A 1689/1677 Second London Baptist Confession Commentary

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 9: Of Free-will, Section 2 of 5, the following:

2. Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom and power to will and to do that which was good and well-pleasing to God, but yet was mutable[1] [unstable][2], so that he might fall from it. ( Ecclesiastes 7:29; Genesis 3:6 )

The 1689 Confession states: Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom and power to will and to do that which was good and well-pleasing to God

When God created Adam and Eve they were in a perfect state, and God created them with a will that was free and able to choose that which was good and pleased God.  In this state, the will of Adam and Eve desired to do good and to be pleasing to God.

• See, this alone I found, that God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes. Eccl 7:29 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: but yet was mutable, so that he might fall from it. 

Our first parents were not coerced into pleasing God (see section 1), but sought to do so because their nature was uncorrupted; they were in a state of original righteousness.  Their will was not in bondage to sin.  There nature was not sinful.  But it was evident by the fall that they did have the freedom of will to choose disobedience even in their state of original righteousness.

• So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. Gen 3:6 (ESV)

It is important to see that God created Adam and Eve good; there is no shifting of shadow with God. As well, God did not coerce either obedience or disobedience.  Adam and Eve chose of their own free-will.  Somehow they desired what the serpent presented to them.  

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 9, Of Free Will, section 2 of 5, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• ---

  [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and to the Savoy. The source is presumably Collins.  The 1689 changes the WCF and the Savoy which states: “but yet mutably,” to “was mutable.”

  [2] I have found “unstable” and “mutable” in two different 1689 Confessions.  James Renihan’s (True Confessions) seems to be the most reliable source of the original 1689 and it has “mutable”, so I use that, but “unstable” does not really change the basic meaning. In the Baptist Confession of Faith published by Solid Ground Books and ARBCA it has “mutable.”

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 9: Of Free-will, Section 1 of 5, the following:

1. God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty and power of acting upon choice[1], that it is neither forced, nor by any necessity of nature determined to do good or evil. ( Matthew 17:12; James 1:14; Deuteronomy 30:19 )

R.C. Sproul states:

• “When we examine the question of free will from the view point of Biblical theology, we are pressured by the massive impact that secular views have had on our thinking.  If there is any place where secular humanism has undermined a biblical view of human nature, it’s with respect to the idea of free will.  The prevailing view of free will in the secular culture is that human beings are able to make choices without being encumbered by sin.  On this view, our wills have no predisposition either toward evil or toward righteousness, but remain in a neutral state from birth.
• This view of human freedom is on a collision course with the biblical doctrine of the fall, which speaks of radical corruption of our human condition.”[2]

So what is the biblical view of free-will?  We are about to find out.  This chapter is very foundational in many ways, but especially in laying a foundation for the following chapters which deal with the application of redemption (effectual calling, faith and repentance, justification by faith, sanctification and perseverance of the saints). 

We will see the following in chapter 9: a definition of free-will (section 1), and free-will described in its various states: before the fall, after the fall, after regeneration and then after glorification (section 1 -4).  These distinctions are very important because the will of man is affected by these states.  One mistake of the Arminian or synergist is in not seeing the biblical distinctions about free-will in these various states.

The 1689 Confession states: God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty and power of acting upon choice,

God has given and empowered man with a will.  And that will has liberty or freedom, along with the accompanying ability or power, to take action based upon the nature of the will.  A natural liberty and power, means the will was created in mankind by God, as part of their nature, as part of who they are, as part of what makes them man or woman.  Without a will we would not be human as we understand that.  Certainly our will is a large part of what it means to be created in the image of God.

The 1689 Confession states: that it is neither forced, nor by any necessity of nature determined to do good or evil.

This will, which has liberty and power to act upon choice, is free in that it is not forced to do good or evil.  Nor is the will of liberty and power, determined by some necessity of nature to do good or evil.  If this were so, then it would follow that the will would not be at liberty to act upon choice.  This second part of the definition seems to be a negative definition, or what the free will is not whereas the first part states what the will is.

R.C. Sproul states:

• “Here the Confession distances itself from every form of moral determinism, which would subject human choices to fixed, mechanical, or physical forces, or even to arbitrary influences of fate.  In a word, Reformed theology categorically rejects fatalism and any determinism based upon the forces of nature.  We are not coerced or forced by natural causes, or by our environment, either to do good or to do evil.”[3]

Section 1 provides us with a definition of free-will as the starting point, but if we fail to make any further distinctions beyond that, such as how the will is affected by the fall, regeneration, and glorification, we will not be getting the whole truth.  As we will see, it is the nature of man that affects his will, and to ignore the sinful nature or redeemed nature in considering the will of man is to miss all the Bible teaches about the nature of man’s will.  The further clarifications will come in the next four sections of this chapter.

A.A. Hodge has made this helpful statement:

• “A man freely chooses what he wants to chose.  He would not choose freely if he chose in any other way.  But his desire in the premises is determined by his whole intellectual and emotional state at the time.  It is plain that if the human will is decided in any given case in opposition to all the views of the reason and all the desires of the heart, however free they will might be, the man would be a most pitiful slave to a mere irrational and immoral power of willing.   All men judge that the rational and moral character of any act results from the purpose or desire, the internal state of mind or heart, which prompted the act.  If man wills in any given case in opposition to all his judgments and to all his inclinations of every kind, his act in that case would obviously be neither rational nor moral; and the man himself, in respect to that act, would be neither free nor responsible.”[4]

Let’s say I am in the market for a house.  I do all my research, carefully considering all of the factors that go into making a wise choice, and I finally find the house that fits my criteria.  But as a result of all of this, I decide not to buy it, but rather to buy another house which is inferior in every way and costs more.  The realtor asks why?  I say, “Because I am going to chose opposite of what I want to do, just to do it!”  This is irrational, and rational human beings make decisions based on what they desire to do, not what based upon they do not desire to do.  But it is worth pointing put that even in this opposite decision, what I desired more than a rational choice, was to do the opposite “just to do it.”  So I desired just to do it more than to buy the right house.

A.A. Hodge states:

• “Christ taught…that human action is determined by the character of the agent as certainly as the nature of the fruit is determined by the nature of the tree from which it springs; and that the only way to change the character of the action is to change the permanent character or moral tendency and habit of the heart of the agent. Matt. Vii. 16-20; xii. 33-35.”[5]

 We see in Scripture the following:

• So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. Gen 3:6 (ESV)
• But I tell you that Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they pleased. So also the Son of Man will certainly suffer at their hands.”  Matt 17:12 (ESV)
• But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.  James 1:14 (ESV)
• I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, Deut 30:19 (ESV)

 The following quote by A.A. Hodge is helpful to keep in mind as we continue looking at the various states of the will in the next 4 sections of this chapter:

•  “In all these estates [the free-will in the state of righteousness, sin, regeneration, and glorification] man is unchangeably a free, responsible agent, and in all these cases choosing or refusing as, upon the whole, he prefers to do.  A man’s volition [will] is as his desires are in any given case.  His desires in any given case are as they are determined to be by the general or permanent tastes, tendencies, and habitudes of his character.  He is responsible for his desires, because they are determined by the nature and permanent characteristics of his own soul.  He is responsible for these, because they are the tendencies and qualities of his own nature.  If these are immoral, he and his actions are immoral.  If these are holy, he and his actions are holy.”[6]
• “The moral condition of the heart determines the act of the will, but the act of the will cannot change the moral condition of the heart.”[7]

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 9, Of Free Will, section 1 of 5, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 Adds this to the WCF . The source is the Savoy Declaration.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 10 of 10, the following:

10. This number and order of offices is necessary; for in respect of our ignorance, we stand in need of his prophetical office; and in respect of our alienation from God, and imperfection of the best of our services, we need his priestly office to reconcile us and present us acceptable unto God; and in respect to our averseness and utter inability to return to God, and for our rescue and security from our spiritual adversaries, we need his kingly office to convince, subdue, draw, uphold, deliver, and preserve us to his heavenly kingdom.[1]
( John 1:18; Colossians 1:21; Galatians 5:17; John 16:8; Psalms 110:3; Luke 1:74, 75)

Section 10 is not present in the Westminster Confession, which contains only eight sections in chapter 8.

The 1689 Confession states: This number and order of offices is necessary

The number of the offices (meaning all three: prophet, priest and king) is necessary.  Why is it necessary?  The remaining part of section 10 will answer this question.  The order is also necessary.  Why?  Again, the rest of section 10 will give us the answer to this question. 

 The Baptist Catechism question 26 introduces the topic of the three offices this way:

•  Baptist Catechism
• 26 Q. What offices doth Christ execute as our Redeemer?
  A. Christ as our Redeemer executeth the offices of a prophet, of a priest, and of king, both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation

 First: The Office of a Prophet

The 1689 Confession states: for in respect of our ignorance, we stand in need of his prophetical office;

• The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen Deut 18:15 (ESV)
• And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, Luke 1:76 (ESV) 

Due to our ignorance, we needed a prophet to reveal to us God’s will for our salvation.  Without Christ fulfillment of the office of prophet, mankind would not know the way of salvation.

• Baptist Catechism
• 27 Q. How doth Christ execute the office of a prophet?
  A. Christ executeth the office of prophet in revealing to us, by his word and Spirit, the will of God for our salvation

 Thomas Watson said:

• “If Alexander thought himself so much abliged to Aristotle for the philosophic instruction he received from him, oh, how are we obliged to Jesus Christ, this great Prophet, for opening to us the eternal purposes of his love, and revealing to us the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven!”[2]

Second: The Office of Priest

The 1689 Confession states: and in respect of our alienation from God, and imperfection of the best of our services, we need his priestly office to reconcile us and present us acceptable unto God;

We need the priestly ministry of Christ because he offered up himself on our behalf to satisfy divine justice that we would be reconciled to God.  Further, our High Priest is our effectual Mediator between on our behalf before God.  Since Christ is our defense attorney, our mediator, our intercessor, our high priest, our case cannot fail before the Judge.  In addition, even though our best service for God is inadequate and imperfect, the Father accepts it because of Christ’s perfect obedience and service to the Father, credited to our account, by faith.

• Baptist Catechism
• 28 Q. How doth Christ execute the office of a priest?
  A. Christ executeth the office of priest in his once offering up himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice (Heb. 9:14, 28) and reconcile us to God (Heb. 2:17), and in making continual intercession for us (Heb.7:24, 25).

Third: The Office of King

The 1689 Confession states: and in respect to our averseness and utter inability to return to God, and for our rescue and security from our spiritual adversaries, we need his kingly office to convince, subdue, draw, uphold, deliver, and preserve us to his heavenly kingdom.[3]

We are averse to return to God.  Averse means that we are strongly opposed to return to God.  We are not only strongly opposed to return to God, but we are utterly unable to return to God.

 So the 1689 Confession establishes that we need to be rescued and we require security, as a result the kingly office fails not in doing the following for us:

• Convince: And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: John 16:8 (ESV)
• Subdue: Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. Acts 15:14 (ESV)
• Draw: No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. John 6:44 (ESV)
• Uphold: My soul clings to you; your right hand upholds me. Psalms 63:8 (ESV)
• Deliver: The oath that he swore to our father Abraham, to grant us that we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, Luke 1:73-74 (ESV)
• Preserve us: The Lord will keep you from all evil; he will keep your life. Psalms 121:7 (ESV) And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. John 6:39 (ESV)

Why do we need Christ our King to do these things for us?  That he will bring us us to his heavenly kingdom.  

• Baptist Catechism
• 29 Q. How doth Christ execute the office of king?
  A. Christ executeth the office of a king, in subduing us to himself (Acts 15:14, 15, 16), in ruling (Is. 33:22), and defending us (Is. 32:1, 2), and in restraining and conquering all his and our enemies (1 Cor. 15:25; Ps. 110 throughout).

Thomas Watson states:

• “How came Christ to be king?
• Not by usurpation, but legally.  He holds his crown by immediate tenure from heaven.  God the Father has decreed him to be king.  ‘I have set my king upon my holy hill: I will declare the decree.’ (Psa ii 6,7).  God anointed him and sealed him to his regal office.  ‘Him hath God the Father sealed.’ (John vi 27).  God has set the crown upon his head.[4]

Again Watson states:

• “Let those admire God’s free grace who were once under the power and tyranny of Satan, and now of slaves Christ has made them to become the subjects of his kingdom.  Christ did not need subjects, he has legions of angels ministering to him; but in his love he has honored you to make you his subjects.  Oh, how long it ere Christ could prevail with you to come under his banner!  How much opposition did he meet with ere you would wear this prince’s colors!  At last omnipotent grace overcame you.  When Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, an angel came and beat off his chains, Acts xii:7; so, when thou wast sleeping in the devil’s arms, Christ by his Spirit smote thy heart, and caused the chains of sin to fall off, and made thee a subject of his kingdom.  Oh, admire the free grace! Thou who art a subject of Christ, and art sure to reign with him for ever!”[5]

It has been shown by the 1689 Confession why we need the number of the three offices: prophet, priest, and king.  It is also clear that the order is important.  Though the way of salvation was made known in the prophetic office of Christ, and though redemption was purchased in Christ’s priestly office, more is yet needed to bring us into an estate of salvation.  The third office of king is required to bring us from the state of a treasonous enemy to the majestic kingly throne, to loyal subjects, under his protection forever.  And he surely is a king who executes his decrees without fail.

We now come to the end of chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator.  We have covered ten sections.  This chapter has been very rich in important doctrine for the believer; we have feasted on the glories of our Mediator, our Prophet, Priest, and King.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 9 of 10, the following:

9. This office of mediator between God and man is proper only to Christ, who is the prophet, priest, and king of the church of God; and may not be either in whole, or any part thereof, transferred from him to any other.[1]  ( 1 Timothy 2:5 )

Section 9 is not present in the Westminster Confession, which contains only eight sections in chapter 8.

The 1689 Confession states: This office of mediator between God and man is proper only to Christ,

• The Scripture tells us: For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,  1 Tim 2:5 (ESV)

Not only in there only One, but there no one else who qualifies for this office.  Therefore if anyone claims this role or office, whether in heaven or earth, they are committing a most serious sin against the Father who appointed only one Person for all eternity.  But more on this in the last portion of section 9.

This office of Mediator is proper only to “Christ.” Christ is from the Greek CHRISTOS which means “anointed.” He was the “anointed one,” meaning that the Lord Jesus Christ was the only one the Father chose for this task, and that He was the only one who could carry out the task.  There is no other. 

The 1689 States: who is the prophet, priest, and king of the church of God;

There are three offices that the one Mediator executes or carries out.  Perhaps we could say that these three offices are sub-offices under the primary or super office of Mediator.  And these offices he executes perfectly for the church of God.

The 1689 sConfession states: and may not be either in whole, or any part thereof, transferred from him to any other.

The super office of Mediator and the three offices of prophet, priest and king cannot be transferred to any other person, whether we are talking about the whole office or any part of the offices.

The 1689 Confession means not only that there is only one Mediators, but also that Christ is the only one uniquely equipped for this calling; no other man or angel may assume any of these offices “in whole or part” by means of a “transfer” including, and perhaps particularly, the Pope or the virgin Mary.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 9 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 8 of 10, the following:

8. To all those for whom Christ hath obtained eternal [1]redemption, he doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same, making intercession for them; uniting them to himself by his Spirit[2], revealing unto them, in and by his Word, the mystery[3] of salvation, persuading them to believe and obey, governing their hearts by his Word and Spirit, and[4] overcoming all their enemies by his almighty power and wisdom, in such manner and ways as are most consonant to his wonderful and unsearchable dispensation; and all of free and absolute grace, without any condition foreseen in them to procure it.[5]
( John 6:37;John 10:15, 16;John 17:9; Romans 5:10; John 17:6; Ephesians 1:9; 1 John 5:20; Romans 8:9, 14; Psalms 110:1; 1 Corinthians 15:25, 26; John 3:8; Ephesians 1:8 )

The 1689 Confession states: To all those for whom Christ hath obtained eternal redemption,

As I have stated several times already, Christ did not merely make a way for salvation, or make salvation possible.  He actually obtained redemption for his people.  Christ has obtained redemption and it is eternal. 

The “all” here does not refer to an unlimited or general atonement, but to a limited or particular atonement.  The “all” has a context of “those whom.”  Clearly the 1689 Confession teaches a limited atonement, also called a particular or definite atonement.  So we see here that Christ obtained redemption for those whom he purchased.  He did not pay for the sins of the whole world, but only for the elect.  Of course much more discussion could take place here in terms of the value of the atonement and the applied credit, but we will have to leave that for another time and place. 

The 1689 Confession states: he doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same

Having stated the definiteness of Christ obtaining redemption, it is simply logical that what follows is that he “doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same.”

•  Certainly: This means definitely without fail.
•  Effectually: This means effective, actual or producing result.
•  Communicate:  This means to give or transmit.

If one has purchased a gift for someone, then it follows that it will be given to them.  The purchased gift will definitely and actually be given.  Christ will certainly, without fail, definitely, actually, apply the purchased redemption to those for whom he purchased it.

I recently heard part of a gospel message by a pastor in California who was attempting to share the gospel; he said that because man sinned and God is holy that this put God in a quandary.  He went on to say, that God on the one hand wants a relationship with man, on the other hand God is just.  Really?  My 15 years old son who was watching this with me immediately picked up on the absolute ridiculousness of the statement.  It was almost like God was sorry he was “just” since he wanted a relationship with man so badly.  This pastor’s gospel is anemic and impotent, and so is his weakling god.

The Bible shows us a God who eternally decreed to make man, eternally decreed the fall (passive decree), eternally chose his elected people, eternally decreed to send his Son to purchase those whom he eternally decreed, and eternally decreed when that accomplished redemption would be applied to them personally.  Our God is a deliberate God, and what he wants to happen happens.  There is a God I want to worship!

•  “Since God’s purposes are all eternal and immutable, the Father and the Son will to apply it now precisely to those whom they had designed to apply it when Christ hung upon the cross, and they willed to apply it then precisely tot hose whom they had designed to apply it from eternity.”[6]  A.A. Hodge

The 1689 confession states: making intercession for them;

Christ having purchased and applied redemption to the elect, makes intercession for them.  How is this connected with redemption?  What is the significance of this intercession for the elect?

R.C. Sproul states:

• “This again is a summary of Jesus’ farewell prayer recording in John 17.  Jesus prays for those whom the Father has given him, and he distinguishes them from the world.  He intercedes for the elect in a way that he does not intercede for the rest of the world.”[7]

The Scriptures state:

• “I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.” John 17:9 (ESV)

Again Sproul states:

• “He [Jesus] actually intercedes on our behalf so that his rescue effort will be efficacious.”[8]

It is comforting that Jesus’ intercession, his prayers, are effective and never fail.  So when he prays “keep them from the evil one” (Jn. 17:15), or “Sanctify them in the truth” (Jn. 17:17), we are assured that his prayers for us will be answered. 

This section, so far, is addressing Christ’s office as Priest.

• Baptist Catechism 28 states:
• Q. How doth Christ execute the office of a priest?
  A. Christ executeth the office of priest in his once offering up himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice (Heb. 9:14, 28) and reconcile us to God (Heb. 2:17), and in making continual intercession for us (Heb.7:24, 25).

As this section progresses, his office of Prophet and King will be touched on. 

The 1689 Confession states: uniting them to himself

We are headed towards several chapters (10 to 17) that deal with the order of the application of redemption.  It is significant that this union is mentioned here before we get to those steps, and as we do progress through the steps of the order of salvation, it is important to be aware that our union with Christ underlies every part of the application of redemption.

John Murray states:

• Nothing is more central or basic than union or communion with Christ.”[9]   

This doctrine is also addressed in the following locations in the 1689 Confession also addresses our union with Christ in the following places[10]:

•  Of Sanctification, chapter 13, starts out, “They who are united to Christ, effectually called, and regenerated…”
•  Of the Perseverance of the Saints, chapter 17, paragraph 2, “This perseverance of the saints depends… upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ and union with him,”
•  Of baptism, chapter 29 (though not strictly in the benefits section), starts out, “Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the part baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him;…”

The Westminster Confession does not address our union with Christ as part of the application of redemption, in direct terms.  The 1689 Confession seems to do a better job in addressing this.  My friend has addressed this in a paper he wrote while at Westminster Theological Seminary.  I thought I would quote a portion of his work here.  Mike Decious states:

• “Calvin indeed stressed union with Christ.  In incarnational union, Christ took on flesh and blood that he might be in union with us, that he might be tempted in all ways as us, and be the victorious second Adam (Heb. 2:14-18 and 1 Cor. 15).  In mystical and spiritual union, the Holy Spirit unites us to Christ and redemption is applied to us.  At that point we receive all the benefits of our salvation at once, though the full aspects of each await our resurrection.  One of these benefits, adoption, is especially relational, and Calvin weaves the language of adoption throughout his writing.
•  The Apostle Paul avoids the above criticisms in that for him the ordo solutis does not have the appearance of taking on a life of its own.  The ordo solutis is always rooted in the historio solutis.  This is done by means of union with Christ.  Every benefit we receive is rooted in the person of Christ by reference to our union with Him.  Not merely union with his death, but with His whole life, His death, and especially with his resurrection (Rom 4:25).
•  We were raised with Christ when we were saved (Eph. 2:5-6; Col. 2:12; Col. 3:1).  This is a central theme of Paul.  Unfortunately, the Confession [Westminster] almost exclusively speaks of redemption in terms of his death.  Though it once uses the Scriptural phrase, “raised for our justification”, the implications of that are not brought out.  The resurrection was Jesus’ redemption, and thus in union with him it was our redemption (1 Cor. 1:30).  It was also his justification (1 Tim. 3:16), his adoption (Rom. 1:3-4, Acts 13:33), and His sanctification (1 Cor. 1:30). Jesus became life-giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45), and gives us these benefits as we are united to Him.
• Paul makes frequent use of the relational language of adoption.  We were predestined to adoption (Eph. 1:5).  We receive the Spirit of adoption, by which we cry out Abba, Father (Rom. 8:15). Christ was the first born among many brethren (Rom. 8:29), we are of God’s household (Eph. 2:19), and we are joint-heirs with Christ (Rom. 8:17).
•  Thus by use of relating all to union with Christ, and by using the language of adoption, Calvin and Paul avoid the previously mentioned criticism of the [Westminster] Confession.  There is no medieval cause-and-effect ordo solutis.  Doctrine is not cold, impersonal, or merely forensic.  All is grounded in the person of Christ, and the redemptive significance of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection are not neglected.  The gifts are not separated from the giver, and Christ is not left behind.  The eschatological dimension of benefits are not lost.”[11]       

• John Murray states that union with Christ “can be readily seen if we remember that brief expression which is so common in the New Testament, namely, “in Christ.”  It is that which is meant by “in Christ” that we have in mind when we speak of “union with Christ.”[12]  

If you are not familiar with this topic, I merely want to point out that is a grand and broad topic.  And it is important that we understand it.  One reference I highly recommend on this topic is John Murray’s Redemption Accomplished and Applied.  He an entire chapter addressing our union with Christ that is helpful especially since he discusses it in light of the whole order of salvation.

The 1689 Confession states: by his Spirit

The elect are united with Christ by the Holy Spirit, and here the personal pronoun “his”, is the antecedent is Christ, so here it means the Spirit of Jesus.  The 1689 Confession is states that the Spirit is the one who, in connection with the Word (the gospel message preached or read from the Word of God), reveals the mystery of salvation.  This work of the Spirit is part of effectual calling and regeneration which will be discussed in chapter 10, Of Effectual Calling.

I am reminded of the 1689 Confession, chapter 20, Of the Extent of the Gospel and the Grace Therein, Section 4:

•  4. Although the gospel be the only outward means of revealing Christ and saving grace, and is, as such, abundantly sufficient thereunto; yet that men who are dead in trespasses may be born again, quickened or regenerated, there is moreover necessary an effectual insuperable work of the Holy Spirit upon the whole soul, for the producing in them a new spiritual life; without which no other means will effect their conversion unto God.
  ( Psalms 110:3; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 1:19, 20; John 6:44; 2 Corinthians 4:4, 6 )

So though we must get the gospel right (this is critical), we need to always be mindful that the clearest gospel message will be ineffective without the Spirit of God regenerating the dead sinner.  The Spirit and the Word go hand in hand in bringing the elect to salvation.

• The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit. John 3:8 (ESV)

What is encouraging about this is that this work of Spirit is the Father’s job, and that frees us to concentrate of getting the gospel accurate and clear.  Clarity is the only method we should be concerned about.  Paul did not appear to concern himself with presentation and delivery, so much as a clear gospel.

•  And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. ² For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 1 Cor 2:1-2 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: revealing unto them, in and by his Word, the mystery of salvation,

This description describes how Christ fulfills or executes his office as Prophet.

• Baptist Catechism 27 states:
• Q. How doth Christ execute the office of a prophet?
  A. Christ executeth the office of prophet in revealing to us, by his word and Spirit, the will of God for our salvation. (John 1:18; 1 Pet.1:10,11, 12; John 15:15; and 20:31).

I see three aspects to this “revealing unto them.” Firstly, there is his incarnation as the Word; secondly his Words spoken, and thirdly his Words inscripturated.   

First, Christ became incarnate specifically to fulfill an office given to him by the Father of Mediator.  Within that general office exist three offices: Prophet, Priest and King.  As Prophet he came to deliver the Father message.  But unlike other prophets, this Prophet  was the message in and of himself.  We see in Hebrews 1:2, “he has spoken to us by his Son.”  So Jesus is God’s Word, and that Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:1, 14).

Secondly, Jesus also came speaking words.  The Word spoke words.  These words spoken by the Word revealed to us “the mystery of salvation.”  The one and primary theme that cannot be missed in all that the Prophet Jesus spoke is that he came to save sinners, and whoever believed in him would be saved. 

• For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” John 6:40 (ESV)
•   The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. John 6:63 (ESV)

Thirdly, these words of Jesus were recorded for us in the gospels.  Of course, not all that Jesus said is recorded in Scriptures of the New Testament, but what God intended for future generations was preserved under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.  And even though there is a distinction in the delivery Jesus’ actual words from his own voice (to those in first century Palestine) and those words written down in Scripture, the distinction being the medium, we recognize no difference in terms of accuracy and power.  “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Heb 4:12 ESV).  Either way the Word of God has revealed the way of salvation, in and by his Word.

It is important that we understand that it is only by his Word that the way of salvation is revealed (though the Spirit must apply it).  General revelation does not reveal the way of salvation, only the gospel which is special revelation, reveals the way of salvation.  The 1689 Confession addresses this in Chapter 20, Of the Gospel and Of the Extent of Grace thereof, section 2:

• 2. This promise of Christ, and salvation by him, is revealed only by the Word of God; neither do the works of creation or providence, with the light of nature, make discovery of Christ, or of grace by him, so much as in a general or obscure way; much less that men destitute of the revelation of Him by the promise or gospel, should be enabled thereby to attain saving faith or repentance.  ( Romans 1:17; Romans 10:14,15,17; Proverbs 29:18; Isaiah 25:7;Isaiah 60:2, 3 )

Jesus did not come only as a Prophet bringing the words of life, but he also came as a Priest and King.  The next two sections will make it abundantly clear that all three of the offices are essential to him being the Mediator.  So I will leave that for those sections.

The 1689 Confession states: persuading them to believe and obey,

The persuading is the work of the Spirit and the Word sent forth by Christ.  This phrase seems to hint at Christ’s office as King.  More will be said about that later in the next two sections, so I will not comment too much here about that here.  What is key for us is that the persuading is Christ’s work, not ours.  We in a sense try to persuade with the Word, but we can’t effectually do that; only Christ can through the Word and the Spirit.

The 1689 Confession states: governing their hearts by his Word and Spirit,

Most certainly Christ does this work by his Spirit and His Word.  We cannot be governed without a change of nature and an ongoing work of the Spirit in our hearts.  This again is part of Christ’s office as King. 

The 1689 Confession states: and overcoming all their enemies by his almighty power and wisdom. 

Christ, as our King, will cause his elect not only to be saved, to be preserved (and to persevere) to the end.

• Baptist Catechism 29:
• Q. How doth Christ execute the office of king?
  A. Christ executeth the office of a king, in subduing us to himself (Acts 15:14, 15, 16), in ruling (Is. 33:22), and defending us (Is. 32:1, 2), and in restraining and conquering all his and our enemies (1 Cor. 15:25; Ps. 110 throughout).

All of this is done by his almighty power and wisdom.

• In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, ¹⁴ who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. Eph 1:13-14 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 8 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] The 1689 adds “obtained eternal” to the WCF and the Savoy in place of “purchased” redemption.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] The 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [3] The 1689 places the WCF and Savoy plural “mysteries” with the singular “mystery.” Source is presumably Collins.
• [4] The 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [5] The 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [6] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh), pg. 155.
•  [7] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess: A Laymen’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith (P&R Publishing, New Jersey), Volume I, pg. 274. 
• [8] Ibid, pg 275.
• [9] John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids), pg. 161.
• [10] These references are from a paper entitled: Recommendations for the 1689 Second London Confession Committee on the Application of Redemption, by  Mike Decious.  He is a graduate of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia.   
• [11] Mike Decious, Recommendations for the 1689 Second London Confession Committee on the Application of Redemption.  He is a graduate of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia.   
• [12]John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids), pg. 161.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 7 of 10, the following:

7. Christ, in the work of mediation, acteth[1] according to both natures, by each nature doing that which is proper to itself; yet by reason of the unity of the person, that which is proper to one nature is sometimes in Scripture, attributed to the person denominated by the other nature. ( John 3:13; Acts 20:28 )

The 1689 Confession states: Christ, in the work of mediation, acteth according to both natures, by each nature doing that which is proper to itself;

Here we see a further application and clarification of chapter 8, section two.  In Christ’s work of mediation, he used both natures in carrying out that office.  He did not just use his divine nature, nor did he only use his human nature he used both.  In so doing, however, each nature only acted according to what was proper.  His divine nature did not act according to human nature and his human nature did not act according to his divine nature.  The two natures acted in his office as Mediator, and yet there was no “conversion, composition, or confusion”[2] of the two natures.

The 1689 Confession states: yet by reason of the unity of the person, that which is proper to one nature is sometimes in Scripture, attributed to the person denominated by the other nature.

But while making these distinctions in the two natures, and while acknowledging they both are active in his office as Mediator, yet they exist in one Person, and so there is unity.

A.A. Hodge states the following:

• “This section teaches:
• That because of the unity of both natures in one person, that which is proper to either nature belongs of course to that one person; and sometimes in Scripture that which is attributed to the person denominated by the other nature.  Thus, as shown under section ii., the Scriptures often say that God shed his blood for his Church, or that the Son of man came down from heaven, while they never say that the human nature of Christ came down from heaven, or that his divine nature suffered for his Church.”[3]

Here are some examples:

No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.  John 3:13 (ESV)

• Here there is no reference to his Deity per se, however the Son of Man, is also the Son of God.  One of the two natures is always a part of one person. 

Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood.   Acts 20:28 (ESV)

•  Here we see that the pronoun “he” as a referenced to its antecedent (the last noun used) “God.”  So the end of the verse essentially says, “God obtained with his own blood the church.”  Does God have blood?  No, Christ’s humanity has blood.  Did Christ’s God nature perish on the cross?  No, God cannot ever perish.  Is this a mixing of the natures, contrary to section 2 of this same chapter?  No it is not.  There is no problem here since Christ as one person is God, but also man.  So the reference is ultimately to the one person.

 There is another such passage in 1 John:

•  By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers. 1 John 3:16 (ESV)

R. C. Sproul makes this helpful statement:

• “In these texts, we see references to God’s blood and God’s death.  But this does not mean that the divine nature perished on the cross.  Since there is a perfect unity between the human nature and the divine nature, anything that can be attributed to either nature can be attributed to the person.  We can say that Jesus was God (see John 20:28) without deifying his human nature—without saying he had divine feet or divine hands.  As a matter of convenient theological shorthand, the Bible frequently speaks of the person when only one nature is involved.”[4]

 Perhaps a graphic will help:

Here A and B coexist within The Whole.  Therefore, if I were to say that I moved A from America to Europe, it follows that B also went to Europe since B is a part of The Whole, even though separate from A.  Or likewise if I say that B did such and such an action, it follows that A, as a part of The Whole, was also was present at the action, and yet A did not act, per se. 

In keeping with the 1689 Confession chapter 8, section 2, which addressed the two natures not mixing, we could add that the A is not a B, and B is not A, and even though they exist within The Whole they are still distinct.  And though they are distinct, they are always part of The Whole.  Now at some point someone will find that this illustration breaks down, but I think it may help.

This is a difficult section because the incarnation is difficult, and it stretches our mind how the pre-existing Word could take on human flesh.  All the ramifications of that are difficult.  But we are not left to wander or wonder in the dark; we have the Scriptures as a lamp unto our feet and a light unto our path. 

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 7 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] The 1689 adds “acteth” to the WCF in place of “”acts.”  The source is the Savoy.
• [2] 1689 Chapter 8, section 2.
• [3] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh), pg. 149
•  [4] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess: A Laymen’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith (P&R Publishing, New Jersey), Volume I, pg. 270. 

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 6 of 10, the following:

6. Although the price[1]of redemption was not actually paid[2] by Christ till after his incarnation, yet the virtue, efficacy, and benefit thereof were communicated to[3] the elect in all ages, successively from the beginning of the World, in and by those promises, Types, and Sacrifices wherein he was revealed, and signified to be the Seed of the Woman, which should bruise the Serpent’s head; and the Lamb slain from the foundation[4] of the World, being the same [5]yesterday, and to-day and for ever. [6]  ( 1 Corinthians 4:10;Hebrews 4:2; 1 Peter 1:10, 11; Revelation 13:8; Hebrews 13:8 )

The 1689 Confession states: Although the price of redemption was not actually paid by Christ till after his incarnation,

It is important to note the fact that the incarnation happened at certain point in time on the spectrum of redemptive history. This time reference lays the foundation of what follows, namely, that saints before the incarnation were saved by that redemption, the same as those after the incarnation.  So this paragraph deals with the past and the future, with the incarnation being the reference point, not the present. 

One might wonder, “Why is it that the 1689 refers to the incarnation rather than the crucifixion?” Paragraph four of chapter 8 of the 1689 Confession established that Christ’s active obedience to the law, as well as his passive obedience in his death (penal on our behalf) were both necessary to pay the price.  So it is proper to refer to his life and death in purchasing redemption for the elect. 

It is also important to see that this action actually accomplished something.  It did not make salvation possible, but it actually procured it for God people in the past, present and future. 

The 1689 confession states: yet the virtue, efficacy, and benefit thereof were communicated to the elect in all ages,

• Virtue- This means its value, worth and quality. 
• Efficacy –This means its effectiveness.
• Benefit – This means the advantage and gain of its design.

We could spend a great deal of time on these three words.  But let is suffice to say that these words are packed with the fullest possible meaning in relation to the life and death of Christ in purchasing redemption, and all of these were communicated to the elect in the fullest.

• Communicated: This means transmitted, given or applied; it does not mean merely the giving of information or data.
•  In all ages: This means from Adam and Eve to the time of the incarnation, and in addition it means from the time of the incarnation to the Last Day.  It means the Old Testament saints as well as the New Testament saints.  It means any elect person regardless of the time that they lived.

The unity of the Bible in the Old and New Testament is critical.  Dispensationalism[7] has had a very negative effect on Evangelicalism today by wrongly dividing the Old and New Testaments in relation to the means of salvation.  Faith in the work of Christ was just as essential to salvation in the Old Testament as in the New.  Consider Abel (Hebrew 11:4); consider Abraham (Galatians and Romans).  Justification by faith alone has always been the means to forgiveness and the means of receiving the free gift of righteousness.  

• Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.  Heb 13:8 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: Successively from the beginning of the World,

This virtue, efficacy, and benefit of redemption was promised Genesis all the way through Malachi.  This promise of redemption was not a new promise never before revealed.

