John Owen wrote The Glory of Christ in the final months of his life. These were his meditations as he prepared for his own death, which he knew to be near. And these meditations were also the final sermons that he preached. In the preface he says these meditations were “intended first for the exercise of my own mind, and then for the edification of a private congregation; which is like to be the last service I shall do them in that kind” (275). In fact, Owen even says that his meditations would have been longer, but “weakness, weariness, and the near approaches of death do call me off from any farther labour in this kind” (284).

Owen, as if in his counseling office, shows how meditating on the glory of Christ alleviates the experience of depressive feelings. And then proceeds to show how “a continual contemplation of the glory of Christ, in his person, office, and grace…will carry us cheerfully comfortably, and victoriously through life and death, and all that we have to conflict withal in either of them” (277). This “continual contemplation” is the duty which Owen addresses throughout Glory of Christ.

He then shows how contemplating the glory of Christ prepares the Christian for death in particular: “With respect unto death itself: It is the assiduous contemplation of the glory of Christ which will carry us cheerfully and comfortably into it, and through it” (279). “There are sundry things required of us, that we may be able to encounter death cheerfully, constantly, victoriously.”

1. Commit Your Departing Soul to Jesus

• First, Peculiar actings of faith to resign and commit our departing souls into the hand of him who is able to receive them (280)
• The soul is now parting with all things here below, and that forever… The soul must alone by itself launch into eternity. It is entering an invisible world, which it know no more of that it hath received by faith.
• How is it like to be after the few moments which, under the pangs of death, we have to continue in this world? It is an annihilation…? Is it a state of subsistence in a wandering condition…? Or is it a state of universal misery…?
• No man can comfortably venture on and into this condition, but in the exercise of that fiath which enables him to resign and give up his departing soul into the hand of God… Herein is our Lord Jesus Christ our great example. He resigned his departing spirit into the hands of his Father (Lk 23:46).
• This is the last victorious act of faith.
• But Jesus Christ it is who doth immediately receive the souls of them who believe in him… And what can be a greater encouragement to resign them into his hands, than a daily contemplation of his glory

2. Be Ready and Willing to Part with Your Flesh

• Second, It is required in us, unto the same end, that we be ready and willing to part with the flesh (281)
• The alliance, the relation, the friendship, the union that are between the soul and the body, are the greatest, the nearest, the firmest that are or can be among mere created beings.
• By reason of this peculiar intimate union and relation between the soul and body, there is in the whole nature a fixed aversation from a dissolution… The body claspeth about the soul, and the soul receiveth strange impressions from its embraces
• Wherefore, unless we can overcome this inclination, we can never die comfortably or cheerfully.
• Yet the do believers so conquer this inclination by faith and views of the glory of Christ, as to attain a desire of this dissolution
• He, therefore, that would die comfortably, must be able to say within himself and to himself…
  • “Die, then, thou frail and sinful flesh: ‘dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.’ I yield thee up unto the righteous doom of the Holy One. Yet herein also I give thee into the hand of the great Refiner, who will hide thee in thy grave, and by thy consumption purify thee from all thy corruption and disposition to evil. And otherwise this will not be. After a long sincere endeavour for the mortification of all sin, I find it will never be absolutely perfect, but by this reduction into the dust. Thou shalt no more be a residence for the least remnant of sin unto eternity, nor any clog unto my soul in its acting on God. Rest therefore in hope; for God, in his appointed season, when he shall have a desire unto the work of his hands, will call unto thee, and thou shalt answer him out of the dust. Then shall he, by an act of big almighty power, not only restore thee unto thy pristine glory, as at the first creation, when thou wast the pure workmanship of his hands, but enrich and adorn thee with inconceivable privileges and advantages. Be not, then, afraid; away with all reluctance. Go into the dust, – rest in hope; ‘for thou shalt stand in thy lot at the end of the days.’” 
  • That which will enable us hereunto, in an eminent manner, is that view and consideration of the glory of Christ which is the subject of the ensuing meditations.

3. Comply God’s Ordained Times and Seasons of Your Death

• Third, There is required hereunto a readiness to comply with the times and seasons wherein God would have us depart and leave this world. (283)
• Some desire to live that they may see more of that glorious work of God for his church
• Other may judge themselves to have some work to do in the world
• Others rise no higher than their own private interests or concerns
• But it is the love of life that lies at the bottom of all these desires in men; which of itself will never forsake them. But no man can die cheerfully or comfortably who lives not in a constant resignation of the time and season of his death unto the will of God
• Our times are in his hand, at his sovereign disposal; and his will in all things must be complied withal. Without this resolution, without this resignation, no man can enjoy the least solid peace in this world.

4. Comply with God’s Ordained Ways and Means of Your Death

• Fourth, As the times and seasons, so also the ways and means of the approaches of death have especial trials; which, unless we are prepared for them, will keep us under bondage, with the fear of death itself (283)
• Long, wasting, wearing consumption, burning fevers, strong pains of the stone, or the like from within; or sword, fire, tortures, with shame and reproach from without, may be in the way of the access of death unto us.
• To get above all perplexities on the account of these things, is part of our wisdom in dying daily. 
• And we are to have always in a readiness those graces and duties which are necessary thereunto. Such are a constant resignation of ourselves, in all events, unto the sovereign will, pleasure, and disposal of God. “May he not do what he will with his own?” Is it not right and meet it should be so? Is not his will in all things infinitely holy, wise, just, and good? Does he not know what is best for us, and what conduceth most unto his own glory? Does not he alone do so? 
• Moreover, it is required that we be frequent and steady in comparing these things with those which are eternal
• There is none of all the things we have insisted on—never the resignation of a departing soul into the hand of God, nor a willingness to lay down the flesh in the dust, nor a readiness to comply with the will of God, as to the times and seasons, or the way and manner of the approach of death—that can be attained unto, without a prospect of that glory that shall give us a new state far more excellent than what we here leave or depart from.

