswritteninhisheart,andhelovedthatlawwithhiswholesoul.Becausehestoodinthetruth,hestoodalsoinlove.Righteousnessmeansthatthemanwhothusknewthetruthinhismind,and who was holy in his will and in all his desires, thereby alsocorrespondedwholly toGod's law,wholly satisfied the demands ofHisjustice,andstoodbeforeHisfacewithoutanyguilt.Truthandlovebringpeaceintheirwake,peacewithGod,andourselves,andthewholeworld.The man who himself stands in the right place, the place where hebelongs,alsostandsintherightrelationshiptoGodandtoallcreatures.

Ofthisstateandcircumstanceinwhichthefirstmanwascreatedwecannolongerformanidea.Aheadandaheart,amindandawill,allofthemaltogetherpureandwithoutsin—thatissomethingwhichliesfarbeyondthe pale of all our experiences. When we stop to reflect how sin hasinsinuated itself intoall our thinkingand speaking, intoall our choicesandactions, theneven thedoubt can rise inourheartswhether such astate of truth, love, and peace is possible for man. Holy Scripture,however,winsthevictoryandconquerseverydoubt.Inthefirstplace,itshowsus,notonlyatthebeginningbutalsointhemiddleofhistory,thefigure of a man who could with full justice put the question to hisopponents:Whichofyouconvincethmeofsin?(John8:46).Christwasverymanandthereforealsoperfectman.HedidnosinneitherwasguilefoundinHismouth(1Peter2:22).Inthesecondplace,Scriptureteachesthat the first human couple were created after God's image inrighteousness and holiness as the fruit of known truth. Thus the

Scriptures maintain that sin does not belong to the essence of humannature,andthatitcanthereforealsoberemovedandseparatedfromthathumannature.

Ifsincleavestomanfromhisearliestorigin,andbyvirtueofthenaturewhichishis,thenfromthenatureofthecasethereisnoredemptionfromsinpossible.Theredemptionfromsinwouldthenbetantamounttotheannihilationofhumannature. But now, as it is, not only can a humanbeingexistwithoutsinintheabstract,butsuchaholyhumanbeinghasactually existed. And when he fell, and became guilty and polluted,anotherman, the secondAdam, rose upwithout sin, to set fallenmanfreefromhisguiltandtocleansehimofallpollution.Thecreationofmanaccording to the imageofGodand thepossibilityofhis fall include thepossibilityofhisredemptionandrecreation.Butwhoeverdeniesthefirstcannotaffirm the second; thedenialof the fallhasas itsother side thecomfortless preaching of human irredeemability. In order to be able tofall,manmustfirsthavestood.InordertolosetheimageofGodhemustfirstpossessit.

ThecreationofmanaccordingtotheimageofGod—wereadinGenesis1:26and28—hadasitsnearestpurposethatmanshouldfill,subdue,andhave dominion over the earth. Such dominion is not a constituentelement of the image of God. Nor does it, as some have maintained,constitutethewholecontentofthatimage.Moreover,itabsolutelyisnotan arbitrary and incidental addendum. On the contrary, the emphasisthat is placed upon this dominion and its close relationship with thecreation according to the image of God indicate conclusively that theimagecomestoexpressioninthedominionandbymeansofitmustmoreandmore explain and unfold itself. Further, in the description of thisdominion, it is plainly stated that to a certain extent it was, indeed,immediately given to man as an endowment, but that to a very greatextentitwouldbeachievedonlyinthefuture.Afterall,Goddoesnotsaymerely thatHewillmake "men" inHis imageand likeness (Gen.1:26),but when He has made the first human couple, man and woman, Heblessed themandsaid to them:Be fruitful, andmultiply, and replenishthe earth, and subdue it (Gen. 1:28), and He further gave Adam the

particulartaskofdressingandkeepingthegarden(Gen.2:15).

Allthisteachesveryplainlythatmanwasnotcreatedforidlenessbutforwork.Hewasnotallowedtorestuponhislaurels,buthadtogostraightinto thewideworld inorder to subdue it to thepowerofhiswordandwill.Hewasgivenabig,awidelydistributed,arichtaskontheearth.Hewas given an assignment which would cost him centuries of effort toaccomplish.Hewaspointedinadirectionincalculablyfarawaywhichhehadtotakeandwhichhehadtopursuetotheend.Inshort,thereisabigdifferenceandawideseparationbetweentheconditioninwhichthefirstmanwascreatedand thedestination towhichhewascalled.True, thisdestinationis closely related tohisnature, just as thatnature is closelyrelatedtohisorigin,but there isdistinctionall thesame.Thenatureofman, theessenceofhisbeing—the imageofGodaccording towhichhewascreated—hadtocometoaconstantlyricherandfullerunfoldingofitscontentbymeansofitsstrivingtowardsitsdestination.TheimageofGod,sotospeak,hadtobespreadtotheendsoftheearthandhadtobeimpressedonalltheworksofmen'shands.ManhadtocultivatetheearthsothatitwouldmoreandmorebecomearevelationofGod'sattributes.

The dominion of the earth was therefore the nearest but not the solepurpose towhichmanwascalled.Thenatureof thecasepoints to thatfact.Workwhichisreallyworkcannothaveitsendandfinalpurposeinitselfbutalwayshasasitsfurtherobjectivetobringsomethingintobeing.Itceaseswhenthatobjectivehasbeenreached.Towork,simplytowork,without deliberation, plan, or purpose, is to work hopelessly and isunworthyofrationalman.Adevelopmentwhichcontinuesindefinitelyisnotadevelopment.Developmentimpliesintention,courseofaction,finalpurpose,destination.If,then,manathiscreationwascalledtowork,thatimpliesthathehimselfandthepeoplewhoshouldissuefromhimshouldenterintoarestafterthework.

Theinstitutionoftheseven-dayweekcomestoconfirmandreinforcethisconviction.InhisworkofcreatingGodrestedontheseventhdayfromallHiswork.Man,madeintheimageofGod,immediatelyatthetimeofthecreationgetstherightandtheprivilegetofollowintheDivineexampleinthis respect also. The work which is laid upon him, namely, thereplenishingandsubduingoftheearth,isaweakimitationofthecreative

activity ofGod.Man'swork, too, is aworkwhich is entereduponafterdeliberation,whichfollowsadefinitecourseofaction,andwhichisaimedataspecificobjective.Manisnotamachinewhichunconsciouslymoveson; he does not turn about in a treadmill with an unchangeablemonotony. In his work tooman isman, the image of God, a thinking,willing,actingbeingwhoseekstocreatesomething,andwhointheendlooksbackupon theworkofhishandswithapprobation.As itdoes forGodHimself,man'sworkends inresting,enjoyment,pleasure.Thesix-dayweekcrownedbytheSabbathdignifiesman'swork,raiseshimabovethemonotonousmovementofspiritlessnature,andpressesthestampofaDivinecallingupon it.Whoever, therefore,on theSabbathday entersinto the rest of God in accordancewithHis purpose, that person restsfromhisworksinthesamegladwayasGodrestsfromHis(Heb.4:10).Thisholdstrueoftheindividualanditalsoholdstrueofthechurchandofmankindgenerally.Theworld,too,hasitsworld'sworktoperform,aworkwhichisfollowedandconcludedbyaSabbath.ThereremainsarestforthepeopleofGod.EachSabbathDayisbutanexampleandforetasteof it andat the same timealsoaprophecyandaguaranteeof that rest(Heb.4:9).

ThatiswhytheHeidelbergCatechismrightlysaysthatGodcreatedmangoodandaccordingtoHisownimageinorderthathemightrightlyknowGod his Creator, heartily love Him, and live with Him in eternalblessednesstopraiseandglorifyHim.Thefinalpurposeofmanlayintheeternal blessedness, in the glorificationofGod inheaven andon earth.Butinordertoarriveatthisendmanfirsthadtofulfillhistaskonearth.Inorder toenter into the restofGodhe firsthad to finishGod'swork.The way to heaven goes through the earth and over the earth. TheentrancetotheSabbathisopenedbythesixdaysofwork.Onecomestoeternallifebywayofwork.

This teachingof thepurposeofmanso far restsentirelyupon thoughtswhich are expressed in Genesis 1:26-3:3. But the rest of the secondchapter has another important constituent element to add to it.WhenGodplacesmaninparadise,Hegiveshimtherighttoeatfreelyofallthetreesinthegardenexceptone.ThatoneHesinglesoutasanexception,

thetreeofknowledgeofgoodandevil.Manistoldthathemaynoteatofthattree,andthatonthedayheeatsofithewilldiethedeath(Gen.2:16-17).Toallthatiscommanded isnowaddedonethingthatisforbidden.The commandmentswere known toAdampartly from a reading of hisownheart, partly fromGod's spokenword.Adamdidnot invent them.God created them in him and communicated them to him.Man is notreligiouslyandmorallyautonomous.Heisnothisownlawgiver,andhemay not do as he pleases.Rather,God is his only Lawgiver and Judge(Isa. 33:22). All those commandments which Adam received nowresolvedthemselvesintothisonerequirementthathewhowascreatedastheimageofGodshouldinallhisthinkinganddoing,andthroughouthislife and work, remain the image of God. Man had to remain suchpersonally in his own life, but also in hismarriage relationship, in hisfamily,inhissix-dayworkingweek,inhisrestontheseventhday,inhisreplenishingandmultiplying,inhissubduingandhavingdominionovertheearth,andinhisdressingandkeepingofthegarden.AdamwasnottogohisownwaybuthadtowalkinthewaythatGodappointedforhim.

But all those commandments, which, so to speak, gave Adam amplefreedomofmovementand thewhole earthashis fieldof operation areaugmented,or,better,arelimited,byoneproscription.Thisproscription,nottoeatofthetreeoftheknowledgeofgoodandevil,doesnotbelongtothe image of God, is not a constituent element of it, but, quite to thecontrary, fixes its boundary. If Adam transgresses this proscriptivecommand, he loses the image of God, places himself outside thefellowship of God, and dies the death. By this command therefore theobedienceofman is tested.ThiscommandwillprovewhethermanwillfollowGod'swayorhisownway,whetherhewillkeeptotherightpathorgoastra4y,whetherhewillremainasonofGodinthehouseoftheFatherorwanttotaketheportionofgoodsthatisgivenhimandgotoadistantcountry.Hence,too,thisproscriptivecommandisusuallygiventhenameof the probationary command.Hence, too, it has in a certain sense anarbitrarycontent.AdamandEvecouldfindnoreasonwhyjustnowtheeatingofthisoneparticulartreewasforbidden.Inotherwords,theyhadto keep the command not because they fathomed it in its reasonablecontent and understood it, but solely because God had said it, on thebasisofHisauthority,promptedbysheerobedience,outofapureregard

totheirduty.Thatiswhy,further,thetreewhosefruittheymightnoteatwas called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It was the treewhich would demonstrate whether man should arbitrarily and self-sufficientlywanttodeterminewhatwasgoodandwhatevil,orwhetherhewouldinthismatterpermithimselftobewhollyledbythecommandwhichGodhadgivenconcerningitandkeeptothat.

Thefirstman,therefore,wasgivensomething,indeed,wasgivenmuchtodo;hewasalsogivensomething,thoughthiswaslittle,whichhewasnotto do. Generally the last requirement is the more difficult of the two.Therearequantitiesofpeoplewhoarewillingtodoincrediblymuchforthesake,say,oftheirhealth,butwhoarewillingtogiveupnothingforit,or at least very little. They regard the slightest self-denial as anunbearableburden.Thatwhichisforbiddengivesoffakindofmysteriouslure.Itraisesquestionsaboutwhyandwhatandhow.Itpromptsdoubtandexcites the imagination. This temptationwhich emanated from theproscriptivecommandthefirstmanhadtoresist.Thiswasthestruggleoffaithwhichwasgivenhimtofight.But,intheimageofGodaccordingtowhich hewas created, he also received the strength bywhich he couldhaveremainedstandingandhaveconquered.

Neverthelessitbecomesapparentfromtheprobationarycommandevenmoreclearlythanfromtheinstitutionoftheseven-dayweekthattheendordestinyofmanistobedistinguishedfromhiscreation.Adamwasnotyetatthebeginningwhathecouldbeandhadtobecomeattheend.Helived in paradise, but not yet in heaven. He still had a long way to gobeforehearrivedathisproperdestination.Hehadtoachieveeternallifeby his "commission" and "omission." In short, there is a big differencebetween thestateof innocence inwhich the firstmanwas created, andthestateofgloryforwhichhewasdestined.Thenatureofthisdifferenceisfurtherilluminatedforusbytherestofrevelation.

Adam was dependent upon the change of night and day, waking andsleeping, butwe read of the heavenly Jerusalem that there shall be nonightthere(Rev.21:25and22:5)andthattheredeemedbythebloodoftheLambstandbeforethethroneofGodandserveHimnightanddayinHistemple(Rev.7:15).Thefirstmanwasboundtotheapportionmentoftheweekintosixworkdaysandonedayofrest,butforthepeopleofGod

there remains hereafter an eternal, unintermittent rest (Heb. 4:9 andRev.14:13).Inthestateofinnocencemandailyrequiredfoodanddrink,butinthefutureGodshalldestroyboththebellyandmeats(1Cor.6:13).The first human couple consisted of man and woman and wasaccompanied by the blessing: be fruitful and multiply. But in theresurrectionmendonotmarrynoraregiveninmarriage,butareastheangelsofGodinheaven(Matt.22:30).Thefirstman,Adam,wasof theearth, earthy, had a natural body and so became a living soul, but thebelievers in the resurrection receive a spiritual body andwill thenbeartheimageofheavenlyman,theimageofChristtheLordfromheaven(1Cor.15:45-49).Adamwascreatedinsuchawaythathecouldstray,couldsin, could fall and die; but the believers even on earth are in principleraised above this possibility. They can no longer sin, for whosoever isborn ofGoddoes not commit sin, for his seed remains in him: andhecannotsin,becauseheisbornofGod(1John3:9).Theycannotfalleventotheveryendfortheyarekeptthroughfaithuntosalvationreadytoberevealedinthelasttime(1Peter1:5).Andtheycannotdie,forthosewhobelieve in Christ have, already here on earth, the eternal incorruptiblelife; they shall not die in all eternity, and though they were dead theyshouldyetlive(John11:25-26).

In lookingat the firstman, therefore,wemustbeonguardagainst twoextremes. On the one hand, we must, on the basis of Holy Scripture,maintain that hewas immediately created in the image of God in trueknowledge, righteousness, and holiness: he was not at first a small,innocentchildthathadtodevelopintomaturity;hewasnotabeingwho,mature in body, was spiritually without any content, taking a neutralpositionbetweentruthandfalsehood,goodandevil;andstilllesswasheoriginally an animal being, gradually evolved out of animal existence,whonowatlonglastbyvirtueofstruggleandefforthadbecomeman.

SucharepresentationisinirreconcilableconflictwiththerepresentationofScriptureandwithsoundreason.

Still, on the other hand, the state of the first man should not beexaggeratedly glorified as is so often done in Christian doctrine andpreaching.NomatterhowhighGodplacedmanabovetheanimal level,manhadnotyetachievedhishighestpossiblelevel.Hewasable-not-to-

sin,butnotyetnot-able-to-sin.Hedidnotyetpossesseternallifewhichcannotbe corruptedandcannotdie,but received insteadapreliminaryimmortalitywhoseexistenceanddurationdependeduponthefulfillmentofacondition.HewasimmediatelycreatedasimageofGod,buthecouldstill lose this imageandall itsglory.He livedinparadise, it is true,butthis paradise was not heaven and it could with all of its beauty beforfeitedbyhim.One thingwas lacking in all the riches, both spiritualandphysical,whichAdampossessed:absolutecertainty. As long aswedonothavethat,ourrestandourpleasureisnotyetperfect;infact,thecontemporaryworldwithitsmanyeffortstoinsureeverythingthatmanpossesses is satisfactory evidence for this.Thebelievers are insured forthislifeandthenext,forChrististheirGuarantorandwillnotallowanyofthemtobepluckedoutofHishandandbelost(John10:28).Perfectlovebanishesfearinthem(1John4:18)andpersuadesthemthatnothingshallseparate them from the loveofGodwhich is inChrist Jesus theirLord (Rom.8:38-39).But thisabsolute certaintywas lacking tomaninparadise; he was not, together with his creation in the image of God,permanentlyestablishedinthegood.Irrespectiveofhowmuchhehad,hecould lose it all, both for himself and for his posterity. His origin wasDivine; his nature was related to the Divine nature; his destiny waseternal blessedness in the immediate presence of God. Butwhether hewas to reach that appointed destinationwasmade dependent upon hisownchoiceanduponhisownwill.

Endnotes:

1. Gen.2:19;9:4,10,12,16;Lev.11:10;17:11;andelsewhere.2. Lev.19:31;20:27;andDeut.18:10-14.3. Deut.18:10;Jer.27:10;andRev.21:8.4. Lev.19:26;Isa.47:13;andMicah5:11.5. Deut.18:11.6. Lev.19:26andDent.18:10.7. Deut.18:11andIsa.47:9.8. Matt.18:10and24:36.9. Ps.103:20andCol.1:16.10. Gen.18:2;Judges18:3;andRev.19:14.

11. Deut.33:2;Dan.7:10;andRev.5:11.12. Dan.8:16;9:21;10:13,21;andLuke1:19,26.13. Deut,6:13;Matt,4:10;andRev.2:9.14. Deut.2:30;Judges 15:19;Ezek.3:14;Luke23:46;Acts7:59; 1Cor.

2:11and5:3-4.

TheHistoryandDevelopmentoftheDoctrineofPredestaintion

HermanBavinck

TheDevelopmentoftheDoctrineofPredestinationamongtheReformed(continued):theControversyinregardtoInfra-andSupralapsarianism:

(1) This controversy is rooted in the struggle betweenAugustine and Pelagius. According to Pelagianism bothoriginalandactualsin(unbelief)logicallyprecedeelectionandreprobation;accordingtoAugustineONLYoriginalsinprecedes predestination. According to supra,predestination logically precedes not only actual but alsooriginal sin. Hence, Pelagianism: original sin, actual sin,predestination; Augustinianism or infralapsarianism:originalsin,predestination,actualsin;supralapsarianism:predestination,originalsin,actualsin.

(2)Many followers of Augustine accepted the doctrine oftwo-foldpredestination:apredestinationuntogloryandapredestinationuntodeath.

(3) The three Reformers: Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin,arrived at the supralapsarian view: election and

reprobation are deeds of God's sovereignty, logicallyprecedingGod's decree concerning the fall. Nevertheless,Calvinoftenfollowstheinfralapsarianreasoning.

(4)FortheorderoftheelementsofthedecreeseeIIIC.

(5)TheSynodofDortexpresseditselfinaninfralapsarianmanner but did not in any sense condemnsupralapsarianism.ItrejectedArminianism.

AmongtheReformedanothercontroversysoonarose,namely,inregardtosupra-andinfralapsarianism.Thiscontroversyisrootedinthestrugglebetween Augustine and Pelagius. With the Pelagians the order in theelementsofGod'scounselwasasfollows:

1. Adecreetocreateman.2. AdecreetosendChristinordertoredeemfallenhumanity,tocause

him to die for all and to be proclaimed to all, and to grant to all“gracesufficient”untosalvation.

3. Adecreedeterminingtheeternalsalvationofsomeonthegroundofforeseenfaith,andtheeternalpunishmentofothersonthegroundofforeseenunbelief.

AtotallydifferentorderwaspresentedbyAugustine.Attimeshemakesreprobation a part of predestination, but even then he viewsforeknowledge not as something negative and passive but as a divineactivity.For,God'swillisthe“necessarygroundofthings”;whathappens“contrary to his will does not defeat his will”; when God “permits”something, this permission is positive, efficacious. “Surely, he permitswillingly, not unwillingly.” The supralapsarian position, viz., thatreprobationisanactofGod'ssovereignty,isalreadyimpliedinthisview.Usually, however, Augustine uses the wordsdivine foreknowledge andpermissionwhen he speaks about the fall. Augustine has the followingorder:

1. Adecreetocreatemanandtopermithimtofall.2. Adecreetoelectsomeoutofthiscorruptmassuntoeternallife,and

toallowotherstoremainintheperditionwhereintheyhaveinvolved

themselves.Accordingly,bothelectionandreprobationpresupposeafallen humanity, a “corrupt mass.” From this it appears thatAugustine usually favors the infralapsarian representation; in hisreasoninghedoesnotgobackbeyondthefall;heviewsreprobationas an act ofGod's justice. “God is good,God is just. Because he isgood, he is able to deliver some that are undeserving of salvation;because he is just, he is not able to condemn any one who isundeservingofcondemnation.”

Now, althoughAugustinedoesnot view thedecreeofpredestinationasprecedingbothoriginalandactualsin(thesupraposition),neitherdoesheplace thedecreeof election and reprobation afterbothof these (thePelagian position). According to Augustine, only original sin logicallyprecedes predestination. Moreover, he considers original sin to be asufficientgroundforreprobation.Actualsinsarenottakenintoaccountinthedecreeofreprobationalthoughtheyareconsideredinconnectionwith thedeterminationof thedegreeofpunishment.Augustine derivedthisorderintheelementsofGod'scounselfromRom.9:11,12(“. . . forthe children being not yet born, neither having done anything good orbad, that the purpose ofGod according to electionmight stand, not ofworks,butofhimthatcalleth,itwassaiduntoher,`Theeldershallservethe younger.'Evenas it iswritten, `Jacob I loved,Esau I hated.'”) andfrom the fate of children dying in infancy unbaptized. Nevertheless,although original sin is a sufficient ground for reprobation, Augustinedoesnotviewitasthefinalanddeepestground.AccordingtohimGod'ssovereignty, as expressed in Rom. 9:18, (“So then, he hath mercy onwhomhewill,andwhomhewillhehardeneth”)istheonlyanswertothequestionwhyGodrejectedsomeandchoseothers,particularly,whythispersonwasrejectedandthatoneelected.

3. Finally,adecreedeterminingthemeanswherebytheendinviewwillberealized.

Augustinedoesnotdirectlydeduceadecreeestablishingthemeansuntoperditionfromthedecreeofreprobationassuch.Hedoesteachthatevenin regard to sinGodproceeds inanactiveandpositivemanner;God isthe “Disposer of sins,” he deemed it right that there should be sin, hepunishes sin with sin; but Augustine generally views reprobation

negatively,i.e.,aspreteritionordereliction(passingbyorabandonment),andhedoesnotasaruleviewitaspartofpredestination,butidentifiesthe latter with election, and subsumes both election and reprobationunderGod'sprovidence.On theotherhand there is apredestinationofthemeans unto salvation.WithAugustine predestination or election isalwaysapredestinationuntoglory.Itimpliesforeordinationuntograce.Accordingly, foreseen faith and good works are not the ground ofelection,neitherisChristthefinalground.Butelectionisforeordinationunto thedesired goal, hence, unto themeanswhereby this goalwill herealized,i.e.,untoChristwhowashimselfpredestinated,andthusuntocalling, baptism, faith, and the gift of perseverance; predestination is apreparation forgrace. Accordingly, the elect, byway of grace in Christ,will surely obtain heavenly salvation. Therefore, in later years manyfollowersofAugustinearrivedatthedoctrineoftwofoldpredestination:a“predestination unto death” began to be coordinated with a“predestination unto glory.” Nevertheless, the former could not beconstruedinthesamesenseasthelatter;hence,adistinctionwasmadebetweenanegativeandapositivereprobation.Thenegativereprobationlogically precedes the fall; it is an act of God's sovereignty; it does notdepend upon foreseen demerits any more than election depends uponforeseenmerits;itimplies“thedecreetopermitcertainindividualstofallinto a state of guilt” and it is “the cause of dereliction.” Thus manyThomists, Alvarez, the Salmanticenses, Estius, Sylvius. etc., taught thatnegativereprobationprecedesthefallandthatitispurelyanactofGod'ssovereignty and good pleasure. Nevertheless, this supralapsarianreprobationwasviewedaswhollynegative, i.e.,asGod'spurposenottoelectcertainindividuals,topermitthemtofall,andafterwardtoordainthem to everlasting punishment (positive reprobation). Essentially,Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and all supralapsarian Reformed theologiansneverwentbeyondthispoint.Theyneithertaughta“predestinationuntosins”nordidtheyrepresentGodastheauthorofsin,asisfalselychargedby Roman Catholics, who advance this accusation against thePredestinationistsof the fifth century,Gottschalk,Bradwardina,Wyclif,and especially against the Reformers. They do this merely in order tojustify their own Semi-Pelagian view, and to harmonize it with theteachingsofAugustineandThomasAquinas.

Essentially the teachingofAugustineandThomasAquinas in regard topredestination was accepted by the Reformers: the modificationsintroducedbythemwereslightandunessential,ifweexceptthedoctrineofassurance.TheReformersagreedwithAugustineandThomasAquinasonmanypoints;viz., they, too,believedthatelection isnotconditionedupon foreseenmerits,but that it is the sourceof faithandgoodworks;thatpredestinationuntogloryalwaysimpliespredestinationuntograce;thatnegativereprobationisnottobeexplainedasanactofGod'sjusticebutasanactofhissovereignty,andthatitlogicallyprecedessin;thatthisnegative reprobation is followedby adecree topermit sin and to allowsome to remain in their fallen state and thatpositive reprobation takessin into account. To all this they added, however, that the conceptsforeknowledqeandpermission,thoughnotwrong in themselves, cannotandshouldnotbeinterpretedinamerelypassivesense;thateveniftheycouldbesoconstrued,theywouldoffernorealsolutionoftheproblem;and that the distinction between positive and negative reprobation hasvery little value. Thus. all three Reformers arrived at the so-calledsupralapsarianviewofthedoctrineofpredestination,accordingtowhichboth election and reprobation are to be viewed as acts of God'ssovereignty,logicallyprecedingGod'sdecreeconcerningthefall,sin,andredemption through Christ. But it is especially Calvin who oftenpurposely refuses to go beyond the secondary causes of salvation andperdition, and thereforeoften reasons in an infralapsarianmanner.LetnotthereprobateviewGod'sdecreeasthecauseofhisperdition,butlethim rather look upon his own corrupt naturewith respect towhich hehimselfisguilty.TheelectandthereprobatewereequallyguiltybutGodismercifultowardtheformer,justtowardthelatter.InRomans9:21the“clay” indicatesmen in their fallencondition,ofwhomGodelectssomewhile he leaves others “in their own ruin, to which by nature all areexposed.”ThefallinAdamisthenearestcauseofreprobation.Godhatesonlysininus.Andofthisrepresentation:“thatoutoftheracedoomedinAdamGodelected thosewhomhewaspleased toelect, and reprobatedthosewhomhewilledtoreprobate.”Calvinsays,“justasitisagreatdealmoresuitableuntothecultivationoffaith,soitisdiscussedwithgreaterprofit...isnotonlymoreconduciveuntopiety,but,itseemstome,moretheological, more suitable to practical Christianity, and also moreconducive unto edification.” Nevertheless, this does not fully satisfy

Calvin.Sinmaybe theproximate causeofperdition, it is,nevertheless.not thedeepestcause.For the theory thatGodapart fromany previousplandecidedtocreateman,thensatdown,asitwere,inawatchtowertosee what man would do, and having seen and foreseen this, onlyafterwardproceededtotheactofelectionandreprobation,isaltogetheruntenable. Foreknowledge and permission do not solve the problem.becauseGod,foreseeingthefall,couldhavepreventedit;accordingly,hevoluntarilypermittedthefallbecauseitseemedgoodtohim.Accordingly,the fall ofAdam, sin in general, and all evil,werenot only foreseen byGod but in a certain sense were willed and determined by him.Accordingly, theremust have been a reason, unknown to us, why Godwilled the fall: there is “a deeper divine decree” logically preceding thefall.Hence,whenPighiusanswersCalvinbyobjectingthataccordingtothelatter'sviewtherewouldhavebeeninthedivineminda“distinctionbetweenelectandreprobateprevious to the fallofman,”Calvin indeedanswersthatPighiusfailstodistinguishbetween“proximateandremotecauses,” thateveryreprobatemustconsiderhisownsintobethedirectcauseofhisperdition,andthattheoppositeviewishandicappedwiththesameobjections,hedoesnotdenythevalidityoftheconclusiondrawnbyPighius:thereisa“secretdivinedecree”antecedingthefall,Thefinalanddeepest cause of reprobation as well as of election is the will of God.Hence,withCalvinthesupralansarianandinfralapsarianrepresentationalternates.Thisisalsotrueofmostofthelatertheologianswhoembracedsupralapsarianism.Theyregardthesupralapsarianviewtobeadmissibletheydonotthinkofcondemninginfralapsarianismorofdemandingthattheirviewbeembodiedintheofficialconfessionofthechurchastheonlystandardoftruth.Theydonotaskthattheirownviewhesubstitutedfortheinfralapsarianrepresentationbuttheypleadforactualrecognitionofbothviews.

According to the supralapsarian view a divine knowledge of allpossibilitiesprecedeseverydecree,a“knowledgeofsimpleintelligence.”According to the rule “what is ultimate in execution is first in design,”suprateachesthefollowingorderintheelementsofGod'scounsel:

1. Adecreedetermining thepurpose forwhichGodwould createandgovern all things, namely. the revelation of his virtues, esp. of his

mercy and of his justice; respectively, in the eternal salvation of adefinitenumberofmenconceivedasyetonlyaspossibles,“creatableand fallible.” and in the eternal punishment of another definitenumber.Themanifestationofthesevirtuesnecessitated:

2. A second decree determining the existence of human beings whowouldbe sowretchedandpitiable that theywouldbe fitobjectsofGod'smercyandjustice.Theactualexistenceofsuchhumanbeingsnecessitated:

3. AthirddecreetocreateamanadornedwiththeimageofGodtobethe head of humanity, and “by an efficacious permission” to allowhimtofallsothathewouldinvolvehisentireposterityinthatfall.

4. Finally,adecreetomanifestGod'smercyintheelectbyprovidingaMediator for them and by granting them the gifts of faith andperseverance, and to show God's justice in the reprobate bywithholdingsavinggracefromthemandbygivingthemupuntosin.

In this order of the decrees election and reprobation precede not onlyfaithandunbelief,regenerationandhardening,butalsocreationandthefall. However, one difficulty presents itself immediately: it was theestablished Reformed doctrine that the election of Christ and of thechurcharenot tobeseparatedandthatbothare included inonesingledecreethathasasitsobject“themysticChrist.”ButinthesupralapsarianschemetheelectionofthechurchisseparatedfromtheelectionofChristby the two decrees of creation and the fall. Comrie, however, tried toovercome this objection by teaching that before the decree of creationandthefallthebelieversarechosenuntounionwithChrist.Thisunionissocloseandunbreakablethatwhenthosechosenfall,asisdeterminedinasubsequentdecree,Christ,whohadbeenelectedasHead, isnowalsochosen to be the Mediator of redemption. From this it is clear thatComrieunderstoodthattheelectionof thechurchasthebodyofChristcannot be separated from the election of Christ as the Head of theChurch.Accordingly,heplacedtheelectionofbothbeforethedecreeofcreationandthefall.However, inthismannernotonlymenconsideredas mere possibilities but also a merely possible Christ was made theobjectofthedecreeofelection.

Thechurches,however,alwaysobjectedtothissupralapsarianview.Asa

result, there is not a single Reformed confession that offers thisrepresentation.At theSynodofDort therewerea fewadherentsof thisview, esp. Gomarus and Maccovius; moreover, the delegates of SouthHolland, Overisel, and Friesland preferred to leave the questionundecidedandtouseanexpressionthatwouldsatisfybothparties.Butalthoughthe“opinions”oftheDutchandoftheforeigndelegates,alsoofthosefromGeneva,weredefinitelyReformedincharacter,nevertheless,they were without exception infralapsarian and clothed in mild andmoderate terms. And the Synod at length defined election as “theunchangeable purpose of God whereby, before the foundation of theworld, he hath out of mere grace, according to the sovereign goodpleasureofhisownwill,chosenfromthewholehumanrace,whichhadfallenthroughtheirownfaultfromtheirprimitivestateofrectitude,intosinanddestruction, a certainnumberofpersons to salvation inChrist,whom he from eternity appointed theMediator andHead of the elect,and the foundation of salvation.” Nevertheless, the Synod purposelyrefused tocondemnsupralapsarianism; for, various theologians, amongwhomwere Calvin, Beza, Piscator, Perkins, Hommins, Bogerman, etc.,hadattimesusedstrongexpression;e.g.,“thatsomemenarecreatedinorder that they may be damned; that men viewed as innocent arereprobatedordamned;thatGodhatesmenirrespectiveofsin;thatmenwerepredestinateduntosin;thatGodhasneedofmanasasinner;thatGodwilledandbroughtabout the fact thatmensinned; thatGodactedinsincerelyinthecallingofcertainpersons,”etc.AttheconferenceheldintheHaguetheRemonstrantshadmadereadyuseoftheseexpressionsand of the difference between infra- and supralapsarianism;consequently, themembers of the synod were intent on avoiding such“phrases that were too harsh.” But when the delegates from England,Bremen, andHesse insisted that these expressions be condemned, theSynod refused to grant this request. In defence of this refusal SynodstatedthatScripturealsousesverystrongexpressionsattimes,thatsuchphrases may have a much milder meaning when examined in theircontext than they appear to have when considered apart from theircontext, and that the responsibility for them rests with the respectiveauthors. Inaddition,Synodadmonishedagainst theuseof immoderatephrases without mentioning any specifically and against “many otherthings of the same kind,” and at a later session administered a severe

rebuketoMaccoviusbecauseof themanner inwhichhehadconductedhimself.Accordingly,althoughthesupralapsarianviewwasnotembodiedintheconfession,neitherwasitcondemned.TheWestminsterAssemblypurposely refrained from attempting to decide this question and fromsidingwitheithertheinfra-orthesupralapsarianparty.Forthatreasonmany continued to favor supralapsarianism although the rights ofinfralapsarianism were at the same time recognized inasmuch as thelatter view had been embodied in the confession of the churches, waszealouslyandablydefendedbymanytheologians,andwasusuallyplacedintheforegroundinthepreachingoftheGospel.