• The Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. ¹⁵ I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”  Gen 3:14-15 (ESV)
• For good news came to us just as to them, but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened.   Heb 4:2 (ESV)
• Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, ¹¹ inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. 1 Peter 1:10-11 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: in and by those promises, Types, and Sacrifices wherein he was revealed, and signified to be the Seed of the Woman, which should bruise the Serpent’s head; and the Lamb slain from the foundation of the World, being the same yesterday, and to-day and for ever. 

This answers the question of how the promises were successively shown by God and applied to the elect from the beginning of the world? 

We could perhaps paraphrase this as follows:

• Christ was promised from the beginning, and he was revealed and signified in the Types and Sacrifices that he was indeed the promised Seed of the woman who would crush the Serpent’s head, and the Lamb that was promised who would appease and absorb God’s wrath for his people, counting them as righteous.

A.A. Hodge summarize this in the Westminster Confession as follows:

• “That although this perfect satisfaction was rendered in his obedience and suffering only subsequent to his incarnation, yet the full benefits thereof had been applied to each of the elect severally in their successive generations by the Holy Ghost, through the varying forms of truth to them made known.”[8]

R.C. Sproul, states:

• “The confession is affirming here that the basic distinction between the Old Testament economy and the New Testament economy is the difference between promise and fulfillment.  The Old Testament saints, born before Christ came, believed in God’s covenant promises.  The promises increased over time as God revealed more and more of the content of his plan of redemption.”[9]

• Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.  Heb 13:8 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 6 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The WCF and the Savoy have “work” rather than “price.”  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 add “paid” to the WCF and Savoy in place of “wrought.”  The source is presumably Collins.
• [3] The 1689 adds this to the WCF.  The source is the Savoy.
• [4] The 1689 adds “foundation” to the WCF and Savoy in place of “beginning.”
• [5] The 1689 adds “the same” here to the WCF and the Savoy, and removes “the same” later in the phrase.  The WCF and the Savoy say: “being yesterday, and today “the same,” and forever.”
• [6] The upper case letters to of these several nous are added to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [7] If you are not familiar with Dispensational theology, you might find John Gerstner’s A Primer on Dispensationalism booklet helpful. 
• [8] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh), pg. 149
• [9] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess: A Laymen’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith (P&R Publishing, New Jersey), Volume I, pg. 266.  Please note that Sproul refers to the Westminster Confession of Faith in this quote, not to the 1689 Confession, but since here the confessions are very similar here, Sproul’s book is very helpful.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 5 of 10, the following:

5. The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he through the eternal Spirit once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the Justice [1]of God[2], procured reconciliation[3], and purchased an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto Him. ( Hebrews 9:14;Hebrews 10:14; Romans 3:25, 26; John 17:2; Hebrews 9:15 )

The 1689 Confession states: The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself,

We often hear that Jesus died to take away sin, but how often do we hear that he also lived to take away sin.  Christ’s perfect obedience has two aspects to it.  He was obedient in going to the cross, but he was also obedient to the Law before the cross.  Why is this important?  Because in justification, there is a two-fold aspect.  One, we are pardoned of our sin, thus our debt is forgiven by his death, but secondly, we are credited with Christ’s righteousness because of his perfect obedience to the law.  This two-fold work of Christ that is applied in redemption in a two-fold manner is extremely essential to the gospel. 

John Murray states in Redemption Accomplished and Applied the following:

•  “The distinction between the active and passive obedience is not a distinction of periods.  It is our Lord’s whole work of obedience in every phase and period that is described as active and passive, and we must avoid the mistake of thinking that the active obedience applies to the obedience of his life and the passive obedience of his final sufferings and death.
•  The real use and purpose of the formula is to emphasize the two distinct aspect of our Lord’s vicarious obedience.  The truth expressed rests upon the recognition that the law of God has both penal sanctions and positive demands.  It demands the full discharge of its precepts but also the infliction of penalty for all infractions and shortcomings.  It is this twofold demand of the law of God, which is taken into account when we speak of the active and passive obedience of Christ.  Christ as the vicar of his people came under the curse and condemnation due to sin and he also fulfilled the law of God in all its positive requirements.”  In other words, he took care of the guilt of sin [passive obedience] and perfectly fulfilled the demand of righteousness [active obedience].  He perfectly met both the penal and the perceptive requirements of God’s law. [4]

The 1689 Confession states: which he through the eternal Spirit once offered up unto God,

This wording is taken directly from Scripture:

• How much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.  Heb 9:14 (ESV)

While much focus is upon the Son in the work of redemption, we should always remember that the Triune Godhead is very much involved, and each plays their unique and distinct part in redemption. 

The 1689 Confession states: hath fully satisfied the Justice of God

•  For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. Heb 10:14 (ESV)

Christ’s death was not a symbolic gesture to illustrate his great love for mankind, nor was it a mere effort to procure God’s favor with some token suffering on behalf of the sinner.  Christ’s death actually paid the debt in full, and thus it satisfied divine justice entirely and completely for those to whom it designed and applied, and that is for the elect. 

The 1689 Confession states: procured reconciliation

• Procure: To obtain by care or effort; to gain, win, get possession of. [5]

Christ did not merely make a way for salvation, but he procured it for his people.   He did not procure it for the the non-elect, the reprobate, whom he passed over.

• “Propitiation places in the focus of attention the wrath of God and the divine provision for the removal of that wrath.  Reconciliation places the focus of attention our alienation from God and the divine method of restoring us to his favor.”[6]  John Murray
• Whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. Romans 3:25 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: and purchased an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto Him.

I am reminded here that the everlasting inheritance is to be found in the kingdom of heaven, not in the kingdom of earth.  The prosperity gospel folks seem to think he purchased an inheritance in the kingdom of earth, but this is to misrepresent the Scriptures for personal gain.  He has purchased an everlasting inheritance, and it is of a spiritual nature primarily, and it was purchased only for those whom the Father has given to Christ.  We see the exclusive nature of salvation here; it is not for all, but only for the elect. 

We see this wording regarding those whom the Father gives to Christ clearly issuing forth from the Scriptures:

• Since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him.  John 17:2 (ESV)
• Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.  Heb 9:15 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 5 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

 The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 4 of 10, the following:

4. This office the Lord Jesus did most willingly undertake, which that he might discharge he was made under the law, and did perfectly fulfill it, and underwent the punishment due to us, which we should have borne and suffered, being made sin and a curse for us; enduring [1]most grievous sorrows[2] in his soul, and most painful sufferings in his body; was crucified, and died, and remained in the state of the dead,[3] yet saw no corruption: on the third day he arose from the dead with the same body in which he suffered, with which he also ascended into heaven, and there sitteth at the right hand of his Father making intercession, and shall return to judge men and angels at the end of the world. ( Psalms 40:7, 8; Hebrews 10:5-10; John 10:18; Gal 4:4; Matthew 3:15; Galatians 3:13; Isaiah 53:6; 1 Peter 3:18; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Matthew 26:37, 38; Luke 22:44; Matthew 27:46; Acts 13:37; 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4; John 20:25, 27; Mark 16:19; Acts 1:9-11; Romans 8:34; Hebrews 9:24; Acts 10:42; Romans 14:9, 10; Acts 1:11; 2 Peter 2:4 )

The 1689 Confession states: This office the Lord Jesus did most willingly undertake,

In the previous section, we saw that in the office of Mediator Jesus “took not upon himself, but was thereunto called by his Father.” Here we see that though Jesus was called by the Father and did not take the office of his initiative, yet he responded willingly to this office despite the great sacrifice it would require of him.  We should not pass over this too quickly because there is obedience, and then there is obedience, if you understand my meaning.  As a parent, I have had my children obey me unwillingly and willingly, and let me tell you there is a big difference.  Jesus’ was called to take on an office that would require everything of him, and yet he did it “most willingly.” 

• No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”  John 10:18 (ESV)
•  “Looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. Heb 12:2 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: which that he might discharge he was made under the law,

This phrase sounds awkward if not read in context of the previous phrase.  We might read it as: In order for Jesus to undertake or execute this office, he was made under the law. This means that Jesus was made accountable to the law and was under its obligations just as Adam was and all his posterity.  Jesus was under the obligations of the covenant of works. 

Being made under the law was part of Christ’s humiliation as it is referred to in the Westminster Shorter Catechism or the Baptist Catechism.  The Baptist Catechism states:

• Baptist Catechism
• Q. Wherein did Christ’s humiliation consist?
  A.Christ’s humiliation consisted in his being born, and that in a low condition (Luke 2:7), made under the law (Gal. 4:4), undergoing the miseries of this life (Heb. 12:2, 3; Is. 53:2, 3), the wrath of God (Luke 22:44; Mt. 27:46), and the cursed death of the cross (Phil. 2:8); in being buried (1 Cor. 15:3,4), and continuing under the power of death for a time (Acts 2:24, 25, 26, 27, 31; Mt. 12:40).
• But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. Gal 4:4-5 (ESV)

As w see in Galatians 4:4, his being born under the law, was that he might redeem those who are were under the law.  In other words, he was obedient to the law, to redeem those who were unable to obey the law and therefore guilty before God and cursed by God (under the curse of the law) for that guilt.  And this is expanded upon in the next phrases of the 1689 Confession.

The 1689 Confession states: and did perfectly fulfill it, and underwent the punishment due to us, which we should have borne and suffered, being made sin and a curse for us; 

Christ was under the law, just as the first Adam, but unlike the first Adam, Christ perfectly fulfilled the requirements of the law (called his Active Obedience).  And though he perfectly fulfilled it, and should have received the reward of life under the terms of the covenant of life (the terms being perfect obedience), he actually received punishment as if he did not obey the law, because he was made sin for and a curse for us (Passive Obedience).  This is a spectacular display of the wisdom of God in satisfying divine justice and being able to impute righteousness to the unrighteous to those who believe.

• For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Cor 5:21 (ESV)
• For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, 1 Peter 3:18 (ESV)

This is the gospel and this is indeed good news.  We should rejoice in it everyday!

The 1689 Confession states: enduring most grievous sorrows in his soul, and most painful sufferings in his body; was crucified, and died, and remained in the state of the dead, yet saw no corruption:

This endurance of suffering and humiliation that Christ received was part of his being made sin and a curse for us.  Jesus deserved none of the wrath and curse of God and he was not liable to the miseries of this life and to death (see Baptist Catechism 22) as Adam and his posterity, and yet he was made these things that he might absorb it from the Father on behalf of the elect. 

• Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— Gal 3:13 (ESV)

This portion of the confession also demonstrates that Christ has a real body and was really human.  Jesus is God of God, yes, but at the same time he is man of man.

• In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. ⁸ Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. ⁹ And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, ¹⁰ being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek. Heb 5:5-10 (ESV)
• And taking with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, he began to be sorrowful and troubled.   Matt 26:37 (ESV)
• And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground.  Luke 22:44 (ESV)
• And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Matt 27:46 (ESV)

Yet, the Father did not allow his holy one to under go decay. 

• But he whom God raised up did not see corruption.  Acts 13:37 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: on the third day he arose from the dead with the same body in which he suffered, with which he also ascended into heaven, and there sitteth at the right hand of his Father making intercession, and shall return to judge men and angels at the end of the world.

The confession now moves to describe the exaltation of Christ following his humiliation.

I refer to the Baptist Catechism again here:

•  Baptist Catechism
• Q28: Wherein consisteth Christ’s exaltation?
  A28: Christ’s exaltation consisteth in his rising again from the dead on the third day, in ascending up into heaven, in sitting at the right hand of God the Father, and in coming to judge the world at the last day.

It is important to note the same body that suffered, was the same body that rose from the dead, and the same body that ascended into heaven and the same body that now sits at the right hand of God.  This is the same body which Christ will continue to have into eternity.  There is no mystical spiritual body here; it is the real thing and so continues to be.  What a glorious and real gospel!  Christ went ahead for us and we will certainly be made like him, and our same body that suffers now, will someday be raised incorruptible. We will not have spiritual bodies, but the same bodies we have now, only glorified.  This truth of the “same body” will help us avoid many errors that the church has fought against throughout its history.

Here are many important passages from the Word of God to show Christ’s exaltation:

• So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. Mark 16:19 (ESV)
•  And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight. ¹⁰ And while they were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, ¹¹ and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”  Acts 1:9-11 (ESV)
• Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised— who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. Romans 8:34 (ESV)
• For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Heb 9:24 (ESV)
• And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. Acts 10:42 (ESV)
• For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.  Romans 14:9 (ESV)
•  and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”  Acts 1:11 (ESV)

 This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 4 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 3 of 10, the following:

3. The Lord Jesus, in his human nature thus united to the divine, in the person of the Son,[1]was sanctified and anointed with the Holy Spirit above measure, having in Him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; in whom it pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell, to the end that being holy, harmless, undefiled, and full of grace and truth, he might be throughly furnished to execute the office of mediator and surety; which office he took not upon[2] himself, but was thereunto called by his Father; who also[3] put all power and judgement in[4] his hand, and gave him commandment to execute the same.
( Psalms 45:7; Acts 10:38; John 3:34; Colossians 2:3; Colossians 1:19; Hebrews 7:26; John 1:14; Hebrews 7:22; Hebrews 5:5; John 5:22, 27; Matthew 28:18; Acts 2:36 )

The 1689 Confession states: The Lord Jesus, in his human nature thus united to the divine, in the person of the Son,

Here is a reiteration of the previous section two, as if to remind us that this doctrine of Christ’s Deity and humanity in two natures and one person has been established already, but the confession is now giving us further clarification about power of the Son to carry out the office Mediator, as this Person of the Son.

The 1689 Confession states: was sanctified and anointed with the Holy Spirit above measure,

This Person of the Son was sanctified and anointed for the office of Mediator. He was sanctified, or set apart by the Holy Spirit. He was anointed with the Holy Spirit. How anointed was he, one might ask? He was anointed “above measure.” I understand this to mean, his anointing was beyond measure, or beyond our ability to measure the extent of his anointing.

• you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions; Psalms 45:7 (ESV)
• For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure. John 3:34 (ESV)

When a politician is inaugurated to office he is in a sense being anointed for the office and given the authority to carry it out. A politician though is a secular comparison, but if we go to the sacred text we see that God instructed those filling offices such as priest or kings to be anointed. For example, Samuel anointed Saul and then David. An anointing was an outward sign of God’s appointing and empowering a person to fulfill the office that they were called to. These were but shadows compared to the anointing of Christ. To say the “anointing of Christ” is rather redundant since the word Messiah, means “Anointed One.

We think of this passage: “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me” (Isaiah 61:1 ESV). This Messianic passage goes on in the following verses to explain what the anointing was for, just as the confession is about to do.

We see in Acts 10:38 this anointing: “How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him” (ESV).

The 1689 Confession states: having in Him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; in whom it pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell, to the end that being holy, harmless, undefiled, and full of grace and truth,

• [Christ] in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Col 2:3 (ESV)
• For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. Heb 7:26 (ESV)
• For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, ²⁰ and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. Col 1:19-20 (ESV)
• And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14 (ESV)

We see this descriptive list of amazing qualities that continues from the previous statement that he was sanctified and anointed by the Holy Spirit beyond measure. And as I have said in previous posts, there is so much that could be discussed by breaking won each of these phrases, but time does not permit me to do so. But in carefully looking at this list we see that these qualities all show (“to the end that”) he was fully equipped to carry out his office.

The 1689 Confession states: “he might be throughly furnished to execute the office of mediator and surety.” Here we see from the preceding description that the Son is fully furnished (we might say to today equipped) to carry out the office of Mediator and Surety.

This word Surety is interesting. This Mediator is also Surety. He did not only mediate the case between the elect sinner, but he was the Surety for the elect sinner. To be Surety is to be a guarantor. A guarantor is “somebody who gives a guarantee, especially a formal promise to be responsible for somebody else’s debts or obligations.”[5] What a glorious truth to ponder. The Lord Jesus Christ is God and man and thus able to mediate the suit that God has against Mankind, but even beyond a Mediator, he guarantees to pay the debt for the sinner. This certainly makes me think of the doctrine of particular atonement, because if Jesus was a Surety for all Mankind, then surely all Mankind’s debt would be paid, but the fact is that his Surety is only for those whom the Father has given him.

We see surety or guarantor in Hebrews 7:2,

• “This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant” (Heb 7:22 ESV).

Jesus is the Surety for the covenant of grace which is made only with his particular people.

The 1689 Confession states: which office he took not upon himself, but was thereunto called by his Father;

We see this passage which informs the confession here: So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”; Heb 5:5 (ESV)

The Son was sent by the Father, and though the Son willingly and freely took on the appointment and calling, it is important to note the Father appointed the Son to this office of Mediator and Surety. We must never forget the Father, the offended party sent His Son to redeem His elect.

The 1689 Confession states: who also put all power and judgement in his hand, and gave him commandment to execute the same.

Not only did the Father appoint and call Jesus to this office, but he put all the power and the judgment in Christ’s hand to execute the office. But here the confession also points out that it was a command of the Father to Jesus for him to carry out the office of Mediator and Surety. Indeed, Jesus was obedient–unto death.

• The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, John 5:22 (ESV)
• And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. John 5:27 (ESV)
• And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Matt 28:18 (ESV)
• Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” Acts 2:36 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 3 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF. The source is the Savoy.
• [2] 1689 adds “upon” to the WCF and Savoy in place of “unto.” The source is presumably Collins.
• [3] 1689 adds “also” to the WCF. The source is the Savoy.
• [4] 1689 adds in to the WCF and the Savoy in place of “into.” The source is presumably Collins.
• [5] Taken from Microsoft 2003 for a modern definition of guarantor.

 The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 2 of 10, the  following:

2. The Son of God, the second person in the Holy[1] Trinity, being very and eternal God, the brightness of the Father’s glory,[2] of one substance and equal with him who made the world, who upholdeth and governeth all things he hath made, [3]did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon him man’s nature, with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin; being conceived by the Holy Spirit[4] in the womb of the Virgin Mary [of her substance][5], the Holy Spirit coming down upon her: and the power of the Most High overshadowing her; and so was made of a woman of the tribe of Judah, of the seed of Abraham and David according to the Scriptures;[6] so that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures [the Godhead and the manhood,][7]were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion; which person is very God and very man, yet one Christ, the only mediator between God and man. ( John 1:14; Galatians 4;4; Romans 8:3; Hebrews 2:14, 16, 17; Hebrews 4:15; Matthew 1:22, 23; Luke 1:27, 31, 35; Romans 9:5; 1 Timothy 2:5 )

There is so much doctrine packed into this section that one could spend a great deal of time here.  I will highlight each phrase, but much more could be said.  As you read, grasp, and marvel at the truths about the Lord Jesus Christ does not your soul soar, your mind stretch, and your gratefulness multiply?  These are profound truths, and sadly many professing Christians never contemplate them.

As we go through chapter eight which focuses particularly upon Christ as Mediator, and in this section which focuses upon his Personhood, we should keep in mind the creeds (and confessions) that have preceded the 1689 Confession, and realize that the 1689 Confession stands upon the shoulders, so to speak, of those who have preceded it by their having contended for the faith once and all delivered to the saints.  We should be grateful to our forefathers throughout church history who fought the good fight with blood, sweat and tears for the orthodoxy reflected in the orthodox creeds.

R.C. Sproul states:

• The Reformation built on the truths that had been confessed in the early ecumenical councils, such as Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon, and others.  The Reformers did not jettison that body of historic Christian doctrine.[8]

There are phrases here in this second section that clearly reflect the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed.

Let’s go ahead and dive into section two of chapter eight.

The 1689 Confession states: The Son of God, the second person in the Holy Trinity,

Here we see the clear acknowledgement that there is a certain submission and hierarchy within the Trinity, but as the next phrase in the 1689 Confession indicates, this submission and hierarchy does not in any way diminish Christ’s deity.  How many times are we reasoning with Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and others on this point from the Scriptures?  It must be stated that reason, without the enlightening of the Scriptures, will never come to see or understand this great doctrine of the Trinity.  Scripture alone leads one to the truth of the Triune God in three Persons.

The 1689 Confession states: being very and eternal God, the brightness of the Father’s glory, of one substance and equal with him who made the world, who upholdeth and governeth all things he hath made,

In the Nicene Creed we see these words about Jesus Christ that he is “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.”  It is not difficult to see the similarity between the 1689 Confession and the Nicene Creed here.  It is also interesting to note that the 1689 Confession framers, likely Collins and Coxe, added the above underlined portions to the 1689 Confession of which the Savoy Declaration and Westminster Confession of Faith do not contain.

But even more than the 1689 Confession echoing the words of the Nicene Creed, they echo the very words of Scripture:

Being very and eternal God,

• In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was in the beginning with God. ³  John 1:1-2 (ESV)

The brightness of the Father’s glory,

• He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. Heb 1:3 (ESV)

Of one substance and equal with him who made the world,

• In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1 (ESV)
• Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. ¹¹ Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. John 14:10-11 (ESV)

Who upholdeth and governeth all things he hath made,

• And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. Col 1:17 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon him man’s nature,

With the first focus upon the divinity of Christ in this section, we now see the topic turning to the humanity of Jesus Christ.  This phrase seems to be very similar to the wording in Galatians chapter four:

•  But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, Gal 4:4 (ESV)

 It is easy to move quickly past this statement that he “took upon him man’s nature.” The incarnation is surely the greatest mystery in one sense, but in another Christ’s humanity is the easiest for us to relate to because it is our nature, our minus sin.  The 1689 Confession describes this nature in more detail.

The 1689 Confession states: with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof,

It is very serious to forget or fail to realize that this human nature that Christ took on was physical in all that entails.  His human nature had all the “essential properties” of a human.  This even included the “common infirmities” of human nature.  We think of pain, physical and emotional; we think of hunger; we think of thirst; we think of fatigue; we think of temptations, and so the list goes on, and   Jesus Christ in his human nature experienced all of these.  Why?  Because though he was fully God, he was also fully human, and we should never lose sight of that.  In order for Christ to be our Mediator between God and man, he had to become human like us.  There is a great exception to Christ’s human “essential properties” and “common infirmities.”

The 1689 Confession states: yet without sin;

How can we even begin to appreciate how essential this is?  Perhaps we could simply state that if he were sinful, he could not have been God, and if he were a sinful human, he could not have gone before us as the Second Adam in perfect obedience, and he could not have satisfied divine justice by his death as a sinner, as his death would be his judgment not our propitiation.  But he was indeed the spotless Lamb of God; the only human qualified to be that perfect sacrifice.

 The 1689 Confession states: being conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary, the Holy Spirit coming down upon her: and the power of the Most High overshadowing her;

• Baptist Catechism
• Q25: How did Christ, being the Son of God, become man?
  A25: Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body, and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, and born of her yet without sin.

Mary became pregnant or conceived Jesus by the Holy Spirit; this was in her womb; she was a virgin.  These are all very important elements to Christ having a human nature.  This incarnation was not a mystical, spiritual, or non-material pregnancy; it was physical and Jesus developed as any other human would in his mother’s womb.  But there was a difference was that Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit’s power which overshadowed her; the fallen nature of Adam was not passed onto Jesus as it would have through the seed of a fallen man.  Obviously, I am not exactly saying that sin, in a purely physically way, passes through the seed of a man into the egg of a woman, and that only in this physical way is sin passed to each human.   The imputation of sin to all of Mankind by Adam’s first transgression is a spiritual matter.  It is the judgment upon all mankind since Adam sinned as our federal head.

I can’t pretend to have this all worked out, but we cannot forget that Jesus was sinless (and is still sinless) because he was very God of very God.  Certainly the virgin birth, by the power of the Spirit, assures us that the Second Adam did not inherit Adam’s sin, and that as one who is not born by ordinary generation he did not inherit Adam’s sin, but was born in holiness.  This Second Adam would be tempted by the serpent as was the first, but the Second Adam would not succumb; he would triumph over the devil, thus crushing the serpent under his feet.

The 1689 Confession states: and so was made of a woman of the tribe of Judah, of the seed of Abraham and David according to the Scriptures;

Jesus was born of a the virgin Mary, but there was a context for the birth of this promised One in history (the fullness of times).  He was born, according to the Scripture’s predictions, to the tribe of Judah, from the lineage of Abraham and David as was promised.

This is all so historical, so human, and yet so supernatural all at the same time.  God used ordinary providence, but he also worked freely outside of ordinary providence by the virgin birth of Jesus.  Truly prophecy is a supernatural in its revelation, and add to this the supernatural fulfillment, but in all this supernatural there seems to be a natural or ordinary providence aspect.

Here we come to a finalizing of section two.  The first movement, as it were, declared the deity of Christ, the second movement declared the humanity of Christ, and now the defining, fencing, and distinctions that need to be made in relation to the ”two natures in one person” are stated.

The 1689 Confession states: so that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures were inseparably joined together in one person,

This portion reiterates the fullness each of the two natures.  Jesus is very God, eternal God, and fully God.  Jesus us fully human, being born of a woman from her womb, and born of a woman under the law.  These two natures are whole; they are not partial or lacking in any respect.  But while they are whole, they are also distinct.  They are separate natures.  But while they are whole and distinct, they are also joined inseparably to one person.  It would do us well to make sure we grasp these three aspects before moving on from here.

• 1. Two whole and perfect natures. 
• 2.  The two natures are distinct
• 3. The two natures are inseparably joined to one person

Christ is not two persons, but he is one person.  He is one person with two natures.

• Baptist Catechism
• Q24: Who is the Redeemer of God’s elect?
  A24: The only Redeemer of God’s elect is the Lord Jesus Christ, who, being the eternal Son of God, became man, and so was, and continueth to be, God and man in two distinct natures, and one person, for ever.

We must never forget that Christ continues to be both God and man in two nature and one person, forever.

The 1689 Confession states: without conversion, composition, or confusion;

The two natures are without conversion

The Oxford English Dictionary states that conversion means a “change in character, nature, form or function.”  I believe the meaning is simply that these two natures are always the same and one nature does not change in any degree into the other nature.  Christ’s divine nature never becomes in any way or to any degree human, nor does his human nature in any way ever become in any degree divine.  The human nature never functions in a divine way; the divine nature never functions in a human way.

The two natures are without composition

This means that there is no mixing of the natures.  The Divine does not mix with the human nature and the human nature does not mix with the divine nature.  There is no ratio of the two natures except one-hundred percent divine nature and one-hundred percent human nature.  The ratio is never less or greater than that if we want to look at it a mathematical way.

The two natures are without confusion

The two distinct natures do not bleed into each other, so to speak.  They do not blend together to confuse the two distinct natures.  There is no overlapping of the natures.  If you picture two circles, you might say that the two circle never over lay each other; the two circles, representing the two natures of Christ, never overlap they exist separate, but within a larger circle representing Christ as One Person.

In Charles Hodges Systematic Theology, Volume II, Anthropology, he states in his section entitled: “There is no Transfer of the Attributes of one Nature to the Other”, the following:

• “The third point in relation to the person of Christ, is that no attribute of the one nature is transferred to the other. This is virtually included in what has already been said. There are those, however, who admit that the two natures in Christ are not mixed or confounded, who yet maintain that the attributes of the one are transferred to the other. But the properties or attributes of a substance constitute its essence, so that if they be removed or if others of a different nature be added to them, the substance itself is changed. If you take rationality from mind it ceases to be mind. If you add rationality to matter it ceases to be matter. If you make that extended which in itself is incapable of extension, the identity of the thing is lost. If therefore infinity be conferred on the finite, it ceases to be finite. If divine attributes be conferred on man, he ceases to be man; and if human attributes be transferred to God, he ceases to be God. The Scriptures teach that the human nature of Christ remained in its integrity after the incarnation; and that the divine nature remained divine. The Bible never requires us to receive as true anything which the constitution of our nature given to us by God himself, forces us to believe to be false or impossible.” [9]

The 1689 Confession states: which person is very God and very man, yet one Christ,

This clarifies that the two natures are in one person, and this one person is very God while at the same time being very human.  “Very” does not mean super-human or super-God; it means entirely or fully human and divine.  Christ is one person who has a fully human nature and a fully divine nature.

The 1689 Confession states: the only mediator between God and man.

All of this establishes not only the true personhood and nature of Christ, but it establishes that he is the perfect Mediator as the God- man.  Who can better make man’s case to God (based on Christ’s merits alone) than a man, and who better to make God’s case to man than God?

• For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, Romans 8:3 (ESV)
•  Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, ¹⁵ and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. ¹⁶ For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham.  Heb 2:14-16 (ESV)
• Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. ¹⁵ For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. ¹⁶  Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need. Heb 4:14-16 (ESV)
• For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim 2:5 (ESV)

Let’s break down this part of the 1689 confession graphically:

If we go back to our introduction studies of the creeds, we will remember that the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451 dealt with this particular issue of Christ’s two natures in one person.

R.C. Sproul states:

• “Chalcedon established the boundaries beyond which we dare not tread in our speculations, lest we plunge ourselves into serious heresy.  If we move away from Chalcedon in either direction (exaggerating either the divinity or the humanity of Christ at the expense of the other), we will fall into heresy.”[10]
• At Chalcedon, the church was careful to define the limits of speculation regarding the mystery of this union of two natures, using a method of definition that we call the way of negation.  That is, it is difficult to say much about the union of the divine and a human nature in one person, but we can at least tell you what it is not.  The four famous negatives of Chalcedon are these: the two nature of Christ are without mixture, without confusion, without division, and without separation.[11]

These truths here are life changing, and I can’t help but think about the poor state of Evangelicalism here.  Do most evangelicals understand these doctrines about the very one they profess to believe in to save them from God’s wrath, giving them eternal life?  I dare say that most entertain thoughts about Jesus that are entirely unworthy of him.  A.W. Tozer defined unworthy thoughts about God as idolatry.  To understand Christ’s two natures in one person any other way than defined in this section two of the 1689 Confession is heresy, and it is outside the pale of orthodoxy; it is not Christianity.

May God bring the wandering elements of Evangelicalism back into the camp of historic orthodox Christianity.  May sound doctrine be the sound heard in all the churches.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 2 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds Holy to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins and Coxe.
• [2] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is the 1644 London Baptist Confession.
• [3] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is the 1644 London Baptist Confession.
• [4] 1689 changes “Ghost” in  the WCF and the Savoy to “Spirit”.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [5] 1689 removes this phrase from the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins and Coxe.
• [6] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is the 1644 London Baptist Confession.
• [7] 1689 removes this from the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins and Coxe.
• [8] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess, Volume I, The Triune God (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 240.
• [9] Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology Volume II, Anthropology (Peobody,Mass., Hendrickson Publishers), pg. 390
• [10] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess, Volume I, The Triune God (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 243.
• [11] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess, Volume I, The Triune God (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 244.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator, Section 1 of 10, the following: 

1. It pleased God, in His eternal purpose, to choose and ordain the Lord Jesus, his only begotten Son, according to the Covenant[1] made between them both[2], to be the mediator between God and man; the prophet, priest, and king; head and saviour of the church, the heir of all things, and judge of the world; unto whom he did from all eternity give a people to be his seed and to be by him in time redeemed, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified.  ( Isaiah 42:1; 1 Peter 1:19, 20; Acts 3:22; Hebrews 5:5, 6; Psalms 2:6; Luke 1:33; Ephesians 1:22, 23; Hebrews 1:2; Acts 17:31; Isaiah 53:10; John 17:6; Romans 8:30 )

Now that we have studied the fall and its seriousness, we need to ask the following question:

• Baptist Catechism
• Q. 23 Did God leave all mankind to perish in the estate of sin and misery?
  A. 23 God having out of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of the estate of sin and misery, and to bring them into an estate of salvation by a Redeemer.

God has provided a way for the sinner to be delivered from sin and misery, and to be brought into a state of salvation. He chose a Redeemer and Mediator. 

What is a Mediator? 

• “[It is] one who intervenes between two parties, especially or the purpose of effecting reconciliation; one who brings about (a peace, a treaty) or settles (a dispute) by mediation.” Oxford English Dictionary

God has, in a sense, filed suit against mankind, and we are as such defendants in God’s court for the criminal.  Unless the sinner has the proper Mediator to represent him before God’s tribunal, the case will not go well.  This Mediator can only be obtained for the sinner through faith.

As the Second Adam, Christ, in His humanity could represent the interests of mankind, and as God could represent the interests of his Father.

The Father has appointed the Mediator to unfailingly resolve the case God has against the sinner.  This Mediator gave His life to reconcile the seemingly irreconcilable difference between a holy God and unholy man.

• Christ is represented in Scripture as the Mediator of the covenant.  The Greek word mesites is not found in classical Greek, but it does occur in Philo and in later Greek authors.  In the Septuagint it is found but once, Job 9:33.  The English word “Mediator,” as well as the Holland word “Middlelaar,” and the German “Mettler,” might lead us to think that it (mesites) simply designates one who arbitrates between two parties, an intermediary in the general sense of the word.  It should be borne in mind, however, that the Scriptural idea is far more profound.  Christ is the Mediator in more than sense.  He intervenes between God and man, not merely to sue for peace and to persuade to it, but as armed with plenipotentiary power, to do all that is necessary to establish peace.  The use of the word mesites in the New Testament justifies our speaking of a twofold Mediatorship of Christ, namely, that of surety and that of access (Gr. prosagoge, Rom. 5:2).  In most of the passages in which the word is found in the New Testament, it is equal to egguos, and therefore points to Christ as one who, by taking upon Himself the guilt of sinners, terminated their penal relation to the law and restored them to the right legal relationship to God.[3] Louis Berkhof

 The 1689 confession states: It pleased God, in His eternal purpose…

We have already learned that God is free to do as He pleases, and that what He pleases is not arbitrary, or in reaction to anything, but decreed eternally according to His purpose. 

• but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. ²⁰ He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for your sake,  1 Peter 1:19-20
•  Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. ²³ And it shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.’ ²⁴ And all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and those who came after him, also proclaimed these days. ²⁵  You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’ ²⁶  God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you by turning every one of you from your wickedness.”  Acts 3:22-26 (ESV)

 The 1689 confession states: to choose and ordain the Lord Jesus, his only begotten Son,

The Father Himself chose and ordained Jesus for this office of Mediator.

• “And behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”   Matt 3:17 (ESV)

God told mankind audibly (and in many other ways) that Jesus was His chosen instrument in saying that He was pleased with his Son.  Therefore we also should be pleased with him as well.

• So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”;  Heb 5:5 (ESV)
•  “As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill.”  Psalms 2:6 (ESV)
•  and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.” Luke 1:33 (ESV)
• And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, ²³  which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.  Eph 1:22-23 (ESV)
•   but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.   Heb 1:2 (ESV)

•  Westminster Larger Catechism
• Question 30: Does God leave all mankind to perish in the estate of sin and misery?
• Answer 30: God does not leave all men to perish in the estate of sin and misery, into which they fell by the breach of the first covenant, commonly called the covenant of works; but of his mere love and mercy delivers his elect out of it, and brings them into an estate of salvation by the second covenant, commonly called the covenant of grace.

The 1689 confession states: according to the Covenant made between them both

We have already learned this in chapter seven of God’s covenants.  This again refers to the Covenant of Redemption made between the Father and the Son to redeem the elect.

The 1689 confession states: to be the mediator between God and man;

•  For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim 2:5 (ESV)

 Christ is either a person’s Mediator of mercy and grace (for the elect) or their Judge on the Last Day (for the reprobate). 

 The 1689 confession states: the prophet, priest, and king;

These are the offices executed by Christ as the Mediator.