(Taken from Works, 1:279-284)

Walter McMillian was a black man found guilty of murder by an all-white jury despite a mountain of obvious evidence and eyewitness testimony of his innocence.^[1] The jury had “made up their hearts” about his guilt before they had “made up their minds.” Racial prejudice induced blindness to compelling evidence. 

The arguments, beliefs, and memories that capture our minds are often a matter not of pure reasoning, but of affections and the will. In You Are What You Love James Smith suggests this is because even more deeply than being reasoning creatures, we are worshiping creatures. And we tend to find rational justification for that which we worship. But the love/affection comes first, the reasoning is subsequent.

“Memories are often sadly dependent on our wills.”^[2] We believe what we want to believe, and likewise, we don’t believe what we don’t want to believe. Proving the proverb, “There are none so blind as those who will not see.”

Unbelief and skepticism, two shades of the same thing, are never evidential, but moral. Aldous Huxley (1894-1963), the British author of Brave New World, who coincidently died the same day as JFK and C. S. Lewis, within a few hours of each other, was an atheist and said quite transparently, “I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don’t know because we don’t want to know…Those who detect no meaning in the world generally do so because, for one reason or another, it suits their book that the world should be meaningless.”^[3]

Unbelief is not evidential, but moral. Paul says in Romans 1 that God’s “invisible attributes, namely his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly perceived ever since the creation of the world in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened…[they] exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images.” They rejected plain evidence of God in nature, without excuse, because they chose to worship the creature rather than the creator. An immoral exchange.

Huxley is right, “No philosophy is completely disinterested.” Not to believe in Jesus at its root is a rejection of God, the Creator. So at last we come to it. Unbelief is (im)moral.

---

^[1] The Walter McMillian story is told by his defense lawyer Bryan Stevenson in the book Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption.

^[2] Ryle, Expository Thoughts on John, vol. 2, 20.

^[3] Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means: An Enquiry into the Nature of Ideals and into the Methods employed for their Realization (1937), 270. I first read this quote in Fool’s Talk by Os Guiness, in the chapter, “The Anatomy of Unbelief.” I heard this quote from Tom Mercer in his sermon on Romans 10:14-21 (Feb 24, 2019). Interestingly, J. C. Ryle says the same thing, “They do not believe what they do not like to believe” (Expository Thoughts on John, 21).

God promises his children that he will provide for them like a good father provides for his children. Jesus tells us in the Sermon on the Mount not to be anxious, not even about basic necessities like what to wear and what to eat. Then Jesus offers a word of reassurance, “But seek first the kingdom of God, and all these thing will be added to you” (Matt 6:33). This sounds like an absolute promise of provision from God, just like so many other similar promises throughout scripture.

But here is the provision paradox: Although God promises to provide, still God’s children have often gone hungry and have not been provided for. God promises provision, yet his children experience privation at times.

David says he’s never seen the righteous forsaken or their children begging for bread (Ps 37:25). We might feel incredulous, sensing his naivete, because we’ve all seen people of God at times forsaken, forgotten, hungry.

God promises provision, yet we experience privation. How do we resolve this paradox?

1. God often uses ordinary means for the fulfillment of the promise. If a man doesn’t work neither should he eat (2 These 3:10). Ordinarily, working will lead to eating. This is a proverbial perspective on how God fulfills his promise. It doesn’t turn his promise into a proverb, but rather explains one way the promise finds fulfillment. We should remember however, that even when we have our “daily bread,” it is still only sufficient for today. In other words, it is not an ultimate provision, only immediate. Any provision, even the best provision, that we may have in this life is all anticipatory, a dim precursor to the full experience that awaits God’s people with him in paradise. Which leads to the second point of resolution.
   
2. God will ultimately fulfill his promises of provision in the new world. Jesus reminds his followers they are citizens of a new kingdom, which outlasts this temporary mode of living (Matt 6:19-21). This is both a worldview as well as a present comfort. There will not be hunger or pain or privation there. So when God’s people endure famine leading to death in the present world, they enter into a world of eternal satisfaction, fullness and pleasure. These promises find their ultimate fulfillment not in this age, but in the age to come.
   
   The great men and women of faith in the Bible believed in this delayed fulfillment. Abraham “was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God… These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth” (Heb 11:10, 13).

Some good resources to start with if you want more after reading: 1) The Christ of the Covenants by O. Palmer Robertson, 2) Continuity and Discontinuity edited by John S. Feinberg

Over the past few weeks, I’ve discussed covenant theology with a number of people, and have found that even those who say they definitely hold to it actually have a hard time articulating what covenant theology is. I thought I’d put together a concise overview to help.

So then covenant theology sees the whole story of redemption as a single story. And the covenantal structure of redemptive history could be summarized this way:

The various covenants of the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus Christ, and the promises of them are distributed to the people of God.