SupralapsarianismandInfralapsarianism

byHermanBavinck

C.Thesupralapsarianandinfralapsarianinterpretationofthedecree:

(1)Pointsofagreement.Bothagree:

(a)ThatGodisnottheAuthorofsin(supraaswellasinfra).(b)ThatScripture (notphilosophy) is theonly sourceof our knowledge of God's decree (supra as well asinfra).(c) Thatman's fall and punishment is notmerely theobject of God's foreknowledge but of his decree andforeordination(infraaswellassupra).(d)Thatfaithisnotthecauseofthedecreeofelection,neither sin the cause of the decree of reprobation(infraaswellassupra).

(2)Pointsofdisagreement:

(a)Ingeneral,supralapsarianismplaces thedecreeofpredestination proper above (supra) the decree topermitthefall(lapsus);whileinfralapsarianismplacesthe decree of predestination proper below (infra) thedecreetopermitthefall(lapsus).Hence:

Supralapsarianism:

predestinationfall

Infralapsarianism:

fallpredestination

(b) From this general differentiation it becomes clearthat supra and infra differ in regard to theirpresentationoftheorderintheelementsofGod'splan.Thelogicalorderaccordingtosupra:

1. a decree determining the purpose of all things,namely,therevelationofGod'svirtues;specifically,the revelation of his mercy in the salvation of adefinite number of possible men; and therevelationofhisjusticeintheperditionofanotherdefinitenumberofpossiblemen2. a decree to create the men thus elected andreprobated.3.adecreetopermitthemtofall.4.adecreetoprovideaMediatorfortheelectandthrough him to justify them, and to condemn thereprobate.

Thelogicalorderaccordingtoinfra:

1. a decree to create man in holiness andblessedness.

2.adecreetopermitmantofall.3.adecreetoelectsomeoutofthisfallenmultitudeandtoleaveothersintheirmisery.4.adecreetobringaboutthesalvationoftheelectthroughChrist.SeeII,F.

(c) From this again it is apparent that according tosupramenviewedaspossibleorcreatableandfalliblearetheobjectsofthedecree;while,accordingto inframenviewedasfallenareobjectsofthedecree.

(3)Objections:

(a)Toinfra:

1. God's justice does not explain the decree ofreprobation.TheultimategroundofreprobationisGod'ssovereignwill.2. In order to maintain reprobation as an act ofGod's JUSTICE infra places reprobation after theFALLasifinthedecreeofreprobationGodfiguredonlywithORIGINALsinandnotalsowithACTUALsins.

(b)Tosupra:

1. Supra is correct when it maintains that God'sglory is the final goal of all God's works, but themanner in which that goal will be realized is notthereby given; it is incorrect to say that in theeternalperditionof the reprobateGod revealshisjusticeonlyandthatintheeternalsalvationoftheelectherevealshismercyexclusively.2.Accordingtosuprathedecreeofpredestinationhas for its object possible men and a possibleRedeemer; but just how are we to conceive of adecree concerning possible men whose actualfutureexistencehasnotevenbeendetermined?3.

Supra makes the damnation of the reprobate theobject of the divine will IN THE SAME SENSE asthe salvation of the elect. This position is notsustainedbyScripture.

(c)Tobothinfraandsupra:

1.ItisincorrecttodefinethefinalgoalofallthingsastherevelationofGod'smercyintheelectandofhisjusticeinthereprobate.2. It is incorrect to represent the lost conditionofthereprobateinhellasanobjectofpredestination.3.Predestinationuntoeternaldeathshouldnotbecoordinated with predestination unto eternal life,for while certain Individuals constitute the objectofreprobation,thehumanraceunderanewHead,evenChrist,istheobjectofelection.4. Both supra and infra errwhen they regard thevariouselementsofGod'scounselassubordinatelyrelatedtoeachother.5. Both are one-sided: supra emphasizing God'ssovereignty; Infra, God's righteousness, holiness,andmercy.

(4)Theauthor'sconclusioninregardtothewholematter:“God'sdecreeshouldnotbeexclusivelydescribed. . .asastraight line to indicate a relation merely of before andafter,causeandeffect,meansandgoal;but itshouldalsobe viewed as a system the several elements of which arecoordinatelyrelatedtooneanother....Asinanorganismallthemembersaredependentupononeanotherandinareciprocal manner determine one another, so also theuniverseisGod'sworkofart,theseveralpartsofwhichareorganicallyrelated.”

Theword“predestination,”hasbeenusedinmorethanonesense:ithasbeengivenabroadandanarrowmeaning.AccordingtoPelagianismitismerely the decree whereby God, on the ground of foreseen faith and

perseveranceon thepartof some,and foreseensinandunbeliefon thepartofothers,hasdeterminedtogivetotheformereternalsalvationandtothe lattereternalpunishment.Accordingtothisconception,creation,thefall,Christ,theproclamationoftheGospelandtheofferingofgracetoall, persevering faith and unbelief precede predestination and are notincluded in it but excluded from it; the decree of predestination is nomore than theassignment toeternal lifeor eternalpunishment. In thisway the most restricted meaning is given to the word predestination,whichisthenmadeentirelydependentupon“thebareforeknowledgeofGod,” is a matter of uncertainty, and is not worthy of the namepredestination.InthatcasenotGodbutmanisthemakerofhistoryandthe arbiter of itsdestiny.This errorhasbeen sufficiently refuted in theformer paragraph. The important difference between infra- andsupralapsarianism.however,mustbegivenmoredetaileddiscussion.Atbottom this difference consists in a broader or a more restricteddefinitionof theconcept“predestination.”Augustineacceptedatwofoldrestriction of this concept: in his system the decree of predestinationfollows that concerning creationand the fall, andhegenerallyused theterm“predestination”inthefavorablesense,asasynonymfor“election,”while he gave the preference to the term “foreknowledge” to indicatereprobation:predestination,then,iswhatGoddoes,namelythatwhichisgood; while “foreknowledge” refers to whatman does, namely evil. Ingeneral, scholasticism, Roman Catholicism, and Lutheranism, acceptedthis interpretation of the term predestination. Also in the writings ofReformedinfralapsariantheologiansthedecreeofcreationandofthefallprecedesthatofelectionandofreprobation;butwhilemostofthemwerewillingtolookuponreprobationasapartofpredestination—justsothedecreeofpredestinationfollowsthatofthefall—andtospeakofatwinor double predestination, others considered it better to conceive ofpredestination as a synonym for election, and to discuss reprobationseparatelyandunderadifferentname.Now,iftheterm“foreknowledge”is not used in a Pelagian sense, and if the decree of reprobation is notwithdrawn from the province of the will of God, as was done by laterRomanCatholicandLutherantheologians,thedifferenceisnotessentialbutmerelyverbal.Butit.ischaracteristicofinfralapsarianismthat,inthedecree, creation and the fall precede election and reprobation; whilesupralapsarianism'sconceptofpredestinationisbroadenoughtoinclude

creationandthefall,whicharethenlookeduponasmeanstoanend:theeternal destiny of rational creatures. In the Reformed Church and inReformed theology equal recognition has always been given to bothsupra-and infralapsarianism,viewedas interpretationsof thedecreeofpredestination. To be sure, the Dutch confessional standards areinfralapsarian; nevertheless, no ecclesiastical assembly, not even theSynod of Dort, has ever troubled the supralapsarians. The Lambetharticles of Confession, purposely leave the question unanswered.Reformed theologians have always granted charter privileges to bothconceptions.Spanheimusedtosaythatinthecathedrahewassupra,butwhenhewas teachinghis congregationhewas infra.On theonehand,supralapsarians as well as infralapsarians teach that God is not theAuthorofsin,butthatthecauseofsinliesinthewillofman.Though,astheOmnipotentOne.Godpredestinedthe fall,andthough,asSupremeRuler, he executes his plan even by means of sin; nevertheless, heremains holy and righteous; of his own accordman falls and sins: theguilt is his alone. “Man falls according to the appointment of divineprovidence,buthe fallsbyhisown fault.”Also, thesupralapsariansdidnotarriveattheirconceptionbymeansofphilosophicalspeculation,buttheypresentedtheirviewbecausetheyconsideredittocomeclosertotheteaching of Scripture. just as Augustine arrived at the doctrine ofpredestinationthroughhisstudyofPaul,soCalvinbecameconvincedofthe truth of supralapsarianism by means of his reflection on theScriptural doctrine of sin. According to his own statement he was notgiving a philosophy but the truth of God's Word. On the other hand,Reformedinfralapsariantheologiansarefullyagreedthatman'sfall,sin,and the eternal punishment of many was not the object of “bareforeknowledge” but of God's decree and foreordination. Hence, thedifferencedoesnotconcernthecontentofGod'scounsel.Bothinfra-andsupralapsarianismdenythefreedomofthewill,rejecttheideathatfaithisthecauseofelectionandthatsinisthecauseofreprobation,andthusoppose Pelagianism; both in the final analysis pay homage to God'ssovereignty. The difference concerns only the order of the decrees.Infralapsarianspreferthehistorical,causalorder;supralapsariansdefendthe ideal, teleologicalorder.Theformergiveamore limitedmeaningtotheconceptpredestination,andexcludefromitaprecedingcreation,fall,and providence; the latter subsume all the other decrees under

predestination. The former emphasizes the manyness, the latter theoneness,of thedecree.With the formereachof the severaldecreeshassignificance by itself; with the latter all the preceding decrees aresubordinatetothefinaldecree.

Theproblemisnotsolvedbymeansofanappeal toScripture.Whereasinfralapsarianismissupportedbyallthosepassagesinwhichelectionandreprobation have reference to a fallen universe, and are represented asdeedsofmercyandof justice,Deut.7:6-8;Matt. 12:25,26;John15:19;Rom. 9:15, 16; Eph. 1:4-12; II Tim. 1:9; supralapsarianism seeks itsstrength in all those texts that declare God's absolute sovereignty,especiallywithreferencetosin,Ps.115:3;Prov.16:4;Is.10:15;45:9;Jer.18:6;Matt.20:15;Rom.9:17,19-21.The fact thateachof the twoviewsleansforsupportonacertaingroupoftextswithoutdoingfulljusticetoadifferent group indicates the one-sided character of both theories.Though infralapsarianism deserves praise because of its modesty — itabides by the historical, causal order— and though it seems to be lessoffensiveand though it showsgreaterconsideration for thedemandsofpracticallife,itfailstogivesatisfaction.ItisjustasdifficulttoconceiveofreprobationasanactofGod'sjusticeasitisthustoconceiveofelection.Faith and good works, to be sure, are not the cause of election, butneitherissinthecauseofreprobation;God'ssovereigngoodpleasureisthe cause of both; hence, in a certain sense, the decree of reprobationalways precedes the decree to permit sin. Moreover, if in the divineconsciousness thedecreeof reprobation follows that topermit sin, thequestioncannotbesuppressed,“ThenwhydidGodpermitsin?”Didthispermissionconsistina“bareforeknowledge”andwasthefallinrealityafrustrationofGod'splan?ButnoReformed theologian, even thoughhebeaninfralapsarian,caneverormayeversaythis.Inacertainsensehemust include the fall inGod's decree; hemust conceive of it as havingbeen foreordained. But why did God “by an efficacious permission”foreordain the fall? Infralapsarianism can answer this question only byreferring to God's good pleasure, and then it agrees withsupralapsarianism.Reprobation cannot be explained as an act ofGod'sjustice, for the first sinful deed at any rate was permitted by God'ssovereignty.Reasoningbackward,infralapsarianismfinallyarrivesattheposition of supralapsarianism; in case it should be unwilling to admit

this,itwouldhavetoresorttoforeknowledge.Addtoallthisthefactthatinfra places the decree of reprobationafter the fall, but just where? Isoriginal sin the only sin that is taken into account by the decree ofreprobation, and inmaking this dreadful decree doesGod leaveactualsinsentirelyoutofconsideration?If,asinfrainsists,reprobationmustbereferredtoGod'sjustice,theninsteadofplacingthisdecreeimmediatelyafter the entrance of original sin, why not place it after the completeaccomplishment—respectivelybyeachreprobateperson—ofallactualsins?ThisisexactlywhatwasdonebyArminius—whoalsoincludedthesinof foreseenunbelief—but suchaprocedurewouldneverdoon thepart of a Reformed theologian. Reprobation would then becomedependentuponbareforeknowledge,i.e.,uponman;man'ssinfuldeedswouldthenbecomethefinalanddeepestcauseofreprobation;hence,inorder to avoid this error the decree of reprobation was placedimmediately after the fall. But by doing this infra becomessupralapsarian with respect to all actual sins: reprobation does notprecede original sin, but it does precede all other sin. At first glanceinfralapsarianism seems to be more moderate and less offensive thansupralapsarianism, but deeper study reveals the fact that appearancesdeceive.

Accordingly,supralapsarianismundoubtedlyhasinitsfavorthefactthatitrefrainsfromeveryattempttojustifyGod,andthatbothwithrespecttoreprobation and with respect to election it rests in God's sovereign,incomprehensible,yetwiseandholygoodpleasure.Nevertheless,itisatleast just as unsatisfactory as is infralapsarianism, and perhaps evenmoreso.Itwishestopassforasolution,butinnosensewhateverdoesitgiveasolutionofevenasingleproblem.Inthefirstplace,tosaythatthemanifestationofallGod'sexcellenciesisthefinalgoalofallofthewaysofGodisindeedcorrect;butwhensupraincludesinthatgoalthemannerinwhichthedivineglorywillberevealed intheeternaldestinyofrationalcreatures,iterrs.For,theeternalstateofsalvationorofperditionisnotinitselfthegoal,butoneofthemeansemployedinordertorevealGod'sexcellenciesinamannersuitedtothecreature.ItwouldnotdotosaythatGodwouldhavebeenunable tomanifesthisgloryby savingallmen, ifthishadbeenhispleasure.NeitherisitcorrecttosaythatintheeternalstateofthereprobateGodrevealshisjusticeexclusively,andthatinthe

eternal state of the elect hemanifests hismercy exclusively.Also in thechurch, purchasedwith the blood of the Son,God's justice is revealed;and also in theplace of perdition there aredegrees of punishment andsparksofdivinemercy.ThefinalgoalofallGod'swork'smustneedsbehis glory, but the manner in which that glory will shine forth is nottherebygiven,buthasbeendeterminedbyGod'swill;andalthoughtherewerewiseandholyreasonswhyGodpurposedtheperditionofmanyandnotthesalvationofall,neverthelessthesereasons,thoughknowntohim,arenotknowntous:wearenotabletosaywhyGodwilledtomakeuseofthismeansandnotofanother.Afurtherobjectiontosupralapsarianismisthefactthataccordingtothisviewtheobjectsofthedecreeofelectionand reprobation are men considered merely as possibilities and — asComrieadded—aChristviewedasamerepossibility.Tobesurebysomethis element has been eliminated from the supralapsarian scheme. Butthe principle which gave rise to this error still remains. Logic requiresthatapossibleChrist shouldbe added topossiblemenas theobject ofelection, for in the decree of election the church and itsHead, i.e., thesavedandtheSaviorcannotbeseparated.

But even aside from this, the decree of election and reprobationwhichhasforItsobject“creatableandfalliblemen”isnotthereal,butmerelyatentativedecree.Intheendsupralapsarianismisforcedtoproceedtotheinfralapsarian order in the elements of the decree. For, following thedecree concerning the election and reprobation of these possible mencomesthedecreetocreatethemandtopermitthemtofall,andthismustbe succeededby another decree respecting thesemen,who arenownolongerviewedasmerepossibilitiesbutasrealities—eveninthedecree—viz.,toelectsomeandtoreprobateothers.Thelogicofthesupralapsarianscheme is very weak, indeed. Supralapsarianism really differs frominfralapsarianism only in this respect, viz., that after the manner ofAmyraldism, it prefixes a decree concerning possibilities to theinfralapsarian series of decrees. But just how are we to conceive of adecreerespectingpossiblemen,whoseactualfutureexistencehasasyetnot been determined? In the consciousness of God there is an infinitenumber of “possiblemen,” who will never live. Hence, the decree ofelection and reprobation has for its object “nonentities,” not definitepersonsknowntoGodbyname.Finally,thereisthisdifficultyconnected

withsupra,viz., that itmakes theeternalpunishmentof the reprobatesanobjectofthedivinewillinthesamemannerandinthesamesenseasthe eternal salvation of the elect; and that itmakes sin,which leads toeternaldestruction,ameansinthesamemannerandinthesamesenseastheredemptioninChristisameansuntoeternalsalvation.

Now Reformed theologians all agree that the entrance of sin andpunishmentwaswilledanddeterminedbyGod. It isperfectly true thatwordslike“permission”and“foreknowledge”donotsolveanything.Thedifficulty remains the same, and the same questions arise; viz., why, ifGodforekneweverything,didhecreatemanfallible,andwhydidhenotpreventthefall?WhydidheallowallmentofallinAdam?WhydoeshenotgranttoallmenfaithandtheblessingofhearingtheGospel?Inbrief,ifGod foreknowsandpermitssomething,hedoes thiseither“willingly”or “unwillingly.” The latter is impossible. Accordingly. only the formerremains: God's permission is an “efficacious permission,” an act of hiswill.NorshoulditbesupposedthattheideaofpermissionisofanyforceorvalueoveragainstthechargethatGodistheAuthorofsin;forhewhopermitsorallowssomeonetosinandtoperishinhissinalthoughhewasable to prevent him from sinning is just as guilty as he who incitessomeonetosin.Ontheotherhand,however,allagreethatalthoughsinisnot“excluded”from thewill ofGod it is,nevertheless, “contrary”to hiswill; that it isnotmerelyameanstothefinalgoal,butadisturbance inGod'screation;andthatAdam'sfallwasnotastepaheadbutafallinthereal sense of the word. It is also a fact that admits of no doubt that,howevermuch logical reasoningmay demur, no one is able to suggestother and better words than “permission, foreknowledge, preterition,dereliction,”etc.Even themostoutspokensupralapsarian isnotable todispensewiththesewords,neitherinthepulpitnorinthecathedra.For,although it be admitted that there is a “predestination unto death,” noReformed theologianhas everdared to speak of a “predestination untosin.” Without any exception all (i.e., Zwingli, Calvin, Beza, Zanchius,Gomarus,Comrie,etc.)haverejectedthe idea thatGod is theAuthorofsin,thatmanwascreateduntodamnation,thatreprobationisthe“cause”of sin, and that sin is the “efficient cause” of reprobation; and all havemaintained,thatthe inexorablecharacterofGod's justice ismanifest inthe decree of reprobation, that reprobation is the “accidental cause” of

sin,andthatsinisthe“sufficientcause”ofreprobation,etc.Accordinglyand happily, supralapsarianism is always inconsistent: it begins bymakingadaring leap,but it soonretreatsandreturns to thepreviouslyabandoned position of infralapsarianism. This is very evident from theworksofsupralapsarians.Nearlyallofthemhesitatetoplacethedecreeof reprobation in its entirety and without any restriction before thedecree to permit sin. The Thomists differentiated between a “negativeandapositivereprobation”;theformerwasmadetoprecedecreationandfall,thelatterwasmadetofollowthem.Thissamedistinction,beit inamodifiedform,recursintheworksofReformedtheologians.Notonlydoall admit that reprobation shouldbedistinguished fromcondemnation,whichistheexecutionofthatdecree,takesplaceintime,andhassinforits cause; but in the decree of reprobation itself many differentiatebetween apreceding, general purposeofGod to revealhis excellencies,especiallyhismercyand justice, in certain “creatableand falliblemen”;and a subsequent, definite purpose to create these “possible men,” topermitthemtofallandtosin,andtopunishthemfortheirsins.

Accordingly, neither supra- nor infralapsarianism has succeeded in itsattempttosolvethisproblemandtodojusticetothemany-sidednessofScripture.Toacertainextentthisfailureisduetotheone-sidednessthatcharacterizes both views. In the first place it is incorrect, as we statedbefore, todefine the “final goal” of all things as the revelationofGod'smercyintheelect,andofhisjusticeinthereprobate.God'sgloryandthemanifestationofhisexcellenciesis,tobesure,thefinalgoalofallthings;but thedouble stateof salvationanddamnation isnot included in thatfinalgoal,butisrelatedtoitasameans.Nooneisabletoprovethatthisdoublestatemustofnecessityconstituteanelement in the finalgoalofGod'sglory.Inallhis“outgoingworks”Godalwayshas inviewhisownglory;butthatheseekstoestablishthisgloryinthisandinnootherwayis tobe ascribed to his sovereignty and to nothing else. But even asidefrom this, it is not true that God manifests his justice only in thedamnation of the reprobate, and hismercy only in the salvation of theelect,foralsoinheavenGod'sjusticeandholinessshinesforth,andalsoinhell there is a remnant of hismercy and compassion. Secondly, it isincorrect to represent the lost condition of the reprobate in hell as anobjectofpredestination.Tobesure,sinshouldnotbereferred to“bare

foreknowledge and permission”; in a certain sense, the fall, sin, andeternalpunishmentareincludedinGod'sdecreeandwilledbyhim.Butthisistrueinacertainsenseonly,andnotinthesamesenseasgraceandsalvation.Thesearetheobjectsofhisdelight;butGoddoesnotdelightinsin, neither has he pleasure in punishment. When he makes sinsubservient to his glory, he does this by means of the exercise of hisomnipotence,buttoglorifyGodiscontrarytosin'snature.Andwhenhepunishesthewicked,hedoesnottakedelightintheirsufferingsassuch,but in this punishment he celebrates, the triumph of his virtues, Deut.28:63; Ps. 2:4; Prov. 1:26; Lam. 3:33. Accordingly, though on the onehand,withaview to theall-comprehensiveand immutablecharacterofGod's counsel, it is not wrong to speak of a “twofold predestination”(gemina praedestinatio); nevertheless, on the other hand, we must becareful to keep in mind that in the one case predestination is of adifferentnaturethanintheother.“Predestinationisthedisposition,goaland ordination of the means with a view to a goal. Since eternaldamnation isnot thegoalbutmerely the terminationof aperson's life,thereforereprobationcannotproperlybeclassifiedunderpredestination.Forthesetwothingsareinconflictwitheachother:toordainuntoagoalandtoordainuntodamnation.Forbyreasonofitsverynature,everygoalis the very best something, the perfection of an object; damnation,however, is the extreme evil and the greatest imperfection; hence theexpression `God has predestinated some men unto damnation' isincorrect.”Hence,nomatterhowoftenandclearlyScripturetellsusthatsin and punishment were ordained by God, nevertheless, the words“purpose” (prothesis),“foreknowledge” (prognosis)and “foreordination”(proorismos)are used almost exclusively with reference to“predestination unto glory.” In the third place, there is still anotherground for the assertion that those err who coordinate “predestinationuntoeternaldeath”with“predestinationuntoeternal life,”andviewtheformer as a goal in the same sense as the latter; while it is true thatcertainindividualsconstitutetheobjectofreprobation,thehumanraceunder a new Head, namely Christ, is the object of election; hence, bygrace not only certain individuals are saved, but the human race itselftogetherwiththeentirecosmosissaved.Moreover,wearenottosupposethatmerely a few of God's virtues are revealed in this salvation of thehumanraceandof theuniverse,so that inorder torevealGod's justice

the state of eternal perdition must needs be called into being; on thecontrary, in the consummatedKingdomofGodallofGod's virtuesandexcellenciesareunfolded:his justiceandhisgrace,hisholinessandhislove,hissovereigntyandhismercy.Hence,this“stateofglory”istherealand direct end of creation, though even this goal is subordinate to theexaltationofGod.Inthefourthplace,bothsupraandinfraerrwhentheyregard the various elements of the decree as standing in subordinaterelation to each other. Now it is true, of course, that the means aresubordinatetothefinalendinview,butfromthisitdoesnotfollowthattheyaresubordinatetooneanother.Creationisnotameremeanstowardthefall,neitheristhefallameremeanstowardgraceandperseverance,norare these in turnmerelymeans towardsalvationandperdition.Weshouldneverlosesightofthefactthatthedecreesareasrichincontentastheentirehistoryoftheuniverse,forthelatteristheunfoldmentoftheformer.Thehistoryof theuniversecanneverbemadetofit intoa littlescheme of logic. It is entirely incorrect to suppose that of the series:creation,fall,sin,Christ,faith,unbelief,etc.,eachconstituentismerelyameanstowardtheattainmentof thenext,whichassoonas it ispresentrenderstheformeruseless.AsTwissusalreadyremarked,“Thedifferentelementsofthedecreedonotstandtooneanotherinarelationmerelyofsubordination, but they are also coordinately related.” It is certainlywrong to suppose that the sole purpose of creationwas to produce thefall;onthecontrary,bymeansofGod'screativeactivityauniverse thatwillremaineveninthestateofglorywascalledintobeing.Thefalltookplacenotonlyinorderthattheremightbea“creatureintheconditionofmisery,” but together with all its consequences it will retain itssignificance. Christ not merely became aMediator,which would havebeen all that was necessary for the expiation of sin, but he was alsoordainedbyGodtobetheHeadofthechurch.Thehistoryoftheuniverseisnotameremeanswhichlosesitsvalueassoonastheendoftheageisreached, but it has influence and leaves fruits, for eternity. Moreover,hereonearthweshouldnotconceiveofelectionandreprobationastwostraight and parallel lines; on the contrary, in the unbeliever there ismuch that is not the result of reprobation, and in the believer there ismuch that should not be ascribed to election. On the one hand, bothelectionandreprobationpresupposesin,andaredeedsofmercyandofjustice,Rom. 9:15; Eph. 1:4; on the other hand both are also deeds of

divinerightandsovereignty,Rom.9:11,17,21.So,AdamevenbeforethefallisatypeofChrist,ICor.15:47ff.;nevertheless,inScripturethefactoftheincarnationalwaysrestsuponthefallofthehumanrace,Heb.2:14ff.At times Scripture expresses itself so strongly that reprobation andelection are coordinated, and God is represented as having purposedeternalperditionaswellaseternalsalvation,Luke2:34;John3:19-21;IPet.2:7,8;Rom.9:17,18,22,etc.;butinotherpassageseternaldeathisentirely absent in the description of the future; the victoriousconsummation of the kingdom of God, the new heaven and earth, thenewJerusaleminwhichGodwillbeallandinallispicturedtousastheend of all things, I Cor. 15; Rev. 21, 22; the universe is represented asexisting for the church, and the church for Christ, I Cor. 3 :21-23; andreprobationiscompletelysubordinatedtoelection.

Accordingly, neither the supra- nor the infralapsarian view ofpredestination is able todo full justice to the truthofScripture, and tosatisfyourtheologicalthinking.Thetrueelementinsupralapsarianismis:thatitemphasizestheunityofthedivinedecreeandthefactthatGodhadone final aim in view, that sin's entrance into the universe was notsomethingunexpectedandunlookedforbyGodbutthathewilledsininacertainsense,andthattheworkofcreationwasimmediatelyadaptedtoGod'sredemptiveactivitysothatevenbeforethefall,i.e.,inthecreationofAdam,Christ's comingwas definitely fixed. And the true element ininfralapsarianismis:thatthedecreesmanifestnotonlyaunitybutalsoadiversity (withaviewto their severalobjects), that thesedecrees revealnot only a teleological but also a causal order, that creation and fallcannotmerely be regarded asmeans to an end, and that sin should beregarded not as an element of progress but rather as an element ofdisturbance in theuniverse so that in andby itself it cannothavebeenwilledbyGod.Ingeneral,theformulationofthefinalgoalofallthingsinsuchamannerthatGodrevealshisjusticeinthereprobateandhismercyintheelectistoosimpleandincomplete.The“stateofglory”willberichand glorious beyond all description. We expect a new heaven, a newearth,anewhumanity,areneweduniverse,aconstantlyprogressingandundisturbedunfoldment.Creationandthefall,AdamandChrist,natureandgrace,faithandunbelief,electionandreprobation—alltogetherandeachinitsownway—aresomanyfactors,actingnotonlysubsequently

tobutalsoincoordinationwithoneanother,collaboratingwithaviewtothat exalted state of glory. Indeed, even the universe as it now existstogether with its history, constitutes a continuous revelation of God'svirtues.Itisnotonlyameanstowardahigherandricherrevelationthatis still future, but it has value in itself. It will continue to exert itsinfluencealsointhecomingdispensation,anditwillcontinuetofurnishmaterial for the exaltation and glorification of God by a redeemedhumanity.Accordingly,betweenthedifferentelementsofthedecree—asalsobetweenthefactsofthehistoryoftheuniverse—thereisnotonlyacausalandteleologicalbutalsoanorganicrelation.Becauseofthelimitedcharacterofourreasoningpowerswemustneedsproceedfromtheoneorfromtheotherviewpoint;hence,theadvocatesofacausalworldandlife-view and the defenders of a teleological philosophy are engaged incontinualwarfare.ButthisdisharmonydoesnotexistinthemindofGod.Heseesthewhole,andsurveysallthingsintheirrelations.Allthingsareeternallypresentinhisconsciousness.Hisdecreeisaunity:itisasingleconception.Andinthatdecreeallthedifferentelementsassumethesamerelation which a posteriori we even now observe between the facts ofhistory,andwhichwillbecomefullydisclosedinthefuture.Thisrelationissoinvolvedandcomplicatedthatneithertheadjective“supralapsarian”nor “infralapsarian” nor any other term is able to express it. It is bothcausalandteleological:thatwhichprecedesexertsitsinfluenceuponthatwhichfollows,andthatwhichisstill futurealreadydeterminesthepastandthepresent.Thereisarich,all-sided“reciprocity.”Predestination,inthe generally accepted sense of that term: the foreordination of theeternalstateofrationalcreaturesandofallthemeansnecessarytothatend,isnotthesole,all-inclusiveandall-comprehensive,purposeofGod.ItisaveryimportantpartofGod'sdecreebutitisnotsynonymouswiththedecree.God'sdecreeorcounselisthemainconceptbecauseitisall-comprehensive;itembracesallthingswithoutanyexception:heavenandearth, spirit and matter, visible and invisible things, organic andinorganic creatures; it is the single will of God concerning the entireuniverse with reference to the past, the present, and the future. Butpredestination concerns the eternal state of rational creatures, and themeansthereto:butnotallthingsthatevercomeintobeingnoralleventsthat everhappencanbe included in thesemeans.Hence, in apreviousparagraph we discussed “providence” as a thing by itself, although the

relationbetweenitandpredestinationwasclearlyshown.Inthedoctrineof God's decree common grace should receive a much more detaileddiscussion thanwas formerly the case, and should be recognized in itsown rights.Briefly stated,God'sdecree togetherwith thehistoryof theuniversewhichanswerstoitshouldnotbeexclusivelydescribed—afterthe manner of infra- and supralapsarianism — as a straight lineindicatingarelationmerelyofbeforeandafter,causeandeffect,meansandgoal;butitshouldalsobeviewedasasystemtheseveralelementsofwhich are coordinately related to one another and cooperate with oneanothertowardthatgoalwhichalwayswasandisandwillbethedeepestground of all existence, namely, the glorification of God. As in anorganism all the members are dependent upon one another and in areciprocalmannerdetermineoneanother, soalso theuniverse isGod'sworkofart,theseveralpartsofwhichareorganicallyrelated.Andofthatuniverse, considered in its lengthandbreadth, thecounselordecreeofGodistheeternalidea.

TheKnowledgeofGod

byHermanBavinck

God is the highest good of man-that is the testimony of the wholeScriptures.TheBiblebeginswiththeaccountthatGodcreatedmanafterHis own image and likeness, in order that he should know God hisCreatoraright, should loveHimwithallhisheart, andshould livewithHim in eternal blessedness.And theBible endswith the description ofthenewJerusalem,whoseinhabitantsshallseeGodfacetofaceandshallhaveHisnameupontheirforeheads.

Between these twomoments lies the revelation ofGod in all its lengthand breadth. As its content this revelation has the one, great,comprehensive promise of the covenant of grace: I will be a God untothee,andyeshallbemypeople.Andasitsmid-pointanditshigh-pointthis revelationhas its Immanuel,God-with-us. For the promiseand its

fulfillment go hand in hand. The word of God is the beginning, theprinciple, the seed, and it is in the act that the seed comes into its fullrealization.Justasat thebeginningGodcalledthings intobeingbyHisword,sobyHiswordHewillinthecourseoftheagesbringintobeingthenewheavenand thenewearth, inwhich the tabernacleofGod shallbeamongmen.

ThatiswhyChrist,inwhomtheWordbecameflesh,issaidtobefullofgraceandtruth(John1:14).

He is theWordwhich in thebeginningwaswithGodandHimselfwasGod,andassuchHewasthelifeandthelightofmen.BecausetheFathersharesHislifewithChristandgivesexpressiontoHisthoughtinChrist,therefore the fullbeingofGod isrevealed inHim.HenotonlydeclarestheFathertousanddisclosesHisnametous,butinHimselfHeshowsusand gives us the Father. Christ is God expressed andGod given.He isGodrevealingHimselfandGodsharingHimself,andthereforeHeisfullof truthandalsofullofgrace.Thewordof thepromise, IwillbeaGodunto thee, includedwithin itself from theverymoment inwhich itwasuttered,thefulfillment,IamthyGod.GodgivesHimselftoHispeopleinorderthatHispeopleshouldgivethemselvestoHim.

IntheScriptureswefindGodconstantlyrepeatingHisdeclaration:Iamthy God. From the mother-promise of Genesis 3 :15 on, this richtestimony, comprehendingall blessedness andall salvationwhatsoever,is repeated again and again, be it in the lives of the patriarchs, in thehistory of the people of Israel, or in that of the church of the NewTestament.Andinresponsethechurchthroughouttheagescomeswiththe endless varieties of its language of faith, speaking in gratitude andpraise:ThouartourGod,andweareThypeople,and thesheepofThypasture.