In R.C. Sproul’s, Truth We Confess, he states:

•  “Prophets, priests, and kings functioned as mediators in the Old Testament, yet Paul says that there is only one Mediator between God and man (1 Tim. 2:5). Paul, of course, is not repudiating what was done in former days. Instead, he is speaking of a mediator in the ultimate sense. Only one Mediator is both truly God and truly man. Only one Mediator has a divine nature and a human nature. Only the God-man participates in both deity and humanity, and in that regard Christ is utterly unique. Only one Mediator has the ability, ultimately, to effect the ultimate goal of mediation, our redemption and reconciliation. That was beyond the ability of Elijah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Aaron, Levi, or any other prophet or priest. The work of ultimate redemption could not be mediated by David, Hezekiah, or any of the other kings. It could not even be accomplished by Moses, the mediator of the law. He was not the one who brought about reconciliation by his own person and work.”[4]

•  Baptist Catechism
• Q26: What offices doth Christ execute as our Redeemer?
  A26: Christ, as our Redeemer, executeth the offices of a prophet, of a priest, and of a king, both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation.
•  
• Prophet
• Baptist Catechism
• Q27: How doth Christ execute the office of a prophet?
  A28: Christ executeth the office of a prophet, in revealing to us, by his word and Spirit, the will of God for our salvation.
•  
• Priest
• Baptist Catechism
• Q29: How doth Christ execute the office of a priest?
  A29: Christ executeth the office of a priest, in his once offering up of himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice, and reconcile us to God, and in making continual intercession for us.
•  
• King
• Baptist Catechism
• Q30: How doth Christ execute the office of a king?
  A30: Christ executeth the office of a king, in subduing us to himself, in ruling and defending us, and in restraining and conquering all his and our enemies.

In paragraphs 9 and 10 of this chapter these offices are further discussed in further detail, so we will not discuss them any further in this section.  These shorter catechism questions and answers will serve us well for further study and meditation on these offices.

The 1689 confession states: head and saviour of the church,

Church

• What do we mean by Church?



• Church: Greek word is: Ekklesia.  It means in Greek: public assemblage summoned by a herald.  In the Bible, it is referring to as those who are truly united to Christ and therefore are a part of the assembly of God along with the rest of those united to Christ. 

 Head of the Church

• There is a literal use of the word “head” usedin Scripture, and a metaphor use.  When the word ”head” is used as part of a body it is describing Christ’s relationship of connection and unification with his church.  The elect are the church, those who are summoned together as members of Christ’s body.
•  For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church , his body, and is himself its Savior. Eph 5:23 (ESV)
•  Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. Col 2:18-19 (ESV)

 We see “head” in the following verse being used literally to show that Christ is the head, ruler, or one with the ultimate authority.

•  and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. Col 2:10 (ESV)

 For Christ to be the Head of the Church means that:

1. Literal use: Christ is the head, or ruler; the one in charge, or king of the Church.

2. Metaphorical use: Christ is head of the church in a way similar to how our heads are in charge of our bodies.  What functions does the head perform? The head sees, hears, speaks, tastes, and smells; all of these are processed by our brain which is in our head.  Our brain is also the primary ‘organ’ where we think, remember, etc.  For example, people say, “That’s the way to use your ‘head.”  The rest of our body does not perform any of the functions that our head does.  Our head is “in charge” of all the rest of our body parts. So too Christ is in charge of the Church.  He rules all of those who are a part of the Church.

 Savoir of the Church

 For those who have repented and believed on Christ, Christ becomes their Savior.  He gave his life for the church, and in so doing purchased her for himself.

•  For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.   Eph 5:23 (ESV)

 The 1689 Confession states: the heir of all things;

Christ is the heir of all things; the Father has given all things into his hand.

•  The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.  John 3:35 (ESV)
•  because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”  Acts 17:31 (ESV)
•  but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.  Heb 1:2 (ESV)
•  having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. Heb 1:4 (ESV)

 The 1689 Confession states: and judge of the world

•  but God raised him on the third day and made him to appear, ⁴¹  not to all the people but to us who had been chosen by God as witnesses, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. ⁴² And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. ⁴³  To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”   Acts 10:40-43 (ESV)
•  because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”   Acts 17:31 (ESV)
•  I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom:  2 Tim 4:1 (ESV)
•   Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.    2 Tim 4:8 (ESV)
•  but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.  1 Peter 4:5 (ESV)
•  Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. ¹²  His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. ¹³ He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. ¹⁴ And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. ¹⁵  From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. ¹⁶ On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords. Rev 19:11-16 (ESV) 

The 1689 Confession states: unto whom he did from all eternity give a people to be his seed

To help clarify let me fill in the antecedents of these pronouns: unto Jesus the Father did from all eternity give a people to be Jesus’ seed. 

The Father has given the elect to Jesus as a bride.  In this sense, one could say that arranged marriages are Biblical.  God the Father has chosen his Son’s bride for him, and Christ has demonstrated his love for the bride by purchasing her for the Father, whom in return the Father gives to Christ.

 The metaphor here in the 1689 Confession is of “seed”, but it is hard to resist not bringing out the bride metaphor here.  The use of seed is not something that I have worked out yet.  We see Jesus as our brother, friend, and groom.  Offspring is what I typically think of when seeing the word “seed” in the Bible, but we being Jesus’ offspring, does not seem to fit the categories mnetioned in the sentence.  My working theory is that seed is a metaphor to describe the church as Jesus’ inheritance in the saints, but normally one would not inherit children.  I welcome any help on this.   

•  Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.    Isaiah 53:10 (ESV)
•  “I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. John 17:6 (ESV)

 The 1689 Confession states: to be by him in time redeemed, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified.

In time, the Father’s time that is, he effectually calls the elect person to himself; Jesus having already purchased the elect, the Father then based upon divine justice being satisfied, justifies the elect at the time they exercise faith, the Spirit sanctifies, and the Father glorifies the saint on the Last Day at the resurrection.

•  And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.  Romans 8:30 (ESV)

 Let these Baptist Catechism questions and answers serve us in thinking about what these important words mean.

• Redeemed
• Q33: How doth the Spirit apply to us the redemption purchased by Christ?
  A33: The Spirit applieth to us the redemption purchased by Christ, by working faith in us, and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling.
•  
• Called
• Q34: What is effectual calling?
  A34: Effectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel.
•  
• Justified
• Q36: What is justification?
  A36: Justification is an act of God’s free grace, wherein He pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous in His sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone.
•  
• Sanctified
• Q38: What is sanctification?
  A38: Sanctification is the work of God’s free grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness.
•  
• Glorified
• Q40: What benefits do believers receive from Christ at the resurrection?
  A40: At the resurrection, believers being raised up in glory, shall be openly acknowledged and acquitted in the Day of Judgment, and made perfectly blessed in the full enjoying of God to all eternity.

 This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator, section 1 of 10, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] The Upper case “C” is added to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds this to the WCF.  The source is the Savoy.
• [3] Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans) pg. 282.
• [4] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess, Volume I, The Triune God (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 235.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 7: Of God’s Covenant, Section 3 of 3, the following:

3. This covenant is revealed in the gospel; first of all to Adam in the promise of salvation by the seed of the woman, and afterwards by farther steps, until the full discovery thereof was completed in the New Testament; and it is founded in that eternal covenant transaction that was between the Father and the Son about the redemption of the elect; and it is alone by the grace of this covenant that all the posterity of fallen Adam that ever were saved did obtain life and blessed immortality, man being now utterly incapable of acceptance with God upon those terms on which Adam stood in his state of innocency.[1]  ( Genesis 3:15; Hebrews 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 11;6, 13; Romans 4:1, 2, &c.; Acts 4:12; John 8:56 )

The 1689 Confession states: This covenant is revealed in the gospel;

“This covenant” refers back to the previous paragraph of the confession that spoke of the covenant of grace.  So the covenant of grace is revealed in the gospel.  This is so simple, and yet so profound; it has implications that reach far and wide.

For example, Billy Graham has stated that God’s mercy is wide,[2] meaning that those in dark lands without the gospel may indeed be saved if they live up to the light they have, but if the covenant of grace is revealed in the gospel, then that means that those who do not know of the gospel are still only aware of the covenant of works. Obviously, they are not aware of the works covenant in a detailed doctrinal way, but the Law is written in their conscience, and since they do not obey that Law written in their hearts by God, their consciences condemn them as guilty before God; and certainly they are.

• “For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus” (Romans 2:12-16 ESV).

Romans 3:11-12 makes it clear that “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.  All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”  So, although a way has been open to heaven through the gospel revealed in the covenant of grace, how shall they hear of it, and how shall it be revealed unless they have a preacher.  Missions and evangelism is so very important for this reason; the gospel is the only message that reveals the covenant of grace; the gospel is the only power of God for salvation (Romans 1:16), and it is the only means or way that the Father uses to effectually call the elect to himself.  So though God’s mercy is wide, the way to that wide mercy is narrow.

Billy Graham told Larry King (see link in the footnotes) after denying that Christianity is the only way of salvation, that he has mellowed over the years; but the reality is that he has fallen from grace; he is no longer holding to the truth that the covenant of grace is revealed only in the gospel.  Billy Graham told Robert Schuller in essence that the covenant of works is still a valid way to salvation for those who have not heard of Christ.  But there is no grace in the covenant of works, none, only condemnation for our utter failure in keeping every aspect of that covenant.  It is only by the law of faith in Jesus Christ for his work of atonement to satisfy divine judgment, that saves; to say otherwise, is to no longer believe the gospel.

Let us all beware that in our old age many seem to grow weary of carrying the cross and the shame and scandal it is to the world around us, but the hard truth is that unless we endure to the end we will not be saved.  Those are Jesus’ words not mine.  Paul was a preacher of the gospel also, but Paul was aware of the dangers when he said: “But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified” 1 Corinthians 9:27 ESV).

As I approach fifty years old, I begin to feel that desire for peace, but to preach the gospel is to bring a sword of division; it is to enter into turmoil with others, and to receive hostility.  Obviously, I do not know the depth of Billy Graham’s heart and mind, but I at least imagine that this is his issue.  He is tired of the war.

I think of Isaac Watts Hymn, “I am a Soldier of the Cross.”  The whole hymn is very encouraging, so I cite it all, but I think especially of the second stanza:

Am I a soldier of the cross,
A follower of the Lamb,
And shall I fear to own His cause,
Or blush to speak His Name?

Must I be carried to the skies
On flowery beds of ease,
While others fought to win the prize,
And sailed through bloody seas?

Are there no foes for me to face?
Must I not stem the flood?
Is this vile world a friend to grace,
To help me on to God?

Sure I must fight if I would reign;
Increase my courage, Lord.
I’ll bear the toil, endure the pain,
Supported by Thy Word.

Thy saints in all this glorious war
Shall conquer, though they die;
They see the triumph from afar,
By faith’s discerning eye.

When that illustrious day shall rise,
And all Thy armies shine
In robes of victory through the skies,
The glory shall be Thine.

The 1689 Confession states: first of all to Adam in the promise of salvation by the seed of the woman,

So the 1689 Confession goes back to the first time the gospel was revealed in the covenant of grace, all the way back to Adam.  The promise of salvation is seen in Genesis 3:15: I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”  

The 1689 Confession states: and afterwards by farther steps, until the full discovery thereof was completed in the New Testament;

Since that promise to Adam, the promise has been given progressively in farther steps.  Perhaps one could say that as the proper time for the administration of the gospel in Jesus Christ has come closer, those steps have increased their pace and stride.  But certainly in the completion of the New Testament this promise of salvation has been fully discovered and fully revealed.

Here are two examples from the Old Testament where we see farther steps of the covenant of grace:

• “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, ³² not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. ³³  But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  Jer. 31:31-33 (ESV)
• And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.  And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. Ezek 36:26-27 (ESV)

Here are some New Testament passages that show us the fullness of the discovery of the gospel in the covenant of grace as come:

• “as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.” Eph 1:10 (ESV)
•  But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. Gal 4:4-5 (ESV)
•  “In hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began and at the proper time manifested in his word through the preaching with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior;” Titus 1:2-3 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: and it is founded in that eternal covenant transaction that was between the Father and the Son about the redemption of the elect;

“It” refers to the covenant of grace.  This founding of the covenant of grace is based upon a preceding covenant.  Before the covenant of grace was made, the Father and Son in eternity past, made a covenant with each other; a covenant transaction was made in regards to redeeming the elect.  This covenant is referred to in theology as the Covenant of Redemption.

• “Who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, ¹⁰ and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.”                  2 Tim 1:9-10 (ESV)
• “In hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began and at the proper time manifested in his word through the preaching with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior;” Titus 1:2-3 (ESV)

•  The Westminster Larger Catechism 31 asks and answers: 
• Q31: With whom was the covenant of grace made?
• A31: The covenant of grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and in him with all the elect as his seed.

• The Westminster Larger Catechism 32 also asks and answers:
• Q32: How is the grace of God manifested in the second covenant?
• A32: The grace of God is manifested in the second covenant, in that he freely provides and offers to sinners a Mediator, and life and salvation by him; and requiring faith as the condition to interest them in him, promises and gives his Holy Spirit to all his elect, to work in them that faith, with all other saving graces; and to enable them unto all holy obedience, as the evidence of the truth of their faith and thankfulness to God, and as the way which he has appointed them to salvation.

You can see here in the Westminster Larger Catechism the very last paragraph that we just covered reflected in the 1689 Confession reflected.  The design of the Westminster Larger Catechism was for the pastor to use as sermons whereas the Shorter Catechism was designed for memorization, family worship, and private use.  Of course the Larger and Shorter Catechisms are just summaries of the Westminster Confession of Faith, one being a longer summary the other being a shorter summary.

Let me just continue the citation of the Larger Catechism since it deals with the covenant of grace.  This is a diversion from the third paragraph, but these are helpful.

• Westminster Larger Catechism #33
• Q33: Was the covenant of grace always administered after one and the same manner?
• A33: The covenant of grace was not always administered after the same manner, but the administrations of it under the Old Testament were different from those under the New.

• Westminster Larger Catechism #34
• Q34: How was the covenant of grace administered under the Old Testament?
• A34: The covenant of grace was administered under the Old Testament, by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the Passover, and other types and ordinances, which did all foresignify Christ then to come, and were for that time sufficient to build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom they then had full remission of sin, and eternal salvation.

• Westminster Larger Catechism #35
• Q35: How is the covenant of grace administered under the New Testament?
• A35: Under the New Testament, when Christ the substance was exhibited, the same covenant of grace was and still is to be administered in the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper; in which grace and salvation are held forth in more fulness, evidence, and efficacy, to all nations.

This following question and answer complete that subject in the Larger Catechism, and moves into the next chapter 8, Of Christ the Mediator.  But we are not quite done with this third paragraph of chapter seven.

• Westminster Larger Catechism #36
• Q36: Who is the Mediator of the covenant of grace?
• A36: The only Mediator of the covenant of grace is the Lord Jesus Christ, who, being the eternal Son of God, of one substance and equal with the Father, in the fulness of time became man, and so was and continues to be God and man, in two entire distinct natures, and one person, forever.

The 1689 Confession states: and it is alone by the grace of this covenant that all the posterity of fallen Adam that ever were saved did obtain life and blessed immortality,

There is no other covenant, but the covenant of grace, by which anyone from Adam to present, and on into the future will ever be saved, obtain eternal life, and blessed immortality.  Again, the there are no other options, no other religion, no work of the Law, no other way but by the covenant of grace, which is “by Jesus Christ, requiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved;”  This quote is from the prior paragraph two of chapter 7.

The 1689 Confession states: man being now utterly incapable of acceptance with God upon those terms on which Adam stood in his state of innocency.

 This statement follows as an antithesis to the prior phrase.  Since the covenant of grace alone is the only way anyone was or will ever be saved, this phrase points out that the other covenant of works is no longer a means to being saved.  Why?  Because only Adam was in a state or condition in which to fullfill the terms of that covenant, but when he sinned he, and his posterity, lost their original state of righteousness and are now “utterly incapable” of fulfilling the terms of the covenant of works.  Since no man can fullfill the terms of the covenant of works, God will not accept anyone under those former terms, except of Jesus  Christ because he is the only man who fullfilled the covenant of works (see Romans 5:12-21).

Man can only be accepeted by God under the terms of the new contract, the contract of grace and faith.  For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse;” (Gal. 3:10a ESV).  The law of works is replaced by the new covenant which is based upon the law of faith (see Romans 3:27-28). “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12 (ESV).   Praise to God for his indescribable gift of Jesus.

• Section IV of the WCF and Savoy is removed entirely by the 1689.[3]
• Section V of the WCF is removed entirely by the 1689, and replaced by the 1689 Confession’s own unique wording.
• Section VI of the WCF is removed entirely by the 1689 Confession.[4]

As we conclude this chapter, we see that the chapter was not focused upon all of God’s covenants (thus entitled, Of God’s Covenant, in the singular), but only on the one directly bearing upon the salvation of the sinner.  The focus was upon the covenant of grace, and contrasted with this covenant was the covenant of works.

It is now very logical that we should focus in the next section upon the One who mediates this new contract, or covenant, between the Father and the elect.  “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5 ESV).

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 7, Of God’s Covenant, section 3 of 3, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this entire section to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.  It is interesting to note that the Savoy made great changes to the WCF for this section.  Apparently Collins felt as well the need to entirely rewrite this section.  It appears to me to be a change of improvement of tightening to both the WCF and the Savoy. Here is the wording of the WCF in its section V: “This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law, and in the time of the Gospel: under the law it was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to the people of the Jews, all foresignifying Christ to come; which were, for that time, sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal salvation; and is called the Old Testament.”Here is the wording of the Savoy Declaration its section V: “Although this covenant hath been differently and variously administered in respect of ordinances and institutions in the time of the law, and since the coming of Christ in the flesh; yet for the substance and efficacy of it, to all its spiritual and saving ends, it is one and the same; upon the account of which various dispensations, it is called the Old and New Testament.”  
• [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axxlXy6bLH0 This is not necessarily the best quality video, and I suppose a real skeptic could question it, but if so then see Billy Graham also on Larry king here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cTr34ZnGG0&feature=related or John MacArthur at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDZ1h7QdaNs I do not necessarily endorse these particular YouTube channels that have these on them; I have not checked them out carefully so just because I link there to hear the video do not think I support the particular channel.
• [3] Here is the wording of the WCF and Savoy for their section IV: “This covenant of grace is frequently set forth in the Scripture by the name of a Testament, in reference to the death of Jesus Christ the testator, and to the everlasting inheritance, with all things belonging to it, therein bequeathed.”
• [4] Here is the wording of the WCF for its section VI: “Under the Gospel, when Christ, the substance, was exhibited, the ordinances in which this covenant is dispensed are the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper: which, though fewer in number, and administered with more simplicity, and less outward glory, yet, in them, it is held forth in more fullness, evidence, and spiritual efficacy, to all nations, both Jews and Gentiles; and is called the New Testament. There are not therefore two covenants of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various dispensations.]

 The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 7: Of God’s Covenant, Section 2 of 3, the  following: 

2. Moreover, Man having brought himself under the curse of the Law by his fall,[1] it pleased the Lord to make a covenant of grace, wherein he freely offereth unto Sinners Life and Salvation[2] by Jesus Christ, requiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved; and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal Life, his Holy Spirit, to make them willing and able to believe. ( Genesis 2:17; Galatians 3:10; Romans 3:20, 21; Romans 8:3; Mark 16:15, 16; John 3:16; Ezekiel 36:26, 27; John 6:44, 45; Psalms 110:3 )

Paragraph two of the Westminster Confession and the Savoy Declaration is removed entirely from the 1689 Confession.[3]  See the footnote for the omitted wording from these two confessions.  It appears to me that this was removed so as to avoid redundancy.

The 1689 states: Moreover, Man having brought himself under the curse of the Law by his fall,

It is important to keep in mind that man, by his disobedience to the covenant of works, brought himself under the curse of the Law.  Yes, God did the cursing, but man did the disobedience.  This paragraph two in the 1689 Confession follows what has been carefully laid out in the preceding sixth chapter which dealt with sin and the fall of mankind.

 What do the Scriptures tell us about this disobedience and curse?  Here are just a few passages on this subject:

•  For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.”   Gal 3:10 (ESV)
•  For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.  Romans 3:20 (ESV)
•  For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh,  Romans 8:3 (ESV)

How sad it is that the Law, a means of blessing and life (the covenant of life), became a means of cursing.  Is the Law the problem here since the Law became, as it were, a curse?  Paul said this: “Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure” (Romans 7:13).  Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit said that the Law is good; it is sin that is the problem.  The Law actually serves to show how exceedingly sinful sin is.  If sin can make something good for mankind into a curse, indeed how exceedingly sinful is sin?  This reminds me of a Puritan book by Ralph Venning entitled The Sinfulness of Sin.[4]  The book is based upon this very passage and goes into great detail to show how sinful sin is, and it is a fantastic book of 284 pages, well worth reading.

The 1689 states: it pleased the Lord to make a covenant of grace, wherein he freely offereth unto Sinners Life and Salvation by Jesus Christ,

“It pleased the Lord.”  The reason the Lord made a covenant of grace was because it pleased Him.  Let’s not take this for granted.  First, we must always be aware that God is free to do what he wants, to whom he wants, to what he wants, and how he wants.  God is under no obligation to make a covenant that is based upon his grace.  He could have, if it had pleased him, made only his covenant of works.  He could have made no other covenant, but because it is what he wanted to do, he made a covenant of grace based upon the law of faith, rather than the law of works.  The point is that he was free to choose as he pleased.  So the freedom of God is a wonderful thing.  Some say because God is good that he made a covenant of grace, but this, strictly speaking, is not true.  Had God judged all mankind with no way of finding mercy, God would still have been good.  It is more accurate that God made a grace covenant because of his freedom and his good pleasure. 

Many do not like the doctrine of God’s freedom or the doctrine of God’s pleasure.  These doctrines remind me of a scene in the movie, Chariots of Fire.  The character by the name of Sandy is walking out of church with several people and he asks Eric Liddell’s father, “Surely, a touch of liberality would do no harm?  Liddell’s father responds, “Sandy, the kingdom of God is not a democracy.  The Lord never seeks re-election.  There is no discussion, no deliberation, no referenda as to which road to take.  There is one right, one wrong; one absolute Ruler.”  Sandy, almost interrupting says, “A dictator you mean?”  Liddell’s father responds in his Scottish accent, “Aye, but a benign loving dictator.”  Sandy, responds, “So much for your freedom of choice.”  Eric Liddell following behind the two men says, “You still got a choice Sandy.  Nobody’s forcing you to follow him.” 

God is, in human terms, a dictator; but the fact that he is a benign and loving dictator gives us hope.  But his benign and loving dictatorship does not “dictate” that God is forced to show mercy.  He is not forced, and in fact, does not show mercy to all.  This justice that God shows to many, and the mercy that he shows to many, flow only out of HIS freedom of choice.  “In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Ephesians 1:11).  God is love, and yet He said, “And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy” (Exodus 33:19; Romans 9:15).  The implication of this passage is also that He will show just wrath to to whom He will show just wrath, but in all of this God remains love.  His mercy is based upon his freedom to choose what pleases Him; that is it.

The fact that God was not obligated to elect anyone for his mercy, should cause our hearts to flow with gratitude that he elected anyone.  Though he did not have to show mercy to his enemies (Romans 5:9), yet he did.  The Baptist Catechism asks, “Did God leave all mankind to perish…?”  It is implied in the question that he could have done so. 

• Baptist Catechism 23
• Q23. Did God leave all mankind to perish in the estate of sin and misery?
  A23. God having out of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of the estate of sin and misery, and to bring them into an estate of salvation by a Redeemer.

 The 1689 states: wherein he freely offereth unto Sinners Life and Salvation by Jesus Christ,

This gospel is freely offered to Sinners.  Practically speaking there are those who will never hear the gospel, because in God’s providence the gospel was never preached while they were living (see chapter 20 of the 1689); the point here is not that all hear the gospel, but that it is offered freely or generously to all who hear it.  Though the general call of the gospel is freely offered to all who hear it, it is only effectual to the elect because of God’s Spirit at work in them.

The 1689 states:  requiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved;

Though the gospel is offered freely, faith is required to be saved. There is no getting around this fact.  Though God elects, the elect still must believe.  There is no biblical ground for the doctrine of Eternal Justification.  The elect are not justified until in God’s foreordained time they believe.  Though the elect were chosen in eternity past, they were not justified in eternity past.  The doctrine of election and justification are related, but definitely distinct from one another.  In the 1689 Confession it is simply and emphatically stated that without faith no man will be justified.

The Scriptures are very clear on this and here are just two of many:

• And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Mark 16:15-16 (ESV)
•  “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.  John 3:16 (ESV)

The 1689 states: and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal Life, his Holy Spirit, to make them willing and able to believe.

The Father promises to give to the elect sinner, the Holy Spirit.  The Spirit, who regenerates the sinner, makes them willing and able to believe the gospel freely offered.  Here are some passages along these lines: 

• And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. ²⁷  And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.  Ezek 36:26-27 (ESV)
• No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. John 6:44 (ESV)
• It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— John 6:45 (ESV)
• Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power, in holy garments; from the womb of the morning, the dew of your youth will be yours.  Psalms 110:3 (ESV)

Many feel they must hold onto the belief that they chose Christ, and frankly, I will not argue with such a person because in one sense it is true.  The real issue is not whether they chose Christ, but how and why they chose Christ?  Did they do it on their own initiative, or were they made willing and able?  Why did they come and not their neighbor who heard the same message?  Are they better than their neighbor who did not chose Christ (which is implied if they did it outside of the Spirit making them willing or able), or was it the Father drawing them by sending the Holy Spirit to do a work in them?  What did Jesus say:  “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you” (John 15:16).  Does one really want to take credit for choosing Christ?  Most will concede that the Spirit must have done a work, or else they never would have come. 

Charles Spurgeon said:

“I have thought, if God had left me alone, and had not touched me by His grace, what a great sinner I should have been! I should have run to the utmost lengths of sin, dived into the very depths of evil, nor should I have stopped at any vice or folly, if God had not restrained me. I feel that I should have been a very king of sinners, if God had let me alone. I cannot understand the reason why I am saved, except upon the ground that God would have it so. I cannot, if I look ever so earnestly, discover any kind of reason in myself why I should be a partaker of Divine grace.”[5]

“John Newton used to tell a whimsical story, and laugh at it, too, of a good woman who said, in order to prove the doctrine of election, “Ah! sir, the Lord must have loved me before I was born, or else He would not have seen anything in me to love afterwards.” I am sure it is true in my case; I believe the doctrine of election, because I am quite certain that, if God had not chosen me, I should never have chosen Him; and I am sure He chose me before I was born, or else He never would have chosen me afterwards; and He must have elected me for reasons unknown to me, for I never could find any reason in myself why He should have looked upon me with special love. So I am forced to accept that great Biblical doctrine.”[6]

Here are two of many Scripture passages that could be cited to show that God is the one who draws us and works in us to create faith:

• “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” Ephesians 2:8, 9
• In this passage in Ephesians, the antecedent of “this, in the phrase “And this is not your own doing,” is “faith” not “grace.”  In grammar, the pronoun refers back to the last noun, and that noun is “faith”, not “grace.”  Further, the pronoun “it” in the next phrase also refers to “faith.”  It does not make sense to say: “For by grace you are saved through faith.  And [grace] is not your own doing; [grace] is the gift of God, not a result of works that no one may boast.” No following grammatical rules it states: “For by grace you are saved through faith.  And [faith] is not your own doing; [faith] is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no man may boast.”  Not even our faith is a work because God gifts it to us.  Sure we exercise it, but since faith is gifted and the ability to exercise the faith is granted, where is there room for even an ounce of boasting? 
• “And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” Phil 1:6 (ESV)
• “looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith,” Heb 12:2 (ESV)
• These passages make the truth clear that it is the Father, through the Holy Spirit that He sends, who initiates our coming to Christ through faith.  It is Christ’s choosing us first that causes us to choose him.  He is the One who began the good work.  He is also the one who will complete the work, all glory to God alone.

 So to bring this paragraph altogether in summary, the covenant of grace is freely offered to sinners through the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, and God assures that those to whom he has foreordained do enter into the covenant of grace by the sending his Spirit to make the elect willing and able to come to Christ, by faith. 

As it concerns the covenant of grace, we can see the following steps so far in the 1689 Confession regarding the order in the salvation.  The Father, in eternity past, decreed to save many (the elect in Scripture), and the Father also decreed, in eternity past, to pass over the others, giving them the just penalty for their sin.  The Father and the Son covenanted together that Jesus will come and be a penal substitutionary atonement to satisfy divine justice on behalf of the elect.  Redemption is accomplished in time by Christ’s passive and active obedience, meaning that he obeying the Law (active) and received the penalty from the Father on behalf of the sin of elect (passive).  This opened heaven’s gates to all who receive Christ by faith alone.  We also see that at the right time, the Father sends the Spirit to cause the elect to be willing and able to place their faith in Christ alone. 

Though we are not quite there yet, the confession has been laying a foundation for the ordo salutus (order of salvation) to be explained in the up coming chapters.  But before we get to that wonderful subject, the confession will lay out a foundational understanding of Christ as Mediator (chapter 8), and then the nature of man’s free-will, before the fall, and then after the fall (chapter 9).  After these two important foundations are laid, then the important truths of effectual calling (regeneration is part of this), justification, adoption, sanctification, faith, repentance, good works, perseverance, and assurance are addressed, each with their own chapter.  But before we move to Christ as Mediator in the next chapter, we have one more important paragraph on the subject of God’s covenant.  

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 7, Of God’s Covenant, section 2 of 3, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.  This wording replaces “Man by his fall having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was please to make a second, commonly called the” from the WCF and the Savoy.
• [2] 1689 places these words in the upper case.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [3] This is what the WCF and the Savoy state in their section II: “The first covenant made with man, was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.”
• [4] Ralph Venning, The Sinfulness of Sin (The Banner of Truth Trust, Puritan Paperbacks: Carlisle, Pennsylvania).
• [5] Charles Spurgeon, A Defense of Calvinism (http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm)
• [6] Ibid

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 7: Of God’s Covenant, Section 1 of 3, the following: 

1. The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience to him as their creator, yet they could never have attained the[1] [any fruition of him as their blessedness and][2]  reward of life [3]but by some voluntary condescension on God’s part, which he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant. ( Luke 17:10; Job 35:7,8 )

The 1689 Confession states: “The distance between God and the creature is so great”

The Confession seeks to establish first things first.  It is certainly important when you talk about God making covenants with mere men, that we understand first of all God made us, and that God is under no obligation to make covenants with mere creatures; God is free; he makes covenants by grace with mere man.

The 1689 Confession states:  “that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience to him as their creator,”

God has created us, therefore we are obligated to him, and since we are created reasonable, with reasoning abilities, we owe God our obedience to his laws.

The 1689 Confession states: “yet they could never have attained the reward of life but by some voluntary condescension on God’s part,”

R.C. Sproul states:

• “God’s willingness to enter into a covenant (that is, an agreement, contract, or pact) with us is itself a matter of grace.”
•  “…section 1 reminds us that any covenant into which God enters with us is an act of condescension. Because he is not obligated to be in a covenant relationship with us, even the covenant of works is founded on God’s grace.”
• “Reformed theology is often nicknamed “covenant theology.” The concept of covenant, which provides the structure or framework of redemptive history and of the whole scope of theology, is vitally important.”[4]

The 1689 Confession states: “which he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant.” 

Sproul has ably touched on this, but God only does what he pleases because it pleases him; he does nothing out of obligation.  So as we embark upon the chapter about God’s covenant, we must keep in mind every covenant is ultimately based upon God’s free (freedom) grace in his stooping down to deal with us by way of covenants.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 7, Of God’s Covenant, section 1 of 3, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

•  [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF.  The source is the Savoy.
• [2] 1689 removed this from the WCF.  The source is the Savoy.
• [3] 1689 adds this to the WCF.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [4] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess, Vol. 1 (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 205.  I have mentioned this previously, but I should remind readers that R.C. Sproul has written this commentary on the Westminster Confession, NOT the 1689 Confession.  Where the 1689 Confession and the WCF parallel each other, Sproul’s commentary is extremely useful (as are all of his writings).  I have omitted one small portion of his quote here (indicated by the ellipsis) since it refers to section two of the WCF that the 1689 has omitted.  I am not trying to be sneaky here, but avoid confusion.  The 1689 deleted the WCF section two and the Savoy section two.  This is what the WCF and the Savoy state in their section II: “The first covenant made with man, was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.”

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, Section 5 of 5 the following: 

5. This corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and the first[1] [all the] motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.
( Romans 7:18,23; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8; Romans 7:23-25; Galatians 5:17 ) [2]

I think this quote from R.C. Sproul explains this paragraph very well:

•  “After considering the reality of original sin and our corrupt nature, the confession explains that regeneration does not instantly and automatically eliminate the consequences of our fallen nature. Although we are justified in an instant, we are not instantly sanctified. We remain tainted by sin’s power until we are completely glorified in heaven after death. Regeneration frees us from total bondage to sin, from moral inability. When he justifies us, God pardons our original sin and places it in a dying condition. Nevertheless, the corruption remains throughout our lives, and its remains yield actions that may truly and properly be called sin. Section 5 denies any notion that the Christian is perfected in this life, either initially by regeneration or later in a special work of sanctification. The effect of the grace of sanctification is taken up in greater detail in chapter 13.”[3] 

The 1689 Confession states: “the first motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.”

What does this mean?  There is a modern wording of the 1689 Confession called A Faith to Confess, and it modernizes the language of the 1689 confession; it states: …the corruption itself and all that issues from it, are truly and properly sin.[4]  I think this clarifies the meaning. 

Samuel Waldron indicates the meaning of this paragraph:

• “The specific point of the paragraph is, however, that the corruptions of the believers are sinful.”[5] 

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 6, Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, section 5 of 5, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy in place of  “all the.”  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] [Chapter VI] of the WCF and Savoy are removed by the 1689.
• [3] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess, Vol. 1 (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 192.
• [4]  A Faith to Confess (Leeds, Carey Publications, Ltd.) pg. 26 from LBC 6:5.  This is the 1689 Confession rewritten in modern English.  It is helpful, but it is not as precise as the original; its use should be used thoughtfully, and it would be best to have the original text by your side as you read the modern language.
• [5] Samuel Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Darlington, England, Evangelical Press) pg. 103.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, Section 4 of 5 the following: 

4. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions. ( Romans 8:7; Colossians 1:21; James 1:14, 15; Matthew 15:19 )

The 1689 Confession states: “From this original corruption”, of course refers back to the imputed corruption from Adam to Mankind from the preceding paragraph 3.

The 1689 Confession states: “whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good and wholly inclined to all evil”

We could certainly camp here a while to discuss the meaning and the ramifications of this statement.  We are indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good because of this original corruption. 

 To break this phrase down a little we see:

From this original corruption:

• We are utterly indisposed to all good. (Negative state to doing good)
• We are utterly disabled to all good.  (Negative state to doing good)
• We are made opposite to all good. (Negative state to doing good)
• We are wholly inclined to all evil.  (Positive state to doing evil)

 Utterly: in an extreme or complete way.  We could say utterly means totally.  This paragraph in part addresses the doctrine of the total depravity of Man.

Certainly we can see this in the Word of God in many places.  Her are just a few:

• For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. Romans 8:7-8 (ESV)
• And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, Col 1:21 (ESV)
• None is righteous, no, not one; ¹¹ no one understands; no one seeks for God. ¹² All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” Romans 3:10-12 (ESV)

The Scriptures leave no wiggle room here, nor does the 1689 Confession.

To further look at this topic, let’s look at some helpful summary statements of the 1689 Confession from the Baptist Shorter Catechism:

• Baptist Catechism #20
• Q: Into what estate did the fall bring mankind?
  A: The fall brought mankind into an estate of sin and misery.

• Baptist Catechism #21
• Q: Wherein consists the sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell?
  A: The sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell, consists in the guilt of Adam’s first sin, the want of original righteousness, and the corruption of his whole nature, which is commonly called Original Sin; together with all actual transgressions which proceed from it.

Here we can see Shorter Catechism Question twenty-one visually:

Baptist Catechism #22

Q: What is the misery of that estate whereinto man fell?
A: All mankind by their fall lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all miseries in this life, to death itself, and to the pains of hell for ever.

Here we can see Shorter Catechism Question twenty visually:

So what we see here in paragraph 4 of the 1689 Confession is a sentence with an introduction, body, and conclusion:

• Introduction: From this original corruption
• Body: whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil
• Conclusion: do proceed all actual transgressions.