1. The Various Covenants of the Old Testament

There are four main covenants that carry along the story of the OT, and a fifth is foretold. These covenants are distinct and yet unified. Each grows organically out of the one before it. The first promise of hope is that a seed of the women would crush the head of the serpent (Gen 3:15). This promise offers hope, but gives very little content. The covenants then begin to gradually specify the content of that first word of hope.

The first covenant is the covenant with Noah (Gen 9:1-17). God promises to delay judgment on the whole earth. This covenant establishes the context in which subsequent covenants will unfold: delayed judgment. O. Palmer Robertson calls this the covenant of preservation.

The second covenant is the covenant with Abraham (Gen 15:1-21). The covenant of Genesis 15 enacts the composite promise of Gen 12:1-2: “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you.” This is a three-part promise: 1) land, people, blessing. The land is Canaan, the people are the offspring of Abraham, what will become the nation of Israel. The Lord calls this an everlasting covenant (Gen 17:7-8). Robertson calls this the covenant of promise.

The third covenant is the covenant with Moses (Ex 23; Deut 29). The promises of this covenant are the same as the promises of the covenant with Abraham. But the covenant with Moses introduces something new: the law. And this covenant is conditional. If Israel obeys the law, they will be blessed (Deut 28:1ff). If they disobey the law they will be cursed (Deut 28:15ff). Robertson calls this the covenant of law.

The fourth covenant is the covenant with David (2 Sam 7). This covenant reaffirms the promises of prior covenants, “I will appoint a place for my people Israel.” But God adds a particular promise for David, “Your throne shall be established forever.” The line of David will possess an eternal throne. Robertson calls this the covenant of kingdom.

The fifth covenant, the new covenant, is only foretold in the Old Testament ( Jer 31:31-34; cf. Jer 32:27-44; 50:4f; Ezek 16:60-63; 37:15-28). Robertson calls this the covenant of consummation (as it is fulfilled in Jesus Christ).

2. Fulfilled in Jesus Christ

Jesus enacts and fulfills this new covenant. But since covenantalism sees the new covenant fulfilled in Jesus as the covenant of consummation, this means that by fulfilling the new covenant, he is also fulfilling the previous covenants. So the general principle is this: Christ is the fulfillment of the whole covenant of redemption, which was expressed in various stages through the covenants of the OT.

• And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself (Lk 24:27)
• These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures. (Lk 24: 44-45)
• For all the promises of God find their Yes in him (2 Cor 1:20)

So that’s the general principle, but it then remains to be asked, in what sense does Jesus fulfill the covenant(s) and what are the implications of his fulfillment of them.

Jesus is the true Israel. A primary sense in which Jesus fulfills the covenant is that he is true Israel. Matthew presents him as the new Israel (e.g. Matt 2:15). And Paul makes it explicit, Jesus is the offspring of Abraham. “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, ‘And to offsprings,’ referring to many, but referring to one, ‘And to your offspring,’ who is Christ” (Gal 2:16).

This is why the term “replacement theology” is inaccurate. The term usually refers to the idea that the church (made up of NT Christians) replaces Israel. But covenant theology does not believe this. Rather, Jesus fulfills Israel, and then Christians are those who find their identity in Jesus.

This means the true heir of the three-part promise to Abraham is Jesus himself. His people are all who follow him by faith. His land is the new heavens and new earth over which he will rule. And his blessing is being perfectly accepted by the Father (Matt 3:17). Ethnic Israel will not receive the land between the rivers (Gen 15:18), because this promise has been fulfilled by something even greater: Jesus receives all things as his inheritance. (However, in another sense it would be accurate to say, “Israel will receive the land between the rivers,” see below).

Jesus is also the descendant of David who sits on the throne forever. This is why the writers to the Hebrews interprets Psalm 110 and Psalm 8 as describing the reign of Jesus: “Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present we do not yet see everything in subjection to him. But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death” (Heb 2:8-9). He is the king who reigns. Though we don’t see it fully just yet, the day is coming when we most certainly will.

So Jesus is the true Israel and the true David, and we could show many other ways in which Jesus is fulfillment of OT covenants and promises. But then what are the implications of Jesus fulfilling these things?

3. Distributed to the People of God

The promises of the covenant are distributed to the people of God. Christians are not the heirs of the promise, but co-heirs. Christians get in on covenant promises only because they are “in Christ” who himself fulfilled the covenants.

So Paul identifies the people of God, those who receive the promises, as those who are in Christ. At the same time, he points out that many who are ethnic Jews should not even be called “Israel.” So not all Israel is Israel. And some who are not Israel actually are Israel. Confusing? It shouldn’t be. Paul is simply introducing a better principle for understanding the “Israel” category: it is a spiritual category, not an ethnic one. Consider the following:

• Rom 2:28-29, “For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. [29] But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter”
• Romans 9:6-7, “For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, [7] and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring… [8] This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise that are counted as offspring.”
• Galatians 2:25-29, But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, [26] for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith… [29] And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”

The promises are for the people of God, as they have always been. For instance, think about the promise of land, made to Abraham, then further specified under the Mosaic covenant. Paul envisions that promise as the future hope of all those who are in Christ (consider Rom 8:18-25).