This declaration of faith on the part of the church is not a scientificdoctrine, nor a form of unity that is being repeated, but is rather aconfessionofadeeplyfeltreality,andofaconvictionofrealitythathasout of experience in life. The prophets and apostles, and the saintsgenerallywhoappearbeforeusintheOldandNewTestamentandlaterin the church of Christ, did not sit and philosophize about God in

abstractedconcepts,but ratherconfessedwhatGodmeant to themandwhattheyowedtoHiminallthecircumstancesoflife.Godwasforthemnotatallacoldconcept,whichtheythenproceededrationallytoanalyze,butHewasaliving,personalforce,arealityinfinitelymorerealthantheworldaroundthem.Indeed,Hewastothemtheone,eternal,worshipfulBeing. They reckoned with Him in their lives, they lived in His tent,walked as if always before His face, served Him in His courts, andworshipedHiminHissanctuary.

Thegenuinenessanddepthoftheirexperiencecomestoexpressioninthelanguage they used to express what Godmeant to them. They did nothavetostrainforwords,fortheirlipsoverflowedwithwhatwelledupoutof their hearts, and the world of man and nature supplied them withfigures of speech. God was to them a King, a Lord, a Valiant One, aLeader,aShepherd,aSavior,aRedeemer,aHelper,aPhysician,aMan,andaFather.Alltheirblissandwell-being,theirtruthandrighteousness,theirlifeandmercy,theirstrengthandpower,theirpeaceandresttheyfoundinHim.Hewasasunandshieldtothem,abuckler,alightandafire,a fountainandawell-head,a rockandshelter,ahighrefugeandatower,arewardandashadow,acityandatemple.Allthattheworldhasto offer in discrete and sub-divided goods was to them an image andlikenessoftheunfathomablefullnessofthesalvationavailableinGodforHispeople.Hence it is thatDavid inPsalm16 :2(accordingtoa tellingtranslation)addressesJehovahas follows:ThouartmyLord; IhavenohighergoodthanThou.ThusalsoAsaphsanginPsalm73:WhomhaveIinheavenhut Thee?And there is none upon earth that I desire besideThee.Myfleshandmyheartmayfail,butGodisthestrengthofmyheart,andmyportion forever.For the saint,heaven inall itsblessednessandglory would be void and stale without God; and when he lives incommunionwithGodhecaresfornothingonearth, fortheloveofGodfartranscendsallothergoods.

Such is theexperienceof thechildrenofGod.It isanexperiencewhichthey have felt because God presented Himself to them for theirenjoyment in theSonofHis love. In this senseChrist said that eternallife,thatis,thetotalityofsalvation,consistsformanintheknowledgeoftheone,trueGodandofJesusChristwhomHehassent.

It was an auspicious moment in which Christ spoke those words. Hestood at the point of crossing the brook Kidron in order to enter thegarden ofGethsemane and to suffer the last struggle ofHis soul there.BeforeHeproceeds to thatpoint,however,HepreparesHimselfasourHighPriestforHispassionanddeath,andHepraystheFatherthattheFathermayglorifyHim inHis sufferingandafter it, so that theSon inturnmayglorifytheFatheringivingoutall thoseblessingswhichHeisnow about to achieve byHis obedience unto death. Andwhen the Sonpraysinthisway,HeknowsofnothingtodesireexceptthatwhichistheFather's ownwill and good pleasure. The Father has givenHim poweroverallfleshinorderthattheSonshouldgiveeternallifetoasmanyastheFatherhasgivenHim.Sucheternallifeconsistsofnothingotherthantheknowledgeoftheone,trueGodandofJesusChristwhowassenttorevealHim(John17:1-3).

OurReasonableFaith.HermanBavinck.BakerBookHouse.1956.Pages24-26.

TheDivineandHumanNatureofChrist

byHermanBavinck

Thetestimonywhich,accordingtoScripture,ChristhasgivenofHimselfis developed and confirmed by the preaching of the apostles. Theconfessionthataman,namedJesus, istheChrist, theOnly-BegottenoftheFather, is insuchdirectconflictwithourexperienceandwithallofourthinking,andespeciallywithalltheinclinationsofourheart,thatnoone can honestly and with his whole soul appropriate it without thepersuasive activity of the Holy Spirit. By nature everybody stands inenmitytothisconfession,foritisnotaconfessionnaturaltoman.Noonecan confess that Jesus is the Lord except through the Holy Spirit, butneither can anyone speaking by theHoly Spirit call Jesus accursed; hemustrecognizeHimashisSaviorandKing(1Cor.12:3).

HencewhenChristappearsonearthandHimselfconfessesthatHeistheSonofGod,Hedidnot leave itat that,butHealsohadacare,andHecontinues to have a care, that this confession finds entrance into theworld, and is believed by the church. He called His apostles, and Heinstructed them, andmade themwitnesses toHiswords and deeds, toHisdeathand resurrection.He gave them theHolySpiritwhobroughtthempersonally to the confession thatJesuswas theChrist, theSonofthelivingGod(Matt.16:16),andwholatercausedthem,fromthedayofPentecost on, tominister as preachers of those thingswhich their eyeshadseen,andtheybeheld,andtheirhandshadhandledof theWordoflife(1John1:1).Theapostleswerereallynottherealwitnesses.TheSpiritof truth, proceeding from the Father, is the original, infallible, andalmighty witness to Christ, and the apostles are that only in Him andthroughHim (John 15:26 andActs 5:32). And it is that same Spirit oftruthwhobymeansofthetestimonyoftheapostlesbringsthechurchofallagestotheconfessionandpreservesthemin it:Lord, towhomshallwego?Thouhastthewordsofeternal life.AndwebelieveandaresurethatThouarttheChrist,theSonofthelivingGod(John6:68-69).

WhenthefourEvangelistsinregularorderreporttheeventsofthelifeofJesus,theyusuallyrefertoHimsimplybythenameofJesuswithoutanymoreparticular qualificationor addendum.They tell us that JesuswasborninBethlehem,thatJesuswasledintothewilderness,thatJesussawthemultitudeandwentupthemountain,andsoon.Jesus,thehistoricalpersonwho lived anddied inPalestine, is the object of their chronicle.Andsowefindafewtimesinthelettersoftheapostles,too,thatJesusisdesignatedsimplybyHishistoricalname.Paulsays,forinstance,thatnoonecansaythatJesusistheLordexceptbytheHolySpirit(1Cor.12:3).JohntestifiesthatwhoeverbelievesthatJesusistheChristisbornofGod(1John1 :5compare2:22and4:20).And in thebookofRevelationwereadofthefaithofJesus,andofthewitnessesandwitnessofJesus.

Still, in the letters of the apostles the use of this name withoutqualification is rare. Usually the name occurs in connection with: theLord, Christ, the Son of God, and like designations, and the full nameusually reads: Our Lord Jesus Christ. But, irrespective of whether thename Jesus is used alone or in connection with other names, the

connection with the historical person who was born in Bethlehem andwhodiedonthecrossalwayscomestoexpressioninit.

ThewholeNewTestament,thatoftheepistlesorlettersaswellasthatofthe gospels, rests on the foundation of historical events. The Christ-figureisnotanideanoranidealofthehumanmind,asmanyinpastagesmaintained,andassomeinourtimealsoassert,butisarealfigurewhomanifestedHimself in a particular period and in a particular person inthemanJesus.

True,thevariouseventsinthelifeofJesusrecedeintothebackgroundintheletters.Thoselettershaveadifferentpurposethanthegospelshave.They do not chronicle the history of the life of Jesus but point out thesignificancewhichthatlifehasfortheredemptionofmankind.ButalloftheapostlesarefamiliarwiththepersonandlifeofJesus,areacquaintedwithHiswordsanddeeds,andtheyproceedtoshowusthatthisJesusisthe Christ, exalted by God to His own right hand, in order to grantrepentanceandtheforgivenessofsins(Acts2:36and5:31).

Often,therefore,inthelettersoftheapostlesmentionismadeofeventsinthelifeofJesus.TheypictureHimbeforetheeyesoftheirauditorsandreaders (Gal. 3 :1). They stress the fact that John the Baptist was Hisherald and precursor (Acts 13:25 and 19:4), that He comes from thefamily of Judah and the stemofDavid (Rom. 1:3;Rev. 5:5 and22:16),thatHewasbornofawoman(Gal.4:4),wascircumcisedontheeighthday (Rom. 15 :8), that He was brought up in Nazareth (Acts 2:22 and3:6),andthatHealsohadbrothers(1Cor.9:5andGal.1:19).TheytellusthatHewasperfectlyholyandsinless,1thatHepresentedHimselftousasanexample(1Cor.11:1and1Peter2:21),andthatHespokewordsthathaveauthorityforus(Acts20:35and1Cor.7:10-12).ButitisespeciallyHisdyingthatissignificantforus.Thecrossstandsatthecentralpointintheapostolicpreaching.BetrayedbyoneofthetwelveapostleswhomHechose(1Cor.11:23and1Cor.15:5),andnotrecognizedbytheprincesofthisworldas theLordofglory (1Cor.2:8),Hewasput todeathby theJews(Acts4:10;5:30;and1Thess.2:15),dyingontheaccursedwoodofthecross.2But,eventhoughHesufferedgreatlyinGethsemaneanduponGolgotha,3 He has by the pouring out of His blood achieved thereconciliation and an eternal righteousness.4 And therefore God raised

Him up, exaltedHim toHis right hand, and appointedHim Lord andChrist,PrinceandSaviorforallnations.5

*****

From these few data it is adequately evident that the apostles did notdeny, ignore, or neglect the facts of Christianity but that they fullyhonored themandpenetrated their spiritual significance.No trace is tobe found in themof any separation or conflict between the redemptiveevent and the redemptive word, however much some in the past havetried to postulate such a conflict. The redemptive event is theactualizationoftheredemptiveword;inthesecondthefirsttakesonitsrealandconcreteformandisatthesametimethereforeitsilluminationandinterpretation.

Ifanydoubtaboutthisremainsatall,itisentirelyremovedbythebattlewhichtheapostlesalreadyintheirdayhadtoconduct.Itwasnotmerelyin the second, third, and following centuries but also in the apostolicperiodthatcertainmenappearedwhoregardedthefactsofChristianityofsubordinateandtransientimportance,orelseignoredthemaltogether,andwhoheldthattheideawasthemainthingorinitselfquiteenough.Whatdifferencedoesitmake,theyargued,whetherornotChristbodilyrose from the grave? If only He lives on in the spirit, our salvation issufficientlyassured!But theapostlePaul thoughtverydifferentlyaboutthatandin1Corinthians15heplacedtherealityandthesignificanceofthe resurrection in the clearest possible light. He preaches ChristaccordingtotheScriptures,thatChristwho,accordingtothecounselofthe Father, died, was buried, and was raised again, who after Hisresurrectionwas seen ofmany disciples, andwhose resurrection is thefoundationandsuretyofoursalvation.And, ifpossible,JohnputsevenmoreemphasisonthefactthatheisadeclarerofwhathehasseenwithhiseyesandhandledwithhishandsoftheWordoflife(1John1:1-3).Theprinciple of the antichrist is this that he denies the incarnation of theWord;andtheChristianconfession,tothecontrary,consistsofthebeliefthattheWordhasbecomeflesh,thattheSonofGodhascomebywaterandbyblood(John1:14and1John3:2-3and5:6).Thewholeapostolicpreaching of the letters and of the gospels, hence of the whole NewTestament, comes down to the claim that Jesus, born of Mary and

crucified, is—witness the evidence ofHis exaltation— theChrist, theSonofGod.6

Nowitdeservesnoticethat,inconnectionwiththecontentandpurposeof the apostolic preaching, the use of the single name Jesus, withoutfurtherqualification, is rare in the letters.Usually theapostlesspeakofJesusChrist, orofChrist Jesus, or, evenmore fully, of the orourLordJesus Christ. Even the Evangelists who in their chronicle for themostpartspeakofJesusmakeuse,eitheratthebeginningoratan importantturningpointoftheirgospel,ofthefullnameJesusChrist.7Thistheydobywayofindicatingwhothepersonisconcerningwhomtheyarewritingtheirevangel.IntheActsandinthelettersthisusagebecomestheregularpractice.TheapostlesspeaknotofahumanbeingwhosenamewasJesus,but, by adding the terms Christ and Lord, and the like, they giveexpressiontotheirappreciationofwhothatmanis.Theyarepreachersofthegospel that inthemanJesustheChristofGodhasappearedon theearth.

Thustheyhadgradually,duringtheirgoingaboutwithHim, learned toknowHim.AndespeciallyafterthatimportanthourinCaesareaPhilippialighthaddawnedforthemuponHisperson,andtheyhadallconfessedwithPeterthatHewastheChrist,theSonofthelivingGod(Matt.16:16).ThusJesushadrevealedHimselftothem,atfirstmoreorlessconcealedunderthenameSonofman,butgraduallymoreclearlyandplainlyastheend of His life approached. In the highpriestly prayer He designatesHimselfbythenameJesusChristwhomtheFatherhassent(John17:3).PreciselybecauseHegaveHimselfouttobetheChrist, theSonofGod,HewaschargedbytheJewishcourtwithblasphemyandwascondemnedtodie(Matt.26:63).AndthesuperscriptionaboveHiscrossread:JesusofNazareththeKingoftheJews(Matt.27:37andJohn19:19).

ItistruethatthedisciplescouldnotreconciletheseMessianicclaimsofJesuswithHisapproachingpassionanddeath(Matt.16:22).Butthroughtheresurrection,andafterit,theylearnedtoknowalsothenecessityandthe meaning of the cross. Now they recognized that God had by theresurrectionmadethisJesus,whomtheJewshaddestroyed.tobeLordandChristandhadexaltedHimtobeaPrinceandSavior(Acts2:36and5:31).Thisdoesnotmean tosay thatbeforeHisresurrectionJesuswas

not yet Christ and Lord, and that He became this only after theresurrection,forChristhadproclaimedHimselfastheChristbeforehandand He was then also acknowledged and confessed as such by thedisciples(Matt.16:16).ButbeforetheresurrectionHewasMessiahintheformofaservant,inaformandshapewhichconcealedHisdignityasSonofGodfromtheeyesofmen.IntheresurrectionandafteritHelaidasidethat formofaservant,Here-assumedtheglorywhichHehadwith theFatherbeforetheworldwas(John17:5),andwasthereforeappointedasSonofGodinpower,accordingtothespiritofholinessthatdweltinHim(Rom.1:3).

ItisthereforethatPaulcansaythatHenow,afterithaspleasedGodtorevealHisSontohim,no longerknowsChristaccording to the flesh(2Cor.5:16).BeforeHisrepentanceHeknewChristonlyaccording to theflesh, judged Him solely by His external appearance, according to theformofaservantinwhichHewalkedaboutontheearth.Thenhecouldnot believe that this Jesus, who was without any glory and was evenhanged on the cross and put to death, was the Christ. But by hisconversion all that has changed. Now he knows and judges Christ notaccording to appearance, not according to external, temporal, servantforms, but according to the spirit, according to what was in Christ,according to what He really was internally and in His resurrectionexternallyprovedtobe.

Andthesamecaninasensebesaidofalltheapostles.Itistruethattheyhadbefore thepassionanddeathofChrist beenbrought to abelievingconfessionofHisMessianicreality.Butintheirmindthereremainedanirreconcilability of this reality with the passion and death. Theresurrection,however,reconciledthisconflictforthem.HewastothemnowthesameChristwhohasdescendedintothelowerpartsoftheearthandisascendedupfaraboveallheavens,inorderthatHemightfulfillallthings(Eph.4:9).SpeakingofChrist, theapostles think inoneand thesamebreathofthedeceasedandoftheraisedChrist,ofthecrucifiedandoftheglorifiedChrist.TheyconnecttheirgospelwiththehistoricalJesusnotonly,wholivedafewyearsbackinPalestineanddiedthere,butalsotothatsameJesusasHeis,exalted,andseatedattherighthandofGod’spower.Theystand,sotospeak,atthepointofbisectionofthehorizontal

line, which is tied to the past, to history, and the vertical line, whichconnectsthemwiththelivingLordinheaven.Christianityisthereforeanhistorical religion, but at the same time a religion which lives in thepresentoutof eternity.Thedisciples of Jesus arenot, according toHishistorical name, Jesuites, but, according to the name of His office,Christians.

*****

Thispeculiarpositionwhichtheapostlestookintheirpreachingaftertheresurrection is the reasonwhy they no longer referred to Jesus byHishistoricalnamemerely,butvirtuallyalwaysspokeofHimasJesusChrist,Christ Jesus, our Lord JesusChrist, and so on. As amatter of fact thenameChristsoonlostitsofficialsignificanceinthecircleofthedisciplesandbegantotakeonthatofagivenname.TheconvictionthatJesuswasthe Christ was so strong that He could simply be called Christ, evenwithout the article preceding it. This occurs a few times even in thegospels.8Butwiththeapostles,particularlywithPaul, thisbecomestherule. Moreover, the two names, Jesus Christ, were more than oncereversed,especiallybyPaul,with a view to accentuating evenmore theMessianicrealityofChrist,andthenthenamebecameChristJesus.Thisdesignation,JesusChristorChristJesus,wasthepre-eminentnameforthe early churches. The use and significance of the name in the OldTestamentiscarriedovertoChristintheNew.TheNameoftheLord,orthe Name alone, was in the Old Testament the denomination of therevealedgloryofGod. In thedaysof theNewTestament thatgloryhasappeared in the person of Jesus Christ; and thus the strength of thechurchnowstandsinHisname.Inthatnametheapostlesbaptize(Acts2:38), speak and teach (Acts 4:18), heal the cripple (Acts 3 :6), andforgive sin (Acts 10:43). This name is resisted and it is attacked (Acts26:9).Theconfessionofitbringsonsuffering(Acts5:41).Itisappealedto (Acts 22:8) and ismagnified (Acts 19:17). In this sense the name ofJesusChristwasasortofcompendiumof theconfessionof thechurch,the strength of its faith, and the anchor of its hope. Just as Israel inancienttimesgloried inthenameofJehovah,sothechurchof theNewTestamentfindsitsstrengthinthenameofJesusChrist.InthisnamethenameofJehovahhascomeintoitsfullrevelation.

ThenameofLord,whichintheNewTestamentisconstantlyconnectedwith that of Jesus Christ, points in the same direction. In the gospelsJesusisaddressedbythenameLordanumberoftimesbypersonswhowerenotof thedisciples,butneverthelesscallonHimforhelp.Insuchinstances thenameusually carriesnomore force than that ofRabbi orMaster. But we also find this name often spoken by the disciples.9Further, in the gospel accounts the name of Jesus is sometimesinterchangedbyLukeandJohnwith thatofLord.10And, finally,JesusHimselfalsomakesuseofthatname,designatingHimselfastheLord.11

InthemouthofJesusHimselfandofthedisciplesthisnameoftheLordtakes on a much profounder significance than is contained in theappellationRabbiorMaster.JustwhateverybodywhocametoJesusforhelpandaddressedHimwiththenameLordmeantbyitcannotbesaidwithcertainty.ButJesuswas inHisownconsciousnesstheteacher, themaster,theLordpre-eminently,andHeascribedanauthoritytoHimselfwhichwentfarbeyondthatofthescribes.Somuchisevidentalreadyinsuch passages as Matthew 23:1-11 and Mark 1:22 and 27 where JesusexaltsHimself as the onlyMaster above all other. But it ismuchmoreresolutelyexpressed,andisputbeyondallpossibilityofdoubt,whenHecalls Himself a Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8) and elsewhere callsHimselfDavid’sSonandDavid’sLord (Matt. 22:4345). In these claimsnothinglessisinvolvedthanthatHeistheMessiah,whoisseatedattheright hand of God, shares His power, and judges of the living and thedead.12

ThisdeepsignificancewhichattachesitselftothenameofLordisowingin part also, presumably, to the fact that the names of Jehovah andAdonaioftheOldTestamentweretranslatedbytheGreekkurios,Lord,in the New, that is, by the same word which was also applied to theChrist.AsChristmoreandmoreclearlyexplainedHimself,whoHewas,andasthedisciplesunderstoodbetterandbetterwhichrevelationofGodhadcometotheminChrist,thenameofLordtookonaricherandrichersignificance.TextsoftheOldTestamentinwhichGodwasspokenofwereappliedtotheChristintheNewwithouthesitation.ThusinMark1:3thetextfromIsaiah,PrepareyethewayoftheLord,makeHispathsstraight,is referred to and applied to the preparation by John theBaptist as its

fulfillment. In Christ, GodHimself, the Lord, has come to His people.Andthedisciples,byconfessingJesusasLord,havethusmoreandmoreclearly expressed that God Himself had revealed and given Himself totheminthepersonofChrist.ItisThomaswhomountstotheveryclimaxofthisconfessionduringJesus’sojournonearthwhenhefallsatthefeetoftheresurrectedChristandaddressesHimwiththewords:MyLordandmyGod(John20:28).

After the resurrection the name of Lord becomes the name commonlyusedforJesusinthecircleofHisdisciples.WefinditcontinuallyintheActsandintheletters,especiallythelettersofPaul.SometimesthenameLordisusedalone,butusuallyitgoescombinedwithotherdesignations:theLordJesus,ortheLordJesusChrist,orourLordJesusChrist,orourLordandSaviorJesusChrist,andsoon.ByusingthisnameofLordthebelievers express that Jesus Christ whowas humiliated to the point ofdeathandthecross,hasbyreasonofHisperfectobediencebeenraisedtoLordandPrince(Acts2:35and5:31),whoisseatedatGod’srighthand(Acts2:34),whoisLordofall(Acts10:36):firstofallthechurchwhichHehaspurchasedwithHisblood(Acts20:28),andfurtherofallcreationwhichHewillsometimejudgeastheJudgeoflivinganddead(Acts10:42and17:31).

Whoever,therefore,shallcalluponthenameofJesusasChristandLord,shallbesaved(Acts2:21and1Cor.1:2).TobeChristianistoconfesswiththemouthandtobelievewiththeheartthatGodhasraisedHimupfromthedead.13Thecontentofthepreachingis:ChristJesus,theLord(2Cor.4:5). So completely is the essence of Christianity epitomized in thisconfessionthatinthewritingsofPaulthenameofLordalmostcomestobe used as a given name applied to Christ in His distinction from theFather and the Spirit. As Christians we have one God, the Father, ofwhomareallthings,andweinHim,andoneLordJesusChrist,bywhomareallthings,andwebyHim,andoneandtheselfsameSpirit,dividingtoeverymanseverallyasHewill(1Cor.8:6and12:11).JustasthenameofGodinthewritingsofPaulbecomesthedomesticnameoftheFather,sothenameofLordbecomesthedomesticnameofChrist.

Theapostolicblessing,accordingly,prays that the churchmayhave thegraceoftheLordJesusChrist,theloveofGod,andthefellowshipofthe

HolySpirit (2Cor. 13:13).TheonenameofGod interprets itself in thethreepersonsofFather,Son,andSpirit(Matt.28:19).

*****

IfChrist, according to the testimonyof theapostles,occupies sohighaplace, it is nowonder that all kinds ofDivine attributes andworks areascribedtoHim,andthateventheDivinenatureisrecognizedinHim.

ThefigureweencounterinthepersonofChristonthepagesofScriptureisauniquefigure.Ontheonehand,Heisveryman.Hebecamefleshandcameintotheflesh(John1:14and1John4:2-3).Heborethelikenessofsinful flesh (Rom. 8:3). He came of the fathers, according to the flesh(Rom. 9:5), of Abraham’s seed (Gal. 3:16), of Judah’s line (Heb. 7:14),andofDavid’sgeneration(Rom1:3).Hewasbornofawoman(Gal.4:4),partook of our flesh and blood (Heb. 2:14), possessed a spirit (Matt.27:50),asoul(Matt.26:38),andabody(1Peter2:24),andwashumaninthefull, truesense.AsachildHegrew,andwaxedstrong inspirit,andincreasedinwisdomandstature,andinfavorwithGodandman(Luke2:40 and 52). He was hungry and thirsty, sorrowful and joyful, wasmovedbyemotionandstirredtoanger.14HeplacedHimselfunder thelawandwasobedienttoituntildeath.15Hesuffered,diedonthecross,andwasburied inagarden.Hewaswithout formorcomeliness.WhenwelookeduponHimtherewasnobeautythatweshoulddesireHim.Hewasdespised,andunworthyofesteem,amanofsorrowsandacquaintedwithgrief(Isa.53:2-3).

Nevertheless this samemanwasdistinguished fromallmenand raisedhigh above them. Not only was He according to His human natureconceivedbytheHolySpirit;notonlywasHethroughoutHislife,despitealltemptation,freefromsin;andnotonlywasHeafterHisdeathraisedupagainandtakenintoheaven;butthesamesubject,thesameperson,thesameIwhohumiliatedHimselfsodeeplythatHeassumedtheformof a servant and became obedient unto the death of the cross, alreadyexisted inadifferent formofexistence longbeforeHis incarnationandhumiliation. He existed then in the form of God and thought it norobbery to be equal with God (Phil. 2:6). At His resurrection andascension He simply received again the glory which He had with the

Fatherbefore theworldwas (John 17:5).He is eternal asGodHimself,havingbeenwithHimalreadyinthebeginning(John1:1and1John1:1).HeistheAlphaandtheOmega,thefirstandthelast,thebeginningandtheend (Rev.22:13);He isomnipresent, so that, thoughwalkingaboutonthefaceoftheearth,HeissimultaneouslyinthebosomoftheFatherinheaven (John1:18and3:13) ; andafterHisglorificationHeremainswithHischurchandfulfillsall inall;16Heisunchangeableandfaithfuland is the same yesterday, and today, and forever (Heb. 13:8); He isomniscient, so that He hears prayers;17 He is the One who knows allmen’shearts(Acts1:24;unlessthereferencehereistotheFather);Heisomnipotent so that all things are subjected untoHim and all power isgiventoHiminheavenandonearth,andisthechiefofallkings.18

While inpossessionofall theseDivineattributes,Healsoshares in theDivineworks.TogetherwiththeFatherandtheSpiritHeisthecreatorofallthings(John1:3andCol.1:5).Heisthefirstborn,thebeginning,andtheHeadofallcreatures(Col.1:15andRev.3:14).Heupholdsallthingsby the word of His might, so that they are not only of Him but alsocontinuously in Him and through Him (Heb. 1:3 and Col. 1:17). And,above all,He preserves, reconciles, and restores all things and gatherstheminto oneunderHimself asHead.As suchHebears especially thenameoftheSavioroftheworld.IntheOldTestamentthenameofSaviororRedeemerwasgiventoGod,19but in theNewTestament theSonaswellastheFatherbearsthisname.InsomeplacesthisnameisgiventoGod,20 and in some places it is given to Christ.21 Sometimes it is notclearwhetherthenamereferstoGodortoChrist(Tit.2:13and2Peter1:1).ButitisChristinwhomandthroughwhomthesavingworkofGodiswhollyeffected.

All this points to a unity between Father and Son, between God andChrist,suchasnowhereelseexistsbetweentheCreatorandHiscreature.Even though Christ has assumed a human nature which is finite andlimitedandwhichbegantoexist intime,asperson,asSelf,ChristdoesnotinScripturestandonthesideofthecreaturebutonthesideofGod.He partakes ofGod’s virtues and ofHisworks;He possesses the sameDivinenature.ThislastpointcomesintoparticularlyclearexpressioninthethreenameswhicharegivenChrist:thatoftheImage,theWord,and

theSonofGod.

ChrististheImageofGod,thebrightnessofGod’sglory,andtheexpressimage ofHis person.22 InChrist the invisibleGod has become visible.WhoeverseesHimseestheFather(John14:9).WhoeverwantstoknowwhoGodisandwhatHeismustbeholdtheChrist.AsChrist is,suchistheFather.Further,ChrististheWordofGod(John1:1andRev.19:13).InHimtheFatherhasperfectlyexpressedHimself:Hiswisdom,Hiswill,His excellences, His whole being. He has given Christ to have life inHimself (John 5 :26).Whoever wants to learn to knowGod’s thought,God’scounsel,andGod’swillformankindandtheworld,lethimlistentoChrist,andhearHim(Matt.17:5).Finally,Christ is theSonofGod,theSon, as John describes Him, often without any further qualification (1John2:22 if. andHeb. 1:1, 8), the one andonly-begotten, the ownandbelovedSon,inwhomtheFatheriswellpleased.23Whoeverwouldbeachild ofGod, let him accept Christ, for all who acceptHim receive therightandthepowertobecalledthechildrenofGod(John1:12).

ScripturefinallyplacesitscrownuponthistestimonyofScripturebyalsoallowingHimtheDivinename.ThomasconfessedHimalreadybeforetheascension ashisLord andhisGod (John 20:28). John testifies ofHimthatastheWordHewaswithGodatthebeginningandHimselfwasGod.PauldeclaresthatHeis fromthe fathersaccordingto the fleshbut thataccordingtoHisessenceHeisGodaboveall,tobeblessedforever(Rom.9:5).The letter to theHebrews states thatHe is exaltedhighabove theangelsandisbyGodHimselfaddressedbythenameofGod(Heb.1:8-9).PeterspeaksofHimasourGodandSaviorJesusChrist(2Peter1:1).InthebaptismalmandateofJesusasreportedinMatthew28:19,andinthebenedictionsoftheapostles,24ChriststandsononelinewiththeFatherand the Spirit. The name and essence, the attributes and works of theGodhead are recognized in the Son (and the Spirit) as well as in theFather.

JesustheChrist,theSonofthelivingGod—uponthisstoneisthechurchbuilt. From the very beginning thewholly unique significance ofChristwascleartoallbelievers.HewasconfessedbythemallastheLordwhobyHis teaching and life had accomplished salvation, the forgiveness ofsins, and immortality, who was thereupon raised by the Father to His

righthand,andwhowouldsoonreturnasJudgetojudgethelivingandthe dead. The same names that are given Him in the letters of theapostles are givenHim also in the earliest Christianwritings. By thosenamesHeisaddressedintheearlyprayersandsongs.Allwereconvincedthat there is one God, that they were His children, one Lord who hadmade sure and granted to them the love of God, and one Spirit, whocaused them all to walk in newness of life. The baptismal mandate ofMatthew28:19,whichcame intogeneraluseat theendof theapostolicperiod,istheevidenceofthisunanimityofconviction.

But the moment Christians began to reflect on the content of thisconfession, all kinds of difference of opinion became apparent. Themembers of the church, who were previously educated in Jewry orheathendom and for the most part were among the untutored of thecountry, were not in position immediately to appropriate the apostolicteachingintheirownminds.Theylivedinasocietyinwhichallkindsofideas and currents of thought were criss-crossing, and thus theycontinuouslyweresubjecttomuchtemptationanderror.Evenduringthelife of the apostleswe notice that various heretical teachers had forcedtheir way into the church and tried to wrench it from the fixity of itsbelief.AtColosse,forinstance,therewerememberswhodidinjusticetothe person and work of Christ and changed the gospel into a new law(Col.2:3ff.and16ff.).AtCorinthcertainlibertinesstoodup,who,abusingChristianliberty,wantedtobeboundtonorule(1Cor.6:12and8:1).TheapostleJohninhis first letterconductsanargumentagainstcertainso-calledprophetswhodeniedthecomingofChrist intothefleshandthusdid violence to the genuineness of His human nature (1 John 2:18ff.;4:1ff.;5:5ff.).

And so it remained in thepost-apostolic period. In fact, the errors andheresiesgrewinvariety,force,anddistributionfromthesecondcenturyon.TherewerethosewhobelievedintherealhumannatureofChrist,inHis supernatural birth, His resurrection and ascension, but whorecognizedtheDivineinHiminnothingmorethananunusualmeasureofthegiftsandpowersoftheSpirit.ThesewerethoughtofashavingbeengivenHimatHisbaptisminordertoequipHimforHisreligious-moraltask. The followers of this movement lived under the influence of the

deistic,JewishideaoftherelationshipofGodandtheworld.TheysimplycouldnotconceiveofamoreintimaterelationshipbetweenGodandmanthan one which consisted of a sharing of gifts and abilities. Jesus,accordingly,wasindeedarichlyendowedperson,areligiousgenius,butHewasandHeremainedaman.

But others, brought up formerly in heathendom, found themselvesattracted rather to the polytheistic idea. They thought that they couldverywellunderstandthatChrist,accordingtoHisinnernature,shouldbeoneof themany,or evenperhaps thehighest, of allDivinebeings.ButtheycouldnotbelievethatsuchaDivine,purebeingcouldhaveassumedamaterialandfleshlynature.AndsotheysacrificedtherealhumanityofChristandsaidthat itwasonly temporarily,and inappearancemerely,thatHehadgoneaboutonearth,muchas theAngels according toOldTestament report had often done. Both thought-currents, bothmovements,continueup to thepresentday.Atone timetheDivinityofChristissacrificedtothehumanity;atanotheritisthehumanitythatissacrificedto theDivinity.Therearealwaysextremeswhichsacrifice theideatothefact,orthefacttotheidea.Theydonotcomprehendtheunityandharmonyofthetwo.

*****

But the Christian church from the very beginning stood on a differentbasis and in the person of Christ confessed the most intimate, theprofoundest,andthereforethealtogetherunique,communionofGodandman. Its representatives in the earliest period sometimes expressedthemselves in an awkward way. They had to struggle, first to form asomewhatclearnotionofthereality,andthentogiveexpressiontothisidea in clear language. But, all the same, the church did not for thatreasonletitselfbepushedoffitsbase.Rather,thechurchavoidedtheoneand the other extreme and clung to the teaching of the apostlesconcerningthepersonofChrist.

However,whenoneandthesamepersonsharesintheDivinenatureandalsoisveryman,itfollowsthataneffortatdefinitionmustbemade,andatasharpdelineationofhowthatpersonisrelatedbothtotheDeityandtotheworld.Andwhenthiseffortwasmade,apathoferrorandheresy

defineditselfagaintotheright‘andtotheleft.

When,inotherwords,theunityofGod—whichisafundamentaltruthofChristianity—wasunderstoodinsuchaway that thebeingofGodwasperfectlycoterminusandcoincidentwith thepersonof theFather, thenthereremainednoroomintheGodheadfor theChrist.Christ thenwaspushed outside the pale of deity, and placed alongside of man, forbetweentheCreatorandthecreaturethereisnogradualtransition.OnecouldthengoontosaywithAriusthatintimeandstatusHetranscendedthewholeworld,thatHewasthefirstamongcreatedcreatures,andthatHewas superior to them all in position and in honor. But Christ thusremainsacreature.TherewasatimewhenHedidnotexist,andit is intimethatHe,likeeveryothercreature,wascalledintoexistencebyGod.