Sometimes I find it helpful to temporarily remove the body to help clarify the most basic meaning of a paragraph, so as to help avoid forgetting the connection of the very last phrase to the initial phrase.

When we do this we have: “From this original corruption”… “do proceed all actual corruptions.” 

But the meat in the middle of the sandwich (so to speak) is very critical, and it tells us why or how actual corrupt deeds proceed from the original corruption that is transmitted to us from Adam’s sin.

Some may feel that the transmittal or imputation of Adam’s sin to all mankind is rather theoretical, but the fact that actual transgressions flow from the original sin or corruption, removes all doubt that it is mere theory.  Some may feel that the transference or inheritance of Adam’s sin to Mankind is unfair.  They may feel it is unjust of God to judge us based on another’s sin (Adam’s); but the fact remains that we actually sin, literally and personally breaking God’s law every hour.  

God has been gracious to reveal to us exactly why we sin actually and personally.  If we did not know, we might believe ignorant things and dwell in immense frustration; perhaps, we might think it possible to stop sinning; some believe that is possible.  The Bible shows us that Adam broke God’s covenant, and through that sin came into the world.  This is why we sin; God must have thought it important for us to know why, not just the fact that we sin.  

As we will see from the next paragraph, this paragraph (four), lays a critical foundation for the Christian in understanding what happens to this original corrupt nature once God has regenerated them and given them a new nature.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 6, Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, section 4 of 5, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

There is a new publication this year of The Baptist Confession of Faith & The Baptist Catechism (Solid Ground Christian Books and Reformed Baptist Publications).  As a result of this, I am doing what I should have done from the beginning; rather than citing the Westminster Confession Shorter Catechism, which I vary in opinion on a few areas as a Baptist, I will from now on cite from The Baptist Catechism.  Eventually, I will go back and correct the previous posts to match.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, Section 3 of 5 the following: 

3. They being the root, and by God’s appointment, standing in the room and stead of[1] all mankind, the guilt of the[2] Sin[3] was imputed, and corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them free. [4] ( Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21, 22, 45, 49; Psalms 51:5; Job 14:4; Ephesians 2:3; Romans 6:20 Romans 5:12; Hebrews 2:14, 15; 1 Thessalonians 1:10 )

The 1689 Confession states: They being the root and by God’s appointment, standing in the room and stead of all mankind

“They”, of course, is referring to our first parents.  The Confession is reiterating and clarifying the connection between all mankind and mankind’s first parents.  Parents and children are inseparably linked in many ways.  Here the connection between mankind and their first parents is that:

• Our first parents are the root
• Our first parents stand in the room and stead (by God’s appointment).

One of the grammatical considerations in determining the meaning of the 1689 Confession is its use of  “and“.  For example in the above statement: standing in the room and stead of all mankind.  Does this “and” add more information as an additional phrase, or is it just a repetitive statement for emphasis by using a synonym?  The way to help answer this is by determining whether the additional phrase is similar enough in meaning to the first in order to justify categorizing it as an emphasis phrase.  If the second statement’s meaning varies enough from the first phrase, you probably want to categorize it as additional information.  Now for you grammatical whizzes, what I said is probably grammar 101 subject matter, but more those like me this little clarification helps.  So I say all of that to say that I think this phrase after the “and” is more of an emphasis than additional information.        

We can kick and scream all want about Adam and Eve standing in our stead, but let’s remember God intended (notwithstanding his decree in the fall) this “standing in the stead” before the fall for our good.  It is also a reminder that when God tells us to do or not to do something, he means it.  The resultant disobedience was truly “epic”.  The bottom line to “the covenant of life” being made with Adam and to all mankind by Adam, is that it is all by God’s appointment.  But with the fall, a promise accompanied it:

• If, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. ¹⁸ Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. ¹⁹ For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.” Romans 5:12-19 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: the guilt of the Sin was imputed, and corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation

Having the understanding established that our first parents were the root and stood in our stead, we see that their obedience or disobedience would be credited to us. Unfortunately, our first parents sinned, and so that is what was imputed (or credited) to all mankind.  What exactly was imputed to all mankind?  Sin and corruption were imputed and conveyed. 

• Imputed: To be accounted to, credited to a person.  
• Conveyed: There are several uses of this word, but for our purposes it refers to the act of communicating or transferring something to someone.

Our first parent’s Sin and corruption is transferred or communicated to all mankind who descend from Adam and Eve by the usual means of a man and woman’s union with each other producing a child.  Why would there by this exclusion or qualification of “ordinary generation”? 

Jesus Christ was not the result of ordinary generation; the sin and corruption were not imputed or conveyed to Christ.  Let’s be clear, Jesus was fully human (fully a man), but the sinful nature was not imputed or conveyed to Jesus Christ.  There is a certain degree of mystery in this “conceiving by the Holy Spirit” and this mystery has been taken to extremes throughout Church history by some, including or especially the Gnostics.  But this “conception by the Holy Spirit” in no way disqualifies Christ as being fully human, as well as fully divine.

Again here we see the shorter catechism on this subject:

• Shorter Catechism #17
• Q: Did all mankind fall in Adam’s first transgression?
  A: The covenant being made with Adam, not only for himself, but for his posterity; all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him, in his first transgression.

A.W. Pink states:

•  “Adam acted not simply as a private person, the results of whose conduct affected none but himself, but rather that he transacted as a public person, so that what he did directly concerned and judicially involved others.  Adam was very much more than the father of the human race: he was also their legal agent, standing in their stead. His descendants were not only in him seminally as their natural head, but were in him also morally and legally as their moral and forensic head. In other words, by Divine constitution and covenant arrangement, Adam acted as the federal representative of all his children. By an act of His sovereign will, it pleased God to ordain that Adam’s relation to his natural seed should be like unto that which Christ sustained to His spiritual seed—the one acting on the behalf of many.”[5]

We can see evidence of this sin and corruption to all mankind in life, but as well we see in the Scriptures that there is no doubt about this transference of corruption to mankind from our first parents.

• “Among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.  Eph 2:3 (ESV)
• “The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” Gen 6:5 (ESV)
• “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Psalms 51:5 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them free.

We see a descriptive list of the results of the sin and corruption being transferred and to mankind.

•  being now conceived in sin,
• and by nature children of wrath,
• the servants of sin,
• the subjects of death,
• and all other miseries,
• spiritual,
• temporal,
• and eternal,
• unless the Lord Jesus set them free.

We could spend a lot of time here in discussing each one of these, but due to depth of time and words it would take, and due to the somewhat self-explanatory nature of this list, we will move on.  What is especially hopeful is that there is a way of escape—unless the Lord Jesus sets them free!

No one enjoys spending time on the bad news of this reality of sin and death for all of mankind.  American Evangelicals especially tend to just want to dwell on the positive aspects of Christianity, but this unpleasant aspect of the truth is just as real and just as important as the “good news” of the “gospel” (redundant I know). 

There is a real serious problem in Evangelicalism today, and at its core is a moving away from the true full biblical gospel, which is the only gospel.  An understanding of what the gospel is saving us from is essential, for I am afraid that without that understanding of the above “negative” list, the gospel message ends up for many being very foggy. 

If I may be so bold as to say, if one does not understand the biblical gospel, it is impossible to be saved.  I could make some qualifications and round that statement out a bit, but still I stand by the statement.  I think we see this in these passages: 

• “Because of the hope laid up for you in heaven. Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, ⁶ which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing—as it also does among you, since the day you heard it and understood the grace of God in truth.” Col 1:5-6 (ESV)
•  “But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?” Romans 10:14 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession in Chapter 20, The Gospel and the Extent of the Grace Thereof, has some important things to say along these lines if you care to read ahead.  But Lord willing we will get there. 

If the gospel is not being preached accurately (meaning Biblically), in reality, another gospel is preached instead; and there is no “other” gospel (Gal. 1:6).    So this is not just a matter of refining and making more precise the doctrine of the gospel.  If you were drowning because you fell off a large ocean liner and there was only one life-preserver on board, it would be absolutely critical that the real life-preserver be thrown out to you.  Something that resembled a life-preserver, but was not capable of actually saving you, would not do.

• “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.”  Romans 1:16 (ESV)

For many “coming to Christ” is just one of several ingredients to a happy life.  Why?  Because that is the message that is preached.  I have heard multiple times that we should come to Christ so we can be happy(said in various ways), and so one can be on the winning side, or so one can be a better father, or a better you today, and the list goes on.  These man-centered appeals are not the calls to repentance that our Lord Jesus Himself gave when he preached the gospel, nor that the apostles preached.  If we are not preaching Jesus’ or Paul’s gospel, then whose are we preaching?  Does this matter to anyone? It seems that too many “Evangelicals” or even most Evangelicals today, it does not matter.  Perhaps the thought is that even though it is not what Jesus preached, it’s close enough.  This spiritual lethargy is deadly.  It is as though we have lost our way.  We are so lost that we do not even know we are lost; now that is lost!  The appeal that “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life” message will not do; it is not gospel.  IT IS NOT THE GOSPEL! 

 As Pastor Paul Washer (see one of his sermons on the left margin here) has said, the response that the sinner is likely to give to that kind of message is basically (yes there is a little irony mixed in here), “You mean God loves me?  That’s great, because I love me too.  You mean God has a wonderful plan for my life?  That is fantastic, because I have a wonderful plan for my life also. Can I have two of those?” 

The message that must be preached is that if you do not come to Christ (through repentance for sin and in faith resting wholly on Christ alone) you alone will bear the heavy judgment of God for your sin.  Now the gospel can be stated and presented in various ways, and certainly we “come to Christ” not just for “fire insurance” as they say.  He is the life, the bread of life, the fountain of everlasting water that leaves us never thirsting, but primarily the message of fleeing from the wrath of God and being reconciled to God (because we are alienated and at war with God) is what we see in the Bible.  The emphasis is now so far out of balance that sin and repentance and God’s wrath are rarely emphasized.  The blessings flow from salvation, not the salvation from the blessings.

So is there room for God’s love in the message?  The gospel is God’s love to save sinners from his justice.  That is love.  This true gospel message is not getting through I dare say in most pulpits in America.  If you doubt this assessment, I am afraid you are either simply not in touch with what is happening in Evangelicalism, or you yourself do not have an understanding of the gospel.  I am not saying this to offend you; I am trying to wake you up!

To fail to understand the seriousness of the things listed above that the gospel saves you from, is to not appreciate the significant accomplishment of Christ on your behalf, and inevitably that leads to a walk that is unworthy of the calling to which you have been called.

I am afraid that the current popular gospel message of “come to Christ so you can be a better you” is closer to Universalism than to a biblical call to come to Christ through repentance and faith that you may escape the wrath of God, thus receiving mercy and eternal life instead.  Universalism is an over emphasis on God’s love to the exclusion of God’s wrathful justice against all sin.  If God’s love is preached to the exclusion of his justice, this has all the makings of Universalism.  Considering the eternality of God’s wrath against sin, the gospel is good news indeed.  If the the gospel only offers improvement of life, then the gospel is only one of many options for self-improvement.   

Biblical doctrine does matter; theology does matter!  If these do not matter, then nothing matters.  We can pack it all up, because if these do not matter then there is no truth; there is no one way; there is no need for Christ to have come and died and to have rose again; our faith is in vain if the distinctive of that faith do not matter;  as the eternal optimists like to say, “It is all good.”  If theology and doctrine do not matter, then we can all just eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.  But it is precisely because of death that doctrine and theology matter. 

• “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.” Heb 9:27-28 (ESV)

So as we conclude this section 3 of 5, I am reminded of how foundational chapter 6 is to all the biblical doctrines that follow in the 1689 Confession, and especially to the gospel; we still have two more sections to this chapter though to comment on. 

 This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 6, Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, section 3 of 5, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.   

• [1] 1689 add this to the WCF.  The source is the Savoy.
• [2] 1689 adds “the” in place of “this” to the WCF and the Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [3] 1689 adds the upper case “S” of “sin” to the WCF and the Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [4] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  Source is 1644 London Confession.  There are a few words taken away and added by Collins, but in the main this last addition is the 1689 London Confession.
• [5] A. W. Pink, Doctrine of Human Depravity (Pensacola, Florida, Chapel Library), page 15.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, Section 2 of 5 the following: 

2. Our first Parents,[1] by this Sin[2], fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and we in them whereby death came upon all:[3] all becoming[4] dead in Sin[5], and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. ( Romans 3:23; Romans 5:12, etc; Titus 1:15; Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-19 )

The 1689 Confession states: Our first parents

It is worth pause to remember that mankind is inescapably related to Adam and Eve, and that the covenant of life that God made with them was to them AND by them to all of their posterity. 

It is amazing how many Evangelicals are not clear on this point.  How often do we hear reference to “the age of accountability” as if mankind is born righteous and innocent, and that until they reach an age where they can understand sin and the gospel, they are seemingly free from sin.  I have kids, the manifestation of sin is nearly immediate, and that simply is proceeding from their sinful nature.  Perhaps those who think there is an age of accountability, whereby prior to that you will go to heaven if you die, do not mean to deny original sin, but that is the implication. 

The 1689 Confession states: by this Sin, fell from their original righteousness

The doctrine of “original sin” is the Biblical doctrine that Adam and Eve were created in a state of holiness and righteousness, and that when they committed the original sin (or the first sin) of eating from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they lost that state of original righteousness; their nature that had a state of original righteousness (created there by God) became a nature of sin.  Since then, it is the nature of Adam and Eve and all their posterity to sin, rather than to do righteousness.  Because of this sinful nature, which is in and of its self an act of treason and rebellion against God, all mankind follow that nature and sin.  So there are two aspects in which mankind sin, by nature and by “actual” sin which flows from their nature.  All of mankind are slaves to their natures, whether that nature is righteous or sinful.  If their nature is in a state of original sin, they are slaves to sin.  If their nature is in a state of original righteousness, then they are slaves to righteousness.

All mankind is born accountable to God from birth (if we carried it to its logical conclusion it would be from conception), and all mankind is born with a nature that is hostile to God and to his Law.  They need a Savior to redeem them from sin and the resultant curse and wrath of God that is against them for this original sin and their actual transgressions that flow from it. Adam is the head of all mankind, and as such, all mankind by default under the same obligations as Adam, and the same consequences as Adam.

• “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.”  Romans 5:12 (ESV)
•  Westminster Shorter Catechism
• Q16: Did all mankind fall in Adam’s first transgression?
  A16: The covenant being made with Adam, not only for himself, but for his posterity; all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him, in his first transgression.

The 1689 Confession states: and communion with God

It was not just that the sin of Adam brought about a loss of original righteousness, but it brought a loss of communion with God.  This loss of communion is indeed Adam and mankind’s greatest loss.  Without this communion man is truly lost at every level.

We see this loss in Genesis:

•  “And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.” Gen 3:8 (ESV)

 This text clearly shows us what happened when there was that loss of communion; this is alienation; this is a loss to such a severe degree that our first parents hid from God.  The fellowship had been broken.

•  Westminster Shorter Catechism
• Q19: What is the misery of that estate whereinto man fell?
  A19: All mankind by their fall lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all miseries in this life, to death itself, and to the pains of hell for ever.

The 1689 Confession states: and we in them whereby death came upon all:

We have already touched on this above, but the wording makes it clear that all mankind (we) are “in them (our first parents).”  We are the seed of Adam and again there is no escaping this truth.  As a result, “the death that came upon them came upon all”.

• And you were dead in the trespasses and sins ²  in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— ³ among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. Eph 2:1-3 (ESV)

Death came upon all mankind physically, and upon them spiritually.  Let us remember that to be spiritually dead in sin means that we are unable even to reach out for the very medicine that would cure us.  Dead men are not able to resurrect themselves, let alone reach for medicine lying next to them.  It is too late for medicine.  We must be born again in order to enter the kingdom of God.  First we must be born from above or regenerated, then and only then are we able to repent for our sins and exercise faith in Christ.  This deadness is important to understand.  Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling in the 1689 Confession addresses this work of regeneration in relation to our coming to Christ.  We will get there.

The 1689 Confession states: all becoming dead in Sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body.

Here we have a reference to the doctrine of total depravity.  Here we see the total depravity of man–the “T” in the TULIP acrostic of Calvinism.  Calvinism is a systematic theology of the whole Bible.  As we go through this systematic theology in a sense (in the 1689 Confession), I will point out when we hit upon one of the five points, but realize clearly that the exegetical systematic theology of Calvinism should never be reduced to just five points.  Remember the five points of Calvinism are only a response to the five points the Arminians presented to the Synod of Dort.

For those unfamiliar with the term or meaning of Calvinism, can we have a side bar discussion?

I hope that I will have readers from all sorts of church backgrounds, and because of that I try not to unnecessarily put stumbling blocks in your way.  I believe that most Christians would agree and embrace what Calvinism believes if someone accurately explained it.  But if you have read thus far without realizing the 1689 Confession is a Calvinist document you might as well know now.  Wait, don’t leave.  If you have enjoyed the biblical doctrine so far in the 1689 Confession, do not leave because of a mere label or name put to this Biblical doctrine. 

Here is what C.H. Spurgeon said:

• “It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor.” [6]

Labels are a part of life.  Labels are a quick way to identify something, a group or a set of beliefs.  It is a convenient and often used tool to quickly reference something.  No area of study could possibly be carried out practically without such labels.  This is the end of my side bar.

It is important to note that the doctrine of total depravity does not teach that all of mankind or individuals are as bad they could be; it means that as a result of the fall that all parts of a person are affected, or perhaps we could say infected.  There is not one area that is not corrupted as a result of the fall.  Total depravity means to be “wholly defiled in all faculties and parts of soul and body.”

Contemplate the total destruction and misery that Adam put himself and the whole race into by his sin.  Once you begin to get a sense of it by the help of the Holy Spirit, you begin to realize that you are in the same state without Christ.  And this bad news, makes the glorious gospel good news indeed!  

• “Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift!” 2 Cor 9:15 (ESV)

 This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 6, Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, section 2 of 5, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.   

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds this upper case “S” to the WCF and Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [3] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  Source is the 1644 London Confession.
• [4] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [5] 1689 adds this upper case “S” to the WCF and Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [6] Charles H. Spurgeon, A Defense of Calvinism.  Source: http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm.  I highly recommend this reading.  Also, I recommend reading J.I. Packer’s introduction essay to John Owen’s work entitled: The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.  The introduction has become a helpful work in and of its self.  You can find it online here: http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/packer_intro.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, Section 1 of 5 the following: 

1. Although God created man upright and perfect, and gave him a righteous law, which had been unto life had he kept it, and threatened death upon the breach thereof, yet he did not long abide[1] in this honour; Satan using the subtlety of the serpent to subdue Eve, then by her seducing Adam, who, without any compulsion[2], did willfully transgress the law of their creation, and the command given unto them[3], in eating the forbidden fruit, which[4] God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.
( Genesis 2:16, 17; Genesis 3:12,13; 2 Corinthians 11:3 )

Here we come to another foundational topic addressed in the 1689 Confession.  It is essential that we understand well the issue, nature and essence of the fall of Adam, especially since it was not just his fall, but since Adam is the head of mankind, our representative, fell with him. 

 If we contracted a serious disease, it would be important that three things happened: 

• 1. We would need a proper diagnosis by an expert regarding the disease we have.
• 2. We need to understand the nature of the disease.  We need to understand how we contracted it, what are the symptoms, what can we expect in terms of the damage it has done and will do into the future. 
• 3. Most of all we need to understand what the treatment is.

So following this analogy, we have contracted sin at birth by Adam’s fall.  But now we are no longer discussing the analogy, but the real thing.  I am pointing out that we all have a serious disease that ultimately will cost us our eternal souls unless properly treated.  We can ignore the disease; we can give an intellectual ascent of acknowledgment that we have a disease, but the proper response is to sit up, pay attention, and seek to learn every single important aspect that we can about this sin disease.  Out of mere self-preservation, this topic should interest us intensely. 

R.C. Sproul, in quoting Jonathan Edwards, points out the inescapable reality that the disease of sin is here and truly can’t be denied: 

•  “In his masterful study of original sin, Jonathan Edwards observes that if the Bible did not explicitly teach a historical fall of the human race, the sheer universality of human sin, throughout history and the world, would force us to postulate a historical fall.  Evidence for the fall is everywhere and overwhelming.”[5] R.C. Sproul 

As we study this chapter, the question may arise as to how sin got here in the first place?  Here is what R.C. Sproul states:  

•  The entrance of sin into the world of human beings is one of the most difficult theological questions we face.  I cannot explain how it happened.  I have read the explanations proposed by the most astute theological and philosophical minds, yet have never read one that I found satisfying.  I retreat, in the final analysis, to what theologians call simply the mystery of iniquity.  We are beginning to study that as we begin chapter six.[6]

The 1689 Confession states: Although God created man upright and perfect,  

So we see that God created man upright and perfect.  Let’s just stop here, a reflect on this important fact that God created man upright.  

The Westminster Shorter Catechism states: 

• Q10: How did God create man?
  A10: God created man male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, with dominion over the creatures.

There was no sin in Adam and Even when God created them.  Their nature was after God’s image, and it does not get any more perfect than that. 

The 1689 Confession states: and gave him a righteous law,  

God gave Adam and Eve a righteous law.  This law was morally perfect and holy, as this law is a reflection of God’s character.  There is much I would like to address, but I will be patient and wait until Chapter 19: Of the Law of God.  There more is addressed in terms of God’s righteous law in that chapter, and in terms of what law was actually given to our first parents, since the Ten Commandments had not yet been given.  But I will say here that the righteous law given to Adam and Eve was written on their hearts and is called the Moral Law; as Adam is the head of all mankind, that same Moral Law is written on the heart of all mankind (Romans 2:14-16).  And in addition to this Moral Law Adam and Eve were given another special law, namely, to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Both is these laws were not to be violated. 

The 1689 Confession states: which had been unto life had he kept it, and threatened death upon the breach thereof, 

This command to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (as well as the Moral Law) was a righteous and just law, and to obey it would mean life for Adam and Eve, and to disobey this law would mean serious the serious consequence of death. 

The Westminster Shorter Catechism states: 

• Q12: What special act of providence did God exercise toward man in the estate wherein he was created?
  A12: When God had created man, he entered into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of perfect obedience; forbidding him to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death.

So this is the situation that Adam and Eve found themselves, and it was the most perfect of situations.  Adam and Eve were given a perfect righteous law to obey and they were given a perfect and upright nature wherein they fully had the power to obey that law.  This is the state we would have expected them to remain in forever.  God saw all of his creation and said: It is good, and therefore it was. 

The Shorter Catechism then asks the important questions: 

• Q13: Did our first parents continue in the estate wherein they were created?
  A13: Our first parents, being left to the freedom of their own will, fell from the estate wherein they were created, by sinning against God.

Now the situation goes from perfect happiness and peace, to chaos and misery.  Can the real weight of this rebellion in the garden be over estimated? 

The 1689 Confession states: yet he did not long abide in this honour; 

How sad and tragic, that though Adam and Eve had the idea state, they did not remain in it very long.  So what happened? 

• Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” ¹² The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.” ¹³ Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” Gen 3:11-13 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: Satan using the subtlety of the serpent to subdue Eve, then by her seducing Adam,  

It is important to not ignore the role of Satan in this event.  We can’t blame it on the devil, but nor can we ignore his involvement.  The devil used ‘subtlety’ to subdue Eve.  And then Eve seduced Adam. Had not the Word of God shown us that transaction, would it not forever be a topic of curiosity of mankind to know what happened?  But we do know: 

• Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” ² And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, ³ but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’ ” ⁴  But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. ⁵ For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” ⁶ So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. Gen 3:1-6 (ESV) 
• Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” ¹² The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.” ¹³ Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” Gen 3:11-13 (ESV) 
•  But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 2 Cor 11:3 (ESV) 

 The 1689 Confession states: who, without any compulsion, did willfully transgress the law of their creation, and the command given unto them, in eating the forbidden fruit,  

This point, that Adam took of the fruit without any compulsion, and that he willfully transgressed the law of their creation, and the command given to him, is absolutely essential to pay close attention to.  Why?  Because it establishes the just consequence of their sin given to them by God.  This sin having been committed by Adam was without compulsion; it was a willful transgression of God’s law, and because of God’s nature being that of holiness, justice, goodness, and truth, they were punished severely.  

Adam was given the terms of the ‘covenant of life’, and he broke that covenant; God, who is not a liar, will bring upon Adam what he said he would, namely death.  Now Adam remains under God’s wrath and curse, until such time as God redeems him.  As has been hinted at previously, this ‘covenant of life’ was not just made with Adam, but through Adam to all mankind.  So through Adam, all mankind has essentially broken the ‘covenant of life’, and thus are under the wrath and curse of God. 

The Westminster Shorter Catechism states: 

• Q19: What is the misery of that estate whereinto man fell?
  A19: All mankind by their fall lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all miseries in this life, to death itself, and to the pains of hell for ever.

R.C. Sproul states:    

•  “Adam was satisfied to live by some words that come from the mouth of God, but not every word.  Jesus, in the same kind of confrontation, did not negotiate his Father’s will, but lived every word that God had spoken.”[7] 

 The Westminster Shorter Catechism states: 

• Q15: What is sin?
  A15: Sin is any lack of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.

Getting back to that ultimate question of the source of evil and why Adam and Eve with perfectly righteous natures disobeyed R.C. Sproul states: 

• “If Adam and Eve chose according to their desires, and if they chose an evil action, then they must first have had an evil desire.  Where did it come from?  Were they born with evil desires?  Did God make them with evil desires?  If so, then God is the author of evil.  If an evil desire rises spontaneously within the soul of a righteous creature, we have an inexplicable quantum jump, what Karl Barth calls, die unmogliche Moglichkeit, “the impossible possibility.”  That is why I throw up my hands.  I have no idea what motivated Adam and Eve.  Somehow good desire got twisted into a bad result.”[8]   

But nonetheless, Adam and Eve did sin, and there are fatal consequences to their rebellion and treason against God and his creation. 

Keeping with the Shorter Catechism on this topic, it states: 

• Q16: What was the sin whereby our first parents fell from the estate wherein they were created?
  A16: The sin whereby our first parents fell from the estate wherein they were created, was their eating the forbidden fruit.

 Thomas Watson has a section in A Body of Divinity which he entitles: “The aggravation of Adam’s sin.”  In it he indicates that there were many sins committed in the one sin of eating of the forbidden fruit. 

• Incredulity [disbelief]-Our first parents did not believe what God told them.
• Unthankfulness-Here God had put him in the middle of Paradise, yet he was ungrateful in wanting more.
• Discontent-
• Pride-in that he would be like God.
• Disobedience-
• Curiosity-He meddles with that which was out of his sphere.
• Wantonness-though he had access to all tree, he wanted this one tree.
• Sacrilege-he sacrilegiously robed God of what was His.
• Murder-He destroyed all his posterity.
• Presumption-Adam presumed on God’s mercy.

Further Watson comments: 

• “One sin may have many sins in it.  We are apt to have slight thoughts of sin, and say it is but a little one.  How many sins were in Adam’s sin!  Oh, take heed of any sin!  As in one volume there may be many works bound up, so there may be many sins in one sin.”[9] 
• “This sin of eating the forbidden fruit was such sin as included many other sins, as it was circumstantiated.”[10] 

So as we get to the end of this section of the fall of man, we see that this event is not to be underestimated and it was a serious crime against the Creator of the creation, and that God is completely just and right to bring the punishment he has upon Adam and Eve and through them upon the whole race of Adam.  Mankind, by this fall, is justly under God’s wrath and curse, because they are sinners by nature, and lost their original righteousness.  Now all mankind are sinners by nature and by actual sins proceeding from that sinful nature.  The diagnosis is serious indeed, but thanks be to God for Christ our Redeemer! 

The 1689 Confession states: which God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory. 

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 6, Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof, section 1 of 5, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.    

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy. Source is the 1644 London Confession.
• [3] 1689 adds this to the WCF. Source is presumably Collins.
• [4] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  Source is presumably Collins.
• [5] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess Vol. 1 (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 176
• [6] Ibid., pg. 177.
• [7]R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess Vol. 1 (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 181
• [8] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess Vol. 1 (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 182.
• [9] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 142.
• [10] Thomas Vincent, The Shorter Catechism Explained from Scripture (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust) pg. 58.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 5: Of Divine Providence, Section 7 the following:

7. As the providence of God doth in general reach to all Creatures[1], so after a more special manner it taketh care of his church, and disposeth of all things to the good thereof.(1 Timothy 4:10; Amos 9:8, 9; Isaiah 43:3-5)  

Here we see that the 1689 Confession summarizes sections one through six of this chapter.  This last section mentions general providence, which was the topic in sections one to four, and special providence, which section five addressed. Section six devoted itself exclusively to addressing God’s providence in the ungodly and wicked. 

Here are definitions for these two categories of providence given by R.C. Sproul: 

• General providence- “God’s acts of general providence are things that happen generally, all the time.”[2]
• Special providence- “In special providence God works though the ordinary means of nature, but in an extraordinary way.”[3] 

General providence extends to all creatures, and special providence extends to God’s care of his church, where he ’disposes’ or ‘works out’ all things to her good.  Certainly, Romans 8:28 is a reference to God’s special providence for the elect (those called).

•   And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. Romans 8:28 (ESV)

Here are some wonderful words by Thomas Watson:  

•  “See here, that which may make us long for the time when the great mystery of God’s providence shall be fully unfolded to us.  Now we scarce know what to make of God’s providence, and are ready to censure what we do not understand; but in heaven we shall see how all his providences (sickness, losses, suffering) contributed to our salvation.  Here we see but some dark pieces of God’s providence, and it is impossible to judge of his works by pieces; but when we come to heaven, and see the full body and portrait of his providence drawn out into its lively colours, it will be glorious to behold.  Then we shall see how all God’s providences helped to fulfill his promises.  There is no providence but we shall see a wonder or a mercy in it.”[4] 

 All of chapter five, sections one to seven has addressed in detail the subject of God’s providence.  God’s providence is a carrying out of God’s eternal decrees (the first cause).  Another way we could say it is that ‘providence’ is God’s provision for his decrees.  

In the word ‘providence’ we see the word ‘provide’.  We could look at providence as God’s ‘PROVIDence.’  God provides for his creation in general and for his people specifically.  Ultimately God’s providence is a carrying out of his decrees for his own glory by carrying out what he determined by the counsel of his own will from all eternity.  

This is a humbling thought to us, and it reminds us that all that happens in this life is not all about us.  We do, however, have God’s assurance that ‘all things work together for the good for those who are called.’  But ‘all things’ are not focused upon us, but upon God’s glory.  In these ‘all things’ we see his wonderful decrees and personal involvement in carrying out these decrees by a good God, for his own glory, and for our good.  

The ungodly have only half of this promise; all things will work for God’s own glory through them and despite them, but not all things will work for their good.  In fact, ultimately it will work for their just eternal condemnation.  

•  Chapter three covered God’s decrees (the first cause);
• Chapter four covered the first of the two ways God carries out his decrees, namely his works of creation and providence (See Westminster Shorter Catechism question eight).   
• Chapter five addressed providence, showing that it extends to all creatures and especially God’s church. 

 With a foundation paved dealing with God’s decrees and his execution of it by creation and providence (which extends even to the fall of man), we now come to chapter six which deals with sin and the fall of man.  As we study chapter six entitled: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof, we must remember that the fall and sin is a part of God’s decree, and is not outside of his providence.  

 This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, section 7 of 7, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.   
 

• [1] 1689 adds the upper case “C” to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess: Volume I (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 170.
• [3] Ibid, pg. 170.
• [4] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 127.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 5: Of Divine Providence, Section 6 the following:

6. As for those wicked and ungodly men whom God, as the righteous judge, for former sin doth blind and harden; from them he not only withholdeth his grace, whereby they might have been enlightened in their understanding, and wrought upon their hearts; but sometimes also withdraweth the gifts which they had, and exposeth them to such objects as their corruptions[1] makes occasion[s[2]] of sin; and withal, gives them over to their own lusts, the temptations of the world, and the power of Satan, whereby it comes to pass that they harden themselves, under those means which God useth for the softening of others. ( Romans 1:24-26, 28; Romans 11:7, 8; Deuteronomy 29:4; Matthew 13:12; Deuteronomy 2:30; 2 Kings 8:12, 13; Psalms 81:11, 12; 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12; Exodus 8:15, 32; Isaiah 6:9, 10; 1 Peter 2:7, 8 )

This part of the 1689 Confession faces the issue head-on in addressing the way God, in his providence, works with the wicked and ungodly.  They are not excluded from God’s providence.  Here the Confession picks up in more detail the statement in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decrees, in Section 3.  There the Confession states:

• 3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.

I went into some detail of the term double predestination, as that section addresses God’s passing over the non-elect.  To explain the Calvinistic view of double predestination, we took some time to explain some important distinctions and terms.  We addressed positive decrees and negative decrees, equal-Ultimacy and unequal-Ultimacy, and common grace.  I will again go over some of those concepts because here in the Confession we a get more detailed view of God’s providential work in the reprobate (those who are unregenerate and will never be regenerate, or the non-elect), and these concepts are key to getting a handle on these tough issues.

The 1689 Confession states: As for those wicked and ungodly men whom God, as the righteous judge, for former sin doth blind and harden;

No matter what happens to the wicked and ungodly, in terms of God’s dealing with them, we must remember that God is ‘the righteous judge’.  He will judge rightly and perfectly every time.

The Confession states that for former sins they have committed God ‘does blind and harden’.    

• Blind: This blinding has many implication, but one implication is that they are not provided a clear view of the possible dangers of their sin. They are blind to the consequences.   This ultimately includes the final judgment, but even in the present time on earth God blinds them to the possible consequences, and thus they proceed down paths of sin that they would not have had they seen the consequences.  Sometimes we wonder why a person breaks the law, not fearing the consequences.  Perhaps often it is because they are blinded to the consequence by God’s providence due to former sins.
• Harden: This means to become less sensitive to the conscience and more harden against submitting to God’s law.  One can become so hardened that their conscience is seared (1 Tim 4:1-2).  No longer are the nerves, so to speak, connected between their actions and their conscience.  If this searing of nerves were to happen to someone’s hand they could no longer feel pain sensation.  If their hand was in a fire they could not feel the pain; thus the hand would incur more injury.  So it is with a conscience upon which God has written the moral law upon all men’s hearts.  If they can no longer feel the pain of sin, they will just continue in it and perhaps deteriorate into deeper more serious level of sin.

Does God really harden the wicked and ungodly?  What does the Scripture say?

• You shall speak all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall tell Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go out of his land. But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, Pharaoh will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt and bring my hosts, my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great acts of judgment.  The Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring out the people of Israel from among them.”   Exodus 7:2-5 (ESV)

Let’s make the difficulty here as clear as possible: God told Moses ahead of time He was going to harden Pharaoh’s heart.

Problem: So where do we go from here? Are we left to a God who hardens hearts and is the creator of sin in a person?  Does this show God positively decreed to harden Pharaoh’s heart creating fresh sin in his heart?  And how can God hold someone accountable for their sin and hardened heart, if God created the hard heart and the sin?

Solution: Before finding a solution to this seeming quagmire, let’s define some important terms as they relate to God’s working in the hearts of the wicked and ungodly, and his working in the hearts of his people.

Positive and Negative Decrees:

• Positive Decree – God’s active intervention in the heart of the elect to create faith.
• Negative Decree – God’s passing over or not intervening to create faith in the reprobate.

What can help us here with this impasse is to ask: How did God harden Pharaoh’s heart?  The Bible states: I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go.”  Ex 4:21 (ESV)

The Bible does not say how God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, but as R.C. Sproul points out in his book, Chosen by God, we really have only two options:

1. God actively hardened Pharaoh’s heart-and created fresh evil in it.
2. God passively hardened Pharaoh’s heart.

Answer: God’s judgment was on sin that was already present in Pharaoh’s heart.  All God had to do to harden Pharaoh’s heart was to give him over to sin.  God passively hardened Pharaoh’s heart, according to his negative decree.