So Miguel Echevarria says,

Paul envisions the inheritance to be the renewed earth. The apostle does not see a spiritualized existence as his future hope, for he looks forward to what his forefathers, such as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had anticipated for centuries: a physical, eternal inheritance under the reign of the promised Messiah. This vision is not exclusive to Paul; it is the vision of the saints who came before him.

The Future Inheritance of the Land in Pauline Epistles

So, a covenantal understanding of the promise would agree with the statement, “In the future, Israel will receive the land between the rivers.” But would want to make these clarifications. First, not all Israel are Israel (Rom 9:6-8). Second, Some who are not Israel actually are Israel (Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:26). Third, in addition to the land between the rivers, this newly defined “Israel” will also receive the whole world, the renewed earth.

Conclusion

Obviously much more could be said about each of these points, but my goal is just to provide a concise summary statement of covenantalism. The various-yet-unified covenants of the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus Christ, and the promises of those covenants are distributed to the people of God, that is, all those who are in Christ. The structure is built around Jesus, who in his life, death and resurrection is the culmination of God’s redemptive plan. The story of redemption is all about the work of God in Christ redeeming his people. The whole story is a single story.

It is reasonably certain that Romans was written to the church in Rome in the context of Jews “re-entering” the congregations after having been exiled from them for a time under Claudius. Whether that is historically certain or not, it is clear from within the letter that Paul is consciously writing to a congregation composed of both ethnic Jews and ethnic Greeks. This concern about ethnicity is prominent throughout the book. For instance, when Paul says “all people” he follows up just to be clear, “both Jews and Greeks” (e.g. 3:9), so they don’t point fingers at the other group.

But while the ethnicities within the congregation is a prominent issue in Paul’s mind, at the same time he’s trying to transcend ethnic categories by constantly lumping them together, “both Jews and Greeks.” How many times does some form of this phrase occurs in Romans? Lots (I’m still working on a precise count…).

While Paul recognizes that ongoing ethnic distinctions are real, he is at the same time trying to deconstruct their understanding of what it means to be Jewish or to be Greek. For instance, the Greeks know more about the God of Israel than they are willing to admit (1:18-23), and they are more accountable to Israel’s God than they’d like to think (2:12-16). At the same time, Jews have less distinct privilege than they think (2:28-29), and they are living more like the Greeks than they’d like to admit (2:23-24).

These dynamics don’t eliminate ethnic distinctions, but they do highlight the fact that the theologically controlling categories are no longer ethnic, but rather spiritual. So Paul says, “For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical, [29] but a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter” (2:28-29).

Still, because Paul is writing to an ethnically mixed congregation, we see him using ethnic language to address these groups and their concerns, but then transcending ethnic language to instruct these groups with new doctrinal categories.

For this reason we see the words “Jew” and “Israel” functioning in two different ways in the letter to the Romans, sometimes identifying Israel as an ethnic entity, and other times as a spiritual reality. This is what’s going on in 2:28, where he says, “No one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly.” Which is like saying, “No one is a Jew who is merely a Jew.” But in two different senses of the word. The spiritual sense followed by the ethnic sense. “No one is a Jew (truly and spiritually) who is merely a Jew (ethnically).”

Thus when reading through Romans, it is incumbent upon the interpreter to assess which meaning of “Jew” or “Israel” Paul is referring to—spiritual or ethnic? This will significantly impact one’s conclusions about Paul’s theology, especially in Romans 9-11.

The writers of the OT and NT never seem concerned to press that humans are greater than angels. There are various distinctions between humans and angels to be sure, but the concern never seems to be comparative.

Jonathan Edwards gave three reasons he understood humans to be greater than angels

1. Angels were made to serve God by serving man, but man was made to serve God directly.
2. Human grace, holiness, and love are greater virtues than angelic wisdom and strength.
3. Believers are united to Christ in a way angels never will be.

His basic reason was this, “Men are a more ultimate end of the creation than the angels.” Edwards’ point is logical, but I’m not aware of a single place in Scripture where an author is concerned to make this point. (Miscellanies #103)

Actually, reflecting on the way the Bible speaks of angels, it seems obvious that in many ways angels are greater than humans.

1. Angels are spirit, existing in a realm above us (Heb 1:14)
2. Angels worship around the throne, they participate in heavenly realities beyond our currently experience
3. Angels rescue humans (e.g. Lot, Peter), they have powers and abilities humans do not have

Moses portrays man as the pinnacle of God’s creative work, the bearers of his image (Gen 1). Yet angels are in a realm above us experiencing realities beyond us having powers that exceed ours.

Therefore, we should probably simply maintain that humans and angles hold distinct roles in the redemptive plan of God. Humans are the object of God’s redemptive plan, angels are the messengers and servants of the plan.

But to say in an absolute sense that angels are greater than humans, or that humans are greater than angels seems unwarranted in light of the Biblical evidence.

We are constantly hearing these days about “fake news.” It’s nauseating how much human effort is being wasted on spinning lies to support positions. We wish that watching or reading the news didn’t demand so much incredulity just to avoid being made a fool. Who would want to repost or retweet the attention-grabbing links that hours later are proven to be deceitful propaganda? Evidently all too many are willing. Fake new goes viral. No matter that it was fake. No matter it keeps coming.