Intheattempt,however,toholdtotheunityofGodandatthesametimetograntthepersonofChristtheplaceof,honorpropertoHim,itiseasytofail intoanothererror, theerrornamedafter its foremostproponent,Sabellius.WhileArius, so to speak, identified thebeingof theGodheadwiththepersonoftheFather,Sabelliussacrificedallthreeofthepersonsto the being of the Godhead. According to His teaching, the threepersons,Father,Son,andSpirit,arenoteternalrealities,containedinthebeingoftheGodhead,buttheyareformsandmanifestationsinwhichtheone Divine Being manifests Himself successively in the course of thecenturies:namely,intheOldTestament,intheearthlysojournofChrist,andafterPentecost.Bothheresieshave throughout the centuries foundtheir adherents. The so-called Groningen Theologie, for instance,renewedessentially thedoctrineofArius,andModernTheologyat firstwalkedinthewayofSabellius.

It requiredmuch prayer andmuch struggle for the church to take therightway throughall theseheresies, themore sobecause eachof themwasmodifiedandmingledwithallsortsofdeparturesandvariations.Butunder the leadership of greatmen, eminent by reason of their piety aswellas theirpowerof thought,andtherefore justlycalled fathersof thechurch,thatchurchremainedfaithfultotheteachingoftheapostles.AttheSynodofNiceain325thechurchconfesseditsfaithintheoneGod,theFather,theAlmighty,creatorofallthingsvisibleandinvisible,andinoneLordJesusChrist,theSonofGod,whowasbegottenbytheFatheras

theonly-begotten, that is,outof thebeingofGod,GodofGod,LightofLight,veryGodofveryGod,begotten,notmade,beingofonesubstancewiththeFather,bywhomallthingsinheavenandearthweremade,andintheHolySpirit.

VerysignificantasthisNiceanresultwasitbynomeansputastoptothedoctrinal disputes. On the contrary, the confession of Nicea gaveopportunity fornewquestions anddifferent answers.For, although therelationshipofChrist to thebeingofGodand to theworldofmenwasnowdeterminedinthesensethat inHispersonHesharedinboth,andthatHewas inHisownpersonbothGodandman, thequestionwouldnotdownastothenatureofthatrelationshipbetweenthosetwonaturesin one person. In the answer to that question, too, various ways weretaken.

Nestoriusconcluded that if therewere twonatures inChrist, there alsohadtobetwopersons,twoselves,whichcouldonlybemadeonebysomemoral tie such as that which obtains in the marriage of a man and awoman. And Eutyches, proceeding from a like identification of personand nature, came to the conclusion that if in Christ there was but oneperson,oneself,present,thenthetwonatureshadtobesomingledandweldedtogetherthatonlyonenature,aDivine-humanone,wouldemergefrom the blending. In Nestorius the distinction of the natures wasmaintainedatthecostoftheunityoftheperson;inEutychestheunityofthepersonwasmaintainedatthecostofthedualityofthenatures.

After a long and vehement struggle, however, the church got beyondthesedisputes.AttheCouncilofChalcedonin451itstatedthattheoneperson of Christ consisted of two natures, unchanged and unmingled(against Eutyches), and not separated nor divided (against Nestorius),andthatthesenaturesexistedalongsideofeachother,hayingtheirunityin the one person. With this decision which, later, at the Synod ofConstantinople in 680 was amplified and completed on one specificpoint, the century-long struggle about the person of Christ came to anend. In these disputes the church had preserved the essence ofChristianity, the absolute character of the Christian religion, and thusalsoitsownindependence.

*****

It is of course self-evident that this confession ofNicea andChalcedonmaynot layclaimto infallibility.Thetermsofwhich thechurchand itstheologymakeuse, such as person, nature, unity of substance, and thelike, arenot found inScripture,but are theproductof reflectionwhichChristianity gradually had to devote to this mystery of salvation., Thechurchwascompelledtodothisreflectingbytheheresieswhichloomedup on all sides, both within the church and outside of it. All thoseexpressionsandstatementswhichareemployedintheconfessionofthechurchand in the language of theology arenot designed to explain themysterywhichinthismatterconfrontsit,butrathertomaintainitpureand unviolated over against those who would weaken or deny it. Theincarnation of theWord is not a problemwhichwemust solve, or cansolve,butawonderfulfact,rather,whichwegratefullyconfessinsuchawayasGodHimselfpresentsittousinHisWord.

But, understood in this way, the confession which the church fixed atNiceaandChalcedonisofgreatvalue.Therehavebeenmany,andtherestillaremany,wholookdownuponthedoctrineofthetwonaturesfromaloftyvantagepoint,andtrytosupplantitbyotherwordsandphrases.What difference does it reallymake, they begin by saying, whether weagreewiththisdoctrineornot?WhatmattersisthatweourselvespossessthepersonofChrist,Hewhostandshighandexaltedabovethisawkwardconfession.Butbeforelongthesesamepersonsbeginintroducingwordsand terms themselves in order to describe the person of Christ whomtheyaccept.Nobodycanescape fromthis situation, forwhatwedonotknowwecannotclaimtopossess. IfwebelievethatwehavetheChrist,thatwehavecommunionwithHim,thatweareHisown,thensuchbeliefmust be confessed with the mouth and be spoken in words, terms,expressions,anddescriptionsofsomekindorother.AndthenhistoryhastaughtthatthetermsoftheattackersoftheDoctrineofTwoNaturesarefarpoorerinworthandforce,andthattheyoften,indeed,involvedoinginjusticetotheincarnationasScriptureexplainsittous.

Inmoderntimes,forinstance,therearemanywhothinkoftheDoctrineofTwoNaturesastheacmeofunreasonablenessandwhointheirmindsform an entirely different picture of the person of Christ. They cannot

denythatthereissomethinginChristwhichdifferentiatesHimfromallmenandraisesHimabovethemall.ButthisDivineelementwhichtheyrecognize inChrist they regard not as a partaking of theDivine natureitself, but as a Divine endowment or strength granted to Christ in aparticularlyhighdegree.Theytendtosay,accordingly,thattherearetwosidestoChrist,aDivineandahumanside;or thatHecanbe lookedatfromtwopointsofview;orthatHelivedintwosuccessivestates,thatofhumiliationand thatof exaltation;or thatHe, althoughhuman, byHispreaching of the Word of God and the founding of His kingdom,neverthelesswastheextraordinaryandperfectvehicleofGod’srevelationandsohasobtainedforusthevalueofGod.Butanyunprejudicedreaderwill feel that theserepresentationsare simply somanymodifications inthelanguageofthechurchnotmerely,butalsothattheymakesomethingofthepersonofChristother than thatwhich thechurchatall timesonthebasisofthetestimonyoftheapostleshasconfessed.

Afterall,Divinegiftsandpowersareinacertainsensegiventoeveryone,forallgoodandperfectgiftscomedownfromtheFatherof lights.Andeven the unusual gifts, such as were the portion of the prophets, forexample,donot raise theseprophetsabove theplaneofhumanbeings.Prophets and apostles weremen of like passions as we have. If Christthereforereceivednomorethanextraordinarygiftsandpowers,Hewasnomorethanahumanbeing,andthentherecanbenosuchthingasanincarnation of the Word in Him. But then He cannot, as othersnevertheless maintain, by virtue of His resurrection and ascension beraisedtothebeingofGod,orhaveobtainedthevalueorworthofGodforus.TheseparationbetweenGodandmanisnotagradualdifferencebutadeep gulf. The relationship is that of Creator and creature, and thecreaturefromthenatureofhisbeingcanneverbecomeCreator,norhavethesignificanceandworthforushumanbeingsoftheCreator,onwhomweareabsolutelydependent.

It is remarkable, therefore, that some in modern times, after havingcompared all these newer representations concerning the person ofChristwiththeteachingofthechurchandofScripture,havecometothehonestconclusionthatinthelastanalysisthedoctrineofthechurchdoesmost justice to the doctrine of Scripture. The teaching that Christ was

Godandmaninonepersonisnotaproductofheathenphilosophybutisbasedontheapostolicwitness.

Thiscertainly is themysteryofsalvationthatHewhowasHimselfwithGodinthebeginningandwasGod(John1:1),whowasintheformofGodanddidnotthinkitrobberytobeequalwithGod(Phil.2:6),whowasthebrightnessofGod’sgloryandtheexpressimageofHisperson(Heb.1:3),in the fulness of time became flesh (John 1:14), was born of a woman(Gal.4:4),humbledHimself,havingtakenontheformofaservant,andwasmadeinthelikenessofmen(Phil.2:7).

*****

ChristwasGod,andisGod,andwillforeverremainGod.HewasnottheFather,northeSpirit,buttheSon,theown,only-begotten,belovedSonoftheFather.AnditwasnottheDivinebeing,neithertheFathernortheSpirit,butthepersonoftheSonwhobecamemaninthefulnessoftime.AndwhenHebecamemanandasmanwentaboutonearth,evenwhenHeagonizedinGethsemaneandhungon thecross,HeremainedGod’sownSoninwhomtheFatherwaswellpleased(hadallHispleasure).Itistrue.ofcourse,astheapostlesays,thatChrist,beingintheformofGod,did not.think it robbery to be equalwithGod, yetmadeHimself of noreputationandemptiedHimself(Phil.2:6-7).Butit isamistaketotakethistomean,assomedo,thatChrist, inHis incarnation, inthestateofhumiliation, completely or partly divestedHimself ofHisDivinity, laidaside His Divine attributes, and thereupon in the state of exaltationgraduallyassumedthemagain.Forhowcouldthisbe,sinceGodcannotdenyHimself (2 Tim. 2:13), and as the Immutable One inHimself fartranscendsallbecomingandchange?No,evenwhenHebecamewhatHewasnot,HeremainedwhatHewas,theOnly-BegottenoftheFather.Butit istruethattheApostlesaysthat inthissenseChristmadeHimselfofnoreputation:beingintheformofGod,Heassumedtheformofamanandaservant.Onecanexpressithumanlyandsimplyinthisway:beforeHisincarnationChristwasequalwiththeFathernotaloneinessenceandattributes,butHehadalsotheformofGod.HelookedlikeGod,HewasthebrightnessofHisglory,andtheexpressedimageofHisperson.Hadanyone been able to see Him, he would immediately have recognizedGod.ButthischangedatHisincarnation.ThenHetookontheformofa

humanbeing, the formofaservant.Whoever lookedatHimnowcouldnolongerrecognizeinHimtheOnly-BegottenSonoftheFather,exceptbytheeyeoffaith.HehadlaidasideHisDivineformandbrightness.HehidHisDivinenaturebehindtheformofaservant.OnearthHewasandHelookedlikeoneofus.

The incarnation thereforealso implies in the secondplace thatHewhoremainedwhatHewasalsobecamewhatHewasnot.Hebecamethisatapoint in time, at aparticularmoment inhistory, at thathourwhen theHoly Spirit came over Mary and the power of the Most Highovershadowed her (Luke 1:35). But all the same this incarnation waspreparedforduringthecenturies.

If we are to understand the incarnation aright, we can say that thegenerationoftheSonandthecreationoftheworldwerepreparatorytotheincarnationoftheWord.Thisisnotatalltosaythatthegenerationand the creation already contain the incarnation. For Scripture alwaysrelates the incarnation of the Son to the redemption from sin and theaccomplishment of salvation.25 But the generation and creation,especiallyalsothecreationofman in the imageofGod,bothteachthatGodissharable, inanabsolutesensewithin,andinarelativesenseoutsideof,theDivinebeing.Ifthiswerenotthecase,therewouldnotbeanypossibility of an incarnationofGod.Whoever thinks the incarnationofGodimpossibleinprinciplealsodeniesthecreationoftheworldandthegeneration of the Son. And whoever acknowledges the creation andgenerationcanhavenoobjectioninprincipletotheincarnationofGodinhumannature.

More directly the incarnation of the Word was prepared for in therevelationwhich began immediately after the fall, continued in Israel’shistory, and reached its climax in the blessing of Mary. The OldTestament is a constantly closer approximation of God to man with aview,inthefulnessoftime,tomakingperpetualdwellinginhim.

Since theSonofGod,who tookonhumannature inMary,had existedbefore that time, and from eternity, as the person of the Son, Hisconception inMary’s womb did not take place through the will of thefleshnorthewilloftheman,butbytheovershadowingoftheHolySpirit.

Itistruethattheincarnationislinkedwiththeprecedingrevelationandcompletesit,butitisnotitselfaproductofnatureorofhumanity.ItisaworkofGod,arevelation,thehighestrevelation.JustasitwastheFatherwhosentHisSonintotheworld,andtheHolySpiritwhoovershadowedMary, so itwas theSonHimselfwho tookofour fleshandblood (Heb.2:14).TheincarnationwasHisownwork;Hewasnotpassiveinregardtoit.HebecamefleshbyHisownwillandHisowndeed.ThereforeHesetsasidethewillofthefleshandthewilloftheman,andpreparesahumannature for Himself inMary’s womb through the overshadowing of theHolySpirit.

That humannature did not exist beforehand. Itwas not brought downwithChristfromheavenandborneintoMaryfromtheoutsideand,sotospeak,conductedthroughherbody.TheAnabaptiststeachthis inordertoholdtothesinlessnessofthehumannatureinChrist.Butintakingthisstand, theyare following in the example of the ancient gnosticism, andproceedfromtheideathatfleshandmatterareinthemselvessinful.Butintheincarnation,also,ScriptureholdstothegoodnessofcreationandtotheDivineoriginofmatter.

Christ took His human nature from Mary.26 So far as the flesh isconcerned,HeisfromDavidandthefathers.27ThereforethisnatureinHim is a true and perfect human nature, like ours in all things, sinexcepted.28 Nothing human was strange to Christ. The denial of thecoming of Christ in the flesh is the beginning of the antichrist (1 John2:22).

JustasthehumannatureofChristdidnotexistbeforetheconceptioninMary,soitdidnotexistforsometimebefore,norforsometimeafter,inastateofseparationfromChrist.TheseedconceivedinMary,andthechildthatwasbornofher,didnotfirstgrowupindependentlyintoaman,intoaperson,aself,inorderthentobeassumedbytheChristandunitedwithHimself. This heresy, too, had its supporters in earlier and later times,butScriptureknowsnothingofit.ThatholythingwhichwasconceivedinMary’s womb was from the beginning the Son of God and from thebeginningHeborethatname(Luke1:35).TheWorddidnotlatertakeahumanbeinguntoHimself,butbecameflesh(John1:14).AndthereforetheChristianchurchinitsconfessionsaidthatthepersonoftheSondid

notassumeahumanpersonbutahumannature,rather.Onlyinthatwaycanthedualityofthenaturesandtheunityofthepersonbemaintained.

For — and this is the third point which requires our attention in thismatter—even thoughScripturestatesasplainlyaspossiblethatChristwas theWordandthatHebecameflesh, thataccording to the fleshHewasfromthefathersbutthataccordingtoHisessenceReisGodoverall,blessedforever,stillinthatChristitalwayspresentsonepersontous.ItisalwaysthesameSelfthatspeaksandactsinChrist.ThechildwhichisbornbearsthenameofthemightyGod,theeverlastingFather(Isa.9:6).David’sSon is at the same timeDavid’sLord.The sameonewhocamedownis theonewhoascendedupfaraboveallheavens(Eph.4:10).HewhoaccordingtothefleshisfromthefathersisaccordingtoHisessenceGodoverall,blessedforever(Rom.9:5).ThoughgoingaboutonearthHewasandHeremained inheaven, in thebosomof theFather (John1:18and 3:13). Born in time and living in time He nevertheless is beforeAbraham(John8:58).ThefulnessoftheGodheaddwellsbodilyinHim(Col.2:9).

Inshort, tooneandthesamesubject,oneandthesameperson,Divineand human attributes andworks, eternity and time, omnipresence andlimitation, creative omnipotence and creaturely weakness are ascribed.Thisbeing so, theunionof the twonatures inChrist cannot have beenthatof twopersons.Twopersonscanthrough lovebe intimatelyunitedwith each other, it is true, but they can never become one person, oneself. In fact, love implies two persons and effects only a mystical andethicalunity.IftheunionoftheSonofGodwithhumannaturewereofthischaracteritcouldatbestbedistinguishedindegreebutnotinkindfrom that which unites God with His creatures, specifically with Hischildren.ButChristoccupiesauniqueposition.HedidnotuniteHimselfinamoralwaywithman,anddidnot takeanexistinghumanbeingupinto His fellowship, but He prepared a human nature for Himself inMary’swombandbecameahumanbeingandaservant.justasahumanbeingcango fromonestateof life toanother,andcan liveat thesametimeorinsuccessionintwospheresoflife,so,bywayofanalogy,Christ,whowasintheformofGod,wentaboutonearthintheformofaservant.TheunionwhichinHisincarnationcametobeeffectedwasnotamoral

union between two persons, but a union of two natures in the sameperson. Man and woman, no matter how intimately united in love,remaintwopersons.Godandman,althoughunitedbythemostintimatelove,remaindifferentinessence.ButinChristmanisthesamesubjectastheWordwhich in the beginningwaswithGod andHimself wasGod.This is a unique, incomparable, and unfathomable union of God andman.Andthebeginningandendofallwisdomisthis:AndtheWordwasmadeflesh,anddweltamongus,andwebeheldHisglory,thegloryasoftheonly-begottenoftheFather,fullofgraceandtruth(John1:14).

In this union Christ in the unity of His person commands all theattributesandpowerswhicharepropertobothnatures.Somehavetriedtoeffectastillstrongerandcloserunionof thetwonaturesbyteachingthat the two natures, immediately at the incarnation,werewelded intooneDivine-humannature,orthattheDivinenaturedivesteditselfofitscharacteristicsandcondescended to the limitation of humannature, orthatthehumannaturelostitspropertiesandreceivedthoseoftheDivinenature (be it all of them, or just some of them such as omnipresence,omnipotence, omniscience, and quickening power.) But the Reformedconfession has always repudiated and attacked such a welding of twonaturesintooneandsuchacommunicationofthepropertiesoftheonenaturetotheother.Itwasaviewofthetwonatureswhichresultedinamingling and confusion of them and so in a pantheistic denial of thedifferenceinessencebetweenGodandman,Creatorandcreature.

True,thereisanintimaterelationshipbetweenthetwonaturesandtheirpropertiesandpowers.Butitisarelationshipwhichcomesintobeinginthe unity of the person. A stronger, deeper, more intimate union isinconceivable.Justas—tomakeacomparisonandnotanequatingofthetwo—soulandbodyareunited inonepersonandnevertheless remaindistinguishedfromeachotherinessenceandproperties,soinChristthesamepersonis thesubjectofbothnatures.Thedifferencebetweensoulandbodyistheassumptionandconditionoftheinnerunionofthetwoinone and the same human being, and so too the difference between theDivineandthehumannatureistheconditionandbasisoftheirunioninChrist.Theweldingof thetwonatures intooneandthecommunicationof the properties from one to another make for no more intimate

relationship, but make for a mingling or fusion, and, in point of fact,impoverishthe fulnesswhich is inChrist.Theysubtracteither fromtheDivine,orfromthehuman,nature,orfrombothnatures,andweakentheword of the Scripture that inHim, that is, in Christ, the fulness of theGodhead bodily dwells (Col. 2:9 and 1:19). That fulness is maintainedonly if both natures are distinguished from each other, communicatingtheir properties and attributes not to each other, but placing them,rather, in the service of the one person. So it is always the same richChristwho inHis humiliation and exaltation commands the propertiesandpowersofbothnaturesandwhopreciselyby thatmeans canbringthose works to pass, which, as the works of the Mediator, aredistinguishedon theonehand fromtheworksofGodandon theotherhandfromtheworksofman,andwhichtakeauniqueplaceinthehistoryoftheworld.

By this Doctrine of the Two Natures one has the advantage thateverythingwhichScripturesaysofthepersonofChristandeverythingitascribes to Him comes into its own. On the one hand He then is andremains the one and eternal Son ofGod,whowith the Father and theSpirit has made all things, sustains and governs them,29 and whothereforemayremain theobjectofourworship.Hewassuchanobjectalreadyinthedaysoftheapostles,30evenasHewasthen,andnowyetis, the object of the faith and confidence of all His disciples.31 But HecannotandHemaynotbebothofthesethingsunlessHeistrueGod,forit iswritten:Thou shaltworship theLordThyGodandHimonly shaltthouserve(Matt.4:10).ThebasisforthereligiousworshipofChristcanbeonlyHisDivinenature,sothatwhoeverdeniesthisandyetmaintainstheworshipbecomesguiltyofdeifyingthecreatureandof idolatry.TheDivinityofChristisnotanabstractdoctrinebutsome-thingwhichisofthehighestimportanceforthelifeofthechurch.

Ontheotherhand,theChristbecameverymanandperfectman,likeusinallthings,sinexcepted.Hewasinfant,child,youth,andman,andHegrewinwisdomandinfavorwithGodandman(Luke2:40and52).Allthis isnot appearance and illusionmerely, as thosemust saywhoholdthat theDivinepropertiesbelong to thehumannature,but it is the fulltruth.TherewasinChristagradualdevelopment,aprogressivegrowthin

body,inthepowersofthesoul, infavorwithGodandman.Thegiftsofthe Spirit were not given to Him all at once, but successively in evergreatermeasure.TherewerethingswhichHehadtolearn,andwhichatfirstHedidnotknow(Mark13:32andActs1:7).EventhoughHewasinpossession of the not-able-to-sin state of being, there was in Him,becauseofHisweakhumannature,thepossibilityofbeingtemptedandof suffering and dying. So long as He was on the earth He was notaccordingtoHishumannatureinheaven,andhenceHetoodidnotlivebysightbutbyfaith.HefoughtandHesuffered,andinallthisHeclungfixedlytothewordandthepromiseofGod.ThusHelearnedobediencefrom the things which He suffered, continually established Himself inobedience,andsosanctifiedHimself.32AndinthisatthesametimeHeleftus anexample, andbecame theauthor of eternal salvationunto allthemthatobeyHim(Heb.5:9).

Notes

1. 2Cor.5:21;Heb.7:26;1Peter1:11;2:22;and1John3:5.2. Gal.3:13;Col.2:14.3. Phil.2:6;Heb.5:7-8;l2:2and13:12.4. Rom.3:25;5:9;andCol.1:20.5. Acts2:32,33,36;5:30,31;Rom.8:34; 1Cor. 15:20;Phil. 2:9; and

otherpassages.6. John20:31;1John2:22;4:15;5:5.7. Matt.1:1,18;16:20;Mark1:1;John1:17;and17:3.8. Matt.8:2,6,21;15:22;17:15;andotherpassages.9. Matt.14:28,30;26:22;11:3;21:15,16,17,and21.10. Luke1:43; 2:11, 38; 7:13, 31; 10:1; 11:39; 17:6; and John 4:1; 6:23;

11:2;20:2,13,18,25,and28;andsoon.11. Matt.7:21;12:8;21:3;22:43-45;Mark5:19;andJohn13:14.12. Matt.21:4,5;13:35;24:42ff.;and25:34ff.13. Rom.10:9;1Cor.12:3;andPhil.2:11.14. Matt.4:2;John11:35;and19:28;andelsewhere.15. Gal.4;4;Phil.2:8;Heb.5:8;and10:7,9.16. Matt.28:20;Eph.1:23;and4:10.17. Acts1:24;7:59;16:13;Rom.10:13andelsewhere.

18. Matt.28:18;1Cor.15:27;Eph.1:22;Rev.1:4;and19:16.19. Isa.43:3,11;45:15;Jer.14:8;andHos.13:4.20. 1Tim.1:11;2:3;Titus1:3;and2:10.21. 2Tim.1:10;Tit.1:4;2:13;3:6;2Peter1:11;2:20;and3:18.22. 2Cor.4:4;Col.1:15;andHeb.1:3.23. Matt.3:17;17:5;John1:14;Rom.8:32;Eph.1:6;andCol.1:13.24. 2Cor.13:13;1Peter1:2;andRev.1:4-6.25. Matt.1:21;John3:16;Rom.8:3;andGal.4:4,5.26. Matt.1:20;Luke2:7;andGal.4:4.27. Acts2:30;Rom.1:3;and9:5.28. Heb.2:14,17;and4:15.29. John1:3;Col.1:15,16;andHeb.1:2.30. John14:13;Acts7:59;9:13;22:16;Rom.10:12-13;Phil.2:9;andHeb.

1:6.31. John 14:1; 17:3;Rom. 14:9; 2 Cor. 5:15; Eph. 3:12; 5:23; Col. 1:27;

andotherpassages.32. John17:19andHeb.5:8and9.

TheFall

fol:

1.MeaningofGenesis3

2.Genesis3intheOldandNewTestaments

3.TheFallandtheTheoryofEvolution

4.TheCharacteroftheFall

Thequestionconcerningtheorigin,theageandthewrittenrecordofthehistoryoftheFallinGenesis3neednotbediscussedhere.Forinthefirstplace, science can never reach to the oldest origins and the ultimatedestinies of humanity, and historical and critical inquiry will never beabletoproveeithertheveracityortheunveracityofthishistory.Andinthesecondplace,exactlyasitnowliesbeforeus,thishistoryhasalreadyformed for centuries a portion of holy Scripture, an indispensableelement in theorganismof the revelationof salvation, and as suchhasbeen accepted in faith by theHebrew congregation (Jewishpeople), byChrist,bytheapostles,andbythewholeChristianchurch.

1.MeaningofGenesis3:

ThatGenesis3givesusanaccountof the fallofman,of the lossofhisprimitiveinnocenceandofthemisery,particularlydeath,towhichhehassince been subjected, cannot reasonably be denied. The opinion of theOphites,Kant,Schiller,Hegel,etc.,thatGenesis3relatestheawakeningofmantoself-consciousnessandpersonality,andthereforedoesnottellusofafall,butamarkedprogression,isdisputedbythenamewhichtheforbiddentreebears,asindicatingtomannotmerelyatreeofknowledgeintheordinaryway,butquitespeciallyatreeofknowledgeofgoodandevil.

Genesis3isnotintheleastmeanttorelatetoushowmanobtainedtheideaofhisnakednessandsexualpassions,and fromastateof childlike

innocence changed in this respect to manlike maturity (Eerdman's DeBeteekenis van het Paradijsverhaal, Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1905, 485-511). For according toGenesis,manwas created full-grown, received awifeimmediatelyashelpmeet,andatthesametimesawhimselfallottedthe task of multiplying and replenishing the earth.Moreover, the ideathat sexual desire is something sinful and deserves punishment wasentirelyforeigntoancientIsrael.

Finally,theinterpretationofWellhausen(GeschichteIsraels,1878,344)cannot be accepted, that man in Genesis 3 should obtain "dieintellektuelleWelterkenntniss,diemetaphysischeErkenntnissderDingein ihrem Zusammenhange, ihremWerth oder Unwerth, ihrem Nutzenoder Schaden" ("the intellectual knowledge of the world, themetaphysical knowledge of things in their connection, their worth orunworth,theirutilityorhurtfulness").Forinthefirstplace,accordingtoGen, this wasman's peculiar province from the beginning; he receivedindeed thevocation tosubdue theearth, tokeepand till theground, togive theanimals theirnames.And in thesecondplace, theacquiringofthisknowledgeamongtheIsraelites,whoesteemedpracticalwisdomsohighly,isdifficulttorepresentasafall,orasapunishmentdeservedfordisobedience.

There is no other explanation possible of Genesis 3 than that it is thenarration of a fall, which consists in the transgression of an explicitcommand of God, thus bearing a moral significance, and thereforefollowedbyrepentance,shame,fearandpunishment.Thecontextofthechapter places this interpretation beyond all doubt, for before his fallman is representedas a creaturemadeafterGod's imageandreceivingparadise as a dwelling-place, and after the fall he is sent into a roughworld, is condemned to a life of labor and sorrow, and increases moreandmoreinsinuntilthejudgmentoftheFlood.

2.Genesis3intheOldandtheNewTestaments:

ItisindeedremarkablehowveryseldomtheOldTestamentreferstothishistory of the Fall. This is not a sufficient reason for pronouncing it oflater origin, for the same peculiarity presents itself at the time when,accordingtoallcriticism,itwasrecordedinliterature.Prophets,Psalms,

Proverbs never quote it; at the most, allusions may be found to it inHosea6:7andEcclesiastes7:29;andevenJesusandHisapostlesintheNew Testament very seldom appeal to Genesis 3 (John 8:44; Romans5:12;1Corinthians15:22;2Corinthians11:3;1Timothy2:14).Butitmaybe considered that the Prophets, Psalms and Proverbs only mentionspecialfactsofthepastbywayofexception,thattheapostlesevenhardlyeverquotethewordsanddeedsofJesus,andthatalllivedatatimewhenrevelation itself was still proceeding and did not lie before them as acompletewhole.Withusitisquiteadifferentmatter;weareinacertainsenseoutsiderevelation,make itasubjectofourstudyandmeditation,trytodiscovertheunitywhichholdsallitspartstogether,anddevoteourspecial interest to Adam as a figure and counterpart of Christ. Thecreation and fall ofman occupy therefore amuch broader place in theprovinceofourthoughtsthantheydidamongthewritersofthebooksoftheOldandNewTestaments.

Nevertheless, the Fall is the silent hypothesis of the whole Biblicaldoctrine of sin and redemption; it does not rest only on a few vaguepassages, but forms an indispensable element in the revelation ofsalvation.Thewholecontemplationofmanandhumanity,ofNatureandhistory,ofethicalandphysicalevil,ofredemptionandthewayinwhichto obtain it, is connected in Scripture with a Fall, such as Genesis 3relates to us. Sin, for example, is common to all men (1 Kings 8:46;Psalms 14:3; 130:3; 143:2), and to every man from his conception(Genesis 6:5; 8:21; Job 14:4; Psalms 51:7). It arouses God's anger anddeservesallkindsofpunishment,notonlyofanethicalbutofaphysicalnature (Genesis 3:14-19; 4:14; 6:7,13; 11:8; Leviticus 26:14 f;Deuteronomy28:15;Psalms90:7,etc.); thewholeofScriptureproceedsfromthethoughtthatsinanddeathareconnectedintheclosestdegree,as are also obedience and life. In the new heaven and new earth allsuffering ceases with sin (Revelation 21:4). Therefore redemption ispossibleonly inthewayof forgiveness(Psalms32:1;Isaiah43:25,etc.),andcircumcisionoftheheart(Deuteronomy10:16;30:16;Jeremiah4:4),and this includes, further, life, joy, peace, salvation. When Paul inRomans5:12;1Corinthians15:22indicatesAdamastheoriginofsinanddeath,andChristasthesourceofrighteousnessandlife,hedevelopsnoideaswhicharecontrarytotheorganismofrevelationorwhichmightbe

neglected without loss; he merely combines and formulates the datawhichareexplicitlyorsilentlycontainedinit.

3.TheFallandtheTheoryofEvolution:

Tradition does little toward the confirmation and elucidation of theBiblical narrative of the Fall. The study of mythology is still too littleadvanced to determine the ideal or historical value which may becontained in the legend of a Golden Age, inmany people's obsequioushonoringoftheserpent,intheequallywidespreadbeliefinatreeoflife.TheBabylonianrepresentationalso(asealonwhichamanandwoman,seated,arefiguredaspluckingfruitfromatree,whileaserpentcurlsupbehind the woman as if whispering in her ear), which G. Smith,LenormantandFriedrichDelitzschcomparewiththeParadisenarrative,showsnosimilarityonnearerview(A.Jeremias,DasAltesTestamentimLichtedesaltenOrients2,Leipzig,1906,203).Indirectly,however,averypowerfulwitnessforthefallofmanis furnishedbythewholeempiricalconditionoftheworldandhumanity.Foraworld,suchasweknowit,fullof unrighteousness and sorrow, cannot be explained without theacceptanceofsucha fact.Hewhoholds fast to thewitnessofScriptureandconsciencetosinassin(asanomia)cannotdeduceitfromcreation,butmustaccepttheconclusionthatitbeganwithatransgressionofGod'scommand and thus with a deed of the will. Pythagoras, Plato, Kant,Schelling,Baaderhaveallunderstoodandacknowledgedthiswithmoreorlessclearness.HewhodeniestheFallmustexplainsinasanecessitywhichhasitsoriginintheCreation,inthenatureofthings,andthereforein God Himself; he justifies man but accuses God, misrepresents thecharacterofsinandmakesiteverlastingandindefeasible.Foriftherehasnotbeenafall intosin, there isnoredemptionof sinpossible; sin thenlosesitsmerelyethicalsignificance,becomesatraitofthenatureofman,andisinexterminable.