This is what the 1689 Confession explains: “As for those wicked and ungodly men whom God, as the righteous judge, for former sin doth blind and harden;

There is a little more rounding out of this though that needs addressed, and it is in the next phrase from section 6 in this chapter of the Confession:

The 1689 Confession states: from them he not only withholdeth his grace, whereby they might have been enlightened in their understanding, and wrought upon their hearts;

What is the Confession mean when it states: “from them he not only withholdeth grace?”

Let’s go over some important terms.  Common Grace and Special Grace:

• Common Grace is the grace that God shows to all.  He is free to show this grace to whom He will, and to the degree He chooses, and in any way He sees fit.  We all receive this grace in common, but not all receive the same amount of this grace.  Again, it is God’s prerogative to give as much or as little common grace to whom he desires. An example of common grace found in the Scriptures is when Jesus referenced the rain falling on the righteous and the unrighteous.  Common grace includes God’s restraining action in holding evil back in the world.  Some of the ways He does this is through civil powers, the opinions of the culture we live in, and by other means.  These all fit under the theological category of common grace.  All God has to do to harden an unregenerate heart is to remove some common grace, thus giving the ungodly a longer leash with which to do what their unregenerate nature desires-to sin more.
• Special grace is the grace that God selectively shows.  This would apply primarily to the grace he gives in regenerating the elect and thereby causing faith to exist in the elect who then exercise that faith thereby being justified.  Special grace is not common to all, it is specialized in its application to mankind.

So the Confession is stating that because of the ‘former sin’ of the ‘wicked and ungodly’, God ‘blinds’ them and ‘hardens’ them, and ‘withholdeth grace from them.’  This grace God withholds is the very grace “whereby they might have been enlightened in their understanding, and wrought upon their hearts.”  We see this in Romans 3:

• And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, ^[57]God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. ²⁹ They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, ³⁰ slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, ³¹ foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. ³² Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.             Romans 1:28-32 (ESV)

God withholds common grace and thereby the wicked and ungodly sin all the more.  God gives them a longer leash by which to hang themselves.  God is not liable here because they desire to hang themselves.  God merely gives them what they want.  There is no coercion of sin by God here upon the sinner’s heart; the sinner, simply following his nature, sins all the more.  And we must remember this nature is hostile to God, declaring its treasonous rebellion against God by criminal acts against his law; the holiness of God dictates justice and it is just to give them what they desire, and merciful not to.  But God is free to pursue justice of mercy as he sees fit.  

• “It is not that God puts His hand on them [the reprobate] to create fresh evil in their hearts; He merely removes His holy hand of restraint from them and lets them do their own will.”[3] R.C. Sproul

We see God’s working in the elect (positively) and in the reprobate (negatively) in Romans 11:

•  What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, ⁸ as it is written, ” God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.” Romans 11:7-8 (ESV)

God in his negative decree is passing over the non-elect by not creating faith in them, and by his positive decree is creating faith by regeneration.  We see in this Romans passage God’s passive hardening by letting them by their own sin be blinded and hardened.  Why?  that they would not see and not hear—to this very day.

The 1689 Confession states: but sometimes also withdraweth the gifts which they had.

Sometimes God withdraws from the wicked and ungodly his gifts that he gave them by common grace.

• For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. Matt 13:12 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: and exposeth them to such objects as their corruptions makes occasion of sin;

One of the things that common grace does is to protect men from various temptations.  Mankind is not as sinful as they could be, only because of God’s common and special grace.  To not be exposed to temptation and thereby to not take of the forbidden fruit, is an act of God’s common grace.  But God is free to withdraw that grace and allow the ungodly to be tempted in an area of weakness and their corrupt sinful nature will naturally take the fruit and sin.  This is not entrapment because they desire it, and because they do not deserve to have ever been sheltered by God’s common grace.  Let’s not forget how much common grace is poured out upon all mankind who deserves nothing but immediate judgment.

We know that Gods tempts no man, but it is not God here doing the tempting.  It is God removing a layer of common grace justly, due to their former sin.  As said previously, God is just in removing all common grace due to the sin of the wicked if he so chooses.  This is passive hardening; this is giving the ungodly more of what they truly desire.  There is no coercion on God’s part.  The next phrase of the Confession further clarifies:

The 1689 Confession states: and withal, gives them over to their own lusts, the temptations of the world, and the power of Satan.

As we read above in Romans 3, for God to remove common grace is for him to give them over to that which their lusts truly desire.  As God’s people, we are assured of special grace and that God will not give us more than we can handle, but the ungodly and wicked have no such assurance.  On the other hand though, we as God’s people have a warning as well:

• But my people did not listen to my voice; Israel would not submit to me. ¹² So I gave them over to their stubborn hearts, to follow their own counsels. Psalms 81:11-12 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: whereby it comes to pass that they harden themselves, under those means which God useth for the softening of others.

Here we see what passive hardening ultimately and truly is:  ‘they harden themselves.’  Ultimately, whatever circumstance the ungodly find themselves, in terms of temptation and sin (which is connected to God’s level of common grace in their lives), it is their own sin that brings about their hardening. Here we see this in Exodus dealing with Pharaoh:

• “But when Pharaoh saw that there was a respite, he hardened his heart and would not listen to them, as the Lord had said.” Ex 8:15 (ESV)
• “But Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also, and did not let the people go.” Ex 8:32 (ESV)

But the means God uses to soften some, the wicked and ungodly use to harden themselves.  As the saying goes, “The same sun that melts the wax hardens the clay.” And in the words of the confession: this is all “to the praise of his glorious justice.” 

 This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, section 6 of 7, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.  

• [1] 1689 adds this Plural “s” to “corruptions” to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 omits the plural “s” from “occasions.”
• [3] R.C. Sproul, Chosen by God (Carol Stream, Illinois, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.) pg. 145.  Sproul’s treatment of this whole area in Chosen by God is most helpful. 

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 5: Of Divine Providence, Section 5, the following:

5. The most wise, righteous, and gracious God doth oftentimes leave for a season his own children to manifold temptations and the corruptions of their own hearts, to chastise them for their former sins, or to discover unto them the hidden strength of corruption and deceitfulness of their hearts, that they may be humbled; and to raise them to a more close and constant dependence for their support upon himself; and to make them more watchful against all future occasions of sin, and for other just and holy ends. So that whatsoever befalls any of his elect is by his appointment, for his glory, and their good. [1]
( 2 Chronicles 32:25, 26, 31; 2 Corinthians 12:7-9; Romans 8:28 ) 

In the prior section, we saw that providence extends to sin, but this was only discussed in a general way.  Now we see how providence extends to sin, in his children—the elect. 

The 1689 Confession states: The most wise, righteous, and gracious God doth oftentimes leave for a season his own children to manifold temptations and the corruptions of their own hearts 

The most wise, righteous and gracious God is first established as the grid through which we look through the rest of the section, and understand God’s work in the lives of his own. 

God does often leave, only for a season, his own children to different temptations, and corruptions of their own hearts.  This is a common experience of believers in Christ.  And when this happens, do we not sometimes feel abandoned by God, or perhaps at least destitute of God?  When we experience this, we should know that this too is a part of God’s direct providence in our life and this should give us hope.  But why does God work this way in his children’s lives?  

The 1689 Confession continues: to chastise them for their former sins, or to discover unto them the hidden strength of corruption and deceitfulness of their hearts.   This is the answer to why God work’s this way in his children’s lives. 

•  To chastise them for their former sins
•  To discover unto them the hidden strength of corruption and
•  Deceitfulness in their hearts

Now it does not end there, of which we are grateful; there is an end in mind here, and the next phrases tell us that end. 

The 1689 Confession continues: that they may be humbled; and to raise them to a more close and constant dependence for their support upon himself; and to make them more watchful against all future occasions of sin, and for other just and holy ends.  So I list these ends out: 

•  That they may be humbled
•  To raise them to a more close and constant dependence for their support on himself.
•  To make them more watchful against all future occasions of sin
•  And for other just and holy ends.

The 1689 Confession does not pretend to understand and know all the reasons God may work this way during seasons, and to those other ends it states that they are ‘just and holy’.  God is always just and always holy.  We should be cautious to be reverent to God during those times in not accusing him of being unjust or unholy. 

The 1689 Confession states: So that whatsoever befalls any of his elect is by his appointment, for his glory, and their good.

All of the words in the previous section fourr have dealt with evil and sin in the life of the elect, but the 1689 Confession states that “whatsoever,” as if covering all the bases, “befalls any of his elect is by appointment.”  And an even higher end for the elect, is God’s glory; but we are assured that though God’s glory is his ultimate aim, this does not exclude that it is also for the good of the elect at the same time. 

 Thomas Watson encourages us with these three quotes below: 

• “You that are Christians, believe that all God’s providence shall conspire for your good at last.  The providences of God are sometimes dark, and our eyes dim, and we can hardly tell what to make of them; but when we cannot unriddle providence, let us believe that it will work together for the good for the elect.  Rom viii 28.  The wheels in a clock seem to move contrary one to another, but they help forward the motion of the clock, and make the larum strike: so the providence of God seem to be cross wheels; but for all that, they shall carry on the good of the elect.”[2]
•  “Some say, there are many things done in the world which are very disorderly and irregular; and surely God’s providence is not in these things.  Yes, the things that seem to us irregular, God makes us of to His own glory.  Suppose you were in a smith’s shop, and should see there several sorts of tools, some crooked, some bowed, others hooked, would you condemn all these things, because they do not look handsome?  The smith makes use of them all for doing his work.  Thus it is with the providences of God; they seem to us to be very crooked and strange, yet they all carry on God’s work.”[3]        
•  “If God will give his people a kingdom when they die, he will not deny them daily bread while they live.”[4]

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, section 5 of 7, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.  

•   [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and the Savoy.  The source is the 1644 London Confession.
•  [2] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 125.
•  [3] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 120.
•  [4] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 120.  

 The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 5: Of Divine Providence, Section 4, the following: 

 4. The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence, that his determinate Counsel [1]extendeth itself even to the first fall, and all other sinful actions both[2] of angels and men; and that not by a bare permission, which also he most wisely and powerfully boundeth[3], and otherwise ordereth[4] and governeth[5], in a manifold dispensation to his most[6] holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness of their acts[7] proceedeth only from the Creatures[8], and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.
( Romans 11:32-34; 2 Samuel 24:1, 1 Chronicles 21:1; 2 Kings 19:28; Psalms 76;10; Genesis 1:20; Isaiah 10:6, 7, 12; Psalms 1:21; 1 John 2:16 )

The 1689 Confession states: The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence,

We cannot disconnect this statement from the following phrase below, but this phrase shows the grandeur of God’s providence.  God’s glory is displayed through his providence, and we see the following manifested as God carries out his providence:

• God’s almighty power
• God’s unsearchable wisdom
• God’s Infinite goodness.

We could stop here and dwell for quite sometime on these three attributes of God and be greatly edified.  We would all do well to stop and meditate on these wonderful attributes and their manifestation, their display, or their being exercised in providence.

The 1689 Confession states: his determinate Counsel

One might ask what does God’s “Counsel” have to do with God’s providence, which is the subject of this chapter?  We must always remember that God’s providence is merely the carrying out of what has already been decreed; all of God’s decrees flow from his counsel.  God’s counsel, decrees, and providence are all so intimately connected that to mention only one of these three is really to mention them all.  We certainly see the distinction of these, but the distinction does not mean they are unrelated. And so the mention of counsel here is simply to go to the root cause of providence: the carrying out of God’s counsel.

As Samuel Waldron states: “The decree takes place in eternity.  Providence takes place in history.”[9]

The 1689 Confession states:  extendeth itself even to the first fall, and all other sinful actions both of angels and men;

Here we approach a rather difficult subject, and I will not try to address as much as I could, partly because Chapter 6, of the 1689 Confession entitled, Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin and Of the Punishment Thereof, will get into more details about the Fall.

This statement of the 1689 Confession above indicates that providence is being exercised, extending even to the fall of Adam and Eve, and to all of the sin of mankind and of angels.  Do not think that God’s counsel, decree, and providence are off limits in the area of the sin of the creature.

Hodge states of this portion of the Westminster Confession, which parallels to the 1689 Confession in this section:

“This section makes no attempt to explain the nature of those providential actions of God’s which are concerned in the origin of sin in the moral universe, and in control of the sinful actions of his creatures in the execution of his purposes.  It simple states the important facts with respect to the relation of his providence to the sins of his creatures which are revealed in the Scriptures.”[10]

 As R.C. Sproul states:

• “Many are willing to say, “Yes, God permits such things to take place, even though it is contrary to his will.”  They contend that to safeguard the creature’s free agency, God steps out of the picture and allows things to happen that he would never ordain, but chooses to allow for his own good reason.”

 As Sproul goes on to point out:

• “But such an answer to the puzzle of evil is simplistic.  For God to allow it to happen, he must choose to allow it.  If he chooses to allow something to happen that he has the power to prevent, then in some sense he has ordained that it come to pass; its coming to pass is within the context of his wisdom, power, and goodness, and it manifests his own holy ends.”[11] 

Here are some Scripture texts on this subject:

• Still Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them, as the Lord had said.  Ex 7:13 (ESV)
•  And I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they shall go in after them, and I will get glory over Pharaoh and all his host, his chariots, and his horsemen. Ex 14:17 (ESV)
•  Surely the wrath of man shall praise you; the remnant of wrath you will put on like a belt. Psalms 76:10 (ESV)
• This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.  Acts 2:23 (ESV)
• But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ would suffer, he thus fulfilled.  Acts 3:18 (ESV)
• For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel,²⁸  to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.  Acts 4:27-28 (ESV)

 So we cannot avoid this matter by simply viewing God as having no providence over evil.

The 1689 Confession states:  not by a bare permission, which also he most wisely and powerfully boundeth, and otherwise ordereth and governeth

I think what Hodge states here is helpful in understanding this phrase:

• “God not only permits sinful acts, but he directs and controls them to the determination of his own purposes.”

 Sproul’s comments above also shed light on this phrase.  To say God ‘permits’ evil is true, but to leave it there is to ignore Scripture, and is only to postpone admitting the fact that God foreordained everything that comes to pass, and everything means everything.

 Hodge states:

• “We have seen that the providential government of God, as the execution through time of his eternal and immutable purpose, forms one connected system, and comprehends all created things and all their actions.”[12] 

Here we see a sample from Scripture where we see that God permits evil:

• In past generations he allowed all the nations to walk in their own ways. Acts 14:16 (ESV)

Here we see a sample from Scripture where we see God’s providence in evil in Scripture:

•  For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel,²⁸  to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.    Acts 4:27-28 (ESV)

 I can’t help but think of the wording here of the Westminster Shorter Catechism Question 8:

• Q11: What are God’s works of providence?
  A11: God’s works of providence are, his most holy, wise, and powerful preserving and governing all his creatures, and all their actions.

The 1689 Confession states:  in a manifold dispensation to his most holy ends

This means in the many way and times, he uses evil to his most holy ends.  As R.C. Sproul said:

• “Yet the fact that evil exists in a universe governed by a perfectly holy God must mean that he has good purpose in mind.  We see this in God’s answer to the wickedness of Jospeh’s brothers: the brothers meant their deed for evil, and it was terribly evil, but God meant it for good and brought much good out of it.”[13]

Thomas Watson said it well:

• “God permitted their sin, which he never would, if he could not bring good out of it.”[14]                                                                                              

The 1689 Confession states: yet so, as the sinfulness of their acts proceedeth only from the Creatures[15], and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.

Here we see a clear denial that God partakes in evil, even in his providence of evil.

So in all of the statements in this section, it still remains true that the sinfulness of the creature’s actions, only proceeds from the creature, not the creator.  We know this is true because God is most holy and righteous, and sin and these cannot co-exist together.

 And even though God’s providence is involved in using evil, God is not the author of it, nor does he ever approve of it.

 So no one can say:

• “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means!”  Romans 6:1, 2a (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, section 4 of 7, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF, and the source is Savoy.  The Upper case “C” in “Council” is added to the Savoy, and the source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [3] 1689 adds this to the WCF .  The source is the Savoy.
• [4] 1689 adds this to the WCF, and the Savoy is the source. The WCF has “ordering.”
• [5] 1689 adds this to the WCF, and the Savoy is the source. The WCF has “ordering.”
• [6] 1689 adds this to the WCF, and the Savoy is the source.
• [7] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [8] 1689 adds the upper case “C” to Creatures and adds the plural “s.”  The source is presumably Collins.
• [9] Samuel Waldron, 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith: A Modern Exposition (Evangelical Press: Darlington, England), pg. 89.
• [10] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (The Banner of Truth Trust: Edinburgh), pg. 99.
• [11] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess (P&R Publishing: New Jersey), Volume One, pg. 156-157. 
• [12] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 101.
• [13] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess (P&R Publishing: New Jersey), Volume One, pg. 157. 
• [14] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 122.
• [15] 1689 adds the upper case “C” to Creatures and adds the plural “s.”  The source is presumably Collins.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 5: Of Divine Providence, Section 3, the following:

3. God, in his ordinary providence maketh use of means, yet is free to work without, above, and against them at his pleasure. ( Acts 27:31, 44; Isaiah 55:10, 11; Hosea 1:7; Romans 4:19-21; Daniel 3:27 )

The 1689 states: “God, in his ordinary providence maketh use of means.”

In the previous section 2, we learned that God’s ordinary providence is the usual way He works.  Section 2 taught that God’s decrees are ‘the first cause’ of everything that happens, and additionally we learned that God’s providence executes the decree.  God, by His providence, does this by ordering the decree to be carried out or “to fall out” according to “the nature of second causes.”

God’s providence can appear natural and ordinary.  This “ordinariness” may cause us to feel God is not directly and personally involved, and that they are just “circumstantial” or “coincidental.”

On the other hand, God is free to go above God’s ordinary providence or ordinary means of accomplishing his plan in, bypass ordinary means or even to go against ordinary means.   This might be something that we would consider as “super-natural.”  We are so used to the word “super-natural” that we may miss some of its meaning. Supernatural really mean ”above” natural; you may see this referred to as supra-natural.  “Supra” is Latin for “above.”

To make my point about natural versus super-natural, I would like to show two contrasting world-views: Theism and Naturalism.

In a Naturalistic world-view, the cosmos is the only reality.  In this world-view there is no super-natural.  A Naturalist consigns no credit to God for anything that happens.  He certainly gives no credit to God for ordinary providence.  Why does a Naturalist not give God credit for “super-natural” or even “natural” actions?  It is because he suppresses the truth (Romans 1), but in terms of consistency with his world-view, he will not do so because there is no God for the Naturalist.  Of course, the theory of evolution fits very nicely into this world-view.

James W. Sire states:

• “Naturalists like Sagan, say that prime reality is the cosmos itself.” [*]

In contrast, Theism states God is the prime reality; he exists, made the cosmos, and is separate from the cosmos.  In Theism, God is the creator of the cosmos.  Sire, in his book Discipleship of the Mind, uses a similar graphic to illustrate the difference between two world-views: Naturalism and Theism:

 For the Naturalist the cosmos is only materialistic, and it is all that is real.  But for the Theist, it is much different.  God is, and God is the creator of the prime reality and is separate from creation.  There is another world-view here called Pantheism.  This view believes that God, more like a force, is in everything, and that the sum of all things put together equals God.  Sire believes that these three world-views cover the wide range of world-views.  Pantheism is not necessarily relevant to our topic.

So strictly speaking, a Naturalistic view is Atheistic, but sometimes a person who says they believe in God holds to a Naturalistic view, not seeing that logically or practically they are atheists.  We can see this in the scoffers’ response to Christ’s second coming in 2 Peter:

• They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. 2 Peter 3:4-7 (ESV)

These scoffers, in verse 4 concluded that based on the continuation of time, without any super-natural intervention, that things will always be as they have.  This is in a sense a Naturalistic world-view.  Based on things being ‘natural’ for as long as these faith-less men have experienced life, they assume that things will always continue ‘naturally’ or “ordinarily” as they have.  But in verse 5, Peter points out that they ‘deliberately overlook this fact.”  What fact?  That the cosmos was created super-naturally by the very words of God.  They overlook that things are not always ordinary, forgetting that God super-naturally once sent a flood of judgment upon the entire earth.  This was not ordinary or natural.  They ignore not just the past, but the future.   They ignore the promise of another super-natural judgment on the ungodly; the Last Day the cosmos will burn with fire.  We see that these scoffers are without excuse.  Naturalists of all persuasions must repent of their suppression of that which is clearly revealed to them in creation , namely a super-natural origin for the cosmos and a super-natural creator and a super-natural judgment.

Let’s make sure we are not holding to a naturalistic view of God’s providence.  Although ordinarily God uses natural means in carrying out his plans, it does not follow that He always will, and even if He does, ordinary providence by an extraordinary God is not so ordinary.

A helpful verse on this “ordinary” providence is:

• “For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, 11 so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.” Isaiah 55:10-11 (ESV)

We have discussed very briefly Naturalism, and Theism.  But there is another medium position called Deism.  Sproul states:

• “This differs sharply from views of creation that were on the rise when the confession was written [the WCF].  Deists metaphorically saw God as the great clock maker in the sky.  He designed the clock, builds it, winds it up, and then lets it operate on its own internal power.  Although the religion of Deism is long gone, its philosophy has captured our modern culture.  For the Christian and the Hebrew, however, God created the world and the world remains dependent on him for its continued existence.”[3]

In this graphic, we see that God exists, that God created the cosmos, and that God is above the cosmos, but the Deist does not believe God is involved in creation once made.  So the black line represents God’s lack of involvement in creation.  Even those who cite providence in creation, often tend to view that “providence as impersonal.  Providence however is personal; it is God’s direct PROVIDEnce of all he has decreed; God is providing for his decrees personally, even if he uses natural means.

So of these various views, Naturalism and Deism do not allow, logically speaking, for God’s direct personal involvement in creation through providence.  Naturalism denies God exists; Deism denies that personal direct providence exists; Theism does allows, logically speaking, for God’s involvement in creation, but neither does it specifically embrace God’s direct and personal providence in creation.  Theism is not specifically Christian, or only Christian.  Other non-christian religions call themselves Theists, such as Islam.  So these categories are general world-views, and we will need more precision to understand the Biblical view of providence.

The 1689 Confession continues: “yet is free to work without, above, and against them at his pleasure.”

But having established in section 2 what God ordinarily does with providence, the 1689 Confession is careful to point out here that God is also free to bypass second causes altogether, even though He ordinarily uses them.  He is free at His pleasure to work “without” the second cause, “above” the second cause, or “against” second causes.

A.A. Hodge states:

• …”God possesses the power of effecting his ends immediately, without the intervention of second causes, is self evident; and that he at times at his sovereign pleasure exercises this power, is a matter of clear and satisfactory evidence.”[1] 
•  “The power of God does indeed work in all ordinary processes of nature, and his will is expressed in what is called natural law; but it does not follow that his whole power is exhausted in those processes, nor his whole will expressed in those laws.  God remains infinitely greater than his works, in the execution  of his eternal, immutable purposes, using the system of second causes as his constant instrument after its kind, and meanwhile manifesting his transcendent prerogatives and powers by the free exercises of his energies and utterances of his will.”[2]

Let’s evaluate these three aspects of the second part of section 3: without, above and against.

1. Without: “yet is free to work ‘without’ …them at his pleasure.”  The antecedent for the word ‘them’ is ‘means’.  The meaning of this is that God is free to work without means.  God can directly cause something to happen without any other intervening or mediating factor.  For example, someone is ill, and God heals them instantly without any possible natural explanation, or any means.  Perhaps Jesus raising Lazareth might serve as a good example.

2. Above: “yet is free to work ‘above’ …them at his pleasure.”  The antecedent for the word ‘them’ is ‘means’.  The meaning of this is that God is free to work ‘above’ means.  God can work ‘above’ the means.  In this case there are means at work to bring about this decreed thing, but God is working ‘above’ it by interfering or influencing the means, or perhaps superseding the means.  For example, someone is ill and is under medical care already (the means), but the normal results of the medical care are greatly accelerated by God working above the means.

3. Against: “yet is free to work ‘against’ …them at his pleasure.”    The antecedent for the word ‘them’ is ‘means’.  The meaning of this is that God is free to work ‘against’ means.  God can work ‘against’ the means.  It seems to me that the means are presumed natural, otherwise it seems God is working against himself.  In the case of this phrase of the 1689 Confession, God is working ‘against’ the means by interfering or influencing the otherwise natural course of these means.  I suppose that these natural means could be positive or negative.

For example in looking at positive means, let’s say someone is ill and taking medicine (the means) to get well; the normal result of the medicine would be healing, but God worked against the means of the medicine, causing the medicine to not work.  On the other hand, a negative means example could be compared to someone who was bit by a snake; the means (the poison) is negative, and God works against that negative means, causing them to have no consequences from the bit, like Paul on the island after his shipwreck.

Please read John Calvin’s Instituteson his section in Book I on providence.  He covers so well the various views of providence people have, and leaves no doubt that the Biblical view is that God is intimately involved with creation; it is a doctrine of great encouragement.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, section 3 of 7, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [*] James W. Sire, Discipleship of the Mind (InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, Ill.), pg. 39.
• [1] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 98.
• [2] I A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 98.
• [3] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess: Volume I (New Jersey, P & R Publishing), pg. 146

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 5: Of Divine Providence, Section 2, the following:

2. Although in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first cause, all things come to pass immutably and infallibly; so that there is not anything[1] befalls any by chance, or without his providence;[2] yet by the same providence he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.  ( Acts 2:23; Proverbs 16:33; Genesis 8:22 )

The 1689 Confession states: ”Although in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first cause, all things come to pass immutably and infallibly”

God’s decree is the first cause of all the things that come to pass; and all of those things that happen, as a result of the first cause (God’s decree), do so immutably (without change) and infallibly.  There is no change or failure from the time God issues the decree and from when it passes.  My statement breaks down a little since “from the time God issues the decree” is in eternity past.   We can count on everything that happens, whether to our country, family, personally and so on, to be immutably and infallibly the carrying out of God’s decree.  For the believer, what a comfort that is as we think of Romans 8:28:  “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” ESV

The 1689 Confession states: so that there is not anything befalls any by chance, or without his providence; 

This means that nothing happens to anyone by chance or outside of God’s providence.

We have already established in the previous section 1, we won’t define providence and move to the next part of section 2:

The 1689 Confession states: ”yet by the same providence he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.”

So let’s talk about what “the nature of second causes” means, and let’s look at the sub words under the “second causes” heading.  The 1689 Confession is stating that these words: necessarily, freely, and contingently, are the ‘nature’ of second causes.  Look at the wording carefully: he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.

The nature of secondary causes: The first cause is God’s decree, and the second cause is the means that he uses to carry these out.  Broadly speaking one could say providence is the oversight of the specific way God’s decree is carried out; but the specific means or way it is done is ”the second cause.”   Providence orders second causes.

• Hodge states, “God ordinarily effects his purposes through means; that is, through the agency of second causes subject to his control.”[3]

Since God’s decree first determines what will happen according to the counsel of his will, this is called the first, and it is the ultimate cause.  The execution of God’s decree is called God’s providence.  Providence is the personal action on God’s part that orders how his decree will come about.  God’s Providence then causes the means by which the decree will be accomplished to happen or to “fall out.”  So we have in chronological order” God’s decree, providence, second causes (necessarily, freely, or contingently).  So the second cause has three characteristics:  necessarily, freely, or contingently.  So if we work backward from any event, which will either happen according to one of (or a combination of) the three natures of second causes, we can conclude that God’s providence ordered the event, and we can conlude from providence that God’s decree was carried out in that event because providence is the execution of God’s decree.   The end result of the decree, its execution by providence, and providence having ordered the second cause, which fell out according to the nature of second causes, is nothing less than the perfect accomplishment of the decree of God.  This is why we can say that God’s decrees are executed through creation AND providence (See Baptist Catechism 11).  It is also why events in creation (that can be seen by all) are a form of general revelation, because once an event has occurred, we know that it was part of God’s decree by working backwards through these steps.

Let’s try and look at this graphically:

The wording of the 1689 Confession separates ‘providence’ from ‘the second cause’.  Providence ‘orders’ the second cause, but providence is not the second cause.  ‘Providence’ and ‘the second cause’ are not the same, though very much related.   The Confession states this:  “by the same providence he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes” so it is ‘providence’ that orders ‘second causes’.  This is important because providence is personal because God is directly ordering it whereas second causes are not neccesarily personal.

The nature of second causes can happen either “necessarily, freely or contingently.” 

I have removed the portion of my post where I described these three aspects because I need to do some more study to be sure of their meaning.  Once I feel more comfortable about what the 1689 Confession means in these three words, I will re-post this portion.

I have often thought how utterly complex it would be if we could see God’s working in all of creation and in all of his creatures.  If God were to put it into a flow chart for us to view, it would be amazingly complex and intricate.  Surely we could not comprehend it!  We see an acknowledgement in the Confession that God’s providence is not simple, and yet can fit into certain general headings to help us grasp its workings in a small way.

For more reading on this topic of providence, I highly recommend John Calvin’s Institutes on the subject of Providence in Book 1, chapters XVI to XVIII; he covers the subject of providence in significant detail.

Let’s finish by reading a very relevant passage from Isaiah:

I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,’  Isaiah 46:9-10 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, section 2 of 7, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is the 1644 London Confession.
• [3] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (The Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh), pg. 95.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 5: Of Divine Providence, Section 1, the following: 

 1. God the good[1] Creator of all things, in his infinite power and wisdom[2] doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures and things, from the greatest even to the least, by his most wise and holy providence, to the end for the which they were created[3], according unto his infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of his own will; to the praise of the glory of his wisdom, power, justice, infinite[4] goodness, and mercy.
( Hebrews 1:3; Job 38:11; Isaiah 46:10, 11; Psalms 135:6; Matthew 10:29-31; Ephesians 1:11 ) 

 Let’s begin by making sure we understand what “providence” means.   

 Providence: 1)The action of providing; provision, preparation, arrangement; chiefly in the phrase to make providence; to make provision. 2) Foresight, prevision; anticipation of and preparation for the future; “timely care”; hence prudent or wise arrangement, management government or guidance.[5]  

• Providence is not only supervision, but provision.

 We can see the word “provide” in the word providence–PROVIDence. 

 John Calvin said: “At the outset, then, let my readers grasp that providence means not that by which God idly observes from heaven what takes place on earth, but that by which, as keeper of the keys, he governs all events.”[6] 

We have learned that God has eternal decrees and what that means in chapter 3 of the 1689 Confession; and we learned that God carries out, or executes those decrees two ways: by the works of creation, and the works of providence.  The last chapter covered the works of creation, and now the 1689 Confession will cover the “works of providence.”  So let’s try to keep this context in mind as we look at providence.  In other words, in providence, we see God’s eternal decrees coming to pass.  Now we might not understand exactly what God is doing at times through His providential carrying out of  His decrees, but He is executing His decrees. 

You may remember the Westminster Shorter Catechism question 9:: 

• Westminster Shorter Catechism #9:
• Q: How doth God execute his decrees?
  A: God executeth his decrees in the works of creation and providence.

As we covered in the last chapter, the Westminster Shorter Catechism states are what God’s works of creation; then it goes on to ask and answer what are God’s works of providence:  

•  Westminster Shorter Catechism #12
• Q: What are God’s works of providence?
  A: God’s works of providence are, his most holy, wise, and powerful preserving and governing all his creatures, and all their actions.

Thomas Watson states: “Of the work of God’s providence Christ says. “My Father worketh hitherto and I work.”  John v 17.  God rested from works of creation, he does not create any new species of things.  “He rested from all His works;” Gen ii 2; and therefore it must needs be meant of his works of  providence: “My Father worketh and I work.”[7]  

 A.A. Hodge states:  

•  “Since the eternal and immutable purpose of God has certainly predetermined whatsoever comes to pass, it follows that he must execute his own purpose not only in works of creation, but likewise in his continual control of all his creatures and all there actions.”[8] 
•  “…His providential control is in all respects the consistent execution of his eternal, immutable and sovereign purpose.”[9]

 In prophecy we see God’s decree and his carrying it out.  Prophecy is God’s decree working out, and this outworking is God’s providential work.  Thomas Watson states: “God’s decree ordains things that shall fall out, God’s providence orders them.”[10] 

Here is another excellent quote from A.A. Hodge: “Since God’s eternal purpose relates to and determines all that comes to pass, and since it is immutable, his providential control of all things must be in execution of his purpose.  And since his purpose is infinitely wise, righteous, and benevolent, and absolutely sovereign (as shown above [section 1]), his providential execution of the decree must posses the same characteristics.”[11] 

•  … “according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.” Eph 1:11 (ESV) 

 So let’s get to the 1689 Confession wording:  ”God the good Creator of all things”… 

•  This is one of the most foundational attributes of God that we can be thankful for: God is good!  If God were not “good” two things come to mind.  One He would not be God, and secondly we would be able to count on nothing.  There would be no order (because this god who is not good might change the order at any moment for his own amusement) and there would be no justice (because he could forgive or judge by any standard he saw fit).  Without God being good, we would live as the Greeks whose gods were at their root not good. 

•  Now not only is God good, but this good God made all things.  Because God is good, He could say after making creation that “it was very good.” 

 The 1689 Confession continues: “in his infinite power and wisdom doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern”… 

•   God’s ability to carry out His decrees through providence (and creation for that matter) flows from His “infinite power and wisdom.”  Because of these attributes, He:
• upholds
• directs
• disposes
• governs 

So what and who is the receiver of these above actions of God’s?  The 1689 Confession states: “all creatures and things, from the greatest even to the least.” 

•  “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? ²⁶  Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?” Matt 6:25-26 (ESV)

• “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.” Matt 10:29 (ESV)

 We know God is able to do this by His infinite power and wisdom, but in what way does He do it? The 1689 Confession states: “by his most wise and holy providence.”  And He does this “to the end for the which they were created,” as the 1689 Confession states.  As well, the 1689 Confession states that this is done “according unto his infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of his own will;”  God’s foreknowledge is infallible!  

•  Throughout this 1689 Confession you see an important doctrine, namely, that God is free.  He has no obligations to any creature, nothing God decrees has anything to do with the action of the creatures or the creation.  He determines it within Himself within the unity of the Godhead.  We see it carried out, and He even uses us at times, but ultimately God is carrying it out because in His freedom He decided to do so.  God is free.  He is completely autonomous, we are not.  

•  God is free, but once He has determined a thing by His decrees, it will not change.  How comforting to God’s people, and how terrifying to the sinner without God’s mercy.  But in the context of providence, God is carrying it out as He planned and it is unchangeable (immutable). 

  “Remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,’ calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of my counsel from a far country. I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have purposed, and I will do it.” Isaiah 46:9-11 (ESV) 

 The 1689 Confession concludes: “to the praise of the glory of his wisdom, power, justice, infinite goodness, and mercy.”   

•   This is to the end or why it is done.  These words can be passed over easily but just think of the depth and richness of these words as relates to our God.  “the glory of”:
•  his wisdom,
• power,
• justice,
• infinite goodness, 
• mercy.”  

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, section 1 of 7, from the 1689 Confession of Faith. 

•  [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is the 1644 London Confession.
• [3] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is the 1644 London Confession.
• [4] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [5] Oxford English Dictionary
• [6] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Louisville, John Knox Press) The Library of Christian Classics Volume XX Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Chapter II, Section 16, pg. 201-202.
• [7] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 119.
• [8] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 91.
• [9] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 91.
• [10] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 119.
• [11] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 95.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 4: Of Creation, Section 3, the following:

3. Besides the[1] law written in their hearts, they received a command not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which whilst[2] they kept, they were happy in their communion with God, and had dominion over the creatures.
( Genesis 2:17; Genesis 1:26, 28 )

The 1689 Confession states: “Besides the law written in their hearts, they received a command not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil”

• God gave Adam and Eve two commandments : the law God had written on their hearts (the Moral Law) and the command to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil upon punishment of death.  The law written on their heart, the Moral Law, was not written on stone tablets like the Ten Commandments, but on the flesh of their hearts.