And yet “there is nothing new under the sun” (Ecc 1:9). Fake news, lies in support of a position, propaganda. This is nothing new. In his collection of essays about the Reformation era, All Things Made New: The Reformation and Its Legacy, Diarmaid MacCulloch tells a cautionary tale about an Irish pseudo-historian named Robert Ware (1639-1697). He was an intellectual from a long line of intellectuals. But he was a liar. A smart liar. And he was an ardent supporter of the emerging Anglican consensus in Dublin. And so he wrote non-historical history that bolstered the Anglican cause.

Robert Ware made up entire historical accounts, dialogues that never transpired, and conspiracy theories that lumped Protestant dissenters (i.e. Presbyterians) in with Roman Catholic conspirators. MacCulloch provides a couple examples.

In 1547 Archbishop Thomas Cranmer preached a pithy and dramatic sermon at the Coronation of King Edward VI, during the royal youth to renew the scriptural role of young King Josiah of Judah in his own kingdom. In the early 1560s, Queen Elizabeth I berated Dean Alexander Nowell in his own cathedral church of St Paul’s, for subversion of her Protestant religious settlement through his hill-judged gift to her of a presentation copy of the Book of Common Prayer, enriched with devotional pictures. Both events are still repeatedly to be met with in accounts of the English Reformation…but there is one problem: neither of them happened. They are fictions created by Robert Ware.

Robert Ware’s forgeries “pollute the historical pool of sources about English and Irish history.” And so a review of his story becomes a caution about “the preoccupations and temptations to which historians are prone, even in modern historiographical practice.”

The caution isn’t just for historians. It’s for all. Lies masquerading as facts are everywhere, meaning we should all have a healthy sense of incredulity. We should not rush to judgment for or against. In evaluating politically oriented news, we should always recognize that the author is “coming from somewhere,” some angle.

As someone who preaches and teaches regularly, I want to be careful in what information I pass along. If I’m presenting a story or anecdote from history or passing along some information as true, then I want to be reasonably sure that it is indeed true. Check original sources, be sure they are reliable sources, investigate any contrary opinions. If I pass along dubious information, does that not call into question my overall methodology and reliability?

 

Calvin’s Central Contribution: The Majesty of God

Calvin’s central theological contributions was his view of God’s infinite majesty, that is, God’s impressive beauty, dignity and transcendence.[1] Calvin said his aim in his ministry was to “set before [man], as the prime motive of his existence, zeal to illustrate the glory of God.”[2] It was Calvin’s “zeal to illustrate the glory of God” which constitutes the heart of his theological reform as well as the legacy he has left the church. In speaking of Calvin’s conception of God’s infinite majesty, we must enter a thought world that almost seems foreign to contemporary religion. As David Wells said, “It is this God, majestic and holy in his being…who has disappeared from the modern evangelical world.”[3]

Instead the church today has espoused what has been called Moralistic Therapeutic Deism,[4] which portrays God as a grandfatherly figure who wants people to be happy and morally good in life. We speak of God in very intimate terms as being among us, on mission, ready to answer our prayers. He treasures us. He speaks to us with advice for living the good life. And we think of Jesus primarily as man. But “Christ” (Anointed One), his majestic title, has fallen into disuse. And we prefer instead to think of the carpenter who lived an exemplary and loving life. And while most of this is true so far as it goes, it simply doesn’t go far enough. It’s damning with faint praise. Calvin saw these realities, the nearness of God, as essentially linked to other realities, the transcendence and majesty of God. And it was this perspective that motivated his efforts toward reform.

So to understand Calvin, we must first gather his understanding of God’s majesty. Then we will be prepared to understand what influence that conception had on his preaching. As John Murray said:

“We must first have a firm grasp on Calvin’s view of God’s infinite majesty. This we may derive in part from Institutes. As we bring even elementary understanding to bear upon our reading of the Institutes we shall immediately discover the profound sense of the majesty of God, veneration for the Word of God, and the jealous care for faithful exposition and systematization which were marked features of the author. And because of this we shall find the Institutes to be suffused with the warmth of godly fear.”^[5]

The Creator has the right to rule and to demand obedience, and man’s self-understanding must take God’s loftiness into account, as Calvin notes, “Man is never sufficiently touched and affected by the awareness of his lowly state until he has compared himself with God’s majesty.”[6]

This then is Calvin’s understanding of God’s infinite majesty, which is the “formative principle of Calvinism” according to B.B. Warfield. Warfield explains what he believes it means to “be a Calvinist”:

The Calvinist is the man who has seen God, and who, having seen God in His glory, is filled on the one hand, with a sense of his own unworthiness to stand in God’s sight as a creature, and much more as a sinner, and on the other hand, with adoring wonder that nevertheless this God is a God who receives sinners. He who believes in God without reserve and is determined that God shall be God to him, in all his thinking, feeling, willing—in the entire compass of his life activities, intellectual, moral, spiritual—throughout all his individual, social, religious relations—is, by the force of that strictest of all logic which presides over the outworking of principles into thought and life, by the very necessity of the case, a Calvinist.[7]

Many others have also noted the foundational or central role of this aspect of Calvin’s thinking, referring to the marrow of Calvinism as the sovereignty of God. “Thus, if we had to reduce Calvinism to one concept,” says Joel Beeke, we must agree, “to be Reformed means to be theocentric.”[8]

