Days of Vengeance - The Preterist Archive

More documents

Recommendations

Info

APPENDIX C APPENDIX C Common Grace, Eschatology and Biblical Law Gary North The concept of common grace is seldom discussed outside of Calvinistic circles, although all Christian theologies must come to grips eventually with the issues underlying the debate over common grace. The phrase itself goes back at least to the days of colonial American Puritanism. I came across it on several occasions when I was doing research on the colonial Puritans’ economic doctrines and experiments. The concept goes back at least to John Calvin’s writings. 1 Before venturing into the forest of theological debate, let me state what I believe is the meaning of the word “grace.” The Bible uses the idea in several ways, but the central meaning of grace is this: A gift given to God’s creatures on the basis, first, of His favor to His Son, Jesus Christ, the incarnation of the second person of the Trinity, and second, on the basis of Christ’s atoning work on the cross. Grace is not strictly unmerited, for Christ merits every gift, but in terms of the merit of the creation – merit deserved by a creature because of its mere creaturehood – there is none. In short, when we speak of any aspect of the creation, other than the incarnate Jesus Christ, grace is defined as an unmerited gift. The essence of grace is conveyed in James 1:17: “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” Special grace is the phrase used by theologians to describe the gift of eternal salvation. Paul writes: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9). He also writes: “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). God selects those on whom He will have mercy (Rom. 9:18). He has chosen these people to be recipients of His gift of eternal salvation, and He chose them before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4-6). But there is another kind of grace, and it is misunderstood. Common grace is equally a gift of God to His creatures, but it is distinguished from special grace in a number of crucial ways. A debate has gone on for close to a century within Calvinistic circles concerning the nature and reality of common grace. I hope that this essay will contribute some acceptable answers to the people of God, though I have little hope of convincing those who have been involved in this debate for 60 years. Because of the confusion associated with the term “common grace,” let me offer James Jordan’s description of it. Common grace is the equivalent of the crumbs that fall from the master’s table that the dogs eat. This is how the Canaanite woman described her request of healing by Jesus, and Jesus healed her because of her understanding and faith (Matt. 15:27 - 28). 2 Background of the Debate In 1924, the Christian Reformed Church debated the subject, and the decision of the Synod led to a major and seemingly permanent division within the ranks of the denomination. The debate was of considerable interest to Dutch Calvinists on both sides of the Atlantic, although traditional American Calvinists were hardly aware of the issue, and Arminian churches were (and are still) completely unaware of it. Herman Hoeksema, who was perhaps the most brilliant systematic theologian in America in this century, left the Christian Reformed Church to form the Protestant Reformed Church. He and his followers were convinced that, contrary to the decision of the CRC, there is no such thing as common grace. The doctrine of common grace, as formulated in the disputed “three points” of the Christian Reformed Church in 1924, asserts the following: 1. There is a “favorable attitude of God toward mankind in general, and not alone toward the elect, . . .” Furthermore, there is “also a certain favor or grace of God which he shows to his creatures in general.” 2. God provides “restraint of sin in the life of the individual and in society, . . .” 3. With regard to “the performance of so-called civic righteousness . . . the unregenerate, though incapable of any saving good . . . can perform such civic good.” 3 These principles can serve as a starting point for a discussion of common grace. The serious Christian eventually will be faced with the problem of explaining the good once he faces the biblical doctrine of evil. James 1:17 informs us that all good gifts are from God. The same point is made in Deuteronomy, chapter 8, which is quoted as the introduction to this essay. It is clear that the unregenerate are the beneficiaries of God’s gifts. None of the participants to the debate The original version of this essay appeared in the Winter, 1976-77 issue of The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, published by the Chalcedon Foundation, P. O. Box 158, Vallecito, California 95251. 1. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (1559), Book II, Section II, chapter 16; 11:111:3; III: XIV:2. 2. Dogs in Israel were not highly loved animals, so the analogy with common grace is biblically legitimate. “And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs” (Ex. 22:31). If we assume that God loves pagans the way that modern people love their dogs, then the analogy will not fit. 248