A.A. Hodge summarizes this portion of the Confession as follows:

• “God furnished Adam with sufficient knowledge for his guidance—a law written on his heart, and a special external revelation of His will.”[3]

The Westminster Shorter Catechism is helpful here:

• Q12: What special act of providence did God exercise toward man in the estate wherein he was created?
  A12: When God had created man, he entered into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of perfect obedience; forbidding him to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death.

The “Covenant of life” was a conditional and specific covenant with specific consequence, if the covenant of life was broken.

The 1689 Confession concludes this section by stating: “which whilst they kept, they were happy in their communion with God, and had dominion over the creatures.”

What a happy state they were in.  Sometimes I think it is beneficial to just meditate on the happy state of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden communing with God before the fall.  Since our estate is quite unlike our first parent’s state, we tend to not dwell there too long and just dive into the state of things after the fall. 

How wonderful it is to realize God is working His redemptive plan to regain in his elect what was lost from the fall.  Once redemption has reached its final step in glorification, we shall be in a better state than even our first parents.  We shall not have a probationary period with the possibility of a fall.  We shall be securely in God’s garden with no more concern of a fall, just pure communion with God.  What more can spur us on to endure to the end! 

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 4, Of Creation, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy. The source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy.  The source is presumably Collins.
• [3] A.A. Hodge, The Westminster Confession: A Commentary (Edinburgh, Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 85. The external revelation of His will Hodge refers to is the command to not to eat from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 4: Of Creation, Section 2, the following:

2. After God had made all other creatures, he created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, rendering them fit unto that life to God; for which they were Created; being made after the image of God, in[1] [endued with][2] knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it, and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change.
( Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:7; Ecclesiastes 7:29; Genesis 1:26; Romans 2:14, 15; Genesis 3:6 )

Section two deals with the state of man and woman before the fall. It is tempting (no pun intended) to dive right into the fall of man in this section, but strictly speaking this chapter deals with creation before the fall, so I will leave that for Chapter 6, Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, and Of the Punishment Thereof.

The 1689 Confession states: “After God had made all other creatures, he created man, male and female,

• So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Gen. 1:27 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: “with reasonable and immortal souls“

• Reasonable – God made us with the ability to think rationally and make deductions.
• Immortal - R.C. Sproul takes issue with the Reformers in using this word.  Immortal means “not mortal.”  Man has a beginning and has not always existed, so in that sense he is not immortal.  We are safe to assume the Reformers meant that after man was created his soul never dies; this is more precise.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism is helpful here:

• Q10: How did God create man?
  A10: God created man male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, with dominion over the creatures.

The 1689 Confession states: “rendering them fit unto that life to God; for which they were Created; being made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it,”

The was no lack in what God provided when he created mankind in the garden of Eden.  God gave all that was needed; our first parents had no excuse for disobeying God’s instruction to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 

They were created with:

• The image of God,
• In knowledge,
• Righteousness, and true holiness;
• Having the law of God written in their hearts,
• And power to fulfil it,

We had knowledge of all God wanted us to know; we had at that time original righteousness and holiness; God’s Moral Law was written on our hearts; we knew God’s will, and we had the power to fulfill God’s law.  Did you catch that?  We had the power to do God’s will, and for an unknown time, presumably short, we kept God’s law and did not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

When the 1689 Confession states: “having the law of God written in their hearts” it is referring to what in theology is termed the Moral Law.  The Ten Commandments were not yet given, and yet they had God’s law written on their hearts.  This law or Moral Law written on their hearts is important to understand.   This law was written on Adam and Eve’s heart, and it was not removed after the fall.  As well, this Moral Law was written on the hearts of Adam and Eve’s posterity.  So everyone has the Moral Law written on their hearts.  All of mankind, even the hidden people groups of the world that have never heart the Ten Commandments have the Moral Law written on their hearts, and are therefore without excuse.  This is a universal Moral Law. 

We see this Moral Law referred to in Romans,

• “For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.”  Romans 2:14-16 (ESV)
• Paul is referring to the Gentiles not having been entrusted with the Ten Commandments as the Jews, but nonetheless, they are accountable to that Moral Law which God did write on their hearts. In contrast to the Gentile, the Jews were entrusted with the Moral Law on their hearts AND the Ten Commandments.  Bottom line, mankind is without excuse. 
• “For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.” Romans 2:12 (ESV)

Now I want to avoid creating the impression that there are two different standards of law: the Moral Law and the Ten Commandments.  The Moral Law encompasses all of God’s moral laws (moral laws are distinct from the ceremonial laws which are not written on the heart, but revealed to Moses).  The Ten Commandments are a summary of the Moral Law.  Just as Jesus summarized the Ten Commandments (and I suppose thereby the Moral Law) by saying we are to love God with all our heart, mind, and strength, and to love our neighbor as ourselves, so the Ten Commandments summarize the Moral Law. 

The Westminster Shorter Catechism is helpful here:

• Q40. What did God at first reveal to man for the rule of his obedience?
  A40. The rule which God at first revealed to man for his obedience, was the Moral Law.
• ___________________________________________________________________
• Q41. Where is the Moral Law summarily comprehended?
  A41. The Moral Law is summarily comprehended in the Ten Commandments.
• ___________________________________________________________
• Q42. What is the sum of the Ten Commandments?
  A42. The sum of the Ten Commandments is, “to love the Lord our God” with all our heart, all our soul, with all our strength, and with all our mind; and our neighbor as ourselves.

The 1689 Confession concludes this section by stating: “and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change.”

This possibility of sinning is one of the most difficult aspects of theology, and though it may be difficult for us to make our way through these theological waters, we want to be clear in our understanding that God is holy and that God made creation good.  In creation there was the possibility of sin, and yet we know that creation was good:  

• “And God saw all that He had made, and behold it was very good” (Genesis 1:31).   

Here is an excellent quote my pastor gave me by the Puritan Stephen Charnock.  The quote is from Charnock’s work entitled, On the Holiness of God:

•  “God never willed sin by his preceptive will. It was never founded upon or produced by any word of his, as the creation was. He never said, ‘Let there be sin under the heavens,’ as he said, ‘Let there be water under the heavens.’ Nor does he will it by infusing any habit of it, or stirring up inclinations to it; no, ‘God tempts no man’ (James 1:13). Nor does he will it by his approving will; it is detestable to him, nor ever can he be otherwise. [Yet] the will of God is in some sort concurrent with sin. He does not properly will it, but he wills not to hinder it. To will sin as sin would be an unanswerable blemish on God. But to will to permit it in order for good is the glory of his wisdom. [sin] would never have peeped up its head, unless there had been some decree of God concerning it. And there would have been no decree concerning it had not God intended to bring good and glory out of it. God wills the permission of sin. He does not positively will sin, but he positively wills to permit it. And though he does not approve of sin, yet he approves of that act of his will whereby he permits it. Though God hated sin, as being against his holiness, yet he did not hate the permission of sin, as being subservient by the immensity of his wisdom to his own glory.”[6]

In addition to this excelent quote, I can’t help but quote from the 1689 Confession Chapter 5, Of Divine Providence, Section 4:

4. The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence, that his determinate counsel extendeth itself even to the first fall, and all other sinful actions both of angels and men; and that not by a bare permission, which also he most wisely and powerfully boundeth, and otherwise ordereth and governeth, in a manifold dispensation to his most holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness of their acts proceedeth only from the creatures, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.

I will of course provide commentary on this once we get to that section.  This concludes this brief commentary on section 2, Chapter 4, Of Creation, from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy, source presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 omits this in lieu of its addition.
• [3] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Louisville, John Knox Press) The Library of Christian Classics Volume XX Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Chapter II, Section 19, pg. 278.
• [4] Ibid., pg. 189.
• [5] Ibid.,  pg. 190.
• [6] Stephen Charnock, On the Holiness of God, Vol. II, pg. 147-149.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 4: Of Creation, Section 1, the following:

1. In the beginning[1] it pleased God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit[2], for the manifestation of the glory of his eternal power, wisdom, and goodness, to create or make [out of nothing][3] the world, and all things therein, whether visible or invisible, in the space of six days, and all very good.
( John 1:2, 3; Hebrews 1:2; Job 26:13; Romans 1:20; Colossians 1:16; Genesis 1:31 )

We have studied God’s decrees; we have learned that God’s decrees are eternal, unchangeable, and that God is most free in His determination of what His decrees will be.  But once He has issued (as it were) His decrees, how does He carry them out? Or put another way, how does God execute His decrees?  The Shorter Catechism is helpful here:

• The Westminster Shorter Catechism #9:
• Q: How doth God execute his decrees?
  A: God executeth his decrees in the works of creation and providence.

So God uses the works of creation and providence as a means to bring about His eternal plan.  We are not yet ready to study God’s providence, that will come in the next chapter, but here we will study God’s works of creation.

• The Westminster Shorter Catechism #10:
• Q: What is the work of creation?
  A: The work of creation is, God’s making all things of nothing, by the word of his power, in the space of six days, and all very good.

 The 1689 Confession states: “In the beginning it pleased God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit“

•  “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” Gen 1:1 (ESV)
• The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Gen 1:2 (ESV)
• “Then God said, “Let Us make man in our image, after Our likeness.” Gen 1:26 (ESV)
• “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3  All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.”  John 1:1-3 (ESV)
• “But in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.”   Heb 1:2 (ESV)
• For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. Col 1:16 (ESV)

We see the 1689 Confession is very Trinitarian here.  In the beginning, it pleased the Triune God.  We should just stop a moment right here.  Think about it.  The reason God has done anything is because it pleased our great Triune God to do it.  There is no other reason that God needs.  This view right here in this small portion is a life changing transforming world-view.  It is all about God.  As of yet, man is not even involved.  We are not needed.

The 1689 Confession goes on to state: “for the manifestation of the glory of his eternal power, wisdom, and goodness” 

It please the Triune God:

• for the manifestation of the glory of his eternal power,
• wisdom,
• and goodness 

Certainly we can see these clearly manifested in creation.  In fact, all mankind can clearly see it:

“For his 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.” Romans 1:20 (ESV)

The 1689 goes on to state: “to create or make out of nothing the world, and all things therein, whether visible or invisible,”

• For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. Col 1:16 (ESV)

God made creation out of nothing.  This is really almost inconceivable to us.  Everything we “create” is out of something that already exists.  Try and think of making something out of nothing.  You just can’t do it.  Even when we make something into something else, it still existed in some form before that. 

Ex nihilo is the theological term from Latin to create out of nothing.  But how did God do it?  The answer is just as mind boggling. 

Fiat- the divine imperative.  God spoke, “let there be,” and there was. 

The incredible power that this took, and the incredible wisdom it took, and how it is a good work by a God whose character is goodness.

“And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.” Gen 1:31 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession concludes this section with: “in the space of six days, and all very good.”

I am not going to address for or against whether it was a literal six days or not.  The Confession holds to a literal 6 days.  I believe it is a literal six days, but it is not a hill I am willing to die on as to whether it was a literal six twenty-four hour periods.  Let’s not major on a minor.  There are good Reformed folks on both sides.  However, there are four basic theories, and I just mention their names:

• 1) The Gap Theory
• 2) The day-age theory
• 3) The framework hypothesis
• 4) The six-day creation traditional view.

It is amazing that God did this in six days and all very good.  God was pleased, and we are amazed.  And on the seventh day, God rested.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 4, section 1, Of Creation from the 1689 Confession of Faith.   

• [1] 1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy, the source is presumably Collins.
• [2] 1689 replaces the WCF and Savoy’s “Ghost” with “Spirit.”
• [3] 1689 omits this from the Savoy, it is not in the WCF.
• [4] 1689 omits this from the Savoy, it is not in the WCF.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decree, Section 7, the following:

7. [1]The doctrine of the high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending the will of God revealed in his Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election; so shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel.
( 1 Thessalonians 1:4, 5; 2 Peter 1:10; Ephesians 1:6; Romans 11:33; Romans 11:5, 6, 20; Luke 10:20 )

The 1689 states: “The doctrine of the high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care“

Predestination can be a very hot topic of theology, and discussions can move over into the areas of philosophy as well.  But the important question to ask is what has God revealed about this doctrine.  We have touched on several aspects of it in this chapter on God’s Decrees, but it is important that we do not just take the approach that one camp says this and another camp says this so what is the point of trying to make any definite conclusions.  This doctrine of predestination does need special attention due to its “high mystery:”

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decree, Section 6, the following:

6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so he hath, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or[1] effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
( 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 5:9, 10; Romans 8:30; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:5; John 10:26; John 17:9; John 6:64 )

The 1689 states: “As God hath appointed the elect unto glory,“

God has those of Adam’s race that He has elected, and they are elected for glory.  This is ultimately their destination.

The Circumstances Surrounding Your Salvation

The 1689 Confession states: “by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto”

God’s plan to elect many of Adam’s race is an eternal plan.  It has always been and always will be.  This eternal plan is a purpose He determined by His most free will.  God’s will in determine who would be elected and who would not be elected was made of His own free choosing; it was made entirely independent of the elect as has been established in the prior section.  Along with this choosing the elect, God determined way or the means that the elect would come to salvation.

God has not only ordained the end (salvation of the elect, but He foreordained the means to gets there.  The means AND the ends are foreordained.  The circumstances that surrounded your salvation were the means; they were foreordained.  All these things including of course the Spirit’s supernatural regeneration which resulted in your salvation is the end.

We will get further into effectual calling, justification, adoption and sanctification in Division 2, Unit 2.  Here if a brief touching on these blessings and graces.

The 1689 Confession states: “wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, It is important to realize that the elect and the elect alike are fallen in Adam.  It is also important to understand that until the elect are redeemed by Christ, which happen at a particular point in time, the elect stand just as condemned before God as the non-elect.  The elect are as guilty and accountable for their sin as the non-elect.  So even thought they are elected in eternity past, justification occurs at a later time and a particular time.

The 1689 Confession states: “are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season”

The elect still need salvation, and are redeemed by Christ.  The redemption purchased by Christ for the elect still needs to applied to the elect.  Until redemption is applied, they remain lost as has already been stated. 

There is a process to the application of salvation to the elect, and once that  process has begun it starts with the Father’s effectual call to His elect, and ends ultimately with glorification.  This process is often called the ordo salutis (Latin for the order of salvation), and we will get to it in greater detail, but let me just list the process in order of salvation here:

• Effectual Call
• Regeneration
• Repentance and Faith
• Justification
• Adoption
• Sanctification
• Perseverance
• Glorification

This list calls of course for an explanation which I cannot give in detail right here, but the Westminster Shorter Catechism is listed below in this regard.

The Timing of Your Salvation

The 1689 Confession states: “Effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season”

Not only the circumstances surrounding your salvation are a part of God plan, but the time that you were saved was also apart of God’s predetermined plan.  We should be sorrowful for all the sin that occurred until the time of our salvation, but we should also recognize that whether you came to Christ at 8 years old or 70 years old, this was all apart of God’s plan for His purposes and glory. In due season God always bring His plan to fulfillment.  What initiates your time of salvation is God’s effective or effectual call to Himself.  The effectual call will be addressed later in the 1689 Confession.

• “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.  And I will raise him up on the last day.”  John 6:44
• “The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock.” John 10:25-26 (ESV)
• “I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.” John 17:9 (ESV)
• “But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)”  John 6:64 (ESV)

When we are drawn, it is effective or effectual; we will come when effectually called.  A general call is not the same as an effectual call.  In good time we will get to this very important subject, but in the mean time lets look at the Westminster Shorter Catechism on this subject:

Westminster Shorter Catechism 30-32:

Effectual Call and Regeneration

Q30 : How are we made partakers of the redemption purchased by Christ?
A30: We are made partakers of the redemption purchased by Christ, by the effectual application of it to us by his Holy Spirit.

Q31;How doth the Spirit apply to us the redemption purchased by Christ?
A31:The Spirit applieth to us the redemption purchased by Christ, by working faith in us, and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling.

Q32:What is effectual calling?
A32:Effectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel.

I highly recommend the memorizing of these catechism questions and answers as they are very important relating to the order by which God brings about His salvation in our lives.  They might seem difficult in the language at first, but as you carefully read them and meditate on them they become more clear.

The 1689 Confession states: “are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation;”

Westminster Shorter Catechism 33 -37:

justification, adoption, and sanctification

Q33:What benefits do they that are effectually called partake of in this life?
A33: They that are effectually called do in this life partake of justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits which, in this life, do either accompany or flow from them.

Q34 What is justification?
A34: Justification is an act of God’s free grace, wherein He pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous in His sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone.

Q35: What is adoption?
A35: Adoption is an act of God’s free grace, whereby we are received into the number, and have a right to all the privileges of the Sons of God.

Q36: What is sanctification?
A36: Sanctification is the work of God’s free grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness.

Q37: What are the benefits which in this life do accompany or flow from justification, adoption, and sanctification?
A37: The benefits which in this life do accompany or flow from justification, adoption, and sanctification, are, assurance of God’s love, peace of conscience, joy in the Holy Ghost, increase of grace, and perseverance therein to the end.

An excellent book that discusses the order of salvation that I highly recommend is written by Prof. John Murray, entitled Redemption Accomplished and Applied.[2] The order of salvation is extremely important to understand.  This book cleared up many misunderstandings and errors that I had.

The 1689 Confession states: “neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or[1] effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.”  So as to leave no room for misunderstanding, the 1689 Confession states that all of these items listed in the order of salvation apply only to the elect. 

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 3, Section 6 Of God’s Decrees from the 1689 Confession of Faith. 

• [1] 1689 adds this to Savoy, but not to WCF.  If the Savoy was the original source as discussed in the original sources of the 1689 Confession, then Collins would be the source not the WCF for this minor change.
• [2] John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans)

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decree, Section 5, the following:

5. Those of mankind that are predestinated to[1] life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a[2] condition or cause[3] moving him thereunto. (Ephesians 1:4, 9, 11; Romans 8:30; 2 Timothy 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:9; Romans 9:13, 16; Ephesians 2:5, 12 )

The 1689 Confession states: “before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will”

• The point is made here first, that in terms of time, God’s choice of his elect was before they were born, before creation, and in fact even before time itself; it was made in eternity past.  The choice was made in eternity past and carries into eternity future; it is completely an unchangeable choice God has made of His elect.
• The choice was made by God by His secret will.  We do not know why He chose some and passed over others;  all we do know is that it was according to His good pleasure.
• “Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6  to the praise of his glorious grace,”  Eph. 1:4-6 (ESV)
• “In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,”  Eph 1:11 (ESV)
• “And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” Romans 8:30 (ESV)

• “Who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,” 2 Tim 1:9 (ESV)
• “For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,” 1 Thess 5:9 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: “and good pleasure of his will,”

• This reminds me of a related Westminster Shorter Catechism question #20:
• Q20: Did God leave all mankind to perish in the estate of sin and misery?
• A.20: God having, out of His mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace, to deliver them from the estate of sin and misery, and to bring them into an estate of salvation by a Redeemer.

In Calvinism we see a high view of God’s sovereignty, and part of that is recognizing God’s freedom to do has He pleases.  Calvinism is a God-centered theology whereas other systems of theology are man-centered.  There is a huge difference.  In man-centered theology God is only free to do what we agree makes sense and fits into our view of the world.  Man-centered theology does not allow God to be completely free; God-centered theology takes great care to acknowledge the freedom of God.  Only a completely autonomous and free God, can truly be God.  No other God but the True and Living God is worthy of our worship.

The prior statements of the 1689 Confession left no room for the boasting of man in his choosing Christ, but the 1689 Confession goes further in stating:  ”out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving him thereunto.”

• His election of some is unrelated to anything that man can do or will do. There was no condition in the elect person that caused God to choose them.
• There was no cause at all in the creature, the person moving God to choose them.
• Election is not based on events from the future, but only upon God’s free choice, for His own purpose, by His own will, for His own glory.
• This doctrine overlaps into other chapters and sections the 1689 Confession.  It is God’s sovereignty applied to all of creation and all creatures.

If I think I chose Christ of my own initiative and “free-will,” then why did I choose Christ over my neighbor?  If we are all on the same level in our ability to choose Christ, then that would mean that there was something in me that is better than my neighbor who did not choose Christ.  Is it not better to choose Christ than to not choose Him?  If it is my ability to choose Christ, then there must be something better in me.  But if my election is because of nothing in me, no condition or anything I did, then I have no reason to boast over my neighbor.  This is pure grace.  If I chose Christ because He granted or created the faith in me, then where is there boasting?

• For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.  Eph 2:8-10 (ESV)

When we claim the credit for choosing Christ, we under-estimate our deadness in sin, and we take credit for something that the Father initiated Himself.  We are in a sense taking away God’s freedom in election, and taking glory that belongs only to God.  We take credit for being the initiator, when that belongs to God alone. God is free to show His love on whom He chooses. “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.”  John 6:44 (ESV)

Why must we hold onto “our” choosing of Christ?  We must search our heart carefully on this matter.  I am not convinced it is just a misunderstanding of the Scriptures that stops us here.  I think sin is the issue. Does the Christian choose Christ?  Yes.  But the question is why did the Christian choose Christ?  The Reformed view is that all are unable to choose Christ (because of original sin) until they are first regenerated, thus putting us on the same plane as our neighbor.  We are all unable to choose Christ without regeneration which is an act of God’s free grace.  Once regenerated, then they are able to choose Christ because God has created a repentant heart and faith in them. “What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. Romans 9:14-16 (ESV)

There will be much more on this later (Lord willing) as the 1689 Confession commentary continues into future chapters.  But let me just mention this for now: many reject this Bible teaching because they think the reformed view is taking away man’s responsibility, or creating an unresolvable conflict.  In other words, God tells man to repent and believe in the gospel, and yet man cannot.  This creates a great tension.  But it is not God’s fault man cannot repent and believe; through Adam and their own actual sins proceeding from man’s inherited sin, man lost his ability to obey God’s commands.  God is free to enable those whom he has called and to pass over those whom He has not chosen.  God gives a general call to all who hear the gospel, but makes the call effective (effectual) in the elect through regeneration. Those unable to respond are freely rejecting the gospel following their own sinful desires thus storing up more wrath for themselves.   There is no injustice on God’s part here.  The non-elect (reprobate) receive righteous justice; the elect receive mercy based on Christ’s merits.  This is all God’s free choice, and there is no room for boasting by the elect; he whom has been forgiven much loves much!

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 3, Section 5 Of God’s Decrees from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 changes the “unto” of the WCF and Savoy to “to.” This source will be called Collins.
• [2] 1689 adds the article “a” to the WCF and Savoy. Source will be called Collins.
• [3] 1689 changes “causes” of the WCF and Savoy to the singular “cause.” This source will be called Collins.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decree, Section 4, the following:

4. These angels and men thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.  ( 2 Timothy 2:19; John 13:18 )

In case the idea of “elect angels” is new to you, look at 1 Timothy 5:21:

• “In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality.”  

Here the 1689 Confession expounds the unchangeableness of God’s eternal decrees, particularly in relation to the predestination of the elect angels and men.

What do the Scriptures state along these lines?

• “I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen. But the Scripture will be fulfilled.”  John 13:18 (ESV)
• “My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.”  John 10:29 (ESV)
• “When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him.“  John 17:1-2 (ESV)
• “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.”  John 6:37 (ESV)
• “But God’s firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” “ 2 Tim 2:19 (ESV)

This brings to mind the Westminster Shorter Catechism question #34:

• Q34: What is adoption?
  A34: Adoption is an act of God’s free grace, whereby we are received into the number, and have a right to all the privileges of the sons of God.

The 1689 Confession leaves no wiggle room, no room for openness views of God.  God is not open in His plan and decrees; it has all been laid out from eternity by God.  He is not open to changing His plans; He has foreordained the beginning from the end.  Do not fight God; Be still and know that He is God.  This doctrine is of great comfort for God’s people.  Let us rejoice that everything is about His will not ours.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 3, Section 4 Of God’s Decrees from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decree, Section 3, the following

3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.[1]
( 1 Timothy 5:21; Matthew 25:34; Ephesians 1:5, 6; Romans 9:22, 23; Jude 4 )

The 1689 Confession differs here in section 3 of chapter 3 from the Westminster Confession.  The 1689 Confession avoided the potential pitfall of the Westminster Confession.  Let’s compare:

1689 Confession Chapter 3, Section 3:

• By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.

Westminster Confession Chapter 3, Section 3:

• “By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.”

The risk for the Westminster Confession is that some will see no distinction between the predestination to eternal life and the predestination to eternal death.  The statement is true and accurate, but it makes no distinctions in section 3.  In section 7 the Westminster clarifies it better (click here: http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/ if interested in section 7 of the Westminster Confession), but the 1689 sought the clarification up front in section 3. 

What is the issue?  The issue is if God predestines to eternal death than aren’t men coerced into sin and God then the author of sin.  As well, if men have no choice, then how can a just God hold them accountable for their sins?

This takes some time to lay this all out step by step.  Let’s try and make some sense out of all this.

Let’s begin by looking at the doctrine of election, the doctrine of reprobation.  As well, let’s look at the term “double predestination” which often causes Double Trouble. 

Let’s define some terms here:

• Election: God’s decree to choose those whom He chooses to salvation.
• Reprobation: meaning those that will never be saved, the non-elect.
• Double Predestination: God predestines or decrees to save the elect, and to not save the non-elect.  This definition is inadequate, but for the purpose of a starting point I give this incomplete definition.  

1. We see the doctrine of election to eternal life in the Scriptures; God foreordained many to eternal life.  For example: 

• He predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. Eph 1:5-7 (ESV)
• For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. Romans 8:29-30 (ESV)
• As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” 14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.   Romans 9:13-16 (ESV)
• For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, 5 because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. 1 Thess. 1:4-5 (ESV)
• And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.  Acts 13:48 (ESV)

But what about those who are not foreordained to eternal life (termed the reprobate)?  Unless we take the position that everyone is predestined to salvation (Universalism), then we must face the flip side of election.  If God chose or elected Jacob, what does this tell us about Esau?  What of those who are not elected to life?

2. We see in Scripture the doctrine of reprobation and God’s foreordination the non-elect to eternal death.  Here are some passages on that topic:

• What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. Romans 9:22 (ESV)
• For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. Jude 1:4 (ESV)
• The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come. Rev. 17:8 (ESV)
• At that time Jesus declared, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. Matt 11:25-26 (ESV)
• For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. Romans 9:17-18 (ESV)
• But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”  Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honored use and another for dishonorable use? Romans 9:20-21 (ESV)
• “A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense.”  They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do. 1 Peter 2:8 (ESV)

These verses show us that God does have a decree for the reprobate (those who will never be saved).  We can’t get around that.  But the key question is how does that work?  Many just stop here and will no longer listen.  The wise man listens and become wiser we are told in Proverbs, so hang in there if you are having a difficulty with this.

Is there an Election to Eternal Death?  Is this Double Predestination?  Doesn’t this give us double trouble?

Here is a Larry King type question to the Christian: Does God predestine people to hell?  It is a tough question to ask, but it can be answered oh so well.  It will strain the brain, but it will not strain the Bible or ration.  Let’s start with Double predestination.

The Problem with the term “double predestination”

• The problem with the term “double predestination” is that it can easily be interpreted to mean that there is no distinction between election to eternal life, and election to eternal death.
• If you are going to use the term “double predestination”, one needs to make some careful distinctions to avoid unbiblical extremes.
• “The term “double predestination” is not a helpful term because it gives the impression that both election and reprobation are carried in the same way by God and have no essential difference between them, which is certainly not true.” [3] Wayne Grudem

I agree with Grudem. So why am I mentioning Double predestination?  I mention it because I think it is a good term.  The term helps us not ignore God’s decrees for the elect and the non-elect (the two sides of the coin of election).  But we have to use the phrase with precision.  If we use it well, the term is very helpful.  

Here is a little sidebar session:

• A key term to be familiar with in doctrine and theology is the word distinct, or distinction.  A simple definition of distinction is: clearly different and separate from others.
• If we are going to be able to be precise in our doctrine and theology, we need to gain skill in being able to tell how certain doctrines are related to each, and yet at the same time are distinct from one another.  We need to see the similarities, while at the same time, recognizing the differences, and be able to hold them in a sort of tension. It is like the magnets that want to be pulled together, but we have to use a little force to keep them separate.  There is the glorious unity of the Bible, but that unity does not mean all things in the Bible are the same.
• As well, when it comes to technical theological terms, we cannot allow our minds to be lazy and to guess at what the theological terms mean.  If we guess or assume we will likely misunderstand important issues.  Theology can be technical in its language; we should be careful to not make assumptions about what a technical term means based on what immediately comes to mind.  This applies as well to our current topic: ”Double Predestination.” 

Okay the sidebar session is over.

Wayne Grudem points out that many reformed theologians do not use the term “double predestination,” (although R.C. Sproul did in his book Chosen by God). Grudem, however, did not offer an alternative term or label for us to use.  Perhaps he preferred no replacement.  He also points out that many opponents to reformed theology use the term “double predestination” to criticize reformed theology. Presumably the criticism is that our view places God as the author of sin and the coercer of man’s will, which of course we deny.

But in the absence of a better replacement phrase, and in an effort to understand to ourselves and explain it to our opponents, what do we mean by Double Predestination, and what don’t we mean?

This is what theologians call the election of the elect to salvation, and the foreordained (predestined) passing over of those who are not elected for salvation.  God does have a foreordained plan for the non-elect or reprobate; they are not just ignored by God’s decrees.

Double predestination has two views:

• 1) Equal Ultimacy (Unbiblical)
• 2) Unequal Ultimacy (Biblical)

 1) Equal Ultimacy:

• The Elect:-God intervenes to create faith in the elect.
• The Reprobate-God intervenes to create unbelief in the reprobate.  Many draw this conclusion from the Scriptures about God hardening Pharaoh’s heart.

2) Unequal Ultimacy:

• The Elect-God intervenes to create faith in the elect.
• The Reprobate-God passes over and does not create faith in the reprobate.  He leaves them to their own sin to receive the just consequence from them.

To explore this matter further, we need to explore some further distinctions:

Positive and Negative Decrees:

• Positive Decree – God’s active intervention in the heart of the elect to create faith.
• Negative Decree – God’s passing over or not intervening to create faith in the reprobate.

For both the elect and reprobate the unbelief and sin are already there. They both deserve God’s justice.  God does not coerce sin in either.  They sin by their own choices.

 Positive Decree or Negative Decree, it is still a decree.

What is important to understand is this:

• God’s direct intervention is decreed.  God’s not intervening is decreed.  Both are eternal decrees. 

Here are two slides to show the difference between the hyper-Calvinistic view of Double Predestination versus the Calvinistic view of Double predestination. 

 The difference is important and should be carefully noted by those who claim there is only hyper-Calvinism. 

 But what about Pharaoh? 

The Bible tells us that God hardened his heart right?  Yes it does.  So where do we go from here? Are we left to a God who hardens hearts and is the creator of sin in a person?  Doesn’t this show God positively decreed to harden Pharaoh’s heart?

You shall speak all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall tell Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go out of his land. But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, Pharaoh will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt and bring my hosts, my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great acts of judgment.  The Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring out the people of Israel from among them.”   Exodus 7:2-5 (ESV)

God told Moses ahead of time He was going to harden Pharaoh’s heart.

Problem: How can God hold someone accountable for their sin and hardened heart, if God created the hard heart and sin?

• What can help us here with this impasse is to ask: How did God harden Pharaoh’s heart?  The Bible states: I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go.”  Ex 4:21 (ESV)
• The Bible does not say how God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, but we really have only two options:

              1) God actively hardened Pharaoh’s heart-and created fresh evil in it.

              2) God passively hardened Pharaoh’s heart.

Answer: God’s judgment was on sin that was already present in Pharaoh’s heart.  All God had to do in order to harden Pharaoh’s heart was to give him over to sin.

Some other distinctions:  Common Grace and Special Grace

• Common Grace is the grace that God shows to all.  He is still free to show this grace to whom He will, and to the degree He will, and in any other way He sees fit.  We all receive it in common. An example of common grace is the rain falling on the righteous and the unrighteous, as Jesus said.
• Common grace includes God’s restraining action in holding evil back in the world.  Some of the ways He does this is through civil powers, the opinions of the culture we live in, and other means.  These all fit under the theological category of common grace that God bridles and restrains evil.  All God has to do to harden an unregenerate heart is to give it a longer leash.
• Special grace is the grace that God selectively shows.  This would apply primarily to the grace he gives in Christ to His elect.

Passive Hardening

• “It is not that God puts His hand on them [the reprobate] to create fresh evil in their hearts; He merely removes His holy hand of restraint from them and lets them do their own will.”[4] R.C. Sproul
• “Power corrupts, and absolute power absolutely corrupts.”
• Pharaoh had little restraint as the most powerful man alive at that time. The only real restraint left for the powerful Pharaoh was God’s holy arm.  God removed His holy hand of common grace, and Pharaoh’s evil inclinations did the rest.

The doctrine of election shows God intervening in His elect to create faith in them.  The doctrine of reprobation is God’s passing over the already sinful and unbelieving heart of the non-elect.  And yes, the passing over was foreordained; the reprobate were not just overlooked or fell through the cracks.

 So what are we saying?

• We are saying that God foreordained to save His elect and He also foreordained to pass over the non-elect. 
• God positively decrees salvation for the elect.
• God negatively decrees to pass over the non-elect or reprobate. 

 Let’s get back to the actual wording of the 1689 Confession:

By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.[1] 

All that God does is for His glory.  God’s decrees glorify Him.  His decree to save the elect glorifies Himself.  His decree to not elect some is for His glory. 

The election of angels glorifies Himself.  There are elect angels. 

• In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality. 1 Tim 5:21 (ESV)

• God’s decree (His positive Decree) to predestine and elect some to eternal life glorifies Him by showing His glorious grace.
• God’s decree (negative decree) to predestine some to eternal death by passing over them allowing them to receive justice glorifies Him by showing His glorious justice.

It has been said God had three choices:

1. He could have saved all mankind and shown his glorious grace.
2. He could have saved none and shown His glorious justice.
3. He could have done both: saving some showing His glorious mercy and passed over others showing His glorious justice.

We have nothing to say about God’s ways and His decrees by way of a protest; we can only stand back in awe and terror at His wondrous ways. 

Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”

Rev 4:11 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 3, Section 3 Of God’s Decrees from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

 _______________________________________________________________

• [1] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source is the 1644 LBC.
• [2] Samuel Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Darlington, England, Evangelical Press) pg. 72-73.
• [3] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, IVP and Zondervan) pg. 670.
• [4] R.C. Sproul, Chosen by God (Carol Stream, Illinois, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.) pg. 145

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decree, Section 2, the following

2. Although God knoweth whatsoever may or can come to pass, upon all supposed conditions, yet hath he not decreed anything, because he foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions.
( Acts 15:18; Romans 9:11, 13, 16, 18 )

God made His decrees based solely upon His own will, and not based upon what He saw happen in the future.  This statement applies to all of God’s decrees.  They are eternal, meaning he made these decrees before the world was created and in fact all the way back to eternity past.  The phrase eternity past hurts the mind as it tries looking that far back, but the study of God always does strain the mind.  

Since God’s decrees were made before creation, without God’s looking into the corridor of time and making decisions based upon the future, man’s decisions and will, are not a factor in his decision to make His decrees.  Whatever happens is a result of God’s predetermined decrees, not what happens in time and creation.  It is all from God; all for his glory. 

So why pray?  So why evangelize?  Why do anything? 

Although God has decreed everything before it comes to pass, He is free to use means to accomplish His ends.  He is free to use or to not use creation, including mankind, as a means to bring about His decrees.  In fact, He often does use mankind as a means to accomplish His eternal decrees; that is an amazing thing to ponder.  We can see this reflected in Ephesians 2:10

• “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (ESV).  So we have the  privilege of being used by God as a means to bring about His eternal decrees.  God often uses our prayers, our evangelism, and our good works to bring about His ends, but even our acts were foreordained.  This gives all glory to God and not to us.  