This comes out, in later years, in themany endeavors to unite the Fallwith the doctrine of evolution (compare Tennant, The Origin andPropagationof Sin2, 1905;A. S. Peake,Christianity: ItsNature and ItsTruth, 1908;W. E. Orchard,Modern Theories of Sin, 1909; Francis J.Hall,EvolutionandtheFall,1910).Alltheseendeavorsleadtosettingonone side the objective standard of sin, which is the law of God, and

determiningthenatureandimportanceofsinsubjectivelybythefeelingofguilt,whichinitsturnagaindependsontheknowledgeofandthelovefor the moral ideal, and itself forms an important factor in moralprogress.Itistruethatthestrengthofalltheseendeavorsisdrawnfromtheoryofthedescentofmanfromtheanimal.Butastothistheory,itisworthyofnotice:(1)thatit isuptothepresentdayahypothesis,andisprovedbynosingleobservation,whetherdirector indirect; (2) that thefossils of prehistoric men, found in Germany, Belgium, France andelsewhere have demonstrated the low degree of culture in which thesemenhavelived,butinnosensetheirdissimilaritywithmankindoftoday(W. Branca, Der Stand unserer Kenntnisse vom fossilen Menschen,Leipzig, 1910); (3) that the uncivilized and prehistoric manmay be aslittleidentifiedwiththefirstmanastheunjustlyso-callednature-peopleand children under age; (4) that the oldest history of the human race,whichhasbecomeknownthroughthediscoveriesatBabyloninthe lastcentury,wasnotthatofastateofbarbarism,butofhighandrichculture(D.GathWhitley,"WhatwasthePrimitiveConditionofMan?"PrincetonTheol.Review,October,1906;J.Orr,God'sImageinMan,1906);(5)thatthe acceptance of theory of descent as a universal and unlimited ruleleadstothedenialoftheunityofthehumanrace,inaphysicalandalsoinanintellectual,moralandreligioussense.Foritmaybepossible,evenintheschoolofDarwin,tomaintaintheunityofthehumanracesolongatimeastraditionexercisesitsinfluenceonthehabitofmind;buttheoryitself undermines its foundation and marks it as an arbitrary opinion.Fromthestandpointofevolution,thereisnotonlynoreasontoholdtothe "of oneblood"ofActs 17:26 theKingJamesVersion, but therehasnever evenbeena firstman; the transition fromanimal tomanwassoslow and successive, that the essential distinction fails to be seen. Andwith the effacing of this boundary, the unity of the moral ideal, ofreligion,ofthelawsofthoughtandoftruth,failsalso;theoryofevolutionexpels the absolute everywhere and leads necessarily to psychologism,relativism, pragmatism and even to pluralism, which is literallypolytheisminareligioussense.Theunityofthehumanrace,ontheotherhand, as it is taught in holy Scripture, is not an indifferent physicalquestion, but an important intellectual,moral and religious one; it is a"postulate"of thewholehistoryof civilization, and expressly or silentlyacceptedbynearlyallhistorians.Andconsciencebearswitnesstoit,inso

farasallmenshowtheworkofthemorallawwrittenintheirhearts,andtheirthoughtsaccuseorexcuseoneanother(Romans2:15);itshowsbacktotheFallasan"UrthatsachederGeschichte."

4.TheCharacteroftheFall:

Whattheconditionandhistoryofthehumanracecouldhardlyleadustoimagine,holyScripturerelatestousasatragicfactinitsfirstpages.Thefirst man was created by God after His own image, not therefore inbrutishunconsciousnessorchildlikenaivete,butinastateofbodilyandspiritualmaturity,withunderstandingand reason,withknowledge andspeech,withknowledgeespeciallyofGodandHislaw.Thenwasgiventohimmoreoveracommandnottoeatofthetreeofknowledgeofgoodandevil.This commandwasnot contained in themoral lawas such; itwasnotanaturalbutapositivecommandment;itrestedentirelyandonlyonGod'swillandmustbeobeyedexclusivelyforthisreason.Itplacedbeforemanthechoice,whetherhewouldbefaithfulandobedienttoGod'swordandwouldleavetoHimalonethedecisionastowhatisgoodorevil,orwhetherhewouldreservetohimselftherightarbitrarilytodecidewhatisgoodorevil.Thusthequestionwas:Shalltheonomyorautonomybetheway to happiness?On this account also the tree was called the tree ofknowledgeofgoodandevil. Itdidnotbear thisname in the sense thatmanmightobtainfromittheempiricalknowledgeofgoodandevil,forbyhis transgressionhe in truth lost the empirical knowledge of good.Butthetreewassonamed,becauseman,byeatingofitandsotransgressingGod's commandment, arrogated to himself "die Fahigkeit zurselbstandigenWahlderMittel,durchdiemanseinGluckschaffenwill":"the capacity of independent choice of the means by which he wouldattain his happiness" (Koberle, Sunde und Gnade im relig. Leben desVolkesIsraelbisaufChristenrum,1905,64).Theonomy,asobediencetoGod from free love, includes as such the idea and the possibility ofautonomy,thereforethatofantinomyalso.

Butitisthefreeactandthereforetheguiltofmanthathaschangedthepossibility into reality. For the mind, there remains here an insolubleproblem, as much in the question, why God allowed this Fall to takeplace,asintheother,howman,createdinthelikenessofGod,couldanddidfall.Thereisagreatdealoftruthintheoften-expressedthought,that

wecangivenoaccountoftheoriginofsin,becauseitisnotlogical,anddoesnot result asa conclusiondrawn from twopremises.But facts arebrutal.Whatseemslogicallyimpossibleoftenexistsinreality.Thelawsofmoral life are different from those of thought and from those also ofmechanical nature. The narrative in Genesis 3, in any case, ispsychologically faithful in the highest degree. For the same way as itappearsthereinthefirstman,itrepeatedlytakesplaceamongourselves(James1:14-15).Furthermoreweought toallowGod to justifyHimself.Thecourseofrevelationdiscoverstofaithhow,throughalltheages,HeholdssininitsentiredevelopmentinHisownalmightyhands,andworksthrough grace for a consummation inwhich, in thedispensationof thefullness of times, He will gather together in one all things in Christ(Ephesians1:10).(J.Orr,SinasaProblemofToday,London,1910.)

HermanBavinck,fromtheInternationalStandardBibleEncyclopedia

DEATH

(maweth;thanatos):

PHYSIOLOGICALANDFIGURATIVEVIEW

Theword"Death"isusedinthesenseof(1)theprocessofdying(Genesis21:16);(2)theperiodofdecease(Genesis27:7);(3)asapossiblesynonymfor poison (2 Kings 4:40); (4) as descriptive of person in danger ofperishing(Judges15:18;"indeathsoft"2Corinthians11:23).Inthissensetheshadowofdeath isa familiarexpression inJob, thePsalmsandtheProphets;(5)death ispersonified in1Corinthians15:55andRevelation20:14.Deliverancefromthiscatastropheiscalledthe"issuesfromdeath"(Psalms 68:20 the King James Version; translated "escape" in theRevisedVersion(BritishandAmerican)).Judicialexecution,"puttingtodeath,"ismentioned39timesintheLeviticalLaw.

Figuratively:DeathisthelossofspirituallifeasinRomans8:6;andthefinalstateoftheunregenerateiscalledthe"seconddeath"inRevelation20:14.

Alex.Macalister

THEOLOGICALVIEW

1.ConceptionofSinandDeath:

AccordingtoGenesis2:17,Godgavetoman,created inHisownimage,the commandnot to eatof the treeofknowledgeof goodandevil, andaddedtheretothewarning,"inthedaythatthoueatestthereof,thoushaltsurely die." Thoughnot exclusively, reference is certainlymade here inthefirstplacetobodilydeath.YetbecausedeathbynomeanscameuponAdamandEveonthedayoftheirtransgression,buttookplacehundredsof years later, the expression, "in theday that,"mustbe conceived in awidersense,orthedelayofdeathmustbeattributedtotheentering-inofmercy (Genesis3:15).However thismaybe,Genesis2:17placesa closeconnection between man's death and his transgression of God'scommandment, thereby attaching to death a religious and ethicalsignificance,andontheotherhandmakesthelifeofmandependentonhisobediencetoGod.Thisreligious-ethicalnatureoflifeanddeathisnotonly decidedly and clearly expressed in Genesis 2, but it is thefundamental thought of the whole of Scripture and forms an essentialelementintherevelationsofsalvation.Thetheologiansofearlyandmorerecenttimes,whohavedeniedthespiritualsignificanceofdeathandhaveseparated the connection between ethical and physical life, usuallyendeavor to trace back their opinions to Scripture; and those passageswhichundoubtedlyseeindeathapunishmentforsin(Genesis2:17;John8:44; Romans 5:12; 6:23; 1 Corinthians 15:21), they take as individualopinions, which form no part of the organism of revelation. But thisendeavorshutsouttheorganiccharacteroftherevelationofsalvation.Itis true thatdeath inHoly Scripture is oftenmeasuredby theweaknessand frailty of human nature (Genesis 3:19; Job 14:1,12; Psalms 39:5-6;90:5;103:14-15;Ecclesiastes3:20,etc.).DeathisseldomconnectedwiththetransgressionofthefirstmaneitherintheOldTestamentortheNewTestament,ormentionedasa specifiedpunishment forsin (John8:44;

Romans5:12;6:23;1Corinthians15:21;James1:15);forthemostpartitisportrayedassomethingnatural(Genesis5:5;9:29;15:15;25:8,etc.),alonglifebeingpresentedasablessingincontrasttodeathinthemidstofdaysasadisasterandajudgment(Psalms102:23f;Isaiah65:20).Butallthis is not contrary to the idea that death is a consequence of, and apunishmentfor,sin.Daily,everyonewhoagreeswithScripturethatdeathis held out as a punishment for sin, speaks in the same way. Death,thoughcomeintotheworldthroughsin,isneverthelessatthesametimea consequence of man's physical and frail existence now; it couldthereforebe threatenedasapunishment toman,becausehewas takenoutofthegroundandwasmadealivingsoul,oftheearthearthy(Genesis2:7;1Corinthians15:45,47).Ifhehadremainedobedient,hewouldnothave returned to dust (Genesis 3:19), but have pressed forward on thepathofspiritualdevelopment(1Corinthians15:46,51);hisreturntodustwaspossiblesimplybecausehewasmadefromdust(seeADAMINTHENEWTESTAMENT).Thus,althoughdeathisinthiswayaconsequenceof sin, yet a long life is felt to be a blessing anddeath a disaster and ajudgment,aboveallwhenmanistakenawayinthebloomofhisyouthorthe strength of his years. There is nothing strange, therefore, in themannerinwhichScripturespeaksaboutdeath;weallexpressourselvesdaily in the same way, though we at the same time consider it as thewagesofsin.Beneaththeordinary,everydayexpressionsaboutdeathliesthedeepconsciousnessthatitisunnaturalandcontrarytoourinnermostbeing.

2.TheMeaningofDeath:

ThisisdecidedlyexpressedinScripturemuchmoresoeventhanamongourselves. For we are influenced always more or less by the Greek,Platonicidea,thatthebodydies,yetthesoulisimmortal.Suchanideaisutterly contrary to the Israelite consciousness, and isnowhere found intheOldTestament.Thewholemandies,whenindeaththespirit(Psalms146:4; Ecclesiastes 12:7), or soul (Genesis 35:18; 2 Samuel 1:9; 1Kings17:21;Jonah4:3),goesoutofaman.Notonlyhisbody,buthissoulalsoreturnstoastateofdeathandbelongstothenether-world;thereforetheOld Testament can speak of a death of one's soul (Genesis 37:21(Hebrew); Numbers 23:10 m; Deuteronomy 22:21; Judges 16:30; Job

36:14;Psalms78:50),andofdefilementbycomingincontactwithadeadbody (Leviticus 19:28; 21:11; 22:4; Numbers 5:2; 6:6; 9:6; 19:10 ff;Deuteronomy14:1;Haggai2:13).Thisdeathofman isnotannihilation,however,butadeprivationofallthatmakesforlifeonearth.TheSheol(she'ol) is in contrast with the land of the living in every respect (Job28:13;Proverbs15:24;Ezekiel26:20;32:23); it isanabodeofdarknessandtheshadowofdeath(Job10:21-22;Psalms88:12;143:3),aplaceofdestruction,yeadestructionitself(Job26:6;28:22;31:12;Psalms88:11;Proverbs27:20),withoutanyorder(Job10:22),alandofrest,ofsilence,of oblivion (Job 3:13,17-18; Psalms 94:17; 115:17), whereGod andmanarenolongertobeseen(Isaiah38:11),Godnolongerpraisedorthanked(Psalms 6:5; 115:17), His perfections no more acknowledged (Psalms88:10-13; Isaiah 38:18-19), His wonders not contemplated (Psalms88:12), where the dead are unconscious, do no more work, take noaccountofanything,possessnoknowledgenorwisdom,neitherhaveanymoreaportioninanythingthatisdoneunderthesun(Ecclesiastes9:5-6,10). The dead ("the Shades" the Revised Version, margin; comparearticleDECEASE,INNEWTESTAMENT)areasleep(Job26:5;Proverbs2:18;9:18;21:6;Psalms88:11;Isaiah14:9),weakened(Isaiah14:10)andwithoutstrength(Psalms88:4).

3.LightintheDarkness:

ThedreadofdeathwasfeltmuchmoredeeplythereforebytheIsraelitesthanbyourselves.Deathtothemwasseparationfromallthattheyloved,from God, fromHis service, fromHis law, fromHis people, from Hisland,fromalltherichcompanionshipinwhichtheylived.Butnowinthisdarkness appears the light of the revelation of salvation from on high.The God of Israel is the living God and the fountain of all life(Deuteronomy 5:26; Joshua 3:10; Psalms 36:9). He is the Creator ofheavenandearth,whosepowerknowsnoboundsandwhosedominionextendsover life anddeath (Deuteronomy32:39; 1Samuel2:6;Psalms90:3).Hegave life toman(Genesis1:26;2:7),andcreatesandsustainseverymanstill(Job32:8;33:4;34:14;Psalms104:29;Ecclesiastes12:7).Heconnects lifewiththekeepingofHis lawandappointsdeath for thetransgression of it (Genesis 2:17; Leviticus 18:5; Deuteronomy 30:20;32:47). He lives in heaven, but is present also by His spirit in Sheol

(Psalms139:7-8).SheolandAbaddonareopentoHimevenastheheartsof the children of men (Job 26:6; 38:17; Proverbs 15:11). He kills andmakes alive, brings down into Sheol and raises from thence again(Deuteronomy 32:39; 1 Samuel 2:6; 2 Kings 5:7).He lengthens life forthose who keep His commandments (Exodus 20:12; Job 5:26), givesescape from death, can deliver when death menaces (Psalms 68:20;Isaiah38:5;Jeremiah15:20;Daniel3:26),cantakeEnochandElijahtoHimselfwithoutdying(Genesis5:24;2Kings2:11),canrestorethedeadto life (1 Kings 17:22; 2 Kings 4:34; 13:21). He can even bring deathwhollytonothingandcompletelytriumphoveritspowerbyrisingfromthe dead (Job 14:13-15; 19:25-27;Hosea 6:2; 13:14; Isaiah 25:8; 26:19;Ezekiel37:11-12;Daniel12:2).

4.SpiritualSignificance:

Thisrevelationbydegreesrejects theoldcontrastbetween lifeonearthandthedisconsolateexistenceafterdeath,inthedarkplaceofSheol,andputs another in its place. The physical contrast between life and deathgraduallymakeswayforthemoralandspiritualdifferencebetweenalifespentinthefearoftheLord,andalifeintheserviceofsin.ThemanwhoservesGod isalive (Genesis2:17); life is involved in thekeepingofHiscommandments (Leviticus 18:5; Deuteronomy 30:20); His word is life(Deuteronomy8:3; 32:47). Life is still for themost part understood tomean length of days (Proverbs 2:18; 3:16; 10:30; Isaiah 65:20).NeverthelessitisremarkablethatProvoftenmentionsdeathandSheolinconnection with the godless (Isaiah 2:18; 5:5; 7:25; 9:18), and on theotherhandonlyspeaksoflifeinconnectionwiththerighteous.Wisdom,righteousness,thefearoftheLordisthewayoflife(Isaiah8:22,22;11:16;12:6;13:14; 14:27; 19:23).Thewicked isdrivenaway inhiswickedness,buttherighteoushathhopeinhisdeath(Isaiah14:32).BlessedishewhohastheLordforhisGod(Deuteronomy33:29;Psalms1:1-2;2:12;32:1-2;33:12;34:9,etc.);heiscomfortedinthegreatestadversity(Psalms73:25-28; Habakkuk 3:17-19), and sees a light arise for him behind physicaldeath(Genesis49:18;Job14:13-15;16:16-21;19:25-27;Psalms73:23-26).The godless on the contrary, although enjoying for a time muchprosperity, perish and come to an end (Psalms 1:4-6; 73:18-20; Isaiah48:22;Malachi4:3,etc.).

The righteousof theOldTestament truly are continuallyoccupiedwiththeproblemthatthelotofmanonearthoftencorrespondssolittletohisspiritualworth, but he strengthens himselfwith the conviction that fortherighteousitwillbewell,andforthewicked,ill(Ecclesiastes8:12-13;Isaiah3:10-11).Iftheydonotrealizeitinthepresent,theylookforwardto the future and hope for the day in which God's justice will extendsalvationtotherighteous,andHisangerwillbevisitedonthewickedinjudgment.SointheOldTestamenttherevelationofthenewcovenantisprepared wherein Christ by His appearance hath abolished death andhathbroughtlifeandimmortalitytolightthroughthegospel(2Timothy1:10). See ABOLISH . This everlasting life is already here on earthpresentedtomanbyfaith,anditishisportionalsointhehourofdeath(John 3:36; 11:25-26). On the other hand, he who lives in sin and isdisobedienttotheSonofGod,isinhislivingdead(Matthew8:22;Luke15:32; John 3:36; 8:24; Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13); he shall neverseelife,butshallpassbybodilydeathintotheseconddeath(Revelation2:11;20:6,14;21:8).

5.DeathinNon-ChristianReligionsandinScience:

ThisviewofScriptureupondeathgoesmuchdeeper thanthatwhichisfound in other religions, but it nevertheless receives support from theunanimous witness of humanity with regard to its unnaturalness anddread.Theso-callednature-peoplesevenfeelthatdeathismuchmoreofan enigma than life; Tiele (Inleiding tot de goddienst-artenschap, II(1900),202,referringtoAndrewLang,ModernMythology,chapterxiii)says rightly, that all peoples have the conviction thatman by nature isimmortal, that immortalitywantsnoproof, but that death is amysteryandmust be explained. Touching complaints arise in the hearts of allmen on the frailty and vanity of life, and the whole of mankind fearsdeathasamysteriouspower.Manfindscomfort indeathonlywhenhehopesitwillbeanendtoastillmoremiserablelife.Senecamaybetakenas interpreter of some philosophers when he says: Stultitia est timoremorrismori("Itisstupidtodiethroughthefearofdeath")andsomemaybeable,likeaSocratesoraCato,tofacedeathcalmlyandcourageously;whathavethesefewtosaytothemillions,whothroughfearofdeatharealltheirlifetimesubjecttobondage(Hebrews2:15)?Suchamysteryhas

death remained up to the present day. It may be said with Kassowitz,Verworm and others that the "cell" is the beginning, and the old, grayman is the natural end of an uninterrupted life-development, or withMetschnikoff, that sciencewill oneday so lengthen life that itwill fadeawaylikearoseatlastanddeathloseallitsdread;deathstillisnolessariddle, and one which swallows up all the strength of life. When oneconsiders, besides, that a number of creatures, plants, trees, animals,reachamuchhigheragethanman;thatthelargerhalfofmankinddiesbefore or shortly after birth; that another large percentage dies in thebloomofyouthorintheprimeoflife;thatthelawofthesurvivalofthefittestistrueonlywhenthefactofthesurvivalistakenasaproofoftheirfitness; that the graybeards, who, spent and decrepit, go down to thegrave, form a very small number; then the enigma of death increasesmore and more in mysteriousness. The endeavors to bring death intoconnection with certain activities of the organism and to explain it byincreasing weight, by growth or by fertility, have all led to shipwreck.When Weismann took refuge in the immortality of the "einzelligeProtozoen," he raised a hypothesis which not only found manyopponents, but which also left mortality of the "Korperplasma" aninsolublemystery(Beth,"UeberUrsacheundZweckdesTodes,GlaubenundWissen (1909), 285-304, 335-48). Thus, science certainly does notcompelustoreviewScriptureonthispoint,butratherfurnishesastrongproof of the mysterious majesty of death. When Pelagius, Socinus,Schleiermacher, Ritschl and a number of other theologians andphilosophers separate death from its connection with sin, they are notcompelledtodosobyscience,butareledbyadefectiveinsightintotherelationbetweenethosandphusis.Miseryanddeatharenotabsolutelyalways consequences andpunishment of a great personal transgression(Luke13:2;John9:3);butthattheyareconnectedwithsin,welearnfromthe experience of every day. Who can number the victims ofmammonism,alcoholismandlicentiousness?Evenspiritualsinsexercisetheir influence on corporal life; envy is a rottenness of the bones(Proverbs 14:30). This connection is taught us in a great measure byScripture, when it placed the not yet fallen man in a Paradise, wheredeath had not yet entered, and eternal life was not yet possessed andenjoyed; when it sends fallen man, who, however, is destined forredemption,intoaworldfullofmiseryanddeath;andatlastassignsto

the wholly renewedman a new heaven and a new earth, where death,sorrow,cryingorpainshallnolongerexist(Revelation21:4).

Finally,Scripture isnot thebookofdeath,butof life,of everlasting lifethrough Jesus Christ our Lord. It tells us, in oft-repeated andunmistakableterms,ofthedreadedrealityofdeath,butitproclaimstousstillmoreloudlythewonderfulpowerofthelifewhichisinChristJesus.

HermanBavinck,fromtheInternationalStandardBibleEncyclopedia

TheCovenantofGrace

(Chapter14ofOurReasonableFaith*)

[Butwhocanstandinthejudgment?]Tothatquestionallmankindhasatall timesand inallplacesgiven theanswer thatmen, suchas theyare,maynotappearbeforethefaceofGodnordwellinhispresence.Thereisnoonewho can sayordares to say: Ihavemademyheart clean, I ampurefrommysin(Prov.20:9).Everybody feelshimself tobeguiltyanddefiled,andeverybodyacknowledges, ifnottoothers,at least internallyto himself, that he is not what he should be. The hardened sinner hasmoments in which restlessness and turmoil master him; and the self-righteousinthelastinstancealwayscontinuehopingthatGodwillblinkatwhatislackingandaccepttheintentforthedeed.

True,therearemanywhotrytobanishtheseseriousthoughtsfromtheirminds and plunge into life as though there were no God and nocommandment.Theydeceive themselveswith thehope that there isnoGod (Ps. 14:1), thatHe does not bother about the sins ofmen, so thatwhoever does evil is good in His sight (Mal. 2:17), that He does notrememberevilnorseeit(Ps.10:11and94:7),orelsethat,asperfectLove,He may not seek out and punish the wrong (Ps. 10:14). And whoeverholdstothedemandofthemorallawandletstheethicalidealstandinitsloftiness, can only agree thatGodmust punish thewrong.God is love,indeed,butthisgloriousconfessioncomesintoitsownonlywhenlovein

theDivinebeing isunderstoodasbeingaholy love inperfectharmonywithjustice.ThereisroomforthegraceofGodonlyifthejusticeofGodisfirstfullyestablished.

Afterall,thewholehistoryoftheworldgivesanirrefutabletestimonytothis justice of God. We cannot speculate out of the world the specialrevelationinChristwhichtellsusoftheloveofGodifweweretodothatthegeneralrevelationwithitsbenefitsandblessingswouldbelosttous.But,ifwewere,butforamoment,inourthoughtstoleavetherevelationinChristtoonesidetherewouldremainverylittlegroundforbeliefinaGodoflove.Forifthehistoryoftheworldclearlyteachesusanything, itisthis:thatGodhasaquarrelwithHiscreature.Thereisdisagreement,separation,conflictbetweenGodandthisworld.Goddoesnotagreewithman,andmandoesnotagreewithGod.Eachgoeshisownway,andeachhashisownideaandwillaboutthings.ThethoughtsofGodarenotourthoughts,andHiswaysarenotourways(Isa.55:8).

Thereforethehistoryoftheworldisalsoajudgmentoftheworld.No,itisnotasonepoethassaid,thejudgmentoftheworld,forthatwillcomeattheendofdays;anditisnotjudgmentalone,fortheearthisstillfulloftherichesofGod(Ps.104:24).Allthesame,thehistoryoftheworldisajudgment,ahistory fullof judgments, fullof struggleandwar,ofbloodandtears,calamitiesandafflictions.AboveitarewrittenthewordswhichMoses once spoke when he saw the race of the Israelites dying awaybeforehiseyes:Weareconsumedbythineanger,andbythywratharewetroubled(Ps.90:7).

This testimony of history to the justice ofGod is confirmedby the factthatmankindhasalwayslookedfor,andstilllooksfor,alostParadise,foralastingbliss,andforaredemptionfromallevilthatoppressesit.Thereis in allmenaneed for, and a seeking after, redemption. It is just thiswhichspecificallycomestoexpressioninreligion.True,onecantakethewordredemption inso largeasense that it includesall the laborwhichmendoon the earth.Forwhenmanby theworld of his hands tries tosupply theneedsofhis life,whenhe tries todefendhimself against allkinds of antagonistic forces in nature and among men, and when inscienceandarthestrivestosubduethewholeearth,allthathasalsothepurposeofbeingliberatedfromevilandusheredintothegood.

TheDivineTrinity

byHermanBavinck

The Eternal Being reveals Himself in His triune existence even morerichlyandvitallythaninHisattributes.Itisinthisholytrinitythateachattribute of His Being comes into its own, so to speak, gets its fullestcontent, and takes on its profoundest meaning. It is only when wecontemplatethistrinitythatweknowwhoandwhatGodis.Onlythendoweknow,moreover,whoGod is andwhatHe is for lostman-kind.WecanknowthisonlywhenweknowandconfessHimastheTriuneGodoftheCovenant,asFather,Son,andHolySpirit.

Inconsideringthispartofourconfession,itisparticularlynecessarythata tone of holy reverence and childlike awe be the characteristic of ourapproachandattitude.ForMosesitwasanawfulandunforgettablehourwhentheLordappearedtohiminthedesertintheflameoffirecomingfrom the bramble bush. When Moses looked upon that burning fire,whichburnedbutdidnotconsume,fromadistance,andwhenhewantedtohasten to the spot, theLord restrainedhimand said:Drawnotnighhither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thoustandest is holy ground.AndwhenMosesheard that he feared greatly,hidhisface,andwasafraidtolookuponGod(Ex.3:1-6).

SuchaholyrespectsuitsusalsoaswewitnessGodrevealingHimselfinHis word as a Triune God. For we must always remember that as westudy this fact, we are not dealing with a doctrine about God, with anabstract concept, or with a scientific proposition about the nature ofDivinity. We are not dealing with a human construction which weourselvesorwhichothershaveputuponthefacts,andwhichwenowtrytoanalyzeandlogicallytodismember.Rather,intreatingoftheTrinity,we are dealingwithGodHimself,with the one and trueGod,who hasrevealedHimselfassuchinHisWord.ItisasHesaidtoMoses:Iamthe

GodofAbraham,Isaac,andJacob(Ex.3:6).SoHerevealsHimselftousalsoinHisWordandmanifestsHimselftousasFather,Son,andSpirit.

ItisthusthattheChristianchurchhasalwaysconfessedtherevelationofGodastheTriuneGod,andaccepteditassuch.WefinditintheTwelveArticlesof theApostles’Creed.TheChristian isnot in thatcreedsayingjusthowhethinksaboutGod.HeisnottheregivingoutanotionofGod,norsaying thatGodhassuchandsuchattributes,andthatHeexists inthisandthatwise.Instead,heconfesses:IbelieveinGodtheFather,andinJesusChristHisonly-begottenSon,andintheHolySpirit:IbelieveintheTriuneGod. Inconfessing this theChristiangivesexpression to thefactthatGodisthelivingandthetrueGod,thatHeisGodasFather,Son,and Spirit, the God of His confidence, to whom he has whollysurrenderedhimself,anduponwhomherestswithhiswholeheart.GodistheGodofhislifeandhissalvation.AsFather,Son,andSpirit,Godhascreated him, redeemed him, sanctified him, and glorified him. TheChristianoweseverythingtoHim.It ishis joyandcomfortthathemaybelieveinthatGod,trustHim,andexpecteverythingfromHim.

WhattheChristiangoesontoconfessaboutthatGodisnotsummarizedbyhiminanumberofabstractterms,butisdescribed,rather,asaseriesofdeedsdonebyGod in thepast, in thepresent,andtobedone inthefuture. It is the deeds, the miracles, of God which constitute theconfessionoftheChristian.WhattheChristianconfessesinhiscreedisalong, a broad, and a high history. It is a history which comprises thewholeworldinitslengthandbreadth,initsbeginning,process,andend,initsorigin,development,anddestination,fromthepointofcreationtothefulfillmentoftheages.TheconfessionofthechurchisadeclarationofthemightydeedsofGod.

Thosedeedsarenumerousandarecharacterizedbygreatdiversity.Buttheyalsoconstituteastrictunity.Theyarerelatedtoeachother,preparefor each other, and are interdependent. There is order and pattern,development and upward movement in it. It proceeds from creationthroughredemptiontosanctificationandglorification.Theendreturnstothebeginningandyetisatthesametimetheapexwhichisexaltedhighabovethepointoforigin.ThedeedsofGodformacirclewhichmountsupward in the form of a spiral; they represent a harmony of the

horizontalandthevertical line;theymoveupwardsandforwardsatthesametime.

God is the architect and builder of all those deeds, the source and thefinalendofthem.OutofHimandthroughHimandtoHimareallthings.HeistheirMaker,Restorer,andFulfiller.TheunityanddiversityintheworksofGodproceedsfromandreturnstotheunityanddiversitywhichexist intheDivineBeing.ThatBeingisonebeing,singleandsimple.AtthesametimethatbeingisthreefoldinHisperson,inHisrevelation,andin His influence. The entire work of God is an unbroken whole, andneverthelesscomprisestherichestvarietyandchange.Theconfessionofthe church comprehends thewhole ofworldhistory. In that confessionareincludedthemomentsofthecreationandthefall,reconciliationandforgiveness, and of renewal and restoration. It is a confession whichproceedsfromthetriuneGodandwhichleadseverythingbacktoHim.

Therefore the article of the holy trinity is the heart and core of ourconfession,thedifferentiatingearmarkofourreligion,andthepraiseandcomfortofalltruebelieversofChrist.

It was this confession which was at stake in the warfare of the spiritsthroughout the centuries. The confession of the holy trinity is theprecious pearl which was entrusted for safekeeping and defense to theChristianchurch.

*****

IfthisconfessionofthetrinityofGodtakessuchacentralpositionintheChristianfaith,itisimportanttoknowonwhatgrounditrestsandfromwhatsourceithasflowedintothechurch.Theyarenotafewinourtimewhohold that it is the fruitofhumanargumentandacademic learningand who, accordingly, regard it as of no value for the religious life.According to them the original Gospel, as it was proclaimed by Jesus,knew nothing about any such doctrine of the trinity of God— that is,nothingaboutthetermitselfnorabouttherealitytowhichthetermwasintendedtogiveexpression.Itwasonly—sotheargumentgoes—whenthe original and simple Gospel of Jesus was brought into relationshipwithGreekphilosophy andwas falsifiedby it that theChristian church

absorbed thepersonofChrist inHisDivinenature,andeventuallyalsothe Holy Spirit into the Divine Being. And so it came about that thechurchconfessedthreepersonsintheoneDivinebeing.

ButtheChristianchurchitselfhasalwayshadquiteadifferentideaaboutthat. It saw in the doctrine of the trinity no discovery of subtletheologians,noproductoftheweddingofGospelandGreekphilosophy,butaconfessionratherwhichwasmateriallyconcludedintheGospelandinthewholeWordofGod—adoctrine,inshort,whichwasinferredbyChristian faith from the revelation of God. In answer to the question,SincethereisbutoneDivineBeing,whydoyouspeakoftheFather,theSon, and the Holy Spirit? the Heidelberg Catechism gives a brief andconclusive answer: Because God has so revealed Himself in HisWord(Question 25). The revelation of God is the firm ground onwhich thisconfession of the church also rests. It is the source out of which thisdoctrineoftheone,holy,catholic,Christianchurchhasgrownandbeenbuilt up.God has thus revealedHimself. AndHe has revealedHimselfthus,thatis,asatriuneGod,becauseHeexistsinthatway;andHeexistsinthiswaybecauseHehassorevealedHimself.

The Trinity in the revelation of God points back to the Trinity in Hisexistence.

Thisrevelationdidnothappeninasinglemoment.Itwasnotpresentedandperfectedinasinglepointoftime.Rather,thisrevelationhasalonghistory,spreadoutoverthecenturies.Itbeganatthecreation,continuedafterthefallinthepromisesanddeedsofgracewhichaccruedtoIsrael,andreacheditsapexinthepersonandworkofChrist,inthepouringoutoftheHolySpirit,andtheestablishmentofthechurch.Itmaintainsitselfnow throughout the centuries, and over against all opposition, in theineradicablewitnessofScriptureand in the rock-firmconfessionof thechurch.Becausetherevelationhashadthislonghistory,thereisprogressand development also in the confession of God’s triune existence. Godundergoesnochange,remainingalwaysthesame.Butintheprogressofrevelation,HemakesHimselfalwaysclearerandmoreglorioustopeopleandtoangels.AsHisrevelationcontinues,ourknowledgegrows.

*****

When,inthedaysoftheOldCovenant,GodbeginstorevealHimself,thethingthatstandsintheforegroundiscertainlytheunity,theoneness,ofGod.

For,duetothesinofman,thepureknowledgeofGodhadbeenlost;thetruth, as Paul profoundly says, was held in unrighteousness. Even thatwhich can be knownofGod in the things thatHehasmadewasmadevainbytheir imaginationsandwasdarkenedbythe foolishnessof theirhearts. On every hand mankind fell into idolatry and the worship ofimages(Rom.1:18-23).