APPENDIX C denies the existence of the gifts. What is denied by the Protestant Reformed critics is that these gifts imply the favor of God as far as the unregenerate are concerned. They categorically deny the first point of the original three points. For the moment, let us refrain from using the word grace. Instead, let us limit ourselves to the word gift. The existence of gifts from God raises a whole series of questions: Does a gift from God imply His favor? Does an unregenerate man possess the power to do good? Does the existence of good behavior on the part of the unbeliever deny the doctrine of total depravity? Does history reveal a progressive separation between saved and lost? Would such a separation necessarily lead to the triumph of the unregenerate? Is there a common ground intellectually between Christians and non-Christians? Can Christians and non-Christians cooperate successfully in certain areas? Do God’s gifts increase or decrease over time? Will the cultural mandate (dominion covenant) of Genesis 1:28 be fulfilled? The Favor of God This is a key point of dispute between those who affirm and those who deny the existence of common grace. I wish to save time, if not trouble, so let me say from the outset that the Christian Reformed Church’s 1924 formulation of the first point is defective. The Bible does not indicate that God in any way favors the unregenerate. The opposite is asserted: “He that believeth on the Son bath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shalJ not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36). The prayer of Christ recorded in John 17 reveals His favor toward the redeemed and them alone. There is a fundamental ethical separation between the saved and the lost. God hated Esau and loved Jacob, before either was born (Rom. 9:10-13). What are we to make of the Bible’s passages that have been used to support the idea of limited favor toward creatures in general? Without exception, they refer to gifts of God to the unregenerate. They do not imply God’s favor. For example, there is this affirmation: “The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works” (Ps. 145:9). The verse preceding this one tells us that God is compassionate, slow to anger, gracious. Romans 2:4 tells us He is longsuffering. Luke 6:35-36 says: But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful. I Timothy 4:10 uses explicit language: “’For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.” The Greek word here translated as “Saviour” is transliterated soter: one who saves, heals, protects, or makes whole. God saves (heals) everyone, especially those who believe. Unquestionably, the salvation spoken of is universal – not in the sense of special grace, and therefore in the sense of common grace. This is probably the most difficult verse in the Bible for those who deny universal salvation from hell and who also deny common grace. 4 The most frequently cited passage used by those who defend the idea of God’s favor to the unregenerate is Matthew 5:44-45: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. It is understandable how such verses, in the absence of other verses that more fully explain the nature and intent of God’s gifts, could lead men to equate God’s favor and gifts. Certainly it is true that God protects, heals, rewards, and cares for the unregenerate. But none of these verses indicates an attitude of favor toward the unregenerate beneficiaries of His gifts. Only in the use of the word “favor” in its slang form of “do me a favor” can we argue that a gift from God is the same as His favor. Favor, in the slang usage, simply means gift – an unmerited gift from the donor. But if favor is understood as an attitude favorable to the unregenerate, or an emotional commitment by God to the unregenerate for their sakes, then it must be said, God shows no favor to the unrighteous. Coals of Fire One verse in the Bible, above all others, informs us of the underlying attitude of God toward those who rebel against Him despite His gifts. This passage is the concomitant to the oft-quoted Luke 6:35-36 and Matthew 5:44-45. It is Proverbs 25:21-22, which Paul cites in Romans 12:20: If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord shall reward thee. Why are we to be kind to our enemies? First, because God instructs us to be kind. He is kind to them, and we are to imitate Him. Second, by showing mercy, we heap coals of fire on their rebellious heads. From him to whom much is given, much shall be required (Luke 12:47-48). Our enemy will receive greater punishment 3. Cornelius Van Til, Common Grace (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1954), pp. 20-22. This essay was reprinted in Van Til, Common Grace and the Gospel (Nutley, New Jersey: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1974), same pagination. 4. Gary North, “Aren’t There Two Kinds of Salvation?”, Question 75 in North, 75 Bible Questions Your Instructors Pray You Won’t Ask (Tyler, Texas: Spurgeon Press, 1984). 249
Page 1:
But when you see Jerusalem surround
Page 4 and 5:
Copyright @ 1987 by Dominion Press
Page 6 and 7:
FOREWORD Foreword Readers of the Bo
Page 8 and 9:
PUBLISHER’S PREFACE Publisher’s
Page 10 and 11:
PUBLISHER’S PREFACE case for esch
Page 12 and 13:
PUBLISHER’S PREFACE this book bec
Page 14 and 15:
PUBLISHER’S PREFACE In contrast,
Page 16 and 17:
INTRODUCTION St. Irenaeus is somewh
Page 18 and 19:
INTRODUCTION we must be saved” (A
Page 20 and 21:
INTRODUCTION previous relationship
Page 22 and 23:
INTRODUCTION You have lain down as
Page 24 and 25:
INTRODUCTION are only elaborating a
Page 26 and 27:
INTRODUCTION early churches had suc
Page 28 and 29:
INTRODUCTION actions mean more than
Page 30 and 31:
INTRODUCTION Some will complain tha
Page 32 and 33:
INTRODUCTION Outline of Revelation
Page 34 and 35:
1:1-3 that must shortly take place.