The 1689 confession in this section opposes a popular theory of God’s decrees as seen in election.  This theory goes something like this: 

• In election, the theory is that God looked down the corridors of time, and based upon an individual placing their faith in Christ, God then went back into eternity past decided based upon that person’s faith to elect them.  This theory does violence to the word election.  Election infers freedom of choice.  In election the elector is free in his decision to decide or choose whomever he would, and for his own reasons.  If election is based upon mankind’s choice (as this theory clearly implies) then God is not the elector, but man. 

Election is a Biblical doctrine and those on the non-Calvinistic side of election understand that based on the frequency of the word, the doctrine of election cannot be ignored.  The key is to let the plain sense of Scripture define election, not our traditions.  This subject is addressed in the very next section (chapter 3, Section 3) the 1689 Confession, so I will leave election for that section.

 Section 2 of Chapter 3 also refutes Open-Theism.  In this serious error, God sort of runs around reacting in real-time to our decisions so as to bring about His intended will.  The point of Open-Theism is to find a rational way to make man free in his will without interfering with God’s free will. But if God is not fully free, then He is not free at all.  If God is not free, then He is not God.  Only the doctrine of God’s eternal decree allows God to be free to carry out his decrees according to His own will.  This doctrine adorns the Sovereignty of God.  The 1689 Confession states that all decisions and everything happening in real-time has already been planned and foreordained. 

• The word in the Scriptures Foreknowledge some say shows God’s decrees are based upon foreseen events.  But “Foreknowledge means foreordination.  The Standard Greek Lexicon, of Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich asserts that the word “foreknowledge”, means foreordination in those passages most frequently used to prove that election is on the basis of foreseen qualifications.  This Lexicon asserts that the meaning of this word in Romans 8:29 and Romans [Chapters] 9-11 is “choose beforehand” and in 1 Peter 1:2 “predestination”.  It is crucial to note that in these passages it is not something about the elect which is foreknown, but they themselves who are foreknown.  Here we remember that the term “know” in the Bible frequently carries with it the idea of love.  Thus foreknowledge in these passages contains the idea of distinguishing love.”[1]  Samuel Waldron

What do the Scriptures tells us: 

• After this I will return,
• and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen;
• I will rebuild its ruins,
• and I will restore it,
• 17 that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord,
• and all the Gentiles who are called by my name,
• says the Lord, who makes these things
• 18  known from of old.’ Acts 15:16-18 (ESV)

• “Though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call— 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” 14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. Romans 9:11-18 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 3, Section 2 Of God’s Decrees from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] Samuel Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Darlington, England, Evangelical Press), pg 69-70.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 3: Of God’s Decree, section 1, the following:

1. God hath decreed in himself[1], from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things[2], whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither[3] the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein[4]; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature[5], nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree[6].
( Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11; Hebrews 6:17; Romans 9:15, 18; James 1:13; 1 John 1:5; Acts 4:27, 28; John 19:11; Numbers 23:19; Ephesians 1:3-5 )

In my past Christian up bringing, God’s decrees were not touched on very often as a foundational doctrine, and yet it is a very important foundational teaching upon which so many other doctrines rest.

For starters, let’s try to get our minds around at least a basic understanding of God’s decrees using a dictionary and the Shorter Catechism.

When I first started to read Reformed Theology, I found myself a little bewildered by the term “decrees.”  In fact, I remember having to go to a dictionary to look up what the word decree meant as it was so unfamiliar to me in the context of doctrine.  Here is what I found in the dictionary:

• Decree: “To command (something) by decree; to order, appoint or assign authoritatively, ordain.”   Oxford English Dictionary

I compared God’s decrees or in a sense orders, to that given by a king.  A king gives orders or decrees; they are then carried out.  So this was my working illustration or comparison as I first grappled with the idea of God’s decrees.  At some level I must have understood God issues decrees and that they are carried out, but for whatever reason it was not really a part of my thinking.  I am afraid that for many believers this may also be the case.

I think that part of the problem is that American culture in addition to Arminian theology tends to shy away from God’s decrees.  Partly because it tends to cause Calvinistic and Arminian tensions, but even at a more basic level it tends to interfere with our love for complete autonomous freedom.  We understand if God has decrees, and eternal decrees at that, we suddenly are not really in charge of our destiny; we don’t like to think that way.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism number 7 is one of the most helpful Shorter Catechism questions of all.  It states:

• Westminster Shorter Catechism #7
• Q7: What are the decrees of God?
  A7: The decrees of God are, his eternal purpose, according to the counsel of his will, whereby, for his own glory, he hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.

If more believers had this Christian world view, we would have a more worthy view of our God, His workings, and our place in that process.

God’s Free Will and Man’s Free Will

Let’s get the first issue that is usually raised on the table right up front, the subject of man’s free will versus God’s free will.  Now let me ask you this: if God’s free will and man’s free will clash, who wins?  I hope you will answer God’s free will wins.  This issue: God’s complete ultimate sovereignty over all of mankind and the universe right down to the molecules, atoms and quarks, is where I think we find two ”Christian” world views.  We should not have two different “Christian” world views, but nonetheless it is so.

These are the two “Christian” world views; those who hold man’s free will to be absolutely sovereign and those who hold God’s free will to be absolutely sovereign.  Perhaps there could be another view, namely, those who try to hold the middle ground.  This third category though, in my view, simply borrows from the other two above world views (God’s sovereign free will and man’s sovereign free will).  But still, at some point you still have to answer the question: if God’s free will and man’s free will clash, who wins.

This is of course is an age old discussion of which some people think is irresolvable; many think it irrresolvable because there are “theologians” on both sides.  Just because “men” disagree as to the meaning of the Bible does not mean no one can know what the Bible says on the subject.  So let’s look at this foundational doctrine and let Scripture speak to us on the subject with the 1689 Confession to be used as a tool in the process.

The 1689 Confession, in summarizing the Scriptures on this issue states: “God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass;”

•  What do the Scriptures tell us along these lines:
• “Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, And I will accomplish all my purpose,’  Isaiah 46:10 (ESV)
• “In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.”  Eph 1:11 (ESV)
• “So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath.” Heb 6:17 (ESV)

• I trust for most of the readers, we have no conflict on this point.  But as the English say, “Not to put to fine a point on it,” I hear many a Christian say that God is “in charge”, or God is “on the throne”, or “in control,” but sometimes I think that they really mean that God is in control, but NOT that He foreordained everything that comes to pass.”  That is just a little too much control for some.  Some Christians are not willing to go as far as “foreordained.”  But why not?  I think the problem is due to two difficulties:

Difficulty One: Evil

• How can God foreordain everything? because that would include evil, and we know God can’t be the author of evil.  Very true, but we have to be careful here that we do not diminish God’s sovereignty because we have this “evil problem” to work out.  Evil is a problem for us, but not for God.  If God is not in control of evil to the point of having foreordained it, then God is not in charge of all, and is not then an all Sovereign, all knowing, and all powerful God.  Something would then be out of His control.
• It is possible for God to decree and foreordain evil without being the author of it.  This will be addressed further as we continue in this chapter.  But let’s be clear, the Scriptures make it clear God is not the author of evil and tempts no man (James 1:13; 1 John 1:5). The 1689 Confession reflecting what the Scriptures say about this, states that God foreordained everything that comes to pass and “yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein”

Difficulty Two: Man’s Free Will 

• When we think of God’s decrees and that He is free to do whatever He wants, in any way He wants, to whom ever He wants and whenever He wants, we tend to cringe.  And we think if God is that free in His will, then we are not so free.
• Man’s will is in bondage, so we might as well realize up front we are not free to do anything.  We are not free to perfectly obey God’s Law because we have lost our original righteousness through Adam’s sin.  “If, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ” (Romans 5:17 (ESV)).
• In the 1689 Chapter 9: Of Free Will, the free will of man is summarized very well.  I recommend you click on the 1689 Confession tab above and read chapter 9, because there are very important points and distinctions made there that need to be understood.  Man is free to do what he desires, and that is a great privilege God has given to us.  Unfortunately, usually what we desire is to break God’s law.
• You were free to come to this blog, God did not force you.  In salvation, God does not force us to repent and believe the gospel; He changes our heart and desires through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, and then we want to come.  This is done freely of God’s own choosing and initiating.  We will get to all these various doctrines and issues in good time within the 1689 Confession; I do not want to get bogged down in these specific important points right here, but for those concerned about what the 1689 Confession teaches about man’s free will, here is what the 1689 Confession states about God carrying out His eternal decrees in relation to man’s free will: ”Nor is violence offered to the will of  the creature.”  There is no coercion to man’s free will on God’s part in carrying out His eternal decrees.
• Ultimately it is a mystery (to us) how all of life’s factors, decisions and events interrelate to bring about God’s predetermined plan.  What we are called to do is to carry out God’s written revealed moral will in the Scriptures, and beyond that His eternal decrees and their being carried out are up to Him.  We, if we are His people, are simply beneficiaries of it because He is a loving, good, compassionate and holy God who carries out His will, His way, in His time, and for His own reasons.  In a later section, we will look specifically at Pharaoh and God’s dealings with Pharaoh’s free will because God said He would harden Pharaoh’s heart.  “But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go.” Ex. 4:21b (ESV).  “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.” Romans 9:17-18 (ESV).

The 1689 Confession states: nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away,

• This means that God is free to use indirect means, including His creation and creatures to bring about His will, which again is not just ordained, but foreordained.  He does all this without authoring evil, and without doing violence to the will of the creature.
•  “What scientists call the laws of nature we call the normal operations of the sovereign God.  They are His laws; they are not independent in nature.  They simply describe the regular, normal way in which God manages or governs His universe.  He is the primary cause of everything that comes to pass, the power supply for all force; secondary causes are always dependent for their power on the primary source of power.”[7] R.C. Sproul
• “The more we reflect on this and work through some of the apparent difficulties, the more we realize that our destinies, our lives, and our children’s lives, in the final analysis, are not exposed to the blind forces of chance or fate.  This is our Father’s world, and our lives are in His hands.  His purpose and will are being brought to pass.”[8] R.C. Sproul
•  If God foreordained everything, the ends as well as the means are also foreordained. Only God could orchestrate such holy and “powerful preserving and governing of all His creatures and all their actions.”[9]
•  Here we see the key to understanding the Calvinistic world-view.  It is a world-view that is focused upon the sovereignty of God in everything, including salvation in mankind.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 3, Section 1 Of God’s Decrees from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] 1689 Adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source is the 1644 London Baptist Confession.
• [2] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source is the 1644 London Baptist Confession
• [3] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source will be called Collins.
• [4] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source is close, but not exact to the 1644 London Confession.
• [5] 1689 makes “creatures” from the WCF and Savoy into singular “creature.” The source will be called Collins.
• [6] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source is the 1644 London Baptist Confession (1644 LBC)
• [7] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess (New Jersey, P&R Publishing), Volume I, pg. 81.
• [8]  Ibid.
• [9] Shorter Catechism question 11 for WSC, and 12 for Baptist Version.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 2: Of God and Of the Holy Trinity, section 3 the following:

3. In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit[1], of one substance, power, and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided:[2] the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit[3] proceeding from the Father and the Son; all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations[4]; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on him.[5]
( 1 John 5:7; Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Exodus 3:14; John 14:11; 1 Corinthians 8:6; John 1:14,18; John 15:26; Galatians 4:6 )

The Westminster Shorter Catechism number 7 is a great help here in terms of a short succinct statement of the Trinity.  This catechism does not say all that could be said of course, and much more should be said, but this at least points us in the right orthodox direction.

• Westminster Shorter Catechism #7
• How many persons are their in the Godhead?
• There are three persons in the Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one God, the same in substance, and equal in power and glory.

 The 1689 states: “therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations”

I have previously given these quotes by R.C. Sproul in section 1 of 3 related to God not having “parts” as the Confession states.  But these are worth repeating under this section as well:

• R.C. Sproul says: “This is one way to affirm the simplicity of God.  God is a simple being, rather than a complex being who can be divided into parts.”[6]  
• As well, Sproul states:  “We sometimes tend to think that God is made up of one part holiness, one part immutability, one part omnipotence, and several other parts, but all of God is all of His attributes in their entirety.”[7] 
• And again Sproul states:  “Every attribute we ascribe to him applies to the whole God.  His attributes all exist mutually in a kind of reciprocity of attributes.” [8] R.C. Sproul

We see in this section the unity of the Godhead, and at the same time the distinctions of each member of the Godhead. 

• Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,     Matt 28:19 (ESV)
• The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.   2 Cor. 13:14 (ESV)
• Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. 1 Cor. 8:6 (ESV)

• Peculiar-in the sense of unique, not strange or unusual.

The 1689 Confession states: “which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on him.”

• The doctrine of the Trinity is essential, and to be clear in our understanding, and informed by Scriptures.  It is acknowledged that the Trinity is a deep mystery, but let the mystery exist in what God has not revealed, not in where He has given revelation.
• This area is one of the gravest places where often Evangelical are very ignorant of the great doctrine of the Trinity.  All illustrations fall short, and many are in serious error; be careful of short quips that attempt to define the Trinity.  Even the Shorter Catechism cannot take the place of deeper understanding of the Trinity.  If we get the doctrine of the Trinity wrong, we become idolaters.  Let me repeat this: If we misunderstand the Trinity, then we are worshipping an idol, because we cease to worship the One True Triune God.

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 2, Section 3, Of God, and Of the Holy Trinity from the 1689 Confession of Faith. 

• [1] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source appears to be 1^st London Confession.
• [2] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source appears to be 1^st London Confession.
• [3] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy in place of Ghost.  Source is unknown.
• [4] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy; the source appears to be the 1^st London Confession
• [5] 1689 adds the italics section to the WCF and it appears to be from the Savoy.
• [6] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess (New Jersey, P&R Publishing), Volume I, pg. 36-37.
• [7] Ibid.
• [8] Ibid.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 2: Of God and Of the Holy Trinity, section 2 the following:

2. God, having[1] all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself, is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creature[s][2] which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them; he is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things, and he[3] hath most sovereign dominion over all creatures[4], to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth; in his sight all things are open and manifest, his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain; he is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands; to him is due from angels and men, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience, as creatures they owe unto the Creator, and whatever[5] he is further pleased to require of them.
( John 5:26; Psalms 148:13; Psalms 119:68; Job 22:2, 3; Romans 11:34-36; Daniel 4:25, 34, 35; Hebrews 4:13; Ezekiel 11:5; Acts 15:18; Psalms 145:17; Revelation 5:12-14 )

The 1689 states:  God, having all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself, is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creature[s] which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them;

• This is a detailed and precise way to say that God is self-existant and self-sufficient, standing in need of no one and no thing.  We need to be reminded that all God does is for His own glory ultimately.  Yes, He is kind, merciful, forgiving, compassionate, but for His glory; as well He is holy, wrathful and full of perfect justice for His own glory. 
• Contrary to much man-centered theology today, God is “not standing in need of any creature which he hath made.”  In fact, even though He made us for His own glory, yet He is not “deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them;”  We can’t pass over this point to quickly.

What do the Scriptures say?

• Can a man be profitable to God?
• Surely he who is wise is profitable to himself.
• Is it any pleasure to the Almighty if you are in the right,
• Or is it gain to him if you make your ways blameless?    Job 22:2-3 (ESV)

• “For who has known the mind of the Lord,or who has been his counselor?”
• “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?”
• For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. Romans 11:34-36 (ESV)

The 1689 states: and he hath most sovereign dominion over all creatures, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth; in his sight all things are open and manifest, his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain;

• God has no contingency plan.  The plan of redemption is not on plan B as if God did not see the fall of man coming.  This will be hard for some, but God not only foresaw the fall of man, He decreed the fall of man.  If that is hard for some, ask yourself what it would mean about God if God did not decree the fall.  Is anything out of His control, and if it is not under His control He is not the Lord God of all?  A lot could be said about this topic, and more is said in the 1689 Confession in other sections; there are important disctinctions and clarifications the 1689 Confession will make on this issue, and so some difficulties may be worked out for some folks as the posts continue through the 1689 Confession.  But God only has one plan, namely, plan A. Plan A is what He has always eternally decreed; all of creation and His all of His creatures are on Plan A, and always will be.  Your life is on plan A; take comfort in the seemingly random events of your life, God is at work in His people for their good and His glory.  For those who are not His people God is at work, but there are no guarantees it is for  their good, but it will surely be for God’s glory.

• For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. Romans 11:36 (ESV)

• O king: It is a decree of the Most High, which has come upon my lord the king, that you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. You shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and you shall be wet with the dew of heaven, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, till you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will. And as it was commanded to leave the stump of the roots of the tree, your kingdom shall be confirmed for you from the time that you know that Heaven rules.  Dan. 4:24-27 (ESV)

• At the end of the days I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever, 
• for his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
• and his kingdom endures from generation to generation;      Dan. 4:34 (ESV)

• And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.           Hebrews 4:13 (ESV)

• And the Spirit of the Lord fell upon me, and he said to me, “Say, Thus says the Lord: So you think, O house of Israel. For I know the things that come into your mind.  Ezek. 11:5 (ESV)

• That the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord,
• and all the Gentiles who are called by my name,
• says the Lord, who makes these things
• known from of old.’  Acts 15:17-18 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states:  he is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands; to him is due from angels and men, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience, as creatures they owe unto the Creator, and whatever he is further pleased to require of them.

• This portion of the confession puts our submission to the Lordship and Rulership of Christ and God the Father to the test.  Any squirming we do here on this point should be taken to prayer.  This is the truth of the matter.  We do it His way, or we are not pleasing God. 

• The Lord is righteous in all his ways and kind in all his works.  
• The Lord is near to all who call on him, 
• to all who call on him in truth.   Psalms 145:17-18 (ESV)

• Saying with a loud voice, “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” 13 And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!” 14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped. Rev. 5:12-14 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 2, Section 2 Of God, and Of the Holy Trinity from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy in place of “hath.”
• [2]1689 removes the plural “creatures” from the WCF and Savoy and replaces it with the singular “Creature” and capitalizes.
• [3]1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy.
• [4]1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy. Source is unknown, perhaps Collins or other.
• [5]1689 adds this to WCF; the source appears to be Savoy which also has this addition to WCF.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 2: Of God and Of the Holy Trinity, section 1 the following:

1. The Lord our God[1] [There] is but one only living and true God; whose subsistence is in and of himself[2], infinite in being and perfection; whose essence cannot be comprehended by any but himself;[3] a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; who is[4] immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, every way infinite[5], most holy, most wise[6], most free, most absolute; working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will for his own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek him, and withal most just and terrible in his judgments, hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty.
( 1 Corinthians 8:4, 6; Deuteronomy 6:4; Jeremiah 10:10; Isaiah 48:12; Exodus 3:14; John 4:24; 1 Timothy 1:17; Deuteronomy 4:15, 16; Malachi 3:6; 1 Kings 8:27; Jeremiah 23:23; Psalms 90:2; Genesis 17:1; Isaiah 6:3; Psalms 115:3; Isaiah 46:10; Proverbs 16:4; Romans 11:36; Exodus 34:6, 7; Hebrews 11:6; Nehemiah 9:32, 33; Psalms 5:5, 6; Exodus 34:7; Nahum 1:2, 3 )

The Westminster Shorter Catechism question four might be a good place to start to try and get our minds around the doctrine of God. This question is to the point, What is God?  This might be what we could consider a brief summary of what the Scriptures teach about God.  Now there is much more, but if we can just get our minds around this it would be a good start.  Read it slowly and think about each word:

• Shorter Catechism #4
• Q.4: What is God?
• A.4: God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.

Let’s start to break down the 1689 Confession into bite size portions (or should we say meal size portions).

The 1689 Confession states: The Lord our God is but one only living and true God

•  ”Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Deut. 6:4 (ESV)
• “Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.” 1 Cor. 8:4 (ESV)

Again the Westminster Shorter Catechism asks:

• Shorter Catechism Question 5
• Q. 5: Are there more gods than one?
• A. 5: There is but one only, the living and true God.

• But the Lord is the true God; he is the living God and the everlasting King. At his wrath the earth quakes, and the nations cannot endure his indignation.  Jer. 10:10 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states:  ”whose subsistence is in and of himself”

• What does this mean?  Subsistence- “Existence as a substance or entity; substantial, real, or independent existence.”[7] …”indicating a particular being or existence, an individual instance of a given essence.[8]
• So we could say it means that God exists in and of Himself, or He is self-existent.  No one created God; He exists in Himself, and of Himself.

The 1689 Confession states: “whose essence”

• essence-“essential: essence; the whatness or quidditas of a being, which makes the being precisely what it is; e.g., the essence of Peter, Paul, and John is their humanity; the essence of God is deity or divinity.”[9]  “What a thing is.”[10]
• So God’s essenseis who He is, or what He is.  The “whatness” of God.

The 1689 Confession continues: “Cannot be comprehended by any but Himself”

• “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me. ”Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? ”Or who shut in the sea with doors when it burst out from the womb, when I made clouds its garment Job 38:2-9 (ESV)

• Before we began this study of God in the Confession, we prefaced our ability to learn about God by saying we are under the topic of study, so we understand our limitation to study a limitless God.

• Here is a helpful quote by Samuel Waldron:  “The creeds of the church fence this mystery [the Godhead].  They do not explain it.  The incomprehensibility of God means that the doctrines of the faith will involve holy mysteries which transcend human reason and contradict fleshly wisdom…  Such mysteries must be accepted with humility and reverence by an intellect weaned from the arrogant and foolish notion of rationalism that it must or can comprehend the divine Being.”[11]

The 1689 Confession continues: without body, parts, or passions. 

Without body: 

• God is invisible and a Spirit.

[Without] parts:

• R.C. Sproul says: “This is one way to affirm the simplicity of God.  God is a simple being, rather than a complex being who can be divided into parts.”[12]
• As well, Sproul states:  “We sometimes tend to think that God is made up of one part holiness, one part immutability, one part omnipotence, and several other parts, but all of God is all of His attributes in their entirety.”[13]
• And again Sproul states:  “Every attribute we ascribe to him applies to the whole God.  His attributes all exist mutually in a kind of reciprocity of attributes.” [14] R.C. Sproul

Without passions:

• -”This means that he does not experience mood swings or become depressed, not that He has no cares.  Yet, Scripture plainly teaches that God has an emotive side: he takes delight in things, he loves, he regards us with affection.  God is not an abstract force, but a personal being.”[15] R.C. Sproul

The 1689 Confession continues: “most holy, most wise, most free, most absolute; working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will for his own glory;”

“Most free”

• This applies to every aspect of God and His actions, whether election, healing, death, judgment, etc.
• He is most free to do as He pleases, to the council of His own will.

“Working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will for his own glory;”

•  Shorter Catechism #7
• Q.7: What are the decrees of God?
• Q.A: The decrees of God are His eternal purpose according to the counsel of His will whereby for His own glory He has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.

• Making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ ¹⁰ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. ¹¹ In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.” Eph. 1:9-11 (ESV)

Think on these words:

• immutable (unchangeable)
• most righteous will
• for His own glory

God’s “will” is:

•  His own
• unchangeable
• most righteous
• for His own glory

The Confession summarizes the Biblical teaching that God foreordains everything that comes to pass.  As R.C. Sproul says in his book Chosen by God, there are no maverick molecules out there in the universe; they are all from Him, through Him and in Him.  This is hard for some Evangelicals to swallow, but it is the old doctrine found from Genesis to Revelation.  It is the plan that includes us, but is not for us, because of us, or from us.  It is not “according to our own will” but according to God’s own will for His glory, not for our glory.

There is so much here in this section still to comment on, but let me just conclude by breaking down each word or phrase from the rest of this section without commentary to help us slow down a little as we read it:

• most loving,
• gracious,
• merciful,
• long-suffering,
• abundant in goodness and truth,
• forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin;
• the rewarder of them that diligently seek him,
• and withal most just and
• terrible in his judgments,
• hating all sin,
• and who will by no means clear the guilty.

Here is what the Word of God tells us in Exodus which we see reflected in the 1689 Confession above:

• “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The Lord.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.” Ex. 33:18-19 (ESV)
• The Lord descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. 6 The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, 7  keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.” Ex 34:5-7 (ESV)

This concludes this brief commentary on Chapter 2, Section 1 Of God, and Of the Holy Trinity from the 1689 Confession of Faith.

 _________________________________________________________________________________

• [1]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy, and it appears from the 1^st London Confession.
• [2]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy, and it appears from the 1^st London Confession.
• [3]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy, and it appears from the 1^st London Confession.
• [4]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy, and it appears from the 1^st London Confession.
• [5]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy, and it appears from the 1^st London Confession.
• [6]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy; the source is unknown, perhaps Collins or other.
• [7] Oxford English Dictionary.
• [8] Richard A. Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from the Protestant Scholastic Theology (Grand Rapids, Baker Academic). Pg. 290 subsistentia.
• [9] Ibid., pg. 105-106, essential.
• [10] Oxford English Dictionary
• [11] Samuel Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith(Darlington, England, Evangelical Press), pg. 56.
• [12] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess (New Jersey, P&R Publishing), Volume I, pg. 36-37.
• [13] Ibid.
• [14] Ibid.
• [15] Ibid.

We are now ready to embark on a very exciting chapter of the 1689 Confession on the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.  But before we do this we should prepare our heart and mind for the study of the Godhead.  In Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology, he states:

“God communicates knowledge of himself to Man. Kuyper calls attention to the fact that theology as the knowledge of God differs in an important point from all other knowledge.  In the study of all other sciences man places himself above the object of his investigation and actively elicits from it from his knowledge by whatever method may seem appropriate. But in theology he does not stand above but rather under the object of his knowledge.  In other words, man can know God only in so far as the latter actively makes Himself known.”[1]

Here is a portion of a sermon delivered on Sabbath Morning, January 7th, 1855, by the REV. C. H. Spurgeon at New Park Street Chapel, Southwark. 

“I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.”—Malachi 3:6

It has been said by some one that “the proper study of mankind is man.” I will not oppose the idea, but I believe it is equally true that the proper study of God’s elect is God; the proper study of a Christian is the Godhead. The highest science, the loftiest speculation, the mightiest philosophy, which can ever engage the attention of a child of God, is the name, the nature, the person, the work, the doings, and the existence of the great God whom he calls his Father. There is something exceedingly improving to the mind in a contemplation of the Divinity. It is a subject so vast, that all our thoughts are lost in its immensity; so deep, that our pride is drowned in its infinity. Other subjects we can compass and grapple with; in them we feel a kind of self-content, and go our way with the thought, “Behold I am wise.” But when we come to this master-science, finding that our plumb-line cannot sound its depth, and that our eagle eye cannot see its height, we turn away with the thought, that vain man would be wise, but he is like a wild ass’s colt; and with the solemn exclamation, “I am but of yesterday, and know nothing.” No subject of contemplation will tend more to humble the mind, than thoughts of God. We shall be obliged to feel—

“Great God, how infinite art thou,
What worthless worms are we!”

But while the subject humbles the mind it also expands it. He who often thinks of God, will have a larger mind than the man who simply plods around this narrow globe. He may be a naturalist, boasting of his ability to dissect a beetle, anatomize a fly, or arrange insects and animals in classes with well nigh unutterable names; he may be a geologist, able to discourse of the megatherium and the plesiosaurus, and all kinds of extinct animals; he may imagine that his science, whatever it is, ennobles and enlarges his mind. I dare say it does, but after all, the most excellent study for expanding the soul, is the science of Christ, and him crucified, and the knowledge of the Godhead in the glorious Trinity. Nothing will so enlarge the intellect, nothing so magnify the whole soul of man, as a devout, earnest, continued investigation of the great subject of the Deity. And, whilst humbling and expanding, this subject is eminently consolatary. Oh, there is, in contemplating Christ, a balm for every wound; in musing on the Father, there is a quietus for every grief; and in the influence of the Holy Ghost, there is a balsam for every sore. Would you lose your sorrows? Would you drown your cares? Then go, plunge yourself in the Godhead’s deepest sea; be lost in his immensity; and you shall come forth as from a couch of rest, refreshed and invigorated. I know nothing which can so comfort the soul; so calm the swelling billows of grief and sorrow; so speak peace to the winds of trial, as a devout musing upon the subject of the Godhead. It is to that subject that I invite you this morning.[2] 

 A.W. Tozer states: “The essence of idolatry is the entertainment of thoughts about God that are unworthy of Him.”[3]

Again Tozer says:  “If we insist upon trying to imagine Him, we end up with an idol, made not with hand but with thoughts; and an idol of the mind is as offensive to God as an idol of the hand.”[4]

 Chapter 1 laid a foundation or basis for knowledge, and that basis is revelation found in the holy Scriptures; revelation, meaning it is something that was hidden but has now been shown or revealed.  Again, there are two important categories of revelation in theology, namely general and special revelation.  General revelation will only tell us general things about God and are for a general audience.  We must have special revelation in order to know specific things about God.  Without special revelation, found ONLY in the Scriptures, we end up with an idol we have formed in our minds and not with the only true and living God.  But what glorious revelation He has given us in the written word of God.  We have the Scriptures as the “only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience.”[5]

 Only if we know our limitations and our needs, are we a position to even begin this study of God. 

•  1. We cannot know God unless He reveals Himself to us in the Scriptures.
• 2. We must understand that the ONLY in the Scriptures has God specifically revealed Himself.
• 3. We must receive illumination from the Holy Spirit to understand this special revelation (in the Scriptures).

Knowing how sure, reliable and incapable of error the Scriptures are, we come confidently and expectantly to see what they will tell us of our glorious God.  But one more word of caution from R.C. Sproul:

• “Theology distinguishes between a comprehensive (exhaustive) knowledge of God, which we cannot have, and an apprehensive knowledge, which is limited, finite, human, creaturely knowledge that we can have.[6]

• Who has ascended to heaven and come down?
• Who has gathered the wind in his fists? 
• Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment?
• Who has established all the ends of the earth?
• What is his name, and what is his son’s name?
• Surely you know!
• Every word of God proves true;
• He is a shield to those who take refuge in him.
• Do not add to his words,
• Lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar. Prov. 30:4-6 (ESV)

• [1]Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Erdmann’s), pg. 35
• [2] http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0001.htm
• [3] Knowledge of the Holy, The Attributes of God: Their Meaning in the Christian Life (San Francisco, Harper & Row), pg. 3.
• [4] Ibid., pg. 8
• [5] 1689 Second London Baptist Confession, Chapter 1:1.
• [6] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess (New Jersey, P&R Publishing), Volume I, pg. 42.

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 10 the following:

10.The supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy [Spirit speaking in the Scripture.] [1]Scripture delivered by the Spirit, into which Scripture so delivered, our faith is finally resolved.[2]  ( Matthew 22:29, 31, 32; Ephesians 2:20; Acts 28:23)

• This is insightful in terms of Creeds and Confessions and official doctrinal statements and any authority might be given to them.  In an earlier post I said the following: “Only to the extent that human writings, be it Creeds, Confessions, commentaries or otherwise, accurately reflect the teaching of Scripture does it have any authority at all, and even that “authority” does not originate within the human writing itself, but proceeds only from the Bible.”
• All these (decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits) including individual interpretations and beliefs, must be examined by the Holy Scriptures.
• But Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.  For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.  And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.” And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching. Matt 22:29-33 (ESV)
• Notice the words, “have you not READ what was SAID to you BY GOD?”

The 1689 Confession has laid a foundation of doctrine about the Bible itself.  We now have an excellent foundation from which to base the rest of the doctrines presented in the 1689 Confession.  Although the beginning of everything is God and one might think the 1689 Confession should start there, the fact is without the special revelation of the Bible we would not know very much about God.  Without the Bible, we would be taking guesses about God, except for what God shows us through creation (general revelation).  With the Scriptures as the foundation, we can go beyond general revelation to specific precise revelation and doctrine.  Praise God for this gift of the Bible; without it we would be groping in the darkness.

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 10 of the 1689 Confession of Faith, and this concludes the brief commentary on the entire chapter one.

• [1]1689 removes this wording from the WCF.  The Savoy also removes it.
• [2]1689 and the Savoy add this wording to the WCF.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 9 the following:

9. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched [and known] [1]by other places that speak more clearly.
( 2 Peter 1:20, 21; Acts 15:15, 16)

The 1689 Confession states ”The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself;”

• Here is the first and foremost rule of hermeneutics, let Scripture interpret Scripture. 

The 1689 confession gives us an application of this infallible rule of interpretation stating: therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly.

• If one passage is unclear-then let that passage be interpreted in light of the rest of the Scriptures and in light of Scripture texts that are more clear.

The study of hermeneutics is very important if we are to properly understand the Bible.  Let me just state here that the historical-grammatical method must be employed if one is to determine the meaning of a Bible passage.  This method employs the use of  history and grammar in determining the meaning of a passage of the Bible. 

• The historical method-this makes use of study of  the historical time period and cultural setting of the human author and the audience to help understand the context the Biblical documents were written in; by doing so it helps us to avoiding improper allegorical interpretations, and helps avoid missing important historical and cultural factors that may aid in the interpretive process.  We must be cautious that we do not put over onto the text a view that looks solely through a twenty-first century grid, framework or lens.  Without first taking steps to understand the historical and cultural context of a document, we are apt to get a wrong interpretation; if the interpretation is wrong, surely the application will be wrong.
• The grammatical method ensures the proper consideration of the actual grammar of the text.  It considers such things as grammatical structure, genre, syntax, and other important areas to make sure our interpretation is grounded in the meaning the author intended. 

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 9 of the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1]1689 removes these two words from the WCF and Savoy.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 8 the following:

8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.
( Romans 3:2; Isaiah 8:20; Acts 15:15; John 5:39; 1 Corinthians 14:6, 9, 11, 12, 24, 28; Colossians 3:16 )

The 1689 Confession uses the phrase “immediately inspired by God.”  This means: directly, without any other intervening or mediating means. 

• The 1689 Confession states that the original manuscripts (or the autographs) of the Old and New Testaments are immediately and directly inspired.  The 1689 Confession does not hold that the copies of the manuscripts are inspired.  As the reader may know, we do not have any of the original manuscripts or the autographs.  We do, however, have thousands of copies of the autographs and many still that remain to be studied (Here is a great organization that works on remaining manuscripts ( http://www.csntm.org ).  From these many copies we can determine or extrapolate what the original words of the autographs stated.  This topic moves into the very valuable discipline of textual criticism which we will not get into any further here.

The 1689 Confession goes onto state: “by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic;”

• All these copied manuscripts God has provided to us. By His singular care and providence, we are able know what the autographs said, and in the relatively few areas we are unclear, these do not deal with essential doctrines for salvation.  In other words, God has kept His word pure even through the human process of copying, even through the years of copies decaying, persecution and other factors. 
• Jesus said:  “For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” Matthew  5:18 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states: “all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them”

• Dickson states: “Well then, do not the Papists err who maintain that the Church of Rome, and the pope are the supreme judges of all controversies of faith; and that his decrees and determinations are to be believed without examination, and implicitly to be believed by all believers? Yes. Do not likewise the Quakers err who maintain that the light within which teacheth the elect in the only judge of all controversies? Yes.[1]
• As well in Isaiah it states:  “To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn. Isaiah 8:20 (ESV)
•  And in 1 John: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. 1 John 4:1 (ESV)

The 1689 goes on and states: “they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.”

• This would not be the position of the Roman Catholic Church at that time nor at the present.  Those that did translate the Bible into the vulgar (meaning- common) language of the people either were killed or seriously persecuted at the hands of the Roman Catholic church.  This work of translating the Bible into the vulgar language they did for God’s glory, His Word and His people at great risks to themselves and their families. 

 This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 8 of the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1] David Dickson, Truth’s Victory Over Error: A Commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 16.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 7 the following:

7. All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.(2 Peter 3:16; Psalms 19:7; Psalms 119:130)

The 1689 Confession States: “All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all;

• This means not every part of the Bible is as clear as other part.  Some things in Scripture will need careful and reverent study to understand, and there are some thing relatively few parts that have confounded the best scholars. 

The 1689 Confession states: “yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other. ”  The things that are needed in regards to salvation are very clear and are not hid in dark sayings.

•        “that not only the learned,”
•        “but the unlearned,”
•        “in a due use of” (Meaning: proper and reasonable use)
•        “ordinary means,”
•       “may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.”