HenceitwasnecessarythattherevelationbeginwithanemphasisupontheunityofGod.Itseemstocryouttomankind:ThegodsbeforewhichyebowarenotthetrueGod.ThereisbutonetrueGod,namely,theGodwhoat thebeginningmade theheavenand theearth (Gen.1:1and2:1),the God who made Himself known to Abraham as God the Almighty(Gen.17:1andEx.6:3), theGodwhoappearedtoMosesasJehovah,astheI-Am-that-I-Am(Ex.3:14),andtheGodwho,outofsovereignfavor,chose the people of Israel, and called them, and accepted them inHiscovenant (Ex. 19:4ff.). First of all, therefore, the revelation had as itscontent:JehovahaloneisElohim,theLordaloneisGod,andthereisnootherGodbesideHim.1

For the people of Israel, too, the revelation of the oneness of Godwasdesperatelynecessary.Israelwassurroundedonallsidesbyheathenandby heathen who at all times tried to tempt it into apostacy andunfaithfulnesstotheLord;moreover,rightonuptothecaptivityagreatpartofthepeopleofIsraelfeltthemselvesattractedtothepaganidolatryand image worship, and again and again fell into the practice of themdespite the proscription of the law and the warning of the prophets.Therefore, God Himself placed the emphasis on the fact that He, theLord,whowasnowappearingtoMosesandwhowantedtoredeemHispeoplethroughMoses,wasthesameGodwhohadmadeHimselfknownto Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the Almighty God (Ex. 3:6 and 15).WhenHegaveHislawtoIsraelHewroteaboveitasitspreamble:IamtheLordthyGod,whichhavebroughttheeoutofthelandofEgypt.Andinthefirstcommandment,andthesecond,Hestrictlyforbadeallidolatryandworship of images (Ex. 20:2-5). Be’cause the Lord our God is one

God,IsraelmustloveHimwithitswholeheart,itswholesoul,andallitsstrength(Deut.6:4-5).TheLordaloneisIsrael’sGodandthereforeIsraelmayserveonlyHim.

Nevertheless, despite the fact that the oneness of God is so stronglyemphasized,and,as itwere, constitutes the first articleof Israel’sbasiclaw,thedistinctionswithinthatunityoftheGodheadcometolightalsoas in that revelation His fulness of Being progresses. The very namewhichisusuallyemployedfordesignatingGodintheoriginalHebrewhasacertain significancehere.For thisnameElohim,is inplural form, andtherefore, although it does not, as was formerly generally supposed,designatethethreepersonsofthedivineBeing,itdoes,initscharacterasan intensive plural, point to the fulness of life and of powerwhich arepresent inGod. It is, no doubt, in connectionwith this same fact, thatGodsometimes,inspeakingofHimself,usesapluralreferent,andbythismeansmakesdistinctionswithinHimselfthatbearaperson’alcharacter(Gen.1:26-27;3:22;andIsa.6:8).

OfgreatersignificanceistheteachingoftheOldTestamenttotheeffectthatGodbringseverythinginHiscreationandprovidenceintobeingbyHisWordandSpirit.Heisnotahumanbeing,who,atthecostofgreatdifficultyandexertion,makessomethingelseoutofthematerialsHehasathand.Instead,simplybytheactofspeaking,Hecallseverything intobeingoutofnothing.

InthefirstchapterofGenesiswearetaughtthistruthintheloftiestwaypossible,andelsewhere,too,itisexpressedmostgloriouslyinwordandsong.He speaks, and it is done;He commands, and it stands fast (Ps.33:9).HesendsoutHisword,andmeltsthemorselsofice(Ps.147:18).His voice is upon thewaters, shakes thewilderness, causes the hills toskip like a calf, and discovers the forests (Ps. 29:3-10). Two truths arecontainedinthisexaltedaccountofGod’sworks:thefirst isthatGodistheAlmightyOnewho has but to speak and all things leap into being,whoseword is law(Ps.33:9)andwhosevoice ispower(Ps.29:4); andthesecondisthatGodworksdeliberately,andnotwith’outforethought,andcarriesoutallHisworkswith thehighestwisdom.ThewordwhichGodspeaks ispower,but it isalso thevehicleof thought.HehasmadetheearthbyHispower,HehasestablishedtheworldbyHiswisdom,and

hasstretchedouttheheavensbyHisdiscretion(Jer.10:12and51:15).Hehasmade all His works in wisdom: the earth is full of His riches (Ps.104:24).ThiswisdomofGoddidnotcometoHimfromoutsideHimself,butwaswithHimfromthebeginning.HepossesseditastheprincipleofHisway,beforeHisworksofold.WhenHepreparedtheheavens,setacompass upon the face of the deep, established the clouds above,strengthenedthe fountainsof thedeep, thenwisdomwasalreadythere,brought up alongside of Him, daily his delight, and rejoicing alwaysbefore Him (Prov. 8:22-31 and Job 20:20-28). God rejoiced in thewisdomwithwhichHecreatedtheworld.

AlongsideofthiswordandwisdomtheSpiritofGodastheMediatorofthecreationmakesHisappearancejustasGodatoneandthesametimeiswisdomandpossesses it,sothatHecanshare itandcanexhibit it inHisworks,soHeHimself isSpirit inHisbeing (Deut.4:12, 15)andHepossessesSpirit, thatSpirit bywhichHe candwell in theworldandbealwaysandeverywherepresentinit(Ps.139:7).Withoutany’onehavingbeenHiscounsellor,theLordbyHisSpiritbroughteverythingintobeing(Isa. 40:13ff.). At the beginning that Spiritmoved upon the face of thewaters(Gen.1:2),andHeremainsactiveinallthatwascreated.BythatSpiritGodgarnishestheheavens(Job26:13),renewsthefaceoftheearth(Ps.104:30),giveslifetoman(Job33:4),maintainsthebreathinman’snostrils(Job27:3),giveshimunderstandingandwisdom(Job32:8),andalsocausesthegrasstowitherandtheflowertofade(Isa.40:7).Inshort,bytheWordoftheLordweretheheavensmade,andallthehostofthembytheBreathofHismouth(Ps.33:6).

*****

Andthisself-diversityofGodcomesoutevenmoreintheworksofthere-creation.ThenitisnotElohim,butJehovah,notGodingeneral,buttheLord, the God of the covenant, who reveals Himself and who makesHimself known in wonders of redemption and salvation. As such HeredeemsandleadsHispeople,notbyHiswordalonewhichHespeaksorhasconveyedtothem,butalsobymeansoftheAngelofthecovenant(theAngel of the Lord). This Angel appears already in the history of thepatriarchs:toHagar(Gen.16:6ff.),toAbraham(Gen.18ff.),andtoJacob(Gen.28:13ff.).ThisAngelrevealsHisgraceandpowerespeciallyinthe

emancipation of Israel from the bond’age of Egypt.2 This Angel of theLord does not stand on the same plane of importance as the createdangels;rather,HeisaspecialrevelationandmanifestationofGod.Ontheonehand,HeisclearlydistinguishedfromGod,whospeaksofHimasofHisAngel,andyet,ontheotherhand,isoneinnamewithGodHimself,andinpower,inredemptionandblessing,inworshipfulnessandhonor.He is called God in Genesis 16:13, the God of Bethel in Genesis 31:13,exchangesplaceswithGodortheLord(Gen.28:30,32andEx.3:4),andHebearsthenameofGodwithinHim(Ex.23:21).Heredeemsfromallevil(Gen.48:16),rescuesIsraelfromthehandoftheEgyptians(Ex.3:8),cleavesthewatersanddriesupthesea(Ex.14:21),preservesthepeopleof God in the way, brings them safely into Canaan, causes them totriumph over their enemies (Ex. 3:8 and 23:20), is to be absolutelyobeyedasthoughHewereGodHimself(Ex.23:20).andalwaysen’campsaroundthosewhofeartheLord(Ps.34:7and35:5).

Just as in His re-creating work, Jehovah carries out His redemptiveactivitiesthroughthisAngelofthecovenant,soHebyHisSpiritgivesoutall kinds of energies and gifts toHis people. In theOld Testament theSpirit of the Lord is the source of all life, all weal, and all ability. Hegrants courage and strength to the judges, to Othniel (Judges 3:10),Gideon(Judges6:34),Jephthah(Judges11:29),andtoSamson(Judges14:6and15:14).Hegrantsartisticperceptiontothemakersofthepriests’garments, the tabernacle, and the temple,3 and He gives wisdom andunderstandingtothejudgeswhobeartheburdenofthepeoplealongsideof Moses (Num. 11:17, 25). He gives the spirit of prophecy to theprophets,4 and renewal and sanctification and guidance to all ofGod’schildren(Ps.51:12-13and143:10).

In short: theWord, the promise, the covenant,which the Lord gave toIsrael at the exodus fromEgypt, have existed throughout the ages, andstillstoodfastevenaftertheCaptivityinthedaysofZerubbabel,sothatthepeoplehadnoneedtofear(Haggai2:4-5).WhentheLordledIsraeloutofEgyptHebecametheSaviorofIsrael.AndthisdispositionofGodtowards His people came to expression in the fact that in all theiroppressionHewasoppressed(HeregardedtheafflictionofHispeopleasHis own affliction), and that He therefore sent them His Angel to

preserve them.He redeemed them byHis love and grace andHe tookthemupandcarriedthemasHisownthroughoutthosedaysofold.HesentthemtheSpiritofHisholinessinordertoleadtheminthewaysoftheLord(Isa.63:9-12).InthedaysoftheOldCovenant,theLordthroughthe high priest laid His threefold blessing on the people of Israel: theblessingof vigil, theblessingof grace, and theblessingofpeace (Num.6:24-26).

Thus gradually, then, but ever more unmistakably, the threefolddistinction within the Divine being comes to expression already in thehistoryofGod’s leadingof Israel.However, theOldTestament includesthe furtherpromises that in the future therewillbeahigherandricherrevelation. After all, Israel repudiated theWord of the Lord and vexedHis Holy Spirit (Isa. 63:10 and Ps. 106). The revelation of God in theAngel of the covenant and in the Spirit of the Lord proved to beinadequate: if God wanted to confirm His covenant and fulfill Hispromise,anotherandhigherrevelationwouldbenecessary.

Sucharevelationwasheraldedbytheprophets.Inthefuture,inthelastdays,thentheLordwillcallupoutofthemidstofIsraelsuchaprophetasMoseswas,andtheLordwillputHiswords in thatprophet’smouth(Deut. 18 :18). This one will be a priest for ever after the order ofMelchizedek (Ps. 110:4);Hewillbeakingoutof thehouseofDavid (2Sam.7:12-16), a rodoutof the stemofJesse (Isa. 11:1), aking, judgingandseekingjudgment(Isa.16:5).Ahumanbeing,amanHewillbe,andthesonofawoman(Isa.7:14),andHewillbewithoutformorcomeliness(Isa.53:2ff.);but,atthesametime,HewillbeImmanuel(Isa.7:14),theLordourrighteousness(Jer.23:6),theAngelofthecovenant(Mal.3:1),theLordHimselfappearingtoHispeople(Hos.1:7andMal.3:1).AndHebears the name of Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, TheeverlastingFather,ThePrinceofPeace(Isa.9:6).

ThismanifestationoftheservantoftheLordistobefollowedbyaricherdispensation of the Holy Spirit. As the Spirit of wisdom andunderstanding,ofcounselandstrength,oftheknowledgeandfearoftheLord,thisSpiritwillrestupontheMessiah(Isa.11:2;42:1;and61:1).Hewillbepouredoutuponallflesh,oversonsanddaughters,oldmenandyoungmen,servantsandhandmaids,5andHewillgiveanewheartanda

new spirit, so that His peoplemay walk in His statutes, and keep Hisordinances,anddothem.6

Thus theOldTestament itselfpointsout that the full revelationofGodwillconsistoftherevelationofHistriunebeing.

*****

This promise and announcement the fulfillment of theNew Testamentfullysatisfies.Inthisrespectalso,theunityoronenessofGodisthepointofdepartureofall revelation.7Butoutof thisoneness thedifference intheDivine being now, in theNewTestament, comes intomuch clearerlight. This happens first in the great redemptive events of incarnation,satisfaction,andoutpouring,andnextintheinstructionofJesusandHisapostles. The work of salvation is one whole, a work of God frombeginning to end. But there are three high moments in it, election,forgiveness,andrenewal,andthesethreepointtoathreefoldcauseintheDivinebeing:thatis,totheFather,theSon,andtheHolySpirit.

The very conceivingofChrist already showsus the threefold activity ofGod. Forwhile the Father gives the Son to theworld (John 3:16), andwhile the Son Himself descends from heaven (John 6:38), that Son isconceivedinMaryof theHolySpirit(Matt.1:20andLuke1:35).AtHisbaptism Jesus is anointed by the Holy Spirit, and is there publiclydeclaredtobethebelovedSonoftheFather,theSoninwhomHeiswellpleased(Matt.3:16-17).TheworkswhichJesusdidwereshownHimbythe Father (John 5:19 and 8:38), and they are fulfilled by Him in thestrengthoftheHolySpirit(Matt.12:28).InHisdyingHeoffersHimselftoGodintheeternalSpirit(Heb.9:14).TheresurrectionisaraisingupbytheFather(Acts2:24)andisatthesametimeJesus’ownactbywhichHeisgreatlyprovedtobetheSonoftheFatheraccordingtotheSpiritofholiness (Rom. 1:3).And after his resurrectionHe, on the fortieth day,ascendsintheSpiritwhichquickenedHimonhighinheavenandthereHemakestheangelsandauthoritiesandpowerssubjecttoHimself.

The teaching of Jesus and the apostles agrees fully with the lesson ofthoseeventsthemselves.

JesuscametoearthtodeclaretheFatherandtomakeHisnameknownamongmen(John1:18and17:6).Thenameof fatherappliedtoGodascreator of all things was also used by the pagans. Thismeaning of theterm is supportedalsobyScriptureatvariousplaces.8Besides, theOldTestament several times uses the designation Father to refer to God’stheocraticrelationshiptoIsraelbecauseinHismarvelousabilityHehascreatedandmaintainedthatrelationship(Deut.32:6andIsa.63:16).Butin theNewTestamentagloriouslynew light is shedupon thisnameoffather as applied toGod. Jesus always indicates an essential differencebetweentherelationshipinwhichHeHimselfstandstoGodandthatinwhich others, say the Jews or the disciples, stand to Him. When, forexample,He teaches thedisciples,at their request, the“OurFather. . .”He says expressly “When ye pray, say. . . .” And when, after theresurrection, He announces His forthcoming ascension to MaryMagdalene,Hesays:“IascenduntomyFather,andyourFather;andtomyGod, and yourGod” (John 20:17). In otherwords,God isHisownFather(John5:18).HeknowstheSonandlovesHiminsuchawayandtosuch an extent as, reciprocally, only the Son can know and love theFather.9Among theapostles, accordingly,God is constantly referred toas the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:3). This relationshipbetweentheFatherandtheSondidnotdevelopintimebutexistedfrometernity (John 1:1, 14; 17:24).God is therefore Father in the first placebecause inaveryuniquesenseHe is theFatherof theSon.This isHisoriginal,specialpersonalcharacteristic.

InaderivedsenseGodisfurthercalledtheFatherofallcreaturesbecauseHeistheircreatorandsustainer(1Cor.8:6,andelsewhere).HeiscalledtheFatherofIsraelbecauseIsraelisHishandiworkbyvirtueofelectionandcalling(Deut.32:6andIsa.64:8),andtheFatherofthechurchandallbelieversbecause the loveof theFather for theSonaccrues to them(John 16:27 and 17:24) and because they have been accepted as Hischildren and are born of Him through the Spirit (John 1:12 and Rom.8:15).

TheFatheristhereforealwaystheFather,thefirstperson,HefromwhominthebeingofGod,inthecounselofGod,andinalltheworksofcreationand providence, redemption and sanctification, the initiative proceeds.

HegavetheSontohavelifeinHimself(John5:26),andHesendsouttheSpirit(John15:26).Hisistheelectionandthegoodpleasure(Matt11:26and Eph. 1:4, 9, 11). From Him proceed the creation, providence,redemption,andrenewal (Ps.33:6andJohn3:16).ToHiminaspecialsense thekingdomand thepowerand thegloryaccrue (Matt6:13).Heparticularly bears the name ofGod in distinction from the Lord JesusChristandtheHolySpirit.Indeed,ChristHimselfasMediatorcallsHimHisFather,notonly,butalsoHisGod(Matt27:46andJohn20:17)andChristisHimselfcalledtheChristofGod.10Inaword,thefirstpersonoftheDivinebeingistheFatherbecause“ofHimareallthings”(1Cor.8:6).

IfGodistheFather,theinferenceisthattherealsoisaSonwhoreceivedlifefromHimandwhosharesHislove.IntheOldTestamentthenameofson of God was used for angels,11 for the people of Israel,12 andparticularly too for the theocratickingof thatpeople.13But in theNewTestamentthisnametakesonafarprofoundermeaning.ForChrististheSonofGodinaverypeculiarsense;Heishighlyexaltedaboveangelsandprophets(Matt.13:32;21:27;and22:2),andHeHimselfsaysthatnoonecan know the Son except the Father, and no one can know the Fatherexcept theSon (Matt. 11:27). Indistinction fromangelsandmen,He istheFather’sownSon(Rom.8:32),thebelovedSoninwhomtheFatheriswell pleased (Matt 3:17), the only-begotten Son (John 1:18) whom theFathergavetohavelifeinHimself(John5:26).

This very special, thisunique, relationshipbetweenFatherandSondidnot develop in time byway of the supernatural conception of theHolySpirit,oroftheanointingatbaptism,oroftheresurrectionandascension—thoughmanyhavemaintainedthis—but isarelationshipwhichhasexistedfromalleternity.TheSonwhoinChristassumedhumannaturewasinthebeginningwithGodastheWord(John1:1).thenalreadyhadthe formofGod(Phil.2:6),wasrichandclothedwithglory(John17:5,24),wasthenalreadythebrightnessofGod’sgloryandtheexpressimageofHisperson(Heb.1:3),andpreciselythereforeHecouldinthefulnessoftimebesentout,given,andbroughtintotheworld.14Hence,too,thecreation (John 1:3 and Col. 1:16) and providence (Heb 1:3) and theaccomplishment of the whole of salvation (1 Cor. 1:30) are ascribed toHim.Heisnot,ascreaturesaremadeorcreated,butisinstead,thefirst-

bornofall creatures that is theSonwhohas the rankandrightsof thefirst-bornoveragainstall creatures (Col 1:15)ThusHe is also the first-bornof thedead,thefirst-bornofmanybrethren,andthereforeamongallandinallHeisthefirst(Rom8:29andCol1:18)Andeventhoughinthe fulness of time, He assumed the form of a servant, He wasnevertheless in the formofGod.Hewas inall things likeuntoGod theFather (Phil. 2:6):. in life (John 5:26), in knowledge (Matt. 11:27), instrength (John 1:3 and 5:21, 26), in honor (John 5:23). He is HimselfGod,tobepraisedaboveallelseintoeternity.15JustasallthingsareoftheFather,sotheyarealsoallthroughtheSon(1Cor.8:6).

*****

Both,Father andSon, come together and areunited in theHoly SpiritandbymeansoftheSpiritdwellinallcreatures.True,GodisaccordingtoHisnatureaSpirit(John4:24)andHeisholy(Isa.6:3);buttheHolySpirit is clearly distinguished from God as Spirit. Just as, in acomparativewayofspeaking,man isaspirit inhis invisiblenatureandalsopossessesaspirit,bymeansofwhichhe isawareofhimselfand isself-conscious,soGodisaSpiritbynatureandalsopossessesaSpirit,aSpiritwhich searches thedepthsofHisbeing (1Cor.2:11).As such thelatter is called the Spirit of God or the Holy Spirit (Ps. 51:12 and Isa.63:10-11).Andthisisdoneindistinctionfromthespiritofanangelorofahumanbeingorofanyothercreature.But,althoughHeisdistinguishedfromGod,fromtheFatherandtheSon,Hestandsinthemostintimateofrelationships with both. He is called the breath of the Almighty (Job33:4), thebreathofHismouth(Ps.33:6), issentoutbytheFatherandtheSon(John14:26and15:26),andHeproceedsfromboth,notfromtheFatheralone(John15:26)butalsofromtheSon,forHeisalsocalledtheSpiritofChristortheSpiritoftheFather(Rom.8:9).

AlthoughtheHolySpiritisinthatwaygivenorsentorpouredoutbytheFatherandtheSon,HeoftenmakesHisappearanceasapoweroragiftwhichqualifiesmenfortheircallingoroffice.Thus,forexample,theHolySpirit is spoken of at various places in the Acts of the Apostles inconnectionwiththegiftofprophecy(8:15;10:44;11:15;15:8;and19:2).Butitisnotwarrantedtoinferfromthatfact,asmanydo,thattheHolySpirit is nothing more or other than a gift or power of God. At other

placesHedefinitelymakesHis appearance as a person, onewho bearspersonal names, has personal characteristics, and does personal deeds.Thus in John 15:26 and 16:13, 14 (although the Greek of the wordtranslated Spirit in our language is of neuter gender) Christ uses themasculine referent:He shall testify ofMe and glorifyMe. At the sameplaceChrist callsHimComforter, using the samename that is used ofChristin1John2:1,anametranslatedadvocateintheEnglishversion.

Besides these personal names all sorts of personal characteristics areascribed to the Holy Spirit: for example, selfhood (Acts 132), self-consciousness (Acts 15:28), self-determination or will (1 Cor. 12:11).Besides He is credited with all kinds of personal activities, such asinvestigating (1 Cor. 2:11), listening (John 16:13), speaking (Rev. 2:17),teaching (John 14:26), praying (Rom. 8:27), and the like. And all thiscomesoutmostclearlyandsublimelyinthefactthatHeisplacedononeandthesamelevelwiththeFatherandtheSon(Matt.28:19and2Cor.13:14).

ThelastpointisthemostimportantanditindicatesthefactthattheHolySpiritisapersonnotmerelybutalsoveryGod.AndScripturesprovideallthe datawhich are necessary tomake this confession.Wehave only tonote thatdespite thedistinctionbetweenGodandHisSpiritwhichwaspointed out above, the two frequently exchange places in Scripture, sothatitisquitethesamewhetherGodorHisSpiritsaysordoesathing.InActs 5:3-4 the lying to the Holy Spirit is called a lying to God. In 1Corinthians3:16thebelieversarecalledGod’stemple,becausetheSpiritofGoddwells in them.To these factswemust add that variousDivineattributes, such as eternity (Heb. 9:14), omnipresence (Ps. 139:7),omniscience (1 Cor. 2:11), omnipotence (1 Cor. 12:4-6), and variousDivineworks, such as creation (Ps. 33:6), providence (Ps. 104:30), andredemption(John3:3)areascribedtotheHolySpiritquiteaswellastotheFatherandtheSon.ConsequentlyHeshares in thesameglorywiththosetwo.HetakesHisplacealongsideoftheFatherandtheSonasthecauseofsalvation(2Cor.13:14andRev.1:4).ItisinHisnamealsothatwearebaptized (Matt.28:19),andblessed (2Cor. 13:14).Moreover, theblasphemyagainst theHolySpirit is an unpardonable sin (Matt. 12:31-32).Inotherwords, justasall thingsareoftheFatherandthroughthe

Son,theyallexistandrestintheHolySpirit.

Alloftheseelementsofthedoctrineofthetrinity,spreadthroughouttheScriptures,weregatheredtogether,sotospeak,byJesusinHisbaptismalcommand and by the apostles in their benedictions. After HisresurrectionandbeforeHisascension,ChristbidsHisapostlestogooutandmakeallpeoplesHisdisciplesandtobaptizethemintheonenameinwhich,nevertheless,threedifferentsubjectsarerevealed.Father,Son,and Spirit are in their oneness and their distinction the fulness of theperfected revelation of God. Just so, too, according to the apostles thewholegoodandsalvationofmaniscontained inthe loveof theFather,the graceof theSon, and the fellowshipof theHolySpirit.16 The goodpleasure, the foreknowledge, thepower, the love, thekingdom,and thestrengtharetheFather’s.TheMediatorship,thereconciliation,thegrace,and the redemption are the Son’s. The regeneration, the renewal, thesanctification,theredemptionaretheSpirit’s.

The relationship inwhichChrist stands to theFather corresponds fullywiththerelationshipinwhichtheSpiritstandstoChrist.JustastheSonspeaksnothinganddoesnothingofHimselfbutreceiveseverythingfromtheFather(John5:26and16:15),sotheHolySpirittakeseverythingfromChrist(John16:13-14).AstheSontestifiesoftheFatherandglorifiestheFather(John1:18and17:4,6),sotheHolySpirittestifiesoftheSonandglorifiesHim(John15:26and16:14).JustasnoonecomestotheFatherbutthroughtheSon(John14:6),sonoonecansaythatJesusistheLordexceptthroughtheHolySpirit(1Cor.12:3).ThroughtheSpiritwehavefellowshipwiththeFatherandtheSon.It is intheHolySpiritthatGodHimselfthroughChristdwellsinourhearts.Andifthisallbeso,thentheHolySpirit is, togetherwith theSonand theFather, theone, trueGod,andistobeeternallylaudedandpraisedassuch.

*****

To this instruction of the Holy Spirit the Christian church in itsconfessionof theTrinityofGodhassaidyeaandamen.Thechurchdidnot arrive at this rich and glorious confessionwithout a hard and longstruggleofthespirits.Centuriesonendtheprofoundestexperienceofthespiritual life of the children of God and the doughtiest intellect of the

fathers and teachers of the churchwent into the understanding of thispoint of the revelation of Scripture and to reproducing it purely in theconfessionofthechurch.Nodoubtthechurchwouldnothavesucceededinthiseffortat the layingof foundations, if ithadnotbeenled intothetruth by theHoly. Spirit, and if in Tertullian and Irenaeus, AthanasiusandthethreeCappadocians,Augustine,andHillary,andsomanyothersbesides, it had not received themenwho, endowed and equippedwithunusualgiftsofgodlinessandwisdom,kepttothestraightcourse.

NothinglessthanthepeculiaressenceofChristianitywasatstakeinthisbattleofthespirits.Fromtwosidesthechurchwasexposedtothedangerof permitting itself to bewrested from the firm foundation onwhich itwasbuiltandsotobesubmergedbytheworld.

On the one hand, there was the threat of Arianism, so called after theAlexandrianpresbyterAriuswhodiedintheyear336.AnusheldthattheFatheralonewastheeternalandtrueGod,inasmuchasHealoneinthefullsenseof thewordwasungenerated.ConcerningtheSon, theLogos,whoinChristhadbecomeflesh,hetaughtthat, inasmuchasthisChristwas generated, He could not be God but had to be a creature — acreature, it is true, who had been made before other creatures, butneverthelesswasmadeastheyweremadethroughthewillofGod.And,inthesameway,AriusheldthattheHolySpiritwasacreatureorelseaqualityorattributeofGod.

OntheothersidethepartyofSabellianismwasatwork,socalledafteracertainSabelliuswholivedinRomeatthebeginningofthethirdcentury.SabelliusheldthatFather,Son,andHolySpiritwerebutthreenamesforone and the same God — a God who had made Himself known thussuccessively as His revelation progressed in various forms andmanifestations.IntheformoftheFather,accordingly,GodwasoperativeasCreatorandLawgiver.ThereuponHeworkedasRedeemerintheformoftheSon.AndHenowworksintheformoftheHolySpiritastheRe-creatorofthechurch.

WhileArianismtriestomaintaintheonenessofGod,byplacingSonandSpirit outside the Divine being and reducing these to the level ofcreatures, Sabellianism tries to arrive at the same end by robbing the

three persons of the Godhead of their independence. This it does bymetamorphosingthepersonsintothreesuccessivemodesofrevelationofthe same Divine Being. In the first tendency the Jewish, deistic,rationalistic mode of thinking comes to expression rathercharacteristically, and in the second the idea of Pagan pantheism andmysticism. Themoment the church set about giving itself a fairly clearaccountofthetruthwhichwaslaterstatedintheconfessionoftheTrinityofGod, thesetwoother tendenciesarosealongsideat therightandleft,andtheyaccompanytheconfessionofthechurchtothisday.AlwaysandagainthechurchandeachoneofitsmembersmustbeonguardagainstdoinginjusticeontheonehandtotheonenessoftheDivineBeing,andontheothertothethreePersonswithinthatBeing.Theonenessmaynotbe sacrificed to the diversity, nor the diversity to the oneness. Tomaintain both in their inseparable connection and in their purerelationship,notonlytheoreticallybutalsoinpracticallife,isthecallingofallbelievers.

Inorder to satisfy this requirement, theChristianchurchandChristiantheology intheearlyperiodmadeuseofvariouswordsandexpressionswhichcannotbefoundliterallyintheHolyScriptures.Thechurchbeganto speak of the essenceofGod and of threepersons in that essence ofbeing. It spoke of the triune and the trinitarian,or of essential andpersonalcharacteristics,oftheeternalgenerationoftheSonandof theproceedingoftheHolySpiritfromtheFatherandfromtheSon,andthelike.

There is no reason at all why the church and the Christian theologyshould not use such terms and modes of expression. For the HolyScripturewasnotgiventothechurchbyGodtobethoughtlesslyrepeatedbuttobeunderstoodinallitsfulnessandriches,andtoberestatedinitsown language in order that in this way it might proclaim the mightyworks of God. Moreover, such terms and expressions are necessary inordertomaintainthetruthofScriptureoveragainstitsopponentsandtosecure it against misunderstanding and error. And history has taughtthroughoutthecenturiesthatalighthearteddisapprovalandrejectionofthesenamesandmodesof expression leads to various departures fromtheconfession.

Atthesametime,weshould,intheuseoftheseterms,alwaysrememberthat they are of human origin and therefore limited, defective, fallible.Thechurchfathersalwaysacknowledgedthis.Forexample,theyheldthatthetermpersonswhichwasusedtodesignatethethreewaysofexistenceintheDivineBeingdidnotdojusticetothetruthinthematterbutservedasanaidtowardsmaintainingthetruthandcuttingofferror.Thewordwaschosen,notbecauseitwasaccurateineveryrespect,butbecausenoother and better was to be found. In thismatter again the word is farbehindthethought,andthethoughtisfarbehindtheactuality.Althoughwecannotpreservetheactualityinanybutthisinadequateform,wemayneverforgetthatitistherealityitselfandnotthewordthatcounts.Inthedispensationof gloryotherandbetter expressionswill certainly be laiduponourlips.

*****

Therealityitselfwhichisconcernedintheconfessionoftheholytrinityisofthehighestimportance,bothforthemindandtheheart.

For it isbythatconfessionthat thechurchmaintains, in the firstplace,boththeunityandthediversityinthebeingofGod.TheDivineBeing isone: there isbutoneBeing that isGodand thatmaybe calledGod.Increation and redemption, in nature and grace, in church andworld, instate and society, everywhere and always we are concerned with one,same,living,andtrueGod.Theunityoftheworld,ofmankind,oftruth,of virtue, of justice, andof beautydependsupon theunity ofGod.ThemomentthatunityofGodisdeniedorunderstressed,thedoorisopentopolytheism.

But this unity or oneness of God is, according to Scripture and theconfessionofthechurch,notacontentlessunity,norasolitariness,butafulness of life and strength. It comprises difference, or distinction, ordiversity. It is that diversity which comes to expression in the threepersons ormodes of being ofGod. These three persons are notmerelythree modes of revelation. They are modes of being. Father, Son, andSpiritshareoneandthesameDivinenatureandcharacteristics.Theyareone being. Nevertheless each has His own name, His own particularcharacteristic,bywhichHeisdistinguishedfromtheothers.TheFather

alonehasfatherhood,theSonalonehasgeneration,andtheSpiritalonepossessesthequalityofproceedingfromboth.

To that order of existence in the Divine Being the order of the threepersonsinallDivineworkcorresponds.TheFatherisHefromwhom,theSonisHethroughwhom,andtheSpiritisHeinwhomallthingsare.Allthingsinthecreation,andintheredemption,orre-creation,comefromtheFather,throughtheSonandtheSpirit.AndintheSpiritandthroughthe Son they are come back to Him. It is to the Father that we areparticularly indebted, therefore, forhiselecting love, to theSon forHisredeeming grace, and to the Spirit for his regenerative and renewingpower.

In the second place, the church inmaintaining this confession, takes astrongpositionoveragainsttheheresiesofdeism(beliefinGodwithoutrevelation) and pantheism (polytheism) and of Judaism andPaganism.Always there is thatdual tendency in thehumanheart: the tendencytothink ofGod as distant and removed and to think of self andworld asindependentofGod,andthetendencytodrawGoddownintotheworld,to identifyHimwith theworld, and so to deify the self and theworld.Whenthefirst tendencyprevails inuswecometothepointof thinkingthatwecandowithoutGodinnature,inourcalling,inourbusiness, inour science and art, and also in the work of redemption. And, if thesecondtendencyprevailsinus,wechangethegloryofGodintotheimageof some creature or other, deify the world, the sun, themoon and thestars,art,science,orthestate,andinthecreature,usuallyconceivedinour image, we worship our own greatness. In the first instance God isonlyafaroff;inthesecondHeisonlynearby.Inthefirst,Heisoutsideofthe world, above it, free from it; in the second, He is inside it andidenticalwithit.

But the church confesses both: God is above the world, distinguishedfromitinessence,andyetHeiswithHiswholebeingpresentinitandatno point in space or time separated from it. He is both afar off andnearby.Heisbothhighlyexaltedaboveallcreaturesandatthesametimedeeplycondescendingtothemall.HeisourCreatorwhobroughtusintobeing by His will as creatures distinct from Him in kind. He is ourRedeemerwhosavesus,notbyourworksbutbytherichesofHisgrace.

HeisourSanctifierwhodwellsinusasinHistemple.AsthetriuneGodHeisoneGodandisaboveus,forus,andinus.

Finally, in the third place, this confession of the church is also of thegreatest importance for the spiritual life. Quite unjustifiably it issometimes maintained that the doctrine of the trinity is merely aphilosophically abstracted dogma and that it possesses no value forreligion and life. The Reformed Confession of Faith takes an entirelydifferentviewof this. InArticleXIof thatConfessionthechurchstatedthatGodisoneinessenceandthreeinpersons.Thisweknowfromthewitness ofHoly Scripture, and from the activities of the three persons,especiallythosewhichwesensewithinus.True,wedonotbaseourfaithinthetrinityonfeelingandexperience;butwhenwebelieveit,wenoticethat the doctrine stands in intimate relationship with the spiritualexperienceofthechildrenofGod.

