May

Geerhardus Vos (1862-1949) on Children and the Covenant: Diversity Within the Early Reformed Tradition

Posted by: CalvinandCalvinism in The Efficacy of the Sacraments

(d) With respect to children no less than for adults, it is clear from the above that besides the two elements of the offer of the covenant and the obligation of the covenant, there is still a third element present. This consists of the expectation that covenant children will enter into the fellowship of the covenant. This expectation is based on the promise of God to believers that He desires to be their God and the God of their seed and that He also desires to continue His covenant in their seed and to make it a living reality. This does not merely hold true for some promises under certain restrictions, but also for the promises of the covenant, as they span all of life and include every gift of grace. It is, we think, striking how strongly just in this respect the comprehensive character of the covenant is applied by Reformed churches. All of them assume it to be a totality and do not hesitate to unfold it in all its fullness in their liturgical writings. As a promissory covenant its total content is brought into contact with the individual already as an infant. When that infant later enters into covenantal consciousness by active faith, this faith sums up al1 that is included in the covenant, so that the wide, rich world of God’s works of grace is opened up to his sight, a perspective looking backwards and forward. It is just this beautiful outlook which leads one to call the idea of the covenant of grace a "mother-idea." The covenant is a mother because it spiritually bears sons and daughters by the power of divine grace and the promises, a mother because its children have received everything from it, because it has given birth to them, sustains them, feeds, and blesses them. Reformed theology has certainly realized that the church has two sides, and that besides being the assembly of believers and the revelation of the body of Christ, she must also be the means by which new believers are added. But it has not separated these two sides; rather it has kept them in organic connection. Just because the promises of God have been given to the assembly of believers, in its entirety, including their seed, this assembly is also a mother who conceives sons and daughters and is made to rejoice in her children by the Lord. The name "mother" signifies this truly Reformed point of view in distinction from other terms such as "institution of salvation."

As far as we can discover, the leading spokesmen of Reformed theology are completely agreed on this. They all recognize that the church has received such promises for her offspring. They equally recognize that the consideration of these promises is the heart of the fruit of comfort which her view of the covenant offers. And they insist that remembrance of the promise must function as an urgent reason for rousing the seed of the church to embrace the covenant in faith. On both sides, parents and children, this conviction provides strength. Strength was provided in the days of old, in the golden age of the churches, a glorious comfort, finding its most beautiful fruition in the doctrine of the salvation of the children of covenant who die in infancy. Only in the working out of these principles did the theologians diverge to a greater or lesser degree. One could not but expect that a conscious appropriation, an entering into the relation of the covenant by faith and conversion, would be revealed in each member of the covenant who comes to the age of responsibility. The whole tendency of the doctrine of the covenant, as we have tried to present it, led to that demand. One could hardly be satisfied with the thought that a nonrejection of the covenant, where all expression of life was missing, would be sufficient. Here they collided with the discovery, as they also knew from the Scriptures, that not all belong to the seed of the promise. In comparing the statements of theologians at this point, it is clear that the older theologians generally proceeded more fearlessly than the later ones in the individualization and general application of the promises. Beza writes:

The situation of children who are born of believing parents is a special one. They do not have in themselves that quality of faith which is in the adult believer. Yet it cannot be the case that those who have been sanctified by birth and have been separated from the children of unbelievers, do not have the seed and germ of faith. The promise, accepted by the parents in faith, also includes their children to a thousand generations. . . . If it is objected that not all of them who are born of believing parents are elect, seeing that God did not choose all the children of Abraham and Isaac, we do not lack an answer. Though we do not deny that this is the case, still we say that this hidden judgment must be left to God and that normally, by virtue of the promise, all who have been born of believing parents, or if one of the parents believes, are sanctified (Confessio Christianae Fidei, IV, 48).

Read the rest of this entry »

No Comments

Feb

Name Index [G-H]

Posted by: CalvinandCalvinism in

Gale, Theophilus (1628-1678)

Theophilus Gale on Matthew 23:37

Theophilus Gale on Luke 19:42

Theophilus Gale on Davenant and Amyraut

Theophilus Gale on the Divine Intentionality of the Revealed Will

Gery, Thomas (d. 1670?)