This may be done without the Roman Catholic Church to interpret for the laity.  But yes, ordinary means though must be used.

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 7 of the 1689 Confession of Faith.

___________________________

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 6 the following:

6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily[1] contained [or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture] [2] in the Holy[3] Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word, and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.
( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Galatians 1:8,9; John 6:45; 1 Corinthians 2:9-12; 1 Corinthians 11:13, 14; 1 Corinthians 14:26,40)

Although I have no commentary on some of these portions, I place them separate to assist in breaking the whole section down into bite size pieces.

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture:

Here is another bite:

unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men.

• “Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation.”  2 Peter 1:20 (ESV)

Another bite:

Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word,

• “Well then, do not the Papists err who maintain that things necessary to salvation are obscurely and darkly set down in Scripture; and that without the help of unwritten traditions and the infallible expounding of the church the Scriptures cannot be understood? Yes. …3. Because the Scripture enlighteneth the eyes and maketh the simple wise (Psa. 19:7-8).”[4] David Dickson

Yet another bite:

and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature[5] and

This portion of section 6, deals with Christian prudence, meaning Christian wisdom: 

• “Even though tradition is not infallible, we would be foolish to ignore this corporate wisdom.” [6]  R.C. Sproul

Christian prudence is still guided “according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.”

Sam Waldron puts this section under the general heading in his outline: “As to sanctified common sense.”[7]

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 6 of the 1689 Confession of Faith.  

• [1] 1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy
• [2] 1689 omits this which is contained in the WCF and Savoy
• [3] 1689 adds this to the WCF
• [4] David Dickson, Truth’s Victory Over Error: A Commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 11-12.
• [5] In R.C. Sproul’s book, Truths We Confess: A Layman’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith (New Jersey, P&R Publishing), Volume 1, pg. 22, he make an interesting point that throughout the church age general revelation has been thought of as infallible just as special revelation is infallible. It is apt to be misinterpreted, but that does not nullify its voice.
• [6] Ibid., pg. 23.
• [7] Samuel E. Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Darlington, England, Evangelical Press), pg. 29.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 5 the following:

5. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church of God[1]to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures; and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, and the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, and[2] many other incomparable excellencies, and entire perfections thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God; yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.  ( John 16:13,14; 1 Corinthians 2:10-12; 1 John 2:20, 27)

This section points out three ways we may know the Bible is from God Himself (the third being the ultimate means):

1) The Church is a testimony to the Scriptures, and if the Church is fulfilling its role she may help us to ”be moved and induced to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures.”  This is different from the Church being the only testimony to the authority of the Word of God, or the Word of God being dependant on the testimony of any church (see section Chapter 1, section 3).

• Many Churches are not fulfilling their role in holding up a high and reverent view of the Scriptures for their members.  They are neglectful either by flat out denying the inspiration of the Bible, or by teaching things such as therapeutic methodologies, and pragmatic wisdom while the exposition of the Scriptures takes a backseat. One way you can determine whether the sermon is expositional or not is to ask if the text of the Bible is the topic of the sermon, or is the topic of the sermon only supported by the Bible.  I am not saying every sermon has to be expositional in order for a church to hold a high and reverent view of the Scripture, but I think I can safely and fairly say that most of them should be expositional to do so.  A topical sermon can be Biblical and expositional; but many topical sermons are unbiblical in substance with a few proof texts thrown in as a feeble attempt to show that the topic is “Biblical.”  Bible verses in a sermon do not mean the sermon is Biblical.   
• Another way the Church can fail to hold a high and reverent view of the Bible is by denying proper and full perspicuity (clarity and scope) to the Scriptures; this is done by saying that this particular issue or that particular issue is not addressed with sufficient clarity for us to understand (or not addressed at all), therefore we are free to decide ourselves what is best.  In other words, it can be (not always) an excuse used to say that the word of God does not address whatever the particular issue is so we can do as we please. 
• A low view of Scriptures can come out in many ways, but it WILL come out, and it will be communicated to and will affect the congregation.  I would argue most churches today do not hold Scripture as high as their doctrinal statements say they do.

2) From the character of the Scriptures themselves.

Besides the Church holding up a high and reverent esteem for the Bible as a witness to its infallibility, the following list from this section are evidences and arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God:  

• the heavenliness of the matter
• the efficacy (power or capacity to produce effects[3]) of the doctrine
• the majesty of the style
• the consent of all the parts
• the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God)
• the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation
• and many other incomparable excellencies
• and entire perfections thereof
• are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God;

3) By the inward work of the Holy Spirit.  This inward work of  the Spirit is referring the persuasion and assurance that the Bible is infallible; it is not referring to the obtaining of a proper interpretation of the Bible’s texts here.

The 1689 Confession states: “yet notwithstanding all of this” (the excellencies of the Bible and the testimony of the church):

• Our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority of the Bible, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.
• It is still ultimately the work of the Holy Spirit that convinces and bears witness to us that the Bible is the Word of God.  Let us keep that in mind as we do our best to hold high the Scriptures even when others do not; it is the work of the Spirit of God ultimately.

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 5 of the 1689 Confession of Faith. 

• [1]1689 adds this to the WCF and Savoy
• [2]1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy
• [3] Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford, Oxford University Press)
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 4 the following:

4. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the author thereof; therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God.  ( 2 Peter 1:19-21; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 John 5:9 )

The 1689 Confession states that the authority of the Bible depends not on the:  “testimony of any man”. 

• “And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.” 1 Thess. 2:13 (ESV)

It is likely that the Pope was in mind here.

The 1689 Confession states that the authority of the Bible does not depend on the: “testimony of any church”.  It is likely that the Roman Catholic church was in mind here.

• “Well then, do not the popish church err, who maintain the Scripture to be an imperfect rule, and therefore to stand in need of a supply of unwritten traditions?”[1]  David Dickson 

The 1689 Confession states that the authority of the Bible depends: “but wholly upon God”.

• If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater, for this is the testimony of God that he has borne concerning his Son.    1 John 5:9 (ESV)

And we might add here that nothing is to be added to the word of God:

• You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.   Deut. 4:2 (ESV)
• Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.  Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar.    Prov. 30:5-6 (ESV)
•  I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.   Rev. 22:18-19 (ESV)

The 1689 Confession states of God, the author of the Scriptures, that He is “truth itself” and as a result the Bible is “Therefore it is to be received as the Word of God.”

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 4 of the 1689 Confession of Faith. 

• [1] David Dickson, Truth’s Victory Over Error: A Commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 9.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 3 the following:

3. The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine , inspiration, are no part of the canon or rule [1]of the Scripture, and, therefore, are of no authority to the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings.  (Luke 24:27, 44; Romans 3:2 )

The Roman Catholic Church holds the Apocryphal books to be canonical.  They are books written during the Inter-Testamental period.  Books of the Apocrypha are:

• I Esdras, II Esdras, Tobit, Judith, The rest of Esther, The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah, The Song of the Three holy Children, The History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, The Prayer of Manasses, I Maccabees and II Maccabees.

Protestants do not hold these books to be inspired for good reason.  For one, there are inaccuracies in history and other areas that show them to be fallible.  They do not have the marks of inspired, infallible and inerrant documents.  There are errors and citations that contradict the word of God.

The 1689 states: “Therefore, are of no authority to the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings.”

It is not to say that the Apocrypha has no value in terms of their historical value, cultural worth, or literary benefit.  The 1689 Confession is NOT saying that the Apocrypha or any other human books are not to be read, or that they have no value.  It should be understood that no human book has authority within itself, so this statement should be balanced and not taken to an extreme.

Here is a word about the canon of Scripture from James White that is very useful:

• “Canon refers to a standard or rule.  In this case, the rule, standard or canon refers to which books are inspired or God breathed.  Which writings are inspired and which ones are not.”
• “The canon is a function of the Scripture themselves.  The canon is not just a listing of books; it is a statement about what is inspired.  The canon flows from the work of the author of Scripture, God Himself.  To speak of the canon outside of speaking of what “God-breathed” is to speak nonsense.  Canon is not made by man.  Canon is made by God.  It is the result of the action of His divine inspiration.  That which is God-breathed is canon; that which is not God-breathed is not canon.  It’s just that simple.  Canon is a function of inspiration, and it speaks to an attribute of Scripture.”
• “The Roman error lies in creating a dichotomy between two things that cannot be separated, and then using that false dichotomy to deny sola Scriptura.”  “Often two separate but related issues get confused when this topic is discussed: (1) the canon’s nature, and (2) how people came to know the contents of the canon.  An illustration might help.  I have written eight books.  The action of my writing those books creates the canon of my works.  If a friend of mine does not have an accurate or full knowledge of how many books I have written, does this mean there is no canon of my books?  No, of course not.  In fact, if I was the only one who knew how many books I had written, would that mean that the canon of my books does not exist?  The point is clear.  The canon is one issue, and it comes from God’s action of inspiring the Scriptures.  Our knowledge of the canon is another.  Our knowledge can grow and mature, as it did at times in history.  But the canon is not defined by us nor is it affected by our knowledge or ignorance.”[2]        James White

So the Apocrypha has been pronounced by the Roman Catholic Church to be canonical along with the rest of the Bible, but she has not authority to do so.  The only authority of canon is from God who inspired a document; no church council or human decree can pronounce inspiration.

The canon that the Protestants hold to is based upon time tested proof of the inspiration of the given books of the Bible.  This became obvious as time went on as to which books were inspired; their usage in the early churches were basically already established, there just came a time when it was generally acknowledged in a more official way.

Only to the extent that human writings, be it Creeds, Confessions, commentaries or otherwise, accurately reflect the teaching of Scripture does it have any authority at all, and even that “authority” does not originate within the human writing itself, but proceeds only from the Bible.

This section is very succinct in topic dealing with the non-canonicity of the Apocrypha. 

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 3 of the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1]1689 adds this to WCF and Savoy
• [2] James White, The Roman Catholic Controversy, pg 93-94
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 2 the following:

2. Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these:

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, I Samuel, II Samuel, I Kings, II Kings, I Chronicles, II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomen, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, The Acts of the Apostles, Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I Thessalonians, II Thessalonians, I Timothy, II Timothy, To Titus, To Philemon, The Epistle to the Hebrews, Epistle of James, The first and second Epistles of Peter, The first, second, and third Epistles of John, The Epistle of Jude, The Revelation. 

All of which are given by the[1] inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life. ( 2 Timothy 3:16)

This section of the 1689 Confession is rather straight forward.  In the time of the Reformation and after it would of course be important to point out which books of the Bible are regarded canonical.  This of course varies from the Roman Catholic Church that wrongly accepts the Apocryphal books in their canon.

 The key Scriptural support for this section is found in 2 Timothy: 

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.       2 Tim 3:16-17 (ESV)

 “When Paul says that all Scripture is inspired, or God- breathed, he is technically saying that Scripture is breathed out of the mouth of God, where it originates.”[2]  —R.C. Sproul

This portion of Scripture is an example of how the authority of Scripture comes from within itself, not from an external source such as the Church.  The Church supports this authority already stated in the Bible; the Church is not the authority.  This greatly differs from the Roman church who practicality puts its authority over the Bible by indicating that only the Roman Church can properly interpret it, and by adding an additional authority of church tradition.

 So from the outset, the 1689 Confession is settling matters of authority; this is necessary.  If you are going to make claims of authoritative truth, the source of that truth must be made clear.  This claim will be become more precise as the chapter continues.

The 1689 Confession does not hold to the dictation theory of inspiration.  The dictation view is that God dictated the Scriptures to men of God who then copied it verbatim.

 Why is this not an accurate theory of inspiration?

 One reason is that there are varying styles in the New Testament depending on the writer.  Some of the N.T. writer’s styles also show a more educated style than others; other examples could be given, but the point is that if God dictated it to the writers, we would expect no variation in styles of writing.  Having a human writer is not a stumbling block to the doctrine of the inspiration (God-breathed) of the Scriptures.

“Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. ²¹ For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:20-21 (ESV) 

The doctrine of inspiration, as mysterious as it is, declares that while humans were writing, God the Holy Spirit ensured that what they wrote was without error and was actually verbum Dei, “the Word of God” itself.[3]  —R.C. Sproul

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 2 of the 1689 Confession of Faith.

__________________________________________________________

•  [1] 1689 and Savoy add this to the WCF.
• [2] R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess: A Layman’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith (New Jersey, P&R Publishing), Volume 1, pg. 11.
• [3] Ibid.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

Note: Any text that is underlined in the actual wording of the 1689 Confession is for the purpose of pointing out where the 1689 Confession varies from the Westminster Confession.  If you follow the footnote at the end of the post you will see an explanation. If the source is not traced to the 1644 First London Confession, the Westminster Confession or the Savoy Declaration, I will note the source as Collins from the 1677 meeting as the presumed source.  All textual variations are taken from True Confessions by James M. Renihan (Owensboro, KY, RBAP).

The bold text within the post is for the text of the 1689 Confession, which will usually be followed by commentary. 

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession states in Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures, section 1 the following:

Chapter 1, Of the Holy Scriptures, Section 1 of 10:

1. The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience,[1]although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.
( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29, 31; Ephesians 2:20; Romans 1:19-21; Romans 2:14,15; Psalms 19:1-3; Hebrews 1:1; Proverbs 22:19-21; Romans 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19,20 )

The 1689 Confession starts with: “ The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience,”…

The Westminster Confession starts with “Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest” whereas the 1689 Confession starts with The Holy Scripture’s sufficiency, certainty and infallible rule. So the Westminster Confession starts with general revelation, and the 1689 Confession starts with special revelation.

The use of Onlyis a very narrow word and an important one used.  There is no higher AND no other authority in which to appeal to.

I prefer this wording (only) for the Scriptures, as opposed to “the supreme authority” as is often stated in doctrinal statements.  “Only” does not leave room for other lesser authorities.

Sufficient- “of a quality, extent or scope adequate to a certain purpose or object.” Oxford English Dictionary (OED)[2]

We should keep this definition in the forefront of our mind, because we do not want to think of the Bible as “barely able or barely adequate in the sense we might use the word from time to time.  When our child asks us if they did a good job washing the car and we see several missed spots, we might say they did a sufficient job, or it is adequate.  The Bible does not miss any spots.  It is able to do what it intends, and this is the usage here.

So we should then ask the question, for what is the Bible sufficient?  It is stated in the Confession: “infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience.”

“The Bible is not “omni-sufficient.” It is not “all-sufficient” for every conceivable purpose.  The Scriptures, for instance, are not sufficient as a textbook for math, biology or Spanish.  The sufficiency of the Scriptures does not mean they are all we need for the purpose of learning geometry or algebra.”[3]

The Scriptures are sufficient to reveal redemptive revelation.

“It is often said that the Scriptures are sufficient for showing us the way of salvation.  This is liable to be misunderstood today because of the minimizing mentality abroad which is intent on reducing the way of salvation to its barest elements.  It surely must be clear that such an understanding of the sufficiency of Scripture is a deviation from the historic Reformation understanding articulated in the Westminster Confession. “All things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life” is far more than the “Four Spiritual Laws.”  It is nothing less than sufficiency for the redemption of man both individually and corporately in the whole ethical and religious sphere of life that is asserted.” Samuel Waldron[4]

The word certain is defined as “sure, unerring, not liable to fail, to be depended upon, wholly trustworthy or reliable.” OED[5]

The word infallible is defined as “incapable of error.”[6]

This sufficient, certain, and infallible divine revelation is therefore the Rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience.

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. 2 Tim 3:16-17 (ESV)

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers. 1 Thess 2:13 (ESV)

The Westminster Shorter Catechism question 2 and 3 parallels the 1689 Chapter 1.1 here:

Shorter Catechism Question 2:

• Q. What rule has God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy Him?
• A. The word of God, namely the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy Him.

Shorter Catechism Question 3:

• Q. What do the Scriptures principally teach?
• A. The Scriptures principally teach, what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man.

Here is an additional catechism question added by some Baptists to the Westminster Shorter Catechism:

Shorter Catechism Question 4 (Baptist edition)

• Q. Are the Scriptures trustworthy in all they affirm?
• A. The Scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments, being God-breathed, are infallible and inerrant in all their parts and are, therefore, trustworthy in all they affirm concerning history, science, doctrine, ethics, religious practice, or any other topic.

although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation.

light of nature—Not all divine revelation is confined to Scripture, in the sense that the above shows us.  This divine revelation shown in God’s creation and providence is inadequate for salvation, yet adequate enough to leave men with no excuse for their suppression of the truth.

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his 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. Romans 1:19-20 (ESV)

There are two categories of revelation:

General Revelation

Special Revelation

“General revelation, unlike special revelation, comes to us basically through nature and is called general for two reasons. First, the audience is general; God gives knowledge of himself universally, so that every human has this revelation, which is built into nature.  Second, the content of general revelation gives us knowledge of God in general.  It reveals that he is eternal; it reveals his power, deity, and holiness.” R.C. Sproul [7]

“In fact, general revelation reveals just enough knowledge of God to damn us, to render us without excuse.” R.C. Sproul [8]

Special Revelation-The audience is specific and the revelation is specific.  This revelation tells of redemption through God’s only Redeemer, the Lord Jesus Christ.  This is the inscripturated Word of God.

This general revelation is revealed through these categorical means:

• Works of creation
• Works of providence

God’s works of creation and his works of providence are the means that God uses to carry out or execute His eternal decrees, but also since these are observable executions (generally speaking) of His eternal decrees then they are a form of revelation to us about God acts and His character.  Although these two categories are revelation to mankind, it is of a very general nature; it is only by special revelation that we can better understand the general revelation.  For example, without special revelation we would not understand these two categories and those are the execution of His eternal decrees.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism gives us these definitions of the works of creation and providence:

Works of creation

Shorter Catechism # 10

• Q. What is the work of creation?
• A. The work of God’s creation is God’s making all things of nothing, by the word of His power, in the space of six days, and all very good.

Works of providence

Shorter Catechism # 12

• Q. What are God’s works of providence?
• A. God’s works of providence are His most holy, wise, and powerful preserving and governing all His creatures and all their actions.

Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church;

Here are two different translations of an important Scripture on this topic:

 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. Heb 1:1-2 (ESV)

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Heb 1:1-2 (KJV)

 What were the sundry times and divers manners?

• “by inspiration (2 Chron. 15:1; Isa. 59:21; 2 pet. 1:21)
•  by visions (Num. 12:6-8)
•  by dreams ((Job 33:14-16; Gen. 40:8)
•  Urim and Thummim (Num. 27:21; 1 Sa. 30:7-8)
•  By signs (Gen. 32:24-32; Exod. 13:21)
• By audible voice (Exod. 20:1, Gen. 22:15)

All which do end in writing (Exod. 17:14), which is a most sure and infallible way of the Lord’s revealing his will unto his people.” David Dickson [9]

and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

• Better preserving and propagating of the truth
• More sure establishment and comfort of the church
• Against corruption
• To commit the same wholly unto writing
•             Consider what a gift it is to have the Scriptures in “writing”
• the Holy Scriptures most necessary

“Are the Holy Scriptures most necessary to the Church?  Yes. (2 Timothy 3:15, 2 Peter 1:19)

“Well then, doth not the popish church err that affirms the “true church to be infallible in teaching and propounding articles of faith, without and against Scripture: and that their unwritten traditions are of divine and equal authority with the canon of Scripture?  Yes.

3. Because unwritten traditions are subject and liable to many corruptions and are soon and quickly forgotten.” David Dickson [10]

 How can we go days and weeks without reading, meditating and studying the Scriptures?  Do we think we are that strong; that able to withstand the corruption of the flesh, the malice of Satan, and the world?  Pride goes before a fall!

those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

We should be careful of those whom claim the Lord speaks directly to them without the Scriptures.  They may be devout and zealous for the Lord, but they are liable to be unstable and tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.

We should with gentleness and patience show them that the Holy Spirit only speaks to us through His word, and we can never separate the Word of God from the Spirit of God who wrote it.

We should be leery of our own impressions that we think are from the Lord.

The Lord is alive and active in our lives, but the words of God are only found in the Scriptures.  Let us be leery of “Christian” mysticism.

The Spirit does not “reveal” truth; the Spirit “illuminates” that which He has already revealed in the word of God.

Here is an important quote that has been helpful to me from Alexander Carson as quoted by Bernard Ramm’s Protestant Biblical Interpretation: “No man has a right to say, as some are in the habit of saying, The Spirit tells me that such or such is the meaning of such a passage.  How is he assured that it is the Holy Spirit, and that it is not a spirit of delusion, except from the evidence that the interpretation is the legitimate meaning of the words?”[11]

John Calvin dealt in his day with this issue in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book I, Chapter IV, Section 3 entitled:

IV. ALL THE PRINCIPLES OF PIETY SUBVERTED BY FANATICS, WHO SUBSTITUTE REVELATIONS FOR SCRIPTURE.[12] Section 3:

3. Second Objection from the words of Paul as to the letter and spirit. The Answer, with an explanation of Paul’s meaning. How the Spirit and the written Word are indissolubly connected.

1. The fanatics wrongly appeal to the Holy Spirit

Those who, rejecting Scripture, imagine that they have some peculiar way of penetrating to God, are to be deemed not so much under the influence of error as madness. For certain giddy men have lately appeared, who, while they make a great display of the superiority of the Spirit, reject all reading of the Scriptures themselves, and deride the simplicity of those who only delight in what they call the dead and deadly letter. But I wish they would tell me what spirit it is whose inspiration raises them to such a sublime height that they dare despise the doctrine of Scripture as mean and childish. If they answer that it is the Spirit of Christ, their confidence is exceedingly ridiculous; since they will, I presume, admit that the apostles and other believers in the primitive Church were not illuminated by any other Spirit. None of these thereby learned to despise the word of God, but every one was imbued with greater reverence for it, as their writings most clearly testify. And, indeed, it had been so foretold by the mouth of Isaiah. For when he says, “My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever,” he does not tie down the ancient Church to external doctrine, as he were a mere teacher of elements; he rather shows that, under the reign of Christ, the true and full felicity of the new Church will consist in their being ruled not less by the Word than by the Spirit of God. Hence we infer that these miscreants are guilty of fearful sacrilege in tearing asunder what the prophet joins in indissoluble union. Add to this, that Paul, though carried up even to the third heaven, ceased not to profit by the doctrine of the law and the prophets, while, in like manner, he exhorts Timothy, a teacher of singular excellence, to give attention to reading, (1 Tim. 4: 13.) And the eulogium which he pronounces on Scripture well deserves to be remembered, viz., that “it is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect,” (2 Tim. 3: 16.) What an infatuation of the devil, therefore, to fancy that Scripture, which conducts the sons of God to the final goal, is of transient and temporary use?

Again, I should like those people to tell me whether they have imbibed any other Spirit than that which Christ promised to his disciples. Though their madness is extreme, it will scarcely carry them the length of making this their boast. But what kind of Spirit did our Saviour promise to send? One who should not speak of himself, (John 16: 13,) but suggest and instil the truths which he himself had delivered through the word. Hence the office of the Spirit promised to us, is not to form new and unheard-of revelations, or to coin a new form of doctrine, by which we may be led away from the received doctrine of the gospel, but to seal on our minds the very doctrine which the gospel recommends.

2. The Holy Spirit is recognized in his agreement with Scripture

Hence it is easy to understand that we must give diligent heed both to the reading and hearing of Scripture, if we would obtain any benefit from the Spirit of God, (just as Peter praises those who attentively study the doctrine of the prophets, (2 Pet. 1: 19,) though it might have been thought to be superseded after the gospel light arose,) and, on the contrary, that any spirit which passes by the wisdom of God’s Word, and suggests any other doctrine, is deservedly suspected of vanity and falsehood. Since Satan transforms himself into an angel of light, what authority can the Spirit have with us if he be not ascertained by an infallible mark? And assuredly he is pointed out to us by the Lord with sufficient clearness; but these miserable men err as if bent on their own destruction, while they seek the Spirit from themselves rather than from Him. But they say that it is insulting to subject the Spirit, to whom all things are to be subject, to the Scripture: as if it were disgraceful to the Holy Spirit to maintain a perfect resemblance throughout, and be in all respects without variation consistent with himself. True, if he were subjected to a human, an angelical, or to any foreign standard, it might be thought that he was rendered subordinate, or, if you will, brought into bondage, but so long as he is compared with himself, and considered in himself, how can it be said that he is thereby injured? I admit that he is brought to a test, but the very test by which it has pleased him that his majesty should be confirmed. It ought to be enough for us when once we hear his voice; but lest Satan should insinuate himself under his name, he wishes us to recognise him by the image which he has stamped on the Scriptures. The author of the Scriptures cannot vary, and change his likeness. Such as he there appeared at first, such he will perpetually remain. There is nothing contumelious to him in this, unless we are to think it would be honourable for him to degenerate, and revolt against himself.

3. Word and Spirit belong inseparably together

Their cavil about our cleaving to the dead letter carries with it the punishment which they deserve for despising Scripture. It is clear that Paul is there arguing against false apostles, (2 Cor. 3: 6,) who, by recommending the law without Christ, deprived the people of the benefit of the New Covenant, by which the Lord engages that he will write his law on the hearts of believers, and engrave it on their inward parts. The letter therefore is dead, and the law of the Lord kills its readers when it is dissevered from the grace of Christ, and only sounds in the ear without touching the heart. But if it is effectually impressed on the heart by the Spirit; if it exhibits Christ, it is the word of life converting the soul, and making wise the simple. Nay, in the very same passage, the apostle calls his own preaching the ministration of the Spirit, (2 Cor. 3: 8,) intimating that the Holy Spirit so cleaves to his own truth, as he has expressed it in Scripture, that he then only exerts and puts forth his strength when the word is received with due honour and respect.

There is nothing repugnant here to what was lately said, (chap. 7) that we have no great certainty of the word itself, until it be confirmed by the testimony of the Spirit. For the Lord has so knit together the certainty of his word and his Spirit, that our minds are duly imbued with reverence for the word when the Spirit shining upon it enables us there to behold the face of God; and, on the other hand, we embrace the Spirit with no danger of delusion when we recognise him in his image, that is, in his word. Thus, indeed, it is. God did not produce his word before men for the sake of sudden display, intending to abolish it the moment the Spirit should arrive; but he employed the same Spirit, by whose agency he had administered the word, to complete his work by the efficacious confirmation of the word.

In this way Christ explained to the two disciples, (Luke 24: 27,) not that they were to reject the Scriptures and trust to their own wisdom, but that they were to understand the Scriptures. In like manner, when Paul says to the Thessalonians, “Quench not the Spirit,” he does not carry them aloft to empty speculation apart from the word; he immediately adds, “Despise not prophesying,” (1 Thess. 5: 19, 20.) By this, doubtless, he intimates that the light of the Spirit is quenched the moment prophesying fall into contempt. How is this answered by those swelling enthusiasts, in whose idea the only true illumination consists, in carelessly laying aside, and bidding adieu to the Word of God, while, with no less confidence than folly, they fasten upon any dreaming notion which may have casually sprung up in their minds? Surely a very different sobriety becomes the children of God. As they feel that without the Spirit of God they are utterly devoid of the light of truth, so they are not ignorant that the word is the instrument by which the illumination of the Spirit is dispensed. They know of no other Spirit than the one who dwelt and spake in the apostles–the Spirit by whose oracles they are daily invited to the hearing of the word.

This concludes a brief commentary on Chapter 1, Section 1 of the 1689 Confession of Faith.

• [1]1689 adds this wording; it is not in the Westminster Confession or the Savoy Declaration.  The original source is presumably the 1677 meeting with Collins.

• [2] Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford, Oxford University Press): “The OED [Oxford English Dictionary] is an indispensible tool for determining the seventeenth-century meaning of English words.  This, and not the modern meaning of the words of the Confession, is our first interest.  The question is that of authorial intent, a concern which has vanished to an alarming degree in our post-modern world.” This is quoted from Robert Martin in his essay entitled The Second London Confession on the Doctrine of Scripture: An Exposition of Chapter 1: “Of the Holy Scriptures” (Part 1), Reformed Baptist Theological Review, Vol. IV No. 1, pg. 61.  We will make well use of this dictionary as we go through the study.
• [3]Samuel E. Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith(Darlington, England, Evangelical Press), pg. 43.
• [4] Ibid.
• [5] Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford, Oxford University Press).
• [6] Ibid.
• [7]R.C. Sproul, Truths We Confess: A Layman’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith (New Jersey, P&R Publishing), Volume 1, pg. 6-7.
• [8] Ibid.
• [9]David Dickson, Truth’s Victory Over Error: A Commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith (Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust), pg. 4-5. .  This book is especially relevant for our study as this book is one of the oldest commentaries on the Westminster Confession, first published in 1684.  This puts us fairly close to the time frame that the 1647 when the WCF was written.
• [10] Ibid., pg. 2-3
• [11]Alexander Carson, Examination of the Principles of Biblical Interpretation, pg. 23. as cited by Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids, Baker Book House), pg. xi.
• [12] http://www.reformed.org/master/index.html?mainframe=/books/institutes/; John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 1, Section 9.3.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

Original Sources

It is helpful to be aware of the original sources of the 1677/1689 Confession as we go through it. 

The 1677/1689 Second London Baptist Confession made use of sources, but it was not just a cut and paste job from other documents.  The Elders, William Collins and probably Nehemiah Coxe (who died several months  before the 1689 adoption of the 1677  Confession, and thus his name was not on the list of adoptors sadly), should be considered as having a significant contribution to the 1689 Confession.  Although there are underlying sources, it is unique in some areas due to their work. 

“Elder William Collins of the Petty France Church in London and perhaps others, including Nehemiah Coxe, his co-pastor, were responsible for combining extracts from each of the above documents [Westminster Confession, Savoy Declaration, 1644 London Confession] into a coherent statement of faith. (Elsewhere in this appendix this source will be called “Collins”.)  Here and there in the 1689 Confession are words, phrases and sometimes paragraphs which are not derived from the above-mentioned documents. (Noteworthy is chapter 26, paragraph 10, dealing with the support of pastors.)  These items must have come from Collins or from some other source.[1]

“Dr. James Renihan writes: What documents were used in editing the Confession?  I imagine a scene like this: on the table is placed an English  Bible, a Hebrew Old Testament, A Greek New Testament, copies of the Confession of Faith as well as the Larger and Shorter Catechisms of the Presbyterian Westminster Assembly of 1643-1648, the Savoy Declaration and Platform of Polity produced by the Congregationalists who met at the Savoy in London in 1658, and a copy of the First London Baptist Confession of 1646.  Perhaps there were other books on the table also.  But certainly, the editors employed each of these in thinking through and expressing the system of Christian theology they bequethed us.”

In Samuel Waldron’s book, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, his studies and that of others has led him to believe that although the majority of the text of the 1689 Confession is from the Westminster Confession, this was not the “direct and immediate” document which the 1677 general meeting and Collins used.  Actually evidence shows that the Savoy Declaration was the primary source Confession for which the general meeting used to form the 1689 Confession.  In my use of the parallel texts from these documents I can see this appears to be the case as well.  So the Westminster Confession was used indirectly through the Savoy Declaration to form a majority of the 1689 Confessions.(*)

While a majority of the text of the 1689 parallels the Westminster Confession and  the Savoy Declaration, there is a fair amount of variance.  The major variances mostly follow the 1644 First London Baptist Confession.  When I started my study I was under the impression that the 1689 Confession had little variance from the Westminster Confession of Faith; when one looks at a distance one would reach the same conclusion, but when looking closely the differences are significant in places.  With those differences in mind this quote from Samuel Waldron is important:

“But while the admiration of the Baptists for the Savoy Declaration and the Westminster is patent, there is also sufficient evidence that there was no slavish dependence upon these documents.”[2]

In order of the primary sources for the 1689 Confession by usage:[3]

•                    1.  The Westminster Confession
•                    2. The Savoy Declaration
•                    3. The First London Baptist Confession of 1644

The First London Baptist Confession of 1644

This is the one confession that I have not posted about.  This was prepared by seven particular Baptist churches which contained 52 articles of a Calvinistic faith by theses churches.  It strongly refuted some of the beliefs of the Anabaptists of the Netherlands and Germany.  The title of the Confession shows this focus or purpose:

 A Confession of Faith of Seven Congregations or Churches of Christ, which are commonly (but unjustly) Called Anabaptists.

As I go through the sections of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession I will attempt to make note of where the 1689 Confession varies from the Westminster Confession and the Savoy Declaration with notations of the sources for these variances. 

• [1]As quoted from Samuel Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Faverdale North, Darlington, England, Evangelical Press), Appendix A, pg. 428; he cites as a source for this Alan Dunn, The London Baptist Confession of 1689 with a Key to its Sources, (unpublished 1988).
• (*) James Renihan, Preface to The Baptist Confession of Faith and The Baptist Catechism (ARBCA, Solid Ground Books: 2010).
• [2]Samuel Waldron, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Faverdale North, Darlington, England, Evangelical Press), Appendix A, pg. 429. He goes on to cite evidence for this.
• [3] In Samuel Waldron’s book A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, he provides in his Appendix A, on page 429 to 432 a section entitled Their Significance; he makes an important point that even though the Baptist brethren has suffered some persecution even from the Puritans of the Presbyterians, they still did not feel the need to be innovative.  They rather valued unity and “the well-tried paths of doctrine.”  He makes some important application from this to present Reformed Baptists and ways that they have sometimes lost their effectiveness through “peculiarities and eccentricities.”

 The History

 I.  Baptists and Congregationalist emerge from the English Reformation

•  In the 1630’s to the 1640’s Congregationalists and Baptists emerged from the Church of England.
•  They suffered from cycles of persecutions of as they were not apart of the official state Church of England.

 II. The 1644 First London Confession

• In 1644 the First London Confession was issued for the purpose of distinguishing these Calvinistic Baptists from General Baptists and from Anabaptists.  This predates the Savoy Declaration and the Westminster Confession.

 III.  Parliament calls for an Assembly

• In 1643 to 1648 The English Parliament called for the Assembly of English and Scottish Puritan Divines. 

 IV. 1658 Savoy Declaration

• It is based on the Westminster Confession.
• It is a Congregationalist Confession.

 V. 1660 Claredon Code

In the 1660’s the Claredon Code was a series of laws designed to crush all who were not of the Church of England.  As a result, Presbyterians, Baptist and Congregationalists all suffered from persecution.  

  VI.   1677 Second London Baptist Confession

• In 1677 a Second London Baptist Confession was being circulated and it is possible that this is the year it was edited and formed from various confessions.  It was edited primarily from the 1644 First London Baptist Confession, the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Savoy Declaration, not to mention the orthodox creeds such as the Nicene Creed.
•  It was unable to be widely promoted or published due to the persecution Reformed Churches were suffering in England at that time.

VII. 1689 Act of Tolerance

• The Act of Tolerance was passed on May 24, 1689. 
• This act allowed those whose conscience demanded that they be independent of the Church of England to do so.

 VIII.  A 1689 Meeting of Pastors from London and Wales was Called

• In 1689 the London General Assembly of the Particular Baptists adopted the 1677 Second London Baptist Confession.
• It was “Intended as an apologetic and educative instrument, the Confession became on of the most important of all Baptist confessions.”[1]

 Here are their Closing Statements & Signatories:

“We the MINISTERS, and MESSENGERS of, and concerned for upwards of, one hundred BAPTIZED CHURCHES, in England and Wales (denying Arminianism), being met together in London, from the third of the seventh month to the eleventh of the same, 1689, to consider of some things that might be for the glory of God, and the good of these congregations, have thought meet (for the satisfaction of all other Christians that differ from us in the point of Baptism) to recommend to their perusal the confession of our faith, which confession we own, as containing the doctrine of our faith and practice, and do desire that the members of our churches respectively do furnish themselves therewith.”

Hansard Knollys, Pastor, Broken Wharf, London
William Kiffin, Pastor, Devonshire-square, London
John Harris, Pastor, Joiner’s Hall, London
William Collins, Pastor, Petty France, London
Hurcules Collins