ForthebelieverscometoknowtheworkingsoftheFather,theCreatorofallthings,Hewhogavethemlife,andbreath,andallthings.Theylearntoknow Him as the Lawgiver who gave out His holy commandments inorder that they should walk in them. They learn to know Him as theJudgewho is provoked to terrible wrath by all the unrighteousness ofmen and who in no sense holds the guilty guiltless. And they learn toknowHim,finally, as theFatherwho forChrist’s sake is theirGodandFather,onwhomtheytrustsofarthattheydonotdoubtbutthatHewillsupplyforeveryneedofbodyandsoul,andthatHewillconvertallevilwhichaccruestotheminthisvaleoftearsintogood.TheyknowthatHecan do this as Almighty God and that He wants to do it as a faithfulFather.Hence they confess: I believe inGod, theFather, theAlmighty,Creatorofheavenandearth.

Thus,too,theylearntoknowinthemselvestheworkingsoftheSon,Hewho is the only-begotten of the Father, conceived inMary of theHolySpirit.TheylearntoknowHimastheirhighestProphetandTeacher,HewhohasperfectlyrevealedtothemthesecretcounselandwillofGodinthematter of their redemption. They learn to knowHim as their onlyHighpriest,whohasredeemedthembytheonesacrificeofHisbody,andwho still constantly intercedes for themwith the Father. They learn toknowHimastheireternalKing,whorulesthemwithHisWordandSpirit

and who shelters and preserves them in their achieved redemption.Hencethey confess: I believe in JesusChrist,God’s only-begotten Son,ourLord.

AndtheyalsolearntorecognizeinthemselvestheworkingsoftheHolySpirit,Hewhoregeneratesthemandleadsthemintoalltruth.Theylearnto knowHim as theOperator of their faith,Hewho through that faithcauses themtoshare inChristandallHisbenefits.They learn toknowHimastheComforter,Hewhopraysinthemwithunutterable longingsand who testifies with their spirit that they are children of God. Theylearn to knowHim as the pledge of their eternal inheritance, He whopreserves them until the day of their redemption. And they thereforeconfess:IbelievealsointheHolySpirit.

Thus the confession of the trinity is the sum of the Christian religion.Withoutitneitherthecreationnortheredemptionnorthesanctificationcanbepurelymaintained.

Everydeparturefromthisconfessionleadstoerrorintheotherheadsofdoctrine,justasamistakenrepresentationofthearticlesoffaithcanbetracedbacktoamisconceptionofthedoctrineofthetrinity.Wecantrulyproclaim themightyworksofGodonlywhenwe recognizeand confessthemastheonegreatworkofFather,Son,andSpirit.

IntheloveoftheFather,thegraceoftheSon,andthefellowshipoftheHolySpiritiscontainedthewholesalvationofmen.

Notes

1. Deut.4:35,39;Josh.22:22;2Sam.7:22;22:32; 1Kings 18:39; Isa.45:5,18,21;andelsewhere.

2. Ex.3:2;13:21;14:19;23:20-23;32:34;33:2;andNum.20:16.3. Ex.28:3;31:3-5;35:31-35;and1Chron.28:12.4. Num.11:25,29;24:2-3;Micah3:8;andlikepassages.5. Joel2:28-29;Isa.32:15;44:3;Ezek.36:26-27;andZech.12:10.6. Ezek.11:19-20;36:26;Jer.31:31-34and32:38-41.7. John17:3;1Cor.8:4;and1Tim.2:5.

8. Luke3:38;Acts17:28;Eph.3:15;andHeb.12:9.9. Matt.11:27;Mark12:6;andJohn5:20.10. Luke9:20;1Cor.3:23;andRev.12:10.11. Job38:712. Deut.1:31;8:5;14:1;32:6,18andHosea11:1.13. 2Sam.7:11-14Ps.2:7.14. John3:16;Gal.4:4;andHeb.1:6.15. John1:1;20:8;Rom.9:5;andHeb.1:8-9.16. 1Cor.13:14;1Peter1:2;1John5:4-6;andRev.1:4-6.

TheGreatnessofGod

byHermanBavinck

On the very first page of the Bible the absolute transcendence of GodaboveHiscreaturescomestoourattention.WithoutstrainorfatigueHecallsthewholeworldintoexistencebyHiswordalone.BythewordoftheLordweretheheavensmade,andallthehostofthembythebreathofHismouth(Ps.33:6).Hespeaksanditisdone;Hecommandsanditstandsfast(Ps.33:9).HedoesaccordingtoHiswillinthearmyofheaven,andamongtheinhabitantsoftheearth.AndnonecanstayHishand,orsayuntoHim,whatdoestThou(Dan.4:35)?Thenationsareasadropofabucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, Hetakethuptheislesasaverylittlething.AndLebanonisnotsufficienttoburn, nor the beasts thereof sufficient for a burnt offering. All nationsbefore Him are as nothing, and they are counted to Him as less thannothing,andvanity.TowhomthenwillyoulikenGod?orwhatlikenesswillyoucompareuntoHim(Isa.40:15-18).Forwhointheheavencanbecompared unto the Lord? who among the sons of the mighty can belikeneduntotheLord(Ps.89:6).ThereisnonamebywhichHecantrulybenamed:Hisnameiswonderful.1WhenGodspeaks toJoboutof thethunderanddisplaysthemagnitudeofHisworksbeforehim,Jobhumblybowshishead,andsays:Behold,Iamvile,WhatshallIanswerThee?Iwilllaymyhanduponmymouth(Job40:4).Godisgreat,andweknow

Himnot(Job36:26).Suchknowledgeistoowonderfulforus.Itishigh.Wecannotattainuntoit(Ps.139:6).

Nevertheless, this same sublime and exaltedGod stands in intimate allHiscreatures,eventhemeanestandsmallest.WhatthescripturesgiveusisnotanabstractconceptofGod,suchas thephilosophergivesus,butputsthevery.livingGodbeforeusandletsusseeHimintheworksofHishands.Wehavehuttoliftupoureyesandseewhohasmadeallthings.All things were made by His hand, brought forth by His will and Hisdeed.AndtheyareallsustainedbyHisstrength.HenceeverythingbearsthestampofHisexcellencesandthemarkofHisgoodness,wisdom,andpower. And among creatures only man was created in His image andlikeness.OnlymaniscalledtheoffspringofGod(Acts17:28).

Becauseofthisintimaterelationship,GodcanbenamedinthetermsofHiscreatures,andHecanbespokenofanthropomorphically.ThesameScripturewhich speaks in themost exaltedway of God's incomparablegreatness andmajesty, at the same time speaks of Him in figures andimageswhichsparklewithlife.ItspeaksofHiseyesandears,Hishandsandfeet,Hismouthandlips,Hisheartandbowels.Itascribesallkindsofattributes to Him - of wisdom and knowledge, will and power,righteousness andmercy, and it ascribes toHimalso such emotions asjoyandgrief,fearandvexation,zealandenvy,remorseandwrath,hatredand anger. It speaks of His observing and thinking, His hearing andseeing,Hisrememberingandforgetting,smellingandtasting,sittingandrising, visiting and forsaking, blessing and chastising, and the like. ItcomparesHimtoasunandalight,afountainandaspring,arockandashelter,aswordandbuckler,alionandaneagle,aheroandawarrior,anartistandbuilder,akinganda judge,ahusbandmanandashepherd,amanandafather.Inshort,allthatcanbefoundinthewholeworldinthewayofsupportandshelterandaidisoriginallyandperfectlytobefoundinoverflowingabundanceinGod.OfHimthewholefamilyinheavenandearth isnamed(Eph.3.15).He is theSunofbeingandallcreaturesareHisfleetingrays.

Itisimportant,therefore,inthismatteroftheknowledgeofGod,forustokeepafirmholdonbothofthesegroupsofstatementsconcerningtheDivine being and to do justice to each of them. For, ifwe sacrifice the

absolute transcendence of God above all of His creatures, we fall intopolytheism(thepaganreligionofmanygods)orpantheism(thereligioninwhicheverything isGod), two false religionswhich, according to thelessonofhistory,arecloselyrelatedtoeachotherandeasilypassfromtheoneintotheother.

AndifwesacrificethecloserelationshipofGodtoHiscreatures,wegoagroundonthereefofdeism(beliefinGodwithoutbenefitofrevelation)or of atheism (thedenial of the existence ofGod), two religionswhich,like those others, have numerous characteristics in common with eachother.

Scriptureclingstobothgroupsofcharacteristics,andChristiantheologyhasfollowedinitswake.GodactuallydoesnothaveanameaccordingtowhichwecantrulynameHim,andHenamesHimselfandletsusnameHimwithmany,manynames.HeistheinfinitelyExaltedOne,andatthesame time theOnewho lives alongwith allHis creatures. In a certainsenseallofHisattributesaresuchascannotbeshared,and inanothersensetheyaresuchascanallbeshared.Wecannotfathomthiswithourmind.ThereisnosuchthingasanadequateconceptofGod.Thereisnoonewhocangiveadefinition,adelimitation,ofGodthat isadequatetoHisbeing.ThenamewhichfullyexpresseswhatHe iscannotbe found.Buttheonegroupofcharacteristicsoutlinedabovedoesnotconflictwiththeother.PreciselybecauseGodistheHighandExaltedOne,andlivesineternity, He also dwells with those who are of a contrite and humbleSpirit(Isa.57:15.WeknowthatGoddidnotrevealHimselfinorderthatweshoulddrawupaphilosophical conceptofGod fromHis revelation,butinorderthatweshouldacceptHim,thetrue,livingGod,asourGod,andshouldacknowledgeandconfessHim.Thesethingsarehiddenfromthewiseandprudent,buttheyhavebeenrevealedtobabes(Matt.11:25).

TheknowledgewhichwegetofGodbywayofHisrevelationisthereforea knowledge of faith. It is not adequate, in the sense that it is notequivalenttothebeingofGod,forGodisinfinitelyexaltedaboveallHiscreatures.Suchknowledge isnotpurelysymbolicaleither that is tosay,couched inexpressionswhichwehavearbitrarily formed andwhichdonotcorrespondtoanyreality; insteadthisknowledge isectypal(ectype:animpression,asinprinting)oranalogical(analogy:correspondenceor

similarity in form) because it is based on the likeness and relationshipwhich, notwithstanding God's absolute majesty, nevertheless existsbetweenGodandall theworksofHishand.TheKnowledgewhichGodgrants us of Himself in nature and in Scripture is limited, finite,fragmentary,butitisneverthelesstrueandpure.SuchisGodasHehasrevealedHimselfinHisWordandspecificallyinandthroughChrist;andHealoneissuchasourheartsrequire.

OurReasonableFaith.HermanBavinck.BakerBookHouse.1956.Pages132-134.

TheGreatnessandMiserablenessofMan

HermanBavinck

Theconclusion,therefore,isthatofAugustine,whosaidthattheheartofmanwascreatedforGodandthatitcannotfindrestuntil itrests inhisFather'sheart.HenceallmenarereallyseekingafterGod,asAugustinealsodeclared,but theydonotall seekHim in the rightway,norat therightplace.TheyseekHimdownbelow,andHe isupabove.TheyseekHimon the earth, andHe is inheaven.They seekHimafar, andHe isnearby.TheyseekHiminmoney,inproperty,infame,inpower,andinpassion;andHeistobefoundinthehighandtheholyplaces,andwithhimthatisofacontriteandhumblespirit(Isa.57:15).ButtheydoseekHim,ifhaplytheymightfeelafterHimandfindHim(Acts17:27).TheyseekHimandatthesametimetheyfleeHim.TheyhavenointerestinaknowledgeofHisways, andyet they cannotdowithoutHim.They feelthemselvesattractedtoGodandatthesametimerepelledbyHim.

In this, asPascal soprofoundlypointedout, consists thegreatnessandthemiserablenessofman.He longs for truthandis falsebynature.He

yearnsforrestandthrowshimselffromonediversionuponanother.Hepantsforapermanentandeternalblissandseizesonthepleasuresofamoment.HeseeksforGodandloseshimselfinthecreature.Heisabornsonofthehouseandhefeedsonthehusksoftheswineinastrangeland.He forsakes the fountain of livingwaters and hews out broken cisternsthat canholdnowater (Jer.2:13).He is as a hungrymanwhodreamsthatheiseating,andwhenheawakesfindsthathissoulisempty;andheislikeathirstymanwhodreamsthatheisdrinking,andwhenheawakesfindsthatheisfaintandthathissoulhasappetite(Isa.29:8).

Sciencecannotexplainthiscontradictioninman.Itreckonsonlywithhisgreatnessandnotwithhismisery,oronlywithhismiseryandnotwithhis greatness. It exalts him too high, or it depresses him too far, forsciencedoesnotknowofhisDivineorigin,norofhisprofoundfall.ButtheScripturesknowofboth,andtheyshedtheirlightovermanandovermankind; and the contradictions are reconciled, the mists are cleared,andthehiddenthingsarerevealed.ManisanenigmawhosesolutioncanhefoundonlyinGod.

OurReasonableFaith.HermanBavinck.BakerBookHouse.1956.Pages22-23.

ThePresentStateoftheWorld

byHermanBavinck

WhenthefirstmanandwomanhavetransgressedthecommandmentofGod in Paradise, their punishment does not follow immediately nor infull force. They do not die on the self-same day they have sinned, butremain alive; they are not sent into hell, but instead find themselves

entrustedwithataskonearth;theirlinedoesnotperish:theyreceivethepromiseoftheseedofthewoman.Inshort,aconditionnowsetsinwhichGodhadknownandwhichGodhadestablished,butwhichmanhadnotbeen able to anticipate. It is a condition which has a very specialcharacter.It isoneinwhichwrathandgrace,punishmentandblessing,judgment and long-suffering are mingled with each other It is thecondition which still exists in nature and among men and one whichcomprehendsthesharpestofcontrastswithinitself.

We live ina strangeworld,aworldwhichpresentsuswith tremendouscontrasts.Thehighandthelow,thegreatandthesmall,thesublimeandthe ridiculous, thebeautiful and theugly, the tragic and the comic, thegood and the evil, the truth and the lie, these all are heaped up inunfathomableinterrelationship.Thegravityandthevanityoflifeseizeonus inturn.Nowwearepromptedtooptimism,thentopessimism.Manweeping is constantly giving way to man laughing. The whole worldstandsinthesignofhumor,whichhasbeenwelldescribedasalaughinatear.

Thedeepestcauseofthispresentstateoftheworldisthis:becauseofthesinofman,GodiscontinuallymanifestingHiswrathandyet,byreasonofHisowngoodpleasure,isalwaysagainrevealingHisgracealso.WeareconsumedbyHis anger andyet in themorningwe are satisfied byHismercy(Ps.90:7,14).Hisangerenduresbutamoment,inHisfavorislife;weepingmayendureforanight,butjoycomesinthemorning(Ps.30:6).Curse and blessing are so singularly interdependent that the onesometimesseemstobecometheother.Workinthesweatofthebrowiscurseandblessingatonce.Bothpointtothecrosswhichatoneandthesametimeisthehighestjudgmentandtherichestgrace.Andthatiswhythe cross is the mid -point of history and the reconciliation of allantitheses.

OurReasonableFaith.HermanBavinck.BakerBookHouse.1956.Pages44-45.

CalvinandCommonGrace

HermanBavinck

ThePrincetonTheologicalReviewVol.7No.3(1909),pp437-465

TranslatedbyGeerhardusVos

Christianityhasfromthebeginninglaidclaimtobetheonetruereligion.AlreadyintheOldTestamenttheconsciousnessexiststhatJehovahaloneis Elohim and that the gods of the heathen are things of naught andvanity;andintheNewTestamenttheFatherofJesusChrist is theonlytrueGod,whom theSon reveals anddeclares, andaccess towhomandcommunionwithwhomtheSonalonecanmediate.Thisconvictionoftheabsoluteness of the Christian religion has entered so deeply into theconsciousnessoftheChurchthatthewholehistoryofChristiandoctrinemaybeviewedasonegreatstruggleforupholdingitoveragainstallsortsofoppositionanddenial.For the lifeof theChurchaswell as for everyindividualmanthefundamentalquestionis:WhatthinkyeoftheChrist?ThiswastheissueinthechristologicalandanthropologicalcontroversiesoftheancientChurch,thistheissueatthetimeoftheReformationandintheageof the"Enlightenment",and this is still the issueat thepresentday in the spiritual battleswitnessed by ourselves. No progress can bemarkedinthisrespect:thequestionoftheagesisstillthequestionofourtime,—Is Christ a teacher, a prophet, one of the many founders ofreligions;or ishe theOnly-begotten fromtheFather,and therefore thetrueandperfectrevelationofGod?

ButifChristianitybearssuchanabsolutecharacter,thisfactimmediatelygives rise to a most serious problem. The Christian religion is by nomeans the sole content of history; long before Christianity made itsappearancethereexistedinGreeceandRomearichculture,acompletesocialorganism, a powerful political system, a plurality of religions, an

orderofmoralvirtuesandactions.Andevennow,underneathandsidebysidewiththeChristianreligionarichstreamofnaturallifecontinuestoflow.What,then,istherelationofChristianitytothiswealthofnaturallife, which, originating in creation, has, under the law there imposedupon it, developed from age to age? What is the connection betweennature and grace, creation and regeneration, culture and Christianity,earthlyandheavenlyvocation,themanandtheChristian?Norcanitbesaid that this problem has now for the first time forced itself upon us,owingtothewideextensionofourworld-knowledge,theentranceoftheheathen nations into our field of vision and the extraordinary progressmadebycivilization.Inprincipleandessenceithasbeenpresentthroughall the ages,—in the struggle between Israel and the nations, in thecontest between the Kingdom of Heaven and the world-power, in thewarfarebetweenthefoolishnessofthecrossandthewisdomoftheworld.

To define this relation, Scripture draws certain lines which it is notdifficult to trace. It proceeds on the principle that forman God is thesupreme good. Whatever material or ideal possessions the world mayoffer,allthesetakentogethercannotoutweighorevenbecomparedwiththisgreatestofalltreasures,communionwithGod;andhence,incaseofconflictwiththis,theyaretobeunconditionallysacrificed."WhomhaveIinheavenbut thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire besidesthee."This,however,doesnothinderearthlypossessionsfromretainingarelativevalue.Consideredinthemselvestheyarenotsinfulorunclean;so long as they do not interfere withman's pursuit of the kingdom ofheaven, theyare tobeenjoyedwith thanksgiving.Scriptureavoidsbothextremes, no less that of asceticism on the one hand than that oflibertinism on the other hand. The recognition of this as a principleappearsmostclearlyinitsteachingthatallthings,theentireworldwithall its treasures, includingmatterandthebody,marriageandlabor,arecreated and ordained of God; and that Christ, although, when Heassumedatrueandperfecthumannature,HerenouncedallthesethingsinobediencetoGod'scommand,yetthroughHisresurrectiontookthemall back as henceforth purified of all sin and consecrated through theSpirit.Creation, incarnationand resurrectionare the fundamental factsofChristianityandatthesametimethebulwarksagainstallerrorinlifeanddoctrine.

Itneedsnopointingout,however,thatinthefirstageChristianshadtoassume a preponderantly negative attitude towards the culture of theirtime. They were neither sufficiently numerous nor on the wholesufficiently influential in the world to permit of their taking an active,aggressive part in the affairs of state and society, of science and art.Besides this, all institutions and elements of culturewere so intimatelyassociated with idolatry and superstition that without offense toconscienceitwasimpossibletotakepartinthem.ForthefirstChristiansnothing was to be expected from the Graeco-Roman world butpersecutionandreproach.Consequently,nothingwasleftforthembuttomanifest their faith for the time being through the passive virtues ofobedience and patience. Only gradually could the Church rise to thehigher standpoint of trying all things and holding fast to that which isgood,andadoptaneclecticprocedureinitsvaluationandassimilationoftheexistingculture.

Ofteninthepast,andagaininourowntimehasthechargebeenbroughtagainst the Christian Church, that in applying this principle, it hasfalsified the originalGospel.Harnack finds in the history of doctrine aprogressiveHellenizingoforiginalChristianity.HatchregardstheentireChristian cultus, particularly that of the sacraments, in the light of adegeneration from the primitive Gospel. To Sohm the very idea ofecclesiastical law appears contradictory to the essence of the ChristianChurch.Butsuchassertionspartakeofgrossexaggeration.Ifinalltheserespectsnothingbutdegenerationistobefound,itwillbeeasytoshowthattoaconsiderabledegreethedegenerationmusthavesetinwiththeApostlesandevenwith thewritersof thesynopticGospels,ashas beenfreely acknowledged by not a fewwriters of recent date. TheChristianChurch is indeed chargedwith having falsified the original Gospel, butthosewhobringthechargeretainpracticallynothingofthisGospelorareatleastunabletosayinwhatthisGospelconsisted.It isasarulemadeouttohavebeenasimpledoctrineofmoralswithanascetictinge.Thenthe problem arises, how such a Gospel could ever have come into realcontactwithculture,especiallytotheextentofsufferingcorruptionfromculture.Aconceptionis thusformed,bothof theoriginalGospelandoftheattitudeoftheChristianChurchtowardpaganculture,whichisbasedwhollyonfancyandisatwarwithallthefacts.

FornotonlyistheGospelnotascetic,buteventheChristianChurch,atleastinitsfirstperiod,neveradoptedthisstandpoint.Howevermuchitmightbeonitsguardagainstpaganism,itneverdespisedorcondemnednaturallifeasinitselfsinful.Marriageandfamilylife,secularcallingandmilitary estate, the swearing of the oath and the waging of war,government and state, science and art and philosophy,—all these wererecognizedfromthebeginningasdivine institutionsandasdivinegifts.Hencetheologyearlybegantoformrelationswithphilosophy;theartofpainting,aspracticedinthecatacombs,attacheditselftothesymbolsandfiguresofantiquity;architectureshapedthechurchesafterpaganmodels;musicavaileditselfofthetuneswhichGraeco-Romanarthadproduced.Oneveryhandastrongeffortisperceptibletobringthenewreligionintotouchwithallexistingelementsofculture.

It was possible for the first Christians to do this because of their firmconvictionthatGodistheCreatorofheavenandearth,whointimespasthasneverleftHimselfwithoutwitnesstotheheathen.Notonlywasthereanoriginalrevelation,which, though in corrupted form,yet survived intradition;itwasalsoregardedasprobablethatcertainphilosophershadpossessedadegreeofacquaintancewiththewritingsoftheJews.Butinadditiontothisthereexistedinpaganismacontinuedrevelationthroughnatureand the reason, inheart and conscience,—an illuminationof theLogos,aspeechfromthewisdomofGodthroughthehiddenworkingofgrace. Anima naturaliter Christiana, the man is older than thephilosopherandthepoet,Tertullianexclaimed,thusformulatingatruthwhichlivedintheheartsofall.Nodoubtamongtheheathenthiswisdomhas in many respects become corrupted and falsified; they retain onlyfragments of truth, not the one, entire, full truth. But even suchfragments areprofitable and good. The three sisters, logic, physics andethics, are like unto the three wise men from the east, who came toworship in Jesus the perfect wisdom. The good philosophical thoughtsandethicalpreceptsfoundscatteredthroughthepaganworldreceiveinChrist theirunity and center.They stand for thedesirewhich inChristfindsitssatisfaction;theyrepresentthequestiontowhichChristgivestheanswer;theyaretheideaofwhichChristfurnishesthereality.Thepaganworld, especially in itsphilosophy, is apedagogyuntoChrist;Aristotle,like John the Baptist, is the forerunner of Christ. It behooves the

ChristianstoenrichtheirtemplewiththevesselsoftheEgyptiansandtoadornthecrownofChrist,theirking,withthepearlsbroughtupfromtheseaofpaganism.

Insayingthis,however,webynomeanswishtoimplythattheattitudeofthe Church towards the world has at all times and in every respectmeasureduptotheChurch'shighcalling.Aprioriitisnottobeexpectedthat it should, inasmuchas everyhumandevelopment showsabnormaltraitsandthe lifeofevery individualChristian is taintedwitherrorandsin. When the Church of Rome maintains that the Gospel has beenpreservedbyher andunfolded in its originalpurity, this claim ismadepossibleonlythroughascribinginfallibilitytotheChurch.Butbytheveryactofsubscribingtothisdogma,Romeacknowledgesthatwithoutsuchasupernatural gift the development could not have been kept pure.Further, by attributing this gift to the Pope alone, Rome admits thepossibilityoferrornotonlyintheecclesiadiscensbutalsointheecclesiadocens, even where the latter convenes in ecumenical council. AndRome's confining the effect of this infallible guidance to papaldeliverancesexcathedrainvolvestheconfessionthattheRomanCatholicsystem,asawhole,withallitsteachingandpractice,enjoysnoimmunityfrom corruption. The dogma of papal infallibility is not the ground orcause,butonlyoneof themanyconsequencesand fruitsof thesystem.Andthissystemitselfhasnotgrownupfromoneprinciple; ithasbeendeveloped in the course of the ages by the cooperation of numerousfactors,—adevelopmenttheendofwhichhasnotyetbeenreached.

Although Roman Catholicism has been built up out of varied, evenheterogeneous elements, it nevertheless forms a compact structure, acoherentviewoftheworldandoflife,shapedinallitspartsbyareligiousprinciple. This religion embraces in the first place a series ofsupernatural, inscrutable mysteries, chief among which are the TrinityandtheIncarnation.Thesetruthshavebeenentrustedto theChurchtobe preserved, taught and defended. To discharge these functions theChurch,inthepersonofthePope,assuccessorofPeter,needsthegiftofinfallibility.Thedoctrinesareauthoritatively imposedbytheChurchonall its members. The faith which accepts these mysteries has for itsspecific object the Church-dogma; it does not penetrate through the

dogmatothethingsthemselvesofwhichthedogmaistheexpression;itdoes not bring into communion with God; it does not represent areligiousbutanintellectualact,theassensus,thefideshistorica.Faithisnot a saving power in itself, but is merely preparatory to salvation;nevertheless,itissomethingmeritoriousbecauseandinsofarasitisanactofsubmissiontoecclesiasticalauthority.

TheChurch,however,isnotmerelythepossessorofsupernaturaltruth;inthesecondplaceitisalsothedepositoryanddispenserofsupernaturalgrace. As the Church doctrine is infinitely exalted above all humanknowledgeandscience,sothegracekeptanddistributedbytheChurchfartranscendsnature.Itistruethisgraceis,amongotherthings,gratiamedicinalis,butthisisanaccidentalandadventitiousquality.Beforeallelseitisgratiaelevans,somethingaddedtoandelevatingabovenature.AssuchitenteredintotheimageofGodgiventoAdambeforetheFall,andas such itagainappears in the restoration to thatoriginal state. Inview of its adding to exalted nature a supernatural element, it isconceivedassomethingmaterial,enclosedinthesacrament,andassuchdispensedby thepriest.Thuseverymanbecomes, forhisknowledgeofsupernaturaltruthandforhisreceptionofsupernaturalgrace,thatis,forhis heavenly salvation, absolutely dependent on the Church, the priestandthesacrament.Extraecclesiamnullasalus.

But even this grace, which, to be sure, remains subject to loss andrecovery until the end of life, does not assure man of attainment tofellowshipwithGod.Allitdoesistoimparttohimthepowerwhereby,ifsochoosing,hemaymerit, throughgoodworks, supernatural salvation,thevisioDei. Since work and rewardmust be proportionate, the goodworkswhichmerit supernatural salvationmust all beof a specific kindand therefore need to be defined and prescribed by the Church. TheChurch,besidesbeingthedepositoryoftruthandthedispenserofgrace,isinthethirdplacealsolaw-giverandjudge.ThesatisfactionswhichtheChurchimposesareaccordingtothecharacterofthesinscommitted.Therapidityor slownesswithwhichamanattains toperfection,howmuchtime he shall spend in purgatory, how rich a crown he will receive inheaven,—all thisdependson thenumberofextraordinary, supernaturalworks which he performs. Thus a spiritual hierarchy is created. There

exists a hierarchy in the world of angels, and a hierarchy in theecclesiasticalorganization,butthereisahierarchyalsoamongthesaintson earth and the blessed in heaven. In an ascending scale the saints,divided into orders and ranks, drawnear toGod, and in proportion astheybecomepartakersof thedivinenatureareadmitted to theworshipandadorationofthedeity.

In view of what has been said it is evident that truth, grace and goodworks bear, according toRome, a specific, supernatural character. Andbecause the Church is the God-appointed depository of all theseblessings, the relation between grace and nature coincides with thatbetween the Church and the world. The world, the state, natural life,marriageandculturearenotsinfulinthemselves;onlytheyareofalowerorder,ofasecularnature,and,unlessconsecratedbytheChurch,easilybecome an occasion for sinning. This determines the function of theChurch with reference to the world. It is the calling of the Church todeclare unto the world that in itself the world is profane, but thatnevertheless, through the consecration of the Church, itmay become avehicle of grace. Renunciation of the world and sovereignty over theworldwithRomespringfromoneandthesameprinciple.Thecelibacyofthepriesthoodandtheelevationofmarriagetotherankofasacramentarebranchesofthesamestem.Thewholehierarchicalideaisbuiltonthesharp distinction between nature and grace. Where the supernaturalcharacteroftheChurchandtheefficacyofthesacramentandthepriestlyoffice are concerned, this system brooks neither compromise norconcession;butasidefromthis,itleavesroomforagreatvarietyofstepsand grades, of ranks and orders in holiness and salvation. The Churchcontainsmembersthatbelongtoitinbodyonly,andmembersbelongingto it with a part of their powers or with all their powers; it makesconcessions to the weak and worships the saints; a laxmorality and asevereasceticism,anactiveandacontemplativemodeoflife,rationalismand supernaturalism, unbelief and superstition equally find a placewithinitswalls.

TowardsthecloseoftheMiddleAgesthissystemhadbecomecorruptinalmost every respect. In the sphere of truth it had degenerated intonominalistic scholasticism; in the sphere of grace into demoralizing

trafficinindulgences;inthesphereofgoodworksintotheimmorallifeofpriestsandmonks.Numerouseffortsweremade toremedy these faultsand to reform the Church from within. But the Reformation of thesixteenth century differed from all these attempts in that it notmerelyopposedtheRomansysteminitsexcrescencesbutattackedit internallyinthefoundationsonwhichitrestedandintheprinciplesoutofwhichithad been developed. The Reformation rejected the entire system, andsubstituted for it a totally different conception of veritas, gratia, andbona opera. It was led to this new conception not through scientificreflections or philosophical speculations, but through earnest, heartfeltconcernforthesalvationofsoulsandthegloryofGod.TheReformationwasareligiousandethicalmovementthroughandthrough.ItwasbornoutofthedistressofLuther'ssoul.

When a helpless man, out of distress of soul, looks to the Gospel fordeliverance, theGospelwill appear to him in a totally new light. All atonce it ceases to be a set of supernatural, inscrutable mysteries to bereceived on ecclesiastical authority, with renunciation of the claims ofreason,bymeritoriousassent.ItstraightwaybecomesanewGospel,goodtidings of salvation, revelation of God's gracious and efficaciouswill tosavethesinner,somethingthat itself imparts the forgivenessofsinandeternallifeandthereforeisembracedbylostmanwithjoy,thatliftshimaboveall sinandabove theentireworld to thehighhopeofaheavenlysalvation.HenceitisnolongerpossibletospeakoftheGospelwithRomeas consisting of supernatural mysteries to be responded to by man involuntaryassent.TheGospel isnot law,neither as regards the intellectnorasregardsthewill;itisinessenceapromise,notademandbutagift,afreegiftofthedivinefavor;nay, initthedivinewill itselfthroughtheGospel addresses itself to the will, the heart, the innermost essence ofman, and there produces the faith which rests in this divine will andbuildsonitandputsitstrustinitthroughallperils,eveninthehourofdeath.

By reasonof thisnewconceptionof theGospel,which inprinciplewasbuta return to theold,Scripturalconception, it couldnotbeotherwisethanthatfaithalsoshouldobtainatotallynewsignificance.IftheGospelisnotaveritastowhichthegratiaisaddedlateron,butisitselfgratiain

itsveryorigin,therevelationofGod'sgraciouswill,andatthesametimethe instrument formaking this will effective in the heart ofman, thenfaith canno longer remain apurely intellectual assent. Itmust becometheconfidence in the graciouswill ofGod, producedbyGodhimself inman'sheart;asurrenderofthewholemantothedivinegrace;arestinginthedivinepromise;areceivingofapartinGod'sfavor;admissionintocommunion with him; an absolute assurance of salvation.With Rome,faithisbutoneofthesevenpreparations,whichleadontothereceptionofthegratiainfusainbaptism,andhencebearsnoreligiouscharacter;itisnaughtbutafideshistorica,whichstandsinneedofthesupplementoflove in order to become complete and sufficient unto salvation. To theReformersfaithfromitsveryfirstinceptionisreligiousinnature.Asfidesjustificanssalvifica itdiffersnot indegreebut inprincipleand essencefromthefideshistorica.IthasforitsobjectGodhimself,GodinChrist,and Christ in the garb of Holy Scripture, Christum Evangelio suovestitum;itisinitsessencefirmacertaquecognitio,cordismagisquamcerebri, et affectus magis quam intelligentiae, to be defined rather ascertitudothanasapprehensio.FaithplacesbeyonddoubtDeibonitatemperspicue nobis propositam and enables us to stand before God'spresencetranquillisanimis.ThusitisseentobetheprincipleofthetruefearofGod, forprimusadpietatemgradus [est]agnoscereDeum essenobis Patrem, ut nos tueatur, gubernet ac foveat, donec colligat inaeternamhaereditatemregnisui.

ToalltheReformers,therefore,thereliesbehindtheGospelandbehindfaiththegraciousandefficaciouswillofGod.Nay,morethanthis,intheGospel and in faith the divinewill is revealed and realized. This is thereasonwhythereligiousconceptionoftheGospelandoffaithiswiththeReformersmostintimatelyconnectedwiththeirbeliefinpredestination.We in our time no longer understand this. We have lost the habit ofreligiousthinking,becausewefeellessforourselvesthepersonalneedofcommunion with God, and so feel less of the impulse to interpret theworldfromareligiouspointofview.Instead,ouragehaslearnedtothinkinthetermsofnaturalscience; ithassubstituted for thedivinewill theomnipotent law and the omnipotent force of nature, and thus thrownitselfintothearmsofdeterminism.Itclaimstohavelongsinceoutgrownthebeliefinpredestination.Andundoubtedlythereexistsbetweenthese

two,howeveroften theymaybemixedandconfounded, adifferenceofprinciple. Determinism is in principle rationalistic; it cherishes thedelusionofbeingabletoexplaineverythingfromthereignofnaturallaw,holding that all existing things are rational since reason perceives thattheycouldnotbeotherwisethantheyactuallyare.Predestination,ontheotherhand,isathoroughlyreligiousconception.Whileabletorecognizenatural lawandtoreckonwith the forcesofnature, it refuses torest inthisortoconsidernaturalnecessitythefirstandlastwordofhistory.