Thomas Gery on the Death of Christ

Gibbon, John (1629-1718)

John Gibbon on Death of Christ: Penal Not Pecuniary and Tantundem Not Idem

Gillespie, Patrick (1617-1675)

Patrick Gillespie on Christ Suffering the Tantundem, Not the Idem of the Law’s Punishment

Godfrey, W. Robert

W. Robert Godfrey and the Path to Compromise at Dort

The Delegates from Hesse on the Death of Christ

The Delegates from Gelderland on the Death of Christ

Goodwin, John (1594-1665)

John Goodwin on Calvin on the Extent of the Atonement

Gouge, Thomas (1605-1681)

Thomas Gouge Direct References and Allusions to Romans 2:4

Greenhill, William (1591-1671)

William Greenhill on Ezekiel 18:23, 32 and 33:11

Griffin, Edward D. (1770-1837)

Edward D. Griffin on the Double Payment Fallacy

Edward D. Griffin on the Danger of Conflating Pecuniary and Penal Categories

Edward D. Griffin on the Distinction Between Atonement and Redemption

Edward D. Griffin on Calvin on the Extent of the Atonement

Edward D. Griffin on John 3:14-15

Grohman, Donald D.

Donald Grohman on Dort and the 1649 Genevan Articles

Donald Grohman on Turretin on Amyraut as Reformed

Grudem, Wayne

Wayne Grudem on God’s Will and Desire for the Salvation of all Men

Gualther, Rudolph (1519-1586)

Rudolph Gualther on the Death of Christ

Rudolph Gualther on the Will of God

Rudolph Gualther on Baptism: An informal Comment

Haldane, Robert (1764-1842)

Robert Haldane on the Distinction Between Moral and Natural Inability

Hales, John (1584-1656)

John Hales, English Chaplain at Dort

Hall, Addison (1797-1871)

Addison Hall on the Distinction Between Atonement and Redemption

Hall, Joseph (1574–1656)

Bishop Joseph Hall on Predestination and the Death of Christ

Bishop Joseph Hall on “Conditional Decree” and “Will” in Early Reformation Theology

Halyburton, Thomas (1674-1712)

Thomas Halyburton on the Free Offer of the Gospel

Hardy, Nathanael (1618-1670)

Nathanael Hardy on the Death of Christ

Nathanael Hardy on General Love

Nathanael Hardy on the Sufficiency and Efficiency of Christ’s Death

Nathanael Hardy on 2 Peter 2:1 and Jude 4

Nathanael Hardy on 1 John 2:2

Nathanael Hardy on Conditional Satisfaction (Contra the Double-Payment dilemma)

Nathanael Hardy on the Covenant

Harmon, Matthew Paul

Matthew Harmon on Amyraut on ‘General Conditional Election’

Harris, Robert (1581-1658)

Robert Harris (Westminster Divine) on Common and Saving Grace

Robert Harris Westminster Divine, on God’s Long-Suffering

Haykin, Michael

Jerome (347-420) on the Death of Christ

Ambrose (337-397): The Double Payment Dilemma Legitimately Applied: Informal Reference

Hendriksen, William (1900-1982)

William Hendriksen on Matthew 23:37

William Hendriksen on John 3:16

William Hendriksen on 1 Timothy 2:1-7

Henry, Matthew (1662-1714)

Matthew Henry on the Universal Redemption of Mankind

Matthew Henry on Christ Suffering the Tantundem, Not the Idem of the Law’s Punishment

Matthew Henry on Psalm 81:13

Matthew Henry on Ezekiel 18:23, 32; and 33:7-9 and 11

Matthew Henry on 2 Corinthians 5:19-21

Matthew Henry on 1 Timothy 2:1-6 and from The Matthew Henry Commentaries

Matthew Henry (1662-1714) on 2 Peter 3:9 with Ezekiel 33:11

Heppe, Heinrich (1820-1879)

Heinrich Heppe and the Reformed Doctrine of General Love

Heinrich Heppe: Some Early References to the Reformed Doctrine of Common Grace

Heinrich Heppe: The Reprobate Are Not Denied Common Grace

Heinrich Heppe’s Summary of the Reformed Doctrine of Reprobation

Heinrich Heppe Divine Permission of Sin as Standard Reformed Doctrine

Heinrich Heppe’s brief survey of the Sufficient-Efficient formula

Hibbert, Henry (1601/2-1678)

Henry Hibbert on the Mercy of God

Hickman, Henry (d. 1692)

Henry Hickman on Universal Redemption in the Church of England, with reference to the Synod of Dort, Ussher and Davenant

Hilary of Poitiers (300-368)

Hilary of Poitiers: Suggestive Comments Regarding the Scope of the Redemptive Work of Christ

Hobson, Paul (d. 1666)

Paul Hobson on the Death of Christ

Hodge, A.A. (1823-1886)