Page 36 and 37:
1:4-6 accomplishment. We probably h
Page 38 and 39:
1:7-8 observe that a central aspect
Page 40 and 41:
1:9 14 And His head and His hair we
Page 42 and 43:
1:16 That all the peoples, nations,
Page 44 and 45:
1:20 things that must shortly take
Page 46 and 47:
INTRODUCTION TO PART TWO Part Two H
Page 48 and 49:
INTRODUCTION TO PART TWO The confli
Page 50 and 51:
2:4-6 endure evil men. . . . And yo
Page 52 and 53:
2:9-10 dead, and has come to life:
Page 54 and 55:
2:14-16 expression (none of which m
Page 56 and 57:
2:18-23 and leads my servants astra
Page 58 and 59:
2:26-29 end, to him I will give aut
Page 60 and 61:
3:4-6 church, or even against a nat
Page 62 and 63:
3:8-11 And I will clothe him with y
Page 64 and 65:
3:14-16 sons disinherited and cast
Page 66 and 67:
3:21-22 the elders of a church, and
Page 68 and 69:
INTRODUCTION TO PART THREE The laws
Page 70 and 71:
4:2-3 numerous names and descriptio
Page 72 and 73:
4:5-8 superseded and transcended; t
Page 74 and 75:
4:5-8 19) led Biblical writers to s
Page 76 and 77:
5:1-4 family worship; it is radical
Page 78 and 79:
5:5-7 St. John; and it seems as if
Page 80 and 81:
5:8-10 have gained the victory for
Page 82 and 83:
6:1-2 6 IN THE PATH OF THE WHITE HO
Page 84 and 85:
6:3-4 forth conquering, and to conq
Page 86 and 87:
6:9-10 And authority was given to h
Page 88 and 89:
6:15-17 that Israel’s time has ru
Page 90 and 91:
7:4-8 Though he flourishes among th
Page 92 and 93:
7:4-8 they were listening to the Ap
Page 94 and 95:
7:9 is presumably deliberate, for i
Page 96 and 97:
7:10-14 inheriting the Kingdom (Mat
Page 98 and 99:
7:15-17 They will not hunger or thi
Page 100 and 101:
8:3-5 for that would be about the l
Page 102 and 103:
8:6-7 rout the Midianites, in Judge
Page 104 and 105:
8:12 13 And I looked, and I heard a
Page 106 and 107:
9:13 The vegetation of the earth is
Page 108 and 109:
9:20-21 lations advanced by some co
Page 110 and 111:
9:20-21 men much more atheistical t
Page 112 and 113:
10:2-4 beyond reasonable doubt that
Page 114 and 115:
10:8-10 the Spirit at Pentecost was
Page 116 and 117:
11:1-2 angelic priest measures the
Page 118 and 119:
11:7 have the power to shut up the
Page 120 and 121:
11:11-14 climax with the murder of
Page 122 and 123:
11:16-18 month in the liturgical ye
Page 124 and 125:
12:1-2 12 THE HOLY WAR The Book of
Page 126 and 127:
12:1-2 birth to the Christ, to brin
Page 128 and 129:
12:4 Daniel repeats the same idea i
Page 130 and 131:
12:5-9 Chronologically, this explan
Page 132 and 133:
12:12 And when we see the Lord warr
Page 134 and 135:
12:17 for the action of Pharaoh, wh
Page 136 and 137:
13:3-4 of the ten imperial province
Page 138 and 139:
13:8-10 The Beast was given authori
Page 140 and 141:
13:13-14 character and office (1 Co
Page 142 and 143:
13:18 work throughout Revelation ar
Page 144 and 145:
13:18 ✩ ✩✩ ✩★✩ ✩★
Page 146 and 147:
14:1 14 THE KING ON MOUNT ZION St.