HewhohaslearnedtoregardcommunionwithGodasthesupremegoodfor his own person,must feel bound towork his way back, behind theworldandallitsphenomena,untilhearrivesatthewillofGod.Hemustseek an explanation of the origin, development and goal of the world-process,which shall be in accordancewith thatwill and hence bear anethico-religiouscharacter.This is thereasonthat,sosoonasareligiousmovementappearsinhistory,theproblemofpredestinationcomestothefront. In a way, this is true of all religions, but it applies with specialpertinence to thehistory of the Christian religion. In proportion as theChristianreligionisdistinctlyexperiencedandappreciatedinitsessenceastrue,fullreligion,aspuregrace,itwillalsobefelttoinclude,andthatdirectly, without the need of dialectic deduction, the confession ofpredestination.Henceall theReformerswereagreedonthispoint. It istruethatwithLutheritwasafterwards,forpracticalreasons,relegatedtothe background, but even he never recanted or denied it. Itwas in thecontroversyabouttheservumorliberumarbitriumthattheReformationandhumanismpartedwaysonceforall.Erasmuswasandcontinued tobeaRomanistinspiteofhisridiculeofthemonks.Aslateas1537LutherwrotetoCapito:nullumagnoscomeumjustumlibrumnisifortedeliberoarbitrioetcatechismum.Thedoctrineofpredestination,therefore,isnodiscovery of Calvin; before Calvin it had been professed by Luther andZwingli. It sprang spontaneously from the religious experience of theReformers.IfCalvinintroducedanymodification,itconsistsinthis,thathefreedthedoctrinefromthesemblanceofharshnessandarbitrarinessandimpartedtoitamorepurelyethico-religiouscharacter.

For, all affinity and agreement notwithstanding, Calvin differed fromLuther andZwingli.He sharedneither the emotionalnatureof theone

nor thehumanistic inclinationsof theother.When, in amanner as yetbutveryimperfectlyknowntous,hewasconverted,thisexperiencewasimmediatelyaccompaniedbysuchaclear,deepandharmoniousinsightinto Christian truth as to render any subsequent modificationunnecessary.ThefirsteditionoftheInstitutiowhichappearedinMarch,1536, was expanded and increased in the later issues, but it neverchanged, and the task which, in his view, the Reformation had toaccomplish,remainedfrombeginningtoendhisowngoal in life.WhileLuther's faithwas almost entirely absorbed in the fides justificans, andwhileZwinglione-sidedlydefinedfaithasfidesvivificansorregenerans,Calvinwidenedtheconceptiontothatoffidessalvificans,—afaithwhichrenewstheentiremaninhisbeingandconsciousness,insoulandbody,in all his relations and activities, and hence a faith which exercises itssanctifyinginfluenceintheentirerangeoflife,uponChurchandschool,uponsocietyandstate,uponscienceandart.But inorder tobeabletoperform this comprehensive task,—in order to be truly, always andeverywhereafidessalvificans, itwasnecessaryforfaithfirstofalltobefullyassuredofitself,andnolongertobetossedtoandfrobyeverywindofdoubt.Thisexplainswhy,morethanwithZwingliandLuther,faithiswithCalvinunshakenconviction,firmassurance.

But if faith is tobesuchanunshakenassurance itmust restona truthremoved fromall possibilityofdoubt; itmust attest itself as real by itsownwitnessandpower in theheart ofman.Ahouse thatwill defy thetempestcannotbebuiltonthesand.Behindfaith,therefore,mustliethetruth,thewillandactofGod.Inotherwords,faithisthefruitoreffectofelection; it is the experience of an act of God. Always and everywhereCalvinrecurstothiswillofGod.Theworldwithitsinfinitemultitudeofphenomena, with its diversities and inequalities, its disharmonies andcontrasts,isnottobeexplainedfromthewillofthecreaturenorfromtheworthorunworthinessofman.Itistrue,inequalityandcontrastappearmost pronounced in the allotment of man's eternal destiny. They are,however, by no means confined to this, but show themselves in everysphere, in the different places of habitation appointed for men, in thedifferentgiftsandpowersconferredupontheminbodyandsoul,inthedifference between health and sickness, wealth and poverty, prosperityandadversity, joy and sorrow, in the varying ranks andvocations, and,

last of all, in the fact itself thatmen aremen andnot animals. Let theopponentsofthedoctrineofelection,therefore,answerthequestion,curhominessintmagisquambovesautasini,cur,quuminDeimanuessetcanes ipsos fingere, ad imaginem suam formavit. Themorewe reflectupontheworldthemoreweareforcedtofallbackuponthehiddenwillofGodand find in it the ultimate ground for both the existence of theworldanditsbeingwhat it is.All thestandardsofgoodnessandjusticeand righteous recompense and retribution for evil which we areaccustomedtoapply,provewhollyinadequatetomeasuretheworld.ThewillofGodis,andfromthenatureofthecasemustbe,thedeepestcauseof the entire world and of all the varietas and diversitas found in it.There is no more ultimate ground for this than the absconditum Deiconsilium.Theunfathomablemysteryof theworldcompelsthe intellectandtheheart,theologyandphilosophyaliketofallbackuponthewillofGodandseekrestinit.

It frequently happens, however, that theology and philosophy are notcontentedwith this.They thenendeavor,after themannerofPlatoandHegel,toofferarationalexplanationoftheworld.Or,whilefallingbackuponthewillofGod,theymakeoutofthiswillabuqoja`gnwstoj,asisdonebyGnosticism,orablind,irrationalandunhappywill,asisdonebySchopenhauer,oranunconsciousandunknowablepower,as isdonebyvonHartmannandSpencer.ByhisChristianfaithCalvinwaskeptfromthese different forms of pantheism. It is true, Calvin upholds with theutmost energy the sovereignty of the divine will over and against allhumanreasoning.Predestinationbelongstothedivinaesapientiaeadytawhich man may not enter and in regard to which his curiosity mustremainunsatisfied;fortheyformalabyrinthfromwhichnoonecanfindthe exit. Man may not even investigate with impunity the things Godmeant to keep secret. God wants us to adore, not to comprehend, themajesty of His wisdom. Nevertheless God is not exlex. He sufficientlyvindicatesHisjusticebyconvictingofguiltthosewhoblasphemeHimintheirownconsciences.Hiswill isnotabsolutepower,butabomnivitiopura, summa perfectionis regula, etiam legum omnium lex. And theGospel reveals touswhat is the content, theheart and thekernel, as itwere,ofthiswill.

ForsincetheFallnaturenolongerrevealstousGod'spaternalfavor.Onevery side it proclaims thedivine cursewhich cannotbut fill our guiltysoulswithdespair.ExmundiconspectuPatremcolligerenonlicet.Asidefrom the special revelation in Christ, man has no true knowledge ofheavenlythings.HeisignorantandblindasrespectsGod,Hisfatherhoodand His law as the rule of life. Especially of the divinae erga nosbenevolentiae certitudo he is without the faintest consciousness, forhumanreasonneithercanattainnor strives to attain to this truth, andthereforefailstounderstandquissitverusDeus,qualisveerganosessevelit.AndhereinpreciselyconsiststheessenceofGod'sspecialrevelationinChrist,andthis is thecentralcontentof theGospel:GodheremakesHimselfknowntousnotmerelyasourCreator,butasourRedemptor.HedoesnotheretelluswhatHeis,toenableustoindulgeinspeculation,but causes us to know qualis sit et quid ejus naturae conveniat. Thegratuita promissio, the promissio misericordiae, the liberalis legatioquasibiDeusmundumreconciliat,—these constitute the essenceof theGospelandthefirmfoundationoffaith.Heisatruebeliever,who,firmlyconvinced that God is to him a gracious and loving Father, expectseverythingfromHisloving-kindness.Fidelisnonest,nisiquisuaesalutissecuritatiinnixus,diaboloetmorticonfidenterinsultet.

ThisconcentrationoftheGospelinthepromiseofdivinemercynotonlyprovidedCalvinwithafirmfootinginthemidstoftheshiftingopinionsofhistime,butalsowidenedhisoutlookandenlargedhissympathies,sothat, while resolutely standing by his own confession, he neverthelessperpetuallymediatedthethingsthatmadeforunityandpeaceamongallthesonsoftheReformation.Tobesure,theconceptionusuallyformedofCalvindifferswidelyfromthis.Hisimageascommonlyportrayedhasforitsonlyfeaturesthoseofcruelseverityanddespoticintolerance.Butsucha conception does grave injustice to the Genevan Reformer.Unfortunately, he must be held responsible for the death of Servetus,although in this respect he only stands on a level with the otherReformers, none ofwhomhad entirely outgrown all the errors of theirage.ButtheCalvinwhogavehisapprovaltotheexecutionofServetusisnottheonlyCalvinweknow.ThereisalsoafardifferentCalvin,onewhowas united with his friends in the bonds of themost tender affection,whose heart went out in sympathy to all his suffering and struggling

brethren in the faith, one who identified himself with their lot, andsupplied them with comfort and courage and cheer in their severestafflictions.WeknowofaCalvinwhowithout intermissionlaboredmostearnestlyfortheunionofthedividedProtestants,whosoughtGodinHisWord alone and was unwilling to bind himself even to such terms as"Trinity" and "Person", who refused to subscribe to the Nicene andAthanasiancreeds,whodiscountenancedeverydisruptionoftheChurchon the ground of minor impurities of doctrine, who favored fraternaltolerance in all questions touching the form of worship. There was aCalvin, who, notwithstanding all differences of opinion, cherished thehighest regard for Luther, Melanchthon and Zwingli, and recognizedthem as servants of God; who himself subscribed to the AugsburgConfession and, reserving the right of private interpretation,acknowledged it as the expression of his own faith;who recommendedtheLoci ofMelanchthon, although differing from him on the points offree-willandpredestination;whorefusedtoconfinetheinvisibleChurchtoanysingleconfession,butrecognizeditspresencewhereverGodworksbyHisWordandSpiritintheheartsofmen.

Stillanotherinjustice,however,mustbelaidtothechargeoftheaverageconceptionofCalvin.MensometimesspeakasifCalvinknewofnothingelse to preach but the decree of predestination with its two parts ofelectionandreprobation.ThetruthisthatnopreacheroftheGospelhaseversurpassedCalvininthefree,generousproclamationofthegraceandloveofGod.Hewassofarfromputtingpredestinationtothefront,thatin the Institutio the subject does not receive treatment until the thirdbook, after the completion of the discussion of the life of faith. It isentirely wanting in the Confessio of 1536 and is only mentioned inpassing,inconnectionwiththeChurch,intheCatechismusGenevensisof1545. And as regards reprobation, before accusing Calvin, the chargeshould be laid against Scripture, against the reality of life, against thetestimonyofconscience;forallthesebearwitnessthatthereissinintheworld,andthatthisawfulreality,thisdecretumhorribile,cannothaveitsdeepestgroundinthefreewillofman.AndtherearestillotherfeaturesinCalvin's doctrine of reprobation towhich attention should be called.Thereisinthefirstplacethefactthathesayssolittleabouttheworkingof reprobation.The Institutio is awork characterizedby great sobriety,

wholly free from scholastic abstruseness; it everywhere treats thedoctrinesof faith in theclosestconnectionwith thepracticeof religion.This is especially true of eschatology. As is well known, Calvin nevercouldbringhimselftowriteacommentaryontheApocalypse,andinhisInstitutio he devotes to "the last things"; only a few paragraphs. Heavoidsallspinosaequaestioneswithreference to thestateofglory,andinterprets thedescriptions givenby Scripture of the state of the lost assymbolical:darkness,weeping,gnashingofteeth,unquenchablefire,theworm that dies not,—all these serve to impress upon us quam sitcalamitosum alienari ab omni Dei societate, andmajestatem Dei itasentire tibi adversam ut effugere nequeas quin ab ipsa urgearis. Thepunishment of hell consists in exclusion from fellowshipwithGod andadmitsofdegrees.InconnectionwithPaul'swords,thatat lastGodwillbeallinall,itisnotforbiddentothinkofthedevilandthegodless,sinceintheirsubjectionalsothegloryofGodshallberevealed.

ButofevengreatersignificanceisitthatwithCalvinreprobationdoesnotmean thewithholdingof all grace.Althoughman through sin has beenrenderedblindtoallthespiritualrealitiesofthekingdomofGod,sothata special revelation of God's fatherly love in Christ and a specialisilluminatio by theHoly Spirit in thehearts of the sinnersherebecomenecessary,neverthelessthereexistsalongsideoftheseageneralisgratiawhichdispensestoallmenvariousgifts.IfGodhadnotsparedman,hisfall would have involved the whole of nature in ruin. As it was, Godimmediatelyafter theFall interposed, inorderbyHiscommongracetocurbsinandtoupholdinbeingtheuniversitasrerum.Forafterallsinisratheranadventitiaqualitasthanasubstantialisproprietas,andforthisreason God is operis sui corruptioni magis infensus quam operi suo.Although for man's sake the whole of nature is subject to vanity,nevertheless nature is upheld by the hope which God implanted in itsheart. There is no part of theworld inwhich some spark of the divineglorydoesnotglimmer.Thoughitbeametaphoricalmodeofexpression,sinceGodshouldnotbeconfoundedwithnature,itmaybeaffirmedinatruly religious sense that nature is God. Heaven and earth with theirinnumerablewondersareamagnificentdisplayofthedivinewisdom.

EspeciallythehumanraceisstillaclearmirroroftheoperationofGod,

anexhibitionofHismanifoldgifts. Ineveryman there is still a seedofreligion, a consciousness of God, wholly ineradicable, convincing all ofthe heavenly grace on which their life depends, and leading even theheathentonameGodtheFatherofmankind.Thesupernaturalgiftshavebeen lost, and thenatural giftshavebecomecorrupted, so thatmanbynaturenolongerknowswhoandwhatGodseekstobetohim.Stilltheselatter gifts have not been withdrawn entirely from man. Reason andjudgmentandwill,howevercorrupt,yet,insofarastheybelongtoman'snature, have not been wholly lost. The fact that men are found eitherwhollyorinpartdeprivedofreason,provesthatthetithetothesegiftsisnotself-evidentandthattheyarenotdistributedtomenonthebasisofmerit. Nonetheless, the grace of God imparts them to us. The reasonwherebymandistinguishesbetweentruthanderror,goodandevil,andformsconceptionsandjudgments,andalsothewillwhichisinseparablefrom human nature as the faculty whereby man strives after what hedeems good for himself,—these raise him above the animals.Consequently it is contrary to Scripture as well as to experience toattributetomansuchaperpetualblindnessaswouldrenderhimunabletoformanytrueconception.Onthecontrary,thereislightstillshininginthedarkness,menstillretainadegreeofloveforthetruth,somesparksof the truth have still been preserved. Men carry in themselves theprinciplesofthelawswhicharetogovernthemindividuallyandintheirassociationwithoneanother.Theyagreeinregardtothefundamentalsofjusticeandequity,andeverywhereexhibitanaptnessandlikingforsocialorder.Sometimesaremarkablesagacityisgiventomenwherebytheyarenot only able to learn certain things, but also to make importantinventionsanddiscoveries,andtoputthesetopracticaluseinlife.Owingtoallthis,notonlyisanorderlycivilsocietymadepossibleamongmen,but arts and sciences develop, which are not to be despised. For theseshouldbeconsideredgiftsoftheHolySpirit.ItistruetheHolySpiritasaspirit of sanctificationdwells inbelievers only, but as a spirit of life, ofwisdom and of power He works also in those who do not believe. NoChristian,therefore,shoulddespisethesegifts;onthecontrary,heshouldhonorartandscience,musicandphilosophyandvariousotherproductsofthehumanmindaspraestantissimaSpiritusdona,andmakethemostofthemforhisownpersonaluse.Accordingly, in themoralspherealsodistinctionsaretoberecognizedbetweensomemenandothers.Whileall

are corrupt, not all are fallen to an equal depth; but there are sins ofignoranceandsinsofmallice.ThereisadifferencebetweenCamillusandCatiline.EventosinfulmansometimesspeciosaedotesandspecialesDeigratiae are granted. In common parlance it is even permissible to saythatonemanhasbeenbornbene, anotherpravae naturae.Nay, everyman has to acknowledge in the talents entrusted to him a specialis orpeculiaris Dei gratia. In the diversity of all these gifts we see theremnants of the divine image whereby man is distinguished from allothercreatures.

In view of all these utterances,which it would be easy to increase andenforcefromtheotherworksofCalvin,itisgrosslyunjusttochargetheReformer with narrow-mindedness and intolerance. It is, of course, adifferent questionwhether Calvin himself possessed talent and aptnessforalltheseartsandsciencestowhichheaccordspraise.Butevenifthisbenotso,evenifhedidnotpossesstheloveformusicandsingingwhichdistinguishedLuther, this is not tohis discredit, for not only has everygeniusitslimitations,buttheReformerswereandhadtobebyvocationmenoffaith,andforhavingexcelledinthistheydeserveourvenerationandpraise,no less thanthemenofartandscience.Calvinaffirms, it istrue,thatthevirtuesofthenaturalman,howevernoble,donotsufficeforjustificationat the judgment-barofGod,butthis isduetohisprofoundconvictionofthemajestyandspiritualcharacterofthemorallaw.Asidefromthis,heismoregenerousinhisrecognitionofwhatistrueandgood,wherever it be found, than any other Reformer. He surveys the entireearthandfindseverywheretheevidenceofthedivinegoodness,wisdomandpower.Calvinsteleologicalstandpointdoesnotrenderhimnarrowinhissympathies,butrathergivestohismindthestampofcatholicity.

ThisappearswithequalclearnessfromthecallingwhichheassignstotheChristian.InregardtothisalsoCalvintakeshispointofdepartureinthewill of God. To the Romanist view he brings in principle the sameobjection that bears against the pagan conception: the doctrine of themeritoriousness of goodworks is a delusion; themonastic vows are aninfringement of Christian liberty; the perfection striven after by thismethod is an arbitrary ideal, set up by man himself. Romanism andpaganism both minimize the corruption of human nature, and in the

matterofgoodworksstartfromthefreewillofman.Incontradistinctionto thisCalvinproceedson theprinciple:nostri non sumus,Dei sumus.The Christian's life ought to be one continual sacrifice, a perfectconsecration to God, a service of God's name, obedience to His law, apursuit of His glory. This undivided consecration to God assumes onearth largely the character of self-denial and cross-bearing. Paganismknows nothing of this; it merely prescribes certain moral maxims andstrives to bring man's life into subjection to his reason or will, or tonature.ButtheChristiansubjectsalsohisintellectandhiswillandallhispowers to the lawofGod.Hedoesnot resignhimself to the inevitable,but commits himself to the heavenly Father, who is not like unto aphilosopherpreachingvirtue,butistheFatherofourLordJesusChrist.

Theresult is that forCalvin thepassivevirtuesof submission,humility,patience, self-denial, cross-bearing stand in the foreground. Like St.Augustine,Calvinismortallyafraidofpride,wherebymanexaltshimselfabove God. His strong insistence upon the inability of man and thebondageofthewill isnotforthepurposeofplungingmanintodespair,but in order to raise him from his lethargy and to awaken in him thelonging for what he lacks, to make him renounce all self-glorying andself-relianceandputallhisconfidenceinGodalone.CalvinstripsmanofeverythinginordertorestoreuntohimallthingsinGod.Quantomagisinteinfirmuses,tantomagistesuscipitDominus;nostrahumilitasejusaltitudo.Humilitasthusbecomesthefirstvirtue;itgrowsontherootofelection; we are continually taught it by God in all the adversity andcrucifixionofthepresentlife;itplacesusforthefirsttimeintheproperrelationtowardsGodandourfellowman.Foritreconcilesustothefactthat this life is forusa landofpilgrimage, full ofperils andafflictions,and teaches us to surrender ourselves in all things to the will of God:Dominusitavoluit,ergoejusvoluntatemsequamur. It likewiseteachesus to love our neighbor, to value the gifts bestowed upon him and toemployourowngiftsforhisbenefit.

Still it would be a mistake to imagine that according to Calvin theChristianlifeisconfinedtothepracticeofthepassivevirtues.It istrue,he often speaks of despising the present and contemplating the futurelife.Butonconsideringthe times inwhichCalvin lived, thepersecution

andoppressiontowhichtheReformationwasexposedinwell-nigheverycountry, the bodily and mental suffering the Reformer himself had toendure,—on considering all this we cannot wonder that he exhorts thefaithful before all things to the exercise of humility and submission, topatienceandobedience,toself-denialandcross-bearing.ThishasalwaysbeensointheChristianChurch,andmaybetracedbacktotheteachingofJesusandtheApostles.Itdoesnotspeakfavorablyforthedepthandintensityofourspiritual life, ifweareinclinedtofindfaultwithCalvin,theotherReformers,andthemartyrsoftheChurchforthisallegedone-sidednessoftheirfaith.Itrathershouldexciteouradmirationthat,inthemidstofsuchcircumstances,theysolargelykeptstillaneyeopenforthepositivevocationoftheChristian.WithCalvinatleastthereversesidetotheattitudethuscriticizedisnotwanting.Nordoesitappearmerelyafteranincidentalfashion,bywayofappendixtohisethics;itistheoutcomeofhisownmostindividualprinciple;itsrootagainliesinhisconceptionofthewillofGod.

Asisuniversallyacknowledged,weowetoLuthertherestorationofmansnaturalcallingtoaplaceofhonor.Calvin,however,carriedthisprincipleenunciated by his predecessors to its furthermost consequences. HeviewedthewholeoflifefromthestandpointofthewillofGodandplacedit in all its extent under the discipline of the divine law. It was thecommon convictionof theReformers thatChristianperfectionmust berealized not above and outside of, but within the sphere of the callingassigned us by God here on earth. Perfection consists neither incompliancewitharbitraryhumanorecclesiasticalcommandments,norintheperformanceofallsortsofextraordinaryactivities.Itconsists inthefaithfuldischargeof theirordinarydailydutieswhichhavebeen laidbyGoduponeverymanintheconductoflife.ButmuchmorestronglythanLuther,Calvinemphasizestheideathatlifeitselfinitswholelengthandbreadth and depth must be a service of God. Life acquires for him areligious character, is subsumed under and becomes a part of theKingdomofGod.Or,asCalvinhimselfrepeatedlyformulatesit:Christianlife is always and everywhere a life in the presence of God, a walkingbeforeHisface,—coramipsoambulare,acsiessemussubejusoculis.

When,therefore,Calvinspeaksofdespisingthepresentlife,hemeansby

thissomethingfardifferentfromwhatwasmeantbymedievalethics.Hedoesnotmeanthat lifeoughttobefledfrom,suppressed,ormutilated,butwishestoconveytheideathattheChristianshouldnotgivehisheartto this vain, transitory life, but should possess everything as notpossessing it,andputhisconfidence inGodalone.But life in itself is abenedictioDeiandcomprisesmanydivinabeneficia.It isforbelieversameanstopreparethemfartheheavenlysalvation.Itshouldbehatedonlyquatenus nos peccato teneat obnoxios, and this hatred should neverrelatetolifeassuch.Onthecontrary,thislifeandthevocationinitgivenus by God are a part which we have no right to abandon, but whichwithoutmurmuringandimpatiencewemustfaithfullyguard,solongasGodHimselfdoesnotrelieveus.Sotoviewlife,asavocatioDei,—thisisthefirstprinciple,thefoundationofallmoralaction;thisimpartsunitytoour life and symmetry to all its parts; this assigns to each one hisindividualplaceandtask,andprovidesthepreciouscomfortquodnullumerit tam sordidum ac vile opus, quod non coram Deo resplendeat etpretiosissimumhabeatur.

ThusCalvinseesthewholeoflifesteepedinthelightofthedivineglory.As in all nature there is no creature which does not reflect the divineperfection,sointherichworldofmenthereisnovocationsosimple,nolabor so mean, as not to be suffused with the divine splendor andsubservienttothegloryofGod'sname.AndCalvinapplies thispointofviewtoastillwiderrange.All thepossessionsof lifeareafter thesamemanner rescued from the dishonor to which ascetic moralism hadabandonedthem.Tobesure,heprotestsagainstdefilingtheconsciencein the use of these possessions and insists upon it that the Christianshould be actuated by praesentis vitae contemptu et immortalitatismeditatione. But he maintains with equal emphasis that all thesepossessions are gifts of God, designed not merely to provide for ournecessities,butalsobestowedforourenjoymentanddelight.WhenGodadornstheearthwithtreesandplantsandflowers,whenHecausesthevinetogrowwhichmakesgladtheheartofman,whenHepermitsmantodigfromouttheearththepreciousmetalsandstoneswhichshineinthelightof thesun,—all thisproves thatGoddoesnotmean to restrict theuseofearthlypossessionstothereliefofourabsolutenecessities,buthasgiventhemtomanalsoforenjoymentoflife.Prosperity,abundanceand

luxuryalsoaregiftsofGod,tobeenjoyedwithgratitudeandmoderation.AndCalvindoesnotwant tobind the consciencewith regard to this torigidrules,butexpectsitfreelytoregulateitselfbythegeneralprincipleslaiddawninScriptureforthispurpose.

ItmustbeadmittedthattheReformerofGenevadidnotalwaysadhereinpractice consistently to this golden rule. Instead of leaving room forindividuallibertyheendeavoredtobringtheentirecompassoflifeunderdefiniterules.TheConsistoryhadforitstaskinvigilaregregiDominiutDeus pure colatur and had to exercise censorship over every improperwordandeverywrongact; ithad towatchoverorthodoxyand church-attendance, to be on the lookout for Romish customs and wordilyamusements, to oversee domestic life and the education of children; ithadtokeepitseyesonthetradesmaninhisstore,onthecraftsmaninhisworkshop,onthemerchantinthemarket-place,andtosubjecttheentirerange of life to the strictest discipline. Even regulations for fire-departmentsandnight-watches,formarket-facilitiesandstreet-cleaning,for trade and industry, for the prosecution of law-suits and theadministration of justice are to be found among Calvin's writings. It ispossibletojustifyallthesemeasuresinviewofthecircumstancesunderwhichtheywereintroducedinGeneva.ButnobodycandenythatCalvinwent too far in the creation of a moral police of this kind, that heintroduced a régimewhich, while perhaps necessary and productive ofexcellent results for that age, is yet unsuited to other times and todifferentconditions.

ButthiscriticismofCalvin'spracticebynomeansdetractsfromthegloryof the principle proclaimed by him.What he advocates in imitation ofZwingliwasnot amere religious and ecclesiastical reform, but amoralreformationembracingthewholeoflife.BothZwingliandCalvinwagedwar not merely against the Judaistic self-righteousness of the RomanChurch, but assailed with equal vigor all pagan license. Both desired anationallifeinallitspartsinspiredanddirectedbytheprinciplesofthedivineWord.Andbothwereledtothisviewbytheirtheologicalprinciple;theytooktheirpointofdepartureinalltheirthoughtandactivityinGod,walked with Him through all of life and brought back to God as anoffering all theywere and had. Behind everything the sovereignwill of

God lieshiddenandworks.Thecontent, thekernelof thiswill ismadeknowntous in theGospel; from itweknowthatGod isamercifulandgraciousFather,who in spite of all opposition proposes toHimself thesalvationoftheChurch,theredemptionoftheworld,theglorificationofHis perfections. But this will of God is not an impotent desire, it isomnipotentenergy.Itrealizesitself inthefaithoftheelect;truefaithisanexperienceoftheworkofGodinone'ssoul,andforthisreasonaffordsunshakableassurance,immovableconfidence,thepowertosurmountallpainandperilthroughcommunionwithGod.Throughthisgraciousandomnipotent will of God is made known in the Gospel alone andexperienced in faithonly,nevertheless itdoesnot stand isolated,but isencompassed,supportedandreinforcedbytheoperationofthesamewillin the world at large. Special grace is encircled by common grace; thevocationwhichcomestousinfaithisconnectedandconnectsuswiththevocationpresentedtousinourearthlycalling;theelectionrevealedtousinfaiththroughthisfaithcommunicatesitspowertoourentirelife;theGodofcreationandofregenerationisone.Hencethebelievercannotrestcontentedinhisfaith,butmustmakeitthepointofvantagefromwhichhe mounts up to the source of election and presses forward to theconquestoftheentireworld.

History has demonstrated that the belief in election, provided it begenuine,thatis,aheartfeltconvictionoffaith,doesnotproducecarelessorGodlessmen.EspeciallyasdevelopedandprofessedbyCalvin, it isaprinciplewhichcutsoffallRomisherrorattheroot.WhereaswithRomespecial revelation consists primarily in the disclosure of certainmysteries,withCalvinitreceivesforitscontentthegraciousfatherlywillofGodrealizingitselfthroughtheWordofrevelation.WithRomefaithisnothingmorethananintellectualassent,preparingmanforgraceontheprincipleofmeritumcongrui;withCalvinfaithisthereceptionofgraceitself, experience of the power of God, undoubting assurance of God,through and through religious in its nature. With Rome grace chieflyserves thepurposeof strengthening thewill ofmanandqualifying himfortheperformanceofvariousmeritoriousgoodworksprescribedbytheChurch;withCalvin the grace received through faith raisesman to therankofanorganofthedivinewillandcauseshimtowalkinaccordancewith thiswill before the presence of God and for the divine glory. The

ReformationasbegunbyLutherandZwingli,andreinforcedandcarriedthrough by Calvin, put an end to the Romish supernaturalism anddualismandasceticism.Thedivinewillwhichcreatedtheworld,whichinthe state of sin preserves it through common grace and makes itselfknownthroughspecialgraceasthewillofamercifulandgraciousFather,aims at the salvation of the world, and itself through its omnipotentenergybringsaboutthissalvation.Becauseitthusplacedthewholeoflifeunderthecontrolofthedivinewill, itwaspossibleforCalvin'sethicstofall into two precise regulations, into rigorism and puritanism; but inprinciplehisethicsisdiametricallyapposedtoallasceticism,itiscatholicanduniversalinitsscope.

Inordertoprovethisbyonestrikingexampleattentionmaybecalledtothe fact that medieval ethics consistently disapproved the principle ofusuryonthegroundof itsbeingforbiddenbyScriptureandcontrarytotheunproductivenatureofmoney.Accordingly it lookedwithcontemptupon trade and commerce. Luther,Melanchthon, Zwingli andErasmusadheredtothisview,butCalvin,whenthisimportantproblemhadbeensubmittedtohim,formulatedinaclassicdocumentthegroundsonwhichitcouldbeaffirmedthatareasonable interest isneither inconflictwithScripturenorwiththenatureofmoney.Hetookintoaccountthelawoflife underwhich commerce operates and declared that only the sins ofcommerce are to be frowned upon, whereas commerce itself is to beregardedasacallingwell-pleasingtoGodandprofitabletosociety.Andthis merely illustrates the point of view from which Calvin habituallyapproached theproblemsof life.He found thewillofGod revealednotmerelyinScripture,butalsointheworld,andhetracedtheconnectionandsoughttorestoretheharmonybetweenthem.UndertheguidanceofthedivineWordhedistinguishedeverywherebetween the institutionofGod and human corruption, and then sought to establish and restoreeverything in harmony with the divine nature and law. Nothing isunclean in itself; every part of the world and every calling in life is arevelationofthedivineperfections,sothateventhehumblestdaylaborerfulfillsadivinecalling.ThisisthedemocraticelementinthedoctrineofCalvin: there is with God no acceptance of persons; all men are equalbeforeHim;eventhehumblestandmeanestworkman,ifhebeabeliever,fillsaplaceintheKingdomofGodandstandsasacolaborerwithGodin

His presence. But—and this is the aristocratic, reverse side to thedemocratic view—every creature and every calling has its own peculiarnature: Church and state, the family and society, agriculture andcommerce,artandscienceareallinstitutionsandgiftsofGod,buteachinitselfisaspecialrevelationofthedivinewillandthereforepossessesitsownnature. The unity and the diversity in thewholeworld alike pointbacktotheonesovereign,omnipotent,graciousandmercifulwillofGod.

InthisspiritCalvinlaboredinGeneva.Buthisactivitywasnotconfinedtotheterritoryofonecity.GenevawastoCalvinmerelythecenter,fromwhichhesurveyedtheentirefieldoftheReformationinalllands.Whenhis only childwas taken away fromhim by death, he consoled himselfwith the thought that God had given him numerous children after theSpirit. And so it was indeed. Through an extensive correspondence hekeptintouchwithhisfellow-laborersintheworkoftheReformation;allquestionswerereferredtohim;hewasthecouncillorofalltheleadersofthegreatmovement;hetaughthundredsofmenandtrainedtheminhisspirit.Fromallquarters refugees came toGeneva, thatbulwarkagainstRome,toseekprotectionand support, andafterwards returned to theirownlandsinspiredwithnewcourage.ThusCalvincreatedinmanylandsapeoplewho,whilemadeupfromallclasses,noblesandplaincitizens,townspeople and countryfold, were yet one in the consciousness of adivine vocation. In this consciousness they took up the battle againsttyranny inChurch and state alike, and in that contest secured libertiesandrightswhicharestilloursatthepresentday.Calvinhimselfstoodintheforefrontofthisbattle.Lifeanddoctrinewithhimwereone.Hegavehis body a living, holy sacrifice, well-pleasing unto God through JesusChrist. Therein consisted his reasonable service. Cor Deo mactatumoffero.

MONERGISMBOOKS

SelectedWorksofHermanBavinck,EditedbyJohnHendryx,Copyright©2015

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.

ePub, .mobi and .pdf Editions April 2015 Requests for informationshouldbeaddressedto:MonergismBooks,POBox491,WestLinn,OR97068