A.A. Hodge on Common and Effectual Grace

A.A. Hodge on Supra-Lapsarianism

A.A. Hodge on God’s Permission of Sin and Evil

A.A. Hodge on the revision of the Sufficient-Efficient formula

A.A. Hodge on the Removal of Legal Obstacles

A.A. Hodge (1823-1886) on the Imputation of Sin to Christ

A.A. Hodge on Pecuniary and Penal Satisfaction

A.A. Hodge on the Distinction Between Moral and Natural Inability

A.A. Hodge on the Covenant of Works as a Covenant of Grace

A.A. Hodge on the atonement and its modification in confessional theology due to the rise of Federal Theology

A.A. Hodge on 1 Timothy 2:4 and Ezekiel 18:23

Hodge, Charles (1797-1878)

Charles Hodge on the Death of Christ

Charles Hodge on the Love of God: General and Special

Charles Hodge on Common Grace

Charles Hodge on the General Mercy of God

Charles Hodge on The Universal and Free Offer of the Gospel

Charles Hodge on the Work of the Trinity in the Work of Salvation

Charles Hodge on the Sufficiency of Christ’s Satisfaction: As Classically Defined

Charles Hodge on What It Means To “Impute Sin”

Charles Hodge on the Removal of Legal Obstacles

Charles Hodge on Pecuniary and Penal Satisfaction and the Role of Metaphor

Charles Hodge on the Double Payment/Double Jeopardy Fallacy

Charles Hodge on the Extent of the Atonement and Confessional Diversity (WCF) and the Reformed Tradition

Charles Hodge on John 3:16

Charles Hodge on Ephesians 3:9-10

Charles Hodge on 1 Timothy 2:4

Charles Hodge on 1 John 2:2

Hodgson, Francis (1805-1877)

Francis Hodgson on the Distinction Between Atonement and Redemption in New School Theology

Holland, Henry (1555/6-1603)

Henry Holland on God’s General Love: Informal Reference

Holland, Hezekiah (1638-1661)

Hezekiah Holland on the Revised Sufficient-Efficient Formula

Holmes [Homes], Nathanael (1599-1678)

Nathanael Holmes on the Death of Christ

Nathaniel Holmes on John 17:9

Hooker, Richard, (1554-1600)

Richard Hooker on the Death of Christ (Select Comments)

Hooper, John (d. 1555)

John Hooper on the Death of Christ

John Hooper on the Father and the Son in the Work of Redemption

John Hooper on the Death of Christ in His Brief and Clear Confession of the Christian Faith

Hovey, Alvah (1820-1903)

Alvah Hovey on the Death of Christ

Alvah Hovey on Divine Benevolence

Alvah Hovey on the Distinction Between Atonement and Redemption

Alvah Hovey on John 3:16-17

Alvah Hovey on John 17:9

Howe, John (1630-1705)

John Howe on the Redemption of Christ

John Howe on God’s Disposition to Lost Sinners by way of Luke 19:41

John Howe on John 3:16

John Howe on God willing the salvation of all men (Ezekiel 18:32, 1Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9, John 3:16 etc)

John Howe on God willing the salvation of all men

Hufsey, J

J. Hufsey on the Riches of God’s Love to Mankind

J. Hufsey on John 3:16

Hughes, Obadiah, (The Older) (d. 1704)

Obadiah Hughes, The Elder, on the Death of Christ (From the Matthew Poole Commentaries)

Obadiah Hughes on Hebrews 2:9 and 14 from the Poole Commentaries

Obadiah Hughes on the Removal of Legal Obstacles

Hughes, Obadiah, (The Younger) (1695-1751)

Obadiah Hughes on the General Love of God: An Informal Reference

Obadiah Hughes on Ezekiel 33:11 (Informal Reference)on Ezekiel 33:11 (Informal Reference)

Hulse, Erroll

Erroll Hulse on God’s Love and Will For the Salvation of All Men

Humfrey, John (1621-1719)

John Humfrey on the Death of Christ

John Humfrey on Common and Special Grace

John Humfrey on John 3:16

John Humfrey on The Work of the Trinity in the Work of Redemption

John Humfrey on the Death of Christ and the Purchase of Faith

Hutchinson, Roger (d. 1555)

Roger Hutchinson on the Mercy of God

Hyperius, Andreas (1511-1564)

Andreas Hyperius on God’s Desire that all Men be Saved

Andreas Hyperius on God’s Providential Love to Mankind

Andreas Hyperius on the Definition of Faith

Andreas Hyperius on the Efficacy of Baptism

No Comments

Sep

Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) on Reprobation and the Means of Grace

Posted by: CalvinandCalvinism in God who Ordains

Bavinck:

REPROBATION

[246] From the foregoing it has become evident in what sense reprobation must be considered a part of predestination. From the perspective of the comprehensive character of the counsel of God, we have every right to speak of a “double predestination.” Also sin, unbelief, death, and eternal punishment are subject to God’s governance. Not only is there no benefit in preferring the terms “foreknowledge” and “permission” over the term “predestination,” but Scripture, in fact, speaks very decisively and positively in this connection. It is true that Scripture seldom speaks of reprobation as an eternal decree. All the more, however, does it represent reprobation as an act of God in history. He rejects Cain (Gen. 4:5), curses Canaan (Gen. 9:25), expels Ishmael (Gen. 21:12; Rom. 9:7; Gal. 4:30), hates Esau (Gen. 25:23-26; Mal. 1:2-3; Rom. 9:13; Heb. 12:17), and permits the Gentiles to walk in their own ways (Acts 14:16). Even within the circle of revelation there is frequent mention of a rejection by the Lord of his people and of particular persons (Deut. 29:28; 1 Sam. 15:23,26; 16:1; 2 Kings 17:20; 23:27; Ps. 53:5; 78:67; 89:38; Jer. 6:30; 14:19; 31:37; Hos. 4:6; 9:17). But also in that negative event of rejection there is frequently present a positive action of God, consisting in hatred (Mal. 1:2-3; Rom 9:13), cursing (Gen. 9:25), hardening (Exod. 4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:20,27; 11-1F14-4; Deut. 2:30; Josh. 11:20; 1 Sam. 2:25; Ps. 105:25; John 12:40; Rom. 9:18), infatuation (1 Kings 12:15; 2 Sam. 17:14; Ps. 107:40; Job 12:24; Isa. 44:25; 1 Cor. 1:19), blinding and stupefaction (Isa. 6:9; Matt. 13:13; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; John 12:40; Acts 28:26; Rom. 11:8). God’s reign covers all things, and he even has a hand in people’s sins. He sends a lying spirit (1 Kings 22:23; 2 Chron. 18:22), through Satan stirs up David (2 Sam. 24:1; 1 Chron. 2IT), tests Job (ch. 1), calls Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus his servants (2 Chron. 36:22; Ezra 1:1; Isa. 44:28; 45:1; Jer. 27:6; 28:14; etc.) and Assyria the tod of his anger (Isa. 10:5ff.). He delivers up Christ into the hands of his enemies (Acts 2:23; 4:28), sets him for the fall of many, and makes him a fragrance from death to death , a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense (Luke 2:34; John 3:19; John 9:39; 2 Cor. 2:16; 1 Pet. 2:8). He abandons people to their sins (Rom. 1:24), sends a spirit of delusion (2 Thess. 2:11), raises up Shimei to curse David (2 Sam. 16:10; cf. Ps. 39:9), uses Pharaoh to show his power (Rom. 9:17), and heals the man blind from birth to manifest his glory (John 9:3). Certainly in all these works of God one must not overlook people’s own sinfulness. In the process of divine hardening humans harden themselves (Exod. 7:13, 22; 8:15; 9:35; 13:15; 2 Chron. 36:13; Job 9:4; Ps. 95:8; Prov. 28:14; Heb.’ 3:8; 4:7). Jesus speaks in parables not only in order that people will fail to understand but also because people refuse to see or hear (Matt. 13:13). God gives people up to sin and delusion because they have made themselves deserving of it (Rom. 1:32; 2 Thess. 2:11). And it is ex posteriori that believers see Gods governing hand in the wicked deeds of enemies (2 Sam. 16:10; Ps. 39:9-10). Nevertheless, in all these things also the will and power of God become manifest, and his absolute sovereignty is revealed. He makes weal and creates woe; he forms the light and creates the darkness (Isa. 45:7; Amos 3:6); he creates the wicked for the day of evil (Prov. 16:4), does whatever he pleases (Ps. 115:3), does according to his will among the inhabitants of the earth (Dan. 4:35), inclines the heart of all humans as he wills (Prov. 16:9; 21:1), and orders their steps (Prov. 20:24; Jer. 10:23). Out of the same lump of clay he makes one vessel for beauty and another for menial use (Jer. 18; Rom. 9:20-24), has compassion upon whomever he wills and hardens the heart of whomever he wills (Rom. 9:18). He destines some people to disobedience (1 Pet. 2:8), designates some for condemnation (Jude 4), and refrains from recording the names of some in the Book of Life (Rev. 13:8; 17:8).

Read the rest of this entry »

No Comments

May