1. God’s Majesty in Calvin’s Preaching Method

The majesty of God gave shape to the structure of Calvin’s pulpit ministry. As light is emitted from the sun, so also the Word reveals the brilliance of its source. And precisely because Calvin believed that God had revealed his glory through the rays of the Word, he was committed to treating the Word with the same reverence and humility that is appropriate to God himself. So his method of teaching the Word needed to accord with this high reverence. Calvin is known for consecutive expositional preaching: beginning in chapter one verse one of a book, and moving verse by verse through that book to uncover its meaning. In this sense, Calvin tethered himself to the text, recognizing his own lowliness before the Word and not wanting to speak his own opinions over and above God’s revelation. He has such a high view of God’s Word simply because he has such a high view of God himself. “The glory of God so shines in his word, that we ought to be so affected by it, whenever he speaks by his servants, as though he were near to us, face to face.”[9]

2. God’s Majesty in Calvin’s Concluding “Formula”

Not only was Calvin’s expositional method a demonstration of his sense of divine majesty, but so was the manner in which he closed each of his sermons. His closing line in nearly every sermon exhorted the congregation toward humility in light of all that had been taught from the Word. All his sermons in Job ended with the nearly uniform pronouncement, “Now let us bow in humble reverence before the face of our God.”[10] In his 22 sermons from Psalm 119, there is an equal uniformity in his closing words. The final paragraph of each sermon begins this way, “And according to this holy doctrine, let us prostrate ourselves before the face of our good God, in acknowledging our faults.”[11]

A similar pattern is evident in almost all the sermons Calvin preached. In fact, it appears in many of the sermons that having called on the congregation to bow before the majesty of God, Calvin would then ask them to join together in a prayer of praise and confession. In his sermons on the Beatitudes, his final words are recorded at the end of each sermon: “Now let us cast ourselves down before the majesty of our good God, acknowledging our sins….Therefore together let us say, Almighty God and heavenly Father…”[12] Although the rest of the corporate prayer is not recorded, one can imagine the congregation together acknowledging their sins and pleading for mercy because of Christ. Every sermon’s conclusion was marked by this reverence.

The humility that is evident in this constant exhortation points back to Calvin’s understanding of God and what it means to be in fellowship with God. Calvin said that Augustine’s statement pleased him very much: “If you ask me concerning the precepts of the Christian religion, first, second, third, and always, I would answer, ‘Humility.’”[13] Understanding God to be so far exalted above man, he regularly concluded his preaching with a call to submission before divine transcendence.

3. God’s Majesty in the Themes of Calvin’s Preaching

In addition to these two structural results of Calvin’s understanding of God’s majesty (expositional preaching and closing exhortation to humility), there are numerous thematic elements in his preaching that flow directly from his sense of God’s loftiness. I will describe two of those themes and mention several others.

One of those thematic elements is the depravity of man. Calvin labors in all of his preaching to unpack the first line from the Institutes: “Nearly all the wisdom we possess…consists of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves.”[14] In light of this, his exposition attempts to impress the reader with what the passage teaches about God and his majesty, but also about man and his sinfulness. This twofold attempt led Calvin to discuss depravity at length even from passages in which the doctrine of sin is not explicit.

For instance, Psalm 119:1-8 seems to contain very scant evidence of the depravity of man. It is a simple pronouncement of happiness toward those who keep the law of God. For many preachers, depravity may find very little room in the exposition of this passage. But Calvin almost seems to understand this to be a psalm about depravity. He labors throughout his whole sermon to insist on the waywardness of the human heart, that it is so unwilling to respond to God’s law. Calvin says,

First of all, [the psalmist] wants us to note, that we understand not wherein our chief blessedness consists, and the reason is, because we are blind, and do live in the world as savage and wild beasts, utterly void of sense and reason: and suffer ourselves to be led and carried away of our brutish and swinish affections and lusts.[15]

His sermon on 1 Timothy 3:16 also illustrates this point. This verse is a creedal statement about Jesus Christ with hardly a reference to sin, “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory” (ESV). And yet Calvin finds opportunity to impress on the congregation their own condition as sinful people before the majesty of the living God:

There is nothing but rottenness in us; nothing but sin and death. Then let the living God, the well-spring of life, the everlasting glory, and the infinite power, come; and not only approach to us and our miseries, our wretchedness, our frailty, and to this bottomless pit of all iniquity that is in men; let not only the majesty of God come near this, but be joined to it, and made one with it, in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ.[16]

Whatever passage Calvin found himself in, he was careful to correlate that passage to a biblical understanding of the human condition, which is inevitably connected to his view of God’s majesty.

A second theme that runs through Calvin’s preaching is that mankind owes obedience to God. “In reading Calvin, nothing challenges me more than the way in which the obedience due to God controlled his thinking and living….For Calvin, to accept compromise when Scripture has spoken is to affront the divine majesty of the Author.”[17] This theme is plainly evident in all of Calvin’s preaching, although perhaps the most striking example comes from his preaching on the book of Job. He understand the entire story of Job’s life to be teaching us that we ought to submit ourselves in all humility and obedience to the sovereign will of God:

“The story [of Job] shows us how we are in the hand of God, and that it belongs to Him to order our lives and to dispose of them according to His good pleasure, and that our duty is to submit ourselves to Him in all humility and obedience, that it is quite reasonable that we be altogether His both to live and to die; and even if it shall please Him to raise His hand against us, though we may not perceive for what cause He does it, nevertheless we should glorify Him always, confessing that He is just and equitable, that we should not murmur against Him, that we should not enter into dispute, knowing that if we struggle against Him we shall be conquered. This, then, in brief, is what we have to remember from the story, that is, that God has such dominion over His creatures that He can dispose of them at His pleasure, and when He shows strictness that we at first find strange, yet we should keep our mouths closed in order not to murmur; but rather, that we should confess that He is just, expecting that He may declare to us why He chastises us.”[18]

There are many other lesser themes related to God’s majesty that are evident throughout Calvin’s preaching. He reminded his listeners that God’s condescension to mankind’s lowly estate ought to evoke not only utter obedience, but also extreme gratitude. He also impressed upon them the same conviction he displayed through expositional preaching, that the word of God itself reveals the divine majesty. But the controlling vision was the majesty and glory of God. This awareness of the majesty of God is perhaps Calvin’s most important legacy. And the impact this awareness had on his preaching provides a timeless example for preachers who want nothing more than to be faithful to God and his Word.

 

 

[1] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. 2 vols. (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 3.6.2, 3.20.41.

[2] John Dillenberger, ed. John Calvin: Selections from His Writings (Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1975), 89.

[3] David Wells, No Place for Truth (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 300.

[4] Christian Smith, Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 67. Albert Mohler has called Moralistic Therapeutic Deism “the new American religion” in an article entitled “Moralistic Therapeutic Deism—the New American Religion,” available at http://www.christianpost.com/news/moralistic-therapeutic-deism-the-new-american-religion-6266/.

^[5] John Murray, “Introduction,” in Institutes of the Christian Religion (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 1997).

[6] Calvin, Institutes, 1.1.3. This section is entitled “Man before God’s majesty.”

[7] B. B. Warfield, “The Theology of Calvin,” http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/warfield/warfield_calvintheology.html (accessed May 10, 2014). This essay originally appeared in a booklet published by the Presbyterian Board of Education in 1909.

[8] Joel Beeke, Living for God’s Glory: An Introduction to Calvinism (Orlando: Reformation Trust, 2008), 40.

[9] John Calvin, Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948-1950), 4:343.

[10] John Calvin, Sermons from Job, selected and translated by Leroy Nixon (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), 119. Slight variations of this sentence are used as the final words of every sermon in Job.

[11] John Calvin, Sermons on Psalm 119, translated by Thomas Stocker (Old Paths Publications, 1996), no page numbers. As in the sermons on Job, there is slight variation in the form or word of this sentence, but its distinctness from the closing line in the Job sermons is evident, as is its similarity.

[12] John Calvin, Sermons on the Beatitudes (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2006), 48.

[13] Calvin, Institutes, 2.2.11.

[14] Ibid., 1.1.1.

[15] Calvin, Sermons on Psalm 119.

[16] John Calvin, “The Mystery of Godliness,” in The Mystery of Godliness and Other Sermons (Orlando: Soli Deo Gloria, 1999), 12-13.

[17] Iaian Murray, “Foreward,” John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine & Doxology (Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust, 2008), xii.

[18] Calvin, Sermons from Job, 3.

I moved to Raleigh in 2006, and it was obvious to me from the beginning that I wasn’t the only transplant. The “Raleigh native” is somewhat of a rarity. I’m always fascinated to meet such a person. What is it that draws people to Raleigh-Durham? It certainly helps that Raleigh-Durham keeps showing up in rankings of top places to live. But here are a few dynamics behind that.

Small wanting to be big

Raleigh is one of the fastest growing cities in the nation. And the growth is accumulating in “growth centers” (Cameron Village/NCSU area, Crabtree, Mid-Town/North Hills, New Bern Ave and Wake Medical Center). Public transportation has not yet accommodated all the new people, but the city is striving to catch up in order to facilitate rapid growth. Still, at this point, most people don’t tend to walk, bicycle, or use public transportation for their commute. Eighty-eight percent of commuters drive their own car.

Conservative wanting to be progressive

This struggle plays out in politics, responses to state politics, desire to attract business to Wake County. There is a felt tension between Charlotte, the more liberal big NC city, and Raleigh the more conservative. Raleigh seems to be trying to break this mold as we have shifted from McCrory to Cooper, and continue to see activists working to repeal HB2 and speak loudly against Trump, among other things.

Old wanting to be modern

Matt Tomasulo running for Raleigh city council at-large in 2015, ran a slick campaign built around the idea of “making Raleigh a twenty-first century city.” There’s a narrative packed into that statement. Tomasula is the Founder and Chief Instigator behind Walk [Your City], an emerging civic platform to help cities put people first and embrace walkability through online tools that boost offline mobility.

Diverse and growing in diversity

The Research Triangle is drawing a diverse array of employees. There is a large Indian population in Morrisville. Refugees have settled in Raleigh and African and Hispanic immigrants continues to fill the Capital Blvd corridor.

Suburban morphing toward urban

The urban area in Raleigh is expanding from within the inner beltline to within the outer beltline. As growth centers expand along the inner beltline, population and business continues to expand between the beltlines. What was once suburban is turning urban, and “suburban” is now being pushed further out into places like Knightdale, Brier Creek, and Heritage.

Highly educated and achievement oriented

This is not a new shift but as with any large city, lots of people means there are lots of people more educated and more advanced than you are which means you will feel challenged to reach down and strive to do better. Home to eight colleges or universities, including NC State, Duke, and UNC, the Triangle will only continue to advance in education.