Page 148 and 149:
14:6-7 have seen, the Church on ear
Page 150 and 151:
14:9-13 understanding (Prov. 9:1-6)
Page 152 and 153:
14:14-16 I may find them prompt; na
Page 154 and 155:
14:19-20 And now, O inhabitants of
Page 156 and 157:
their Chalices of wrath, one of the
Page 158 and 159:
15:3-4 sacrifices; and the Glory of
Page 160 and 161:
15:8 We should be reminded in this
Page 162 and 163:
16:1-3 5 And I heard the Angel of t
Page 164 and 165:
16:10-11 the heat of the sun by the
Page 166 and 167:
16:15-16 established here, for the
Page 168 and 169:
16:19 thereof, concerning which the
Page 170 and 171:
17:1 17 THE FALSE BRIDE While some
Page 172 and 173:
17:3 action throughout history in s
Page 174 and 175:
17:8 Jerusalem’s whole history, i
Page 176 and 177:
17:13-16 (v. 2), as the instruments
Page 178 and 179:
18:1-2 priority over the kingdoms o
Page 180 and 181:
18:6-8 His people to come out of Ba
Page 182 and 183:
18:17-19 sanctuary two lampstands r
Page 184 and 185:
18:20-21 They went down into the de
Page 186 and 187:
19:1-2 19 THE FEASTS OF THE KINGDOM
Page 188 and 189:
19:3-8 of vengeance, in order that
Page 190 and 191:
19:10 Church admitted its members t
Page 192 and 193:
19:12-15 Let the heavens be glad, a
Page 194 and 195:
19:16-18 of wealth, or wasting dise
Page 196 and 197:
20:1 20 THE MILLENNIUM AND THE JUDG
Page 198 and 199: 20:1-3 Christ established His media
Page 200 and 201: 20:1-3 The great fathers and teache
Page 202 and 203: 20:4 The relationship between the p
Page 204 and 205: 20:5-6 earth? The answer should be
Page 206 and 207: 20:7-8 ministry; that was Satan’s
Page 208 and 209: 20:9-10 St. John’s image for the
Page 210 and 211: 20:12 redeemed with Thy precious bl
Page 212 and 213: 21:1 21 THE NEW JERUSALEM The Bible
Page 214 and 215: 21:1 Pet. 3:5-7; cf. the same analo
Page 216 and 217: 21:3-5 will be established finally,
Page 218 and 219: 21:9-11 The New Jerusalem (21:9-27)
Page 220 and 221: 21:15-21 Covenant of Grace; the fac
Page 222 and 223: 21:24-27 And deep darkness the peop
Page 224 and 225: 22:3-4 Paradise is not, therefore,
Page 226 and 227: 22:6-9 Final Warnings and Blessings
Page 228 and 229: 22:17-21 unconquerable strength and
Page 230 and 231: CONCLUSION the pure Bride-City, is
Page 232 and 233: CONCLUSION does not exempt us from
Page 234 and 235: APPENDIX A it is reflected in “It
Page 236 and 237: APPENDIX A make him a pillar in the
Page 238 and 239: APPENDIX A and wine the night befor
Page 240 and 241: APPENDIX A Babylon, falsely priestl
Page 242 and 243: APPENDIX A B. CHRISTIAN WORSHIP 1.
Page 244 and 245: APPENDIX B been the defining mark o
Page 246 and 247: APPENDIX B The Bible teaches us tha
Page 250 and 251: APPENDIX C for all eternity because
Page 252 and 253: APPENDIX C better arrangement cultu
Page 254 and 255: APPENDIX C be destroyed. The two ex
Page 256 and 257: APPENDIX C universe. It is governed
Page 258 and 259: APPENDIX C completed, the world was
Page 260 and 261: APPENDIX C deceive the nations. The
Page 262 and 263: APPENDIX C creeds and theological u
Page 264 and 265: APPENDIX C coherence that at least
Page 266 and 267: APPENDIX C There is continuity in l
Page 268 and 269: Athanasius. On the Incarnation of t
Page 270: ________. The Institutes of Biblica
show all

Days of Vengeance - The Preterist Archive

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?