New subcultures emerging

Besides these big shifts, there are a number of interesting developments at the “subculture” level. There is greater interest in fitness and health (by the way, check out “The Church of CrossFit” from The Atlantic), there is a growing hipster and artist community, local coffee shops and small craft breweries keep popping up, and local t-shirts are a bit of a craze. More people seem to be identifying strongly as North Carolinians or Raleigh-ites, whether they were born here or in the Midwest like me.

Implications

So many people in RDU have relocated from other places, meaning they are far from family, detached from supportive networks, and “separated from extended families and under a great deal of stress.” At the same time, they’re feeling the pressure of a highly educated and achievement oriented setting. All of this means that we’re logistically we’re fast paced, busy. As Mary Bell said, “achievement is the alcohol of our time…these days the best people don’t abuse alcohol, they abuse their lives.” And that’s no less true in Raleigh than in so many larger cities.

Along with this, depression is a big struggle along with anxieties. People are seeking fulfillment in some constructed identity or achievement. At the same time, there is a large and growing international community, many of whom are struggling through the transition to life in a new country. They are also disconnected from family and roots, and struggle with depression, substance abuse and loneliness.

There is huge space for the gospel in the midst of all this. The gospel teaches us that no earthly achievements will ever satisfy the inner-cravings of the heart. That pursuit is like drinking salt-water to sate your thirst. The gospel also bring the indestructible joy of communion with God and the assurance of undoing life with him. This reality is emotionally stabilizing in the midst of life’s vicissitudes. And the gospel brings us into deep community with others, a community shaped by love, humility and mutual acceptance. These relationships are intended by God to make life bearable even blessed. The gospel speaks most fully to the aspirations of the human soul, and that is true in Raleigh as in every other part of the world.

We usually think of the Proverbs as a collection of sayings about how to live wisely in the world, how to be shrewd and successful in business, the high value of hard work, the practical benefits of honesty. If a business operates according to the proverbs, it will no doubt have many happy customers, not to mention happy shareholders. But where does the practical wisdom of the proverbs come from?

The proverbs are wise precisely because they view the world as God’s world, created and directed by him. God is the Maker, the Creator. The world in which we live and act belongs to him, and the rules by which the world operates flow from him. So to live well in his world a person has to constantly acknowledge God as Creator and then submit to him; this is what it means to fear the Lord.

But even as a person works diligently in God’s world, still the outcome of all work rests with the Lord. This is how the proverbs view the sovereignty of God, his absolute right to rule in every aspect of his world. So that even though a person is expected to make plans and work hard to accomplish them, the outcome is always from God. “Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand” (19:21).

First Implication: Work Hard

God’s work matters more than my work, but this doesn’t diminish the meaningfulness of my work. God expects us to plan, strategize, and work hard. In fact, he accomplishes his purposes through our diligence, not apart from it. Therefore, do not lessen your ambitions, but heighten them. Rather than being slothful or idle, we should work all the harder knowing that God intends to integrate our efforts into his purposes. Work for him and not for yourself. Labor so that he might be exalted, not you.

Second Implication: Commit Your Work to God

“Commit your work to the Lord, and your plans will be established” (16:3). The most appropriate response to the primacy of God’s purposes is the daily recommitment of myself and my work to God. I am his, I am living in his world, my energy and my opportunities are from him, and the eventual result of all my labors today is completely in his hands.

All our daily work, both the mundane and the monumental, must be committed to the Lord. I may prepare a business plan, yet the success of the business is completely dependent on God. The same is true with parenting, developing ministry strategy, resolving conflict, working at a good marriage, or anything else. Pause at the beginning of each day, and throughout the day, to give your work to God. “Father, these efforts are enabled by you, and I ask that you might use them for your purposes.”

Third Implication: Leave the Outcome to God

“The horse is made ready for the day of battle, but the victory belongs to the Lord” (21:31). Do you ever finish some project or presentation and then immediately begin to guess at how it will be received by others? Will they be impressed? Will it have an enduring impact? The anxiety of self-interest. Or have you ever despaired over the meaningless of your work? Perhaps at the end of a long day you wonder, was it worth it? The proverbs remind us that as we work diligently, giving our work to God, that our work is meaningful and God will accomplish his purposes through it.

A prayer of daily commitment might look like this. Father, you are the maker of me and all things. I am yours and I want to be useful for your purposes today. Please give me the energy that I need to do the good works that you have prepared for me. Please help me to steward with wisdom the opportunities you have given me, for I have nothing but what I have received from you. Please make my plans and efforts successful in the economy of your kingdom. I am yours and my work is yours so please use me to make your glory visible in the world today.

God’s sovereignty over our work in the book of Proverbs, a non-exhaustive sampling:

1. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths (Prv 3:6)
2. The Lord by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding he established the heavens (3:19)
3. The Lord does not let the righteous go hungry, but he thwarts the craving of the wicked (10:3)
4. The plans of the heart belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the Lord (16:1)
5. Commit your work to the Lord, and your plans will be established (16:3)
6. The heart of a man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps (16:9)
7. The lot is cast into the lap, but its decision is from the Lord (Prv 16:33)
8. Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand (19:21)
9. The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will (21:1)
10. The horse is made ready for the day of battle, but the victory belongs to the Lord (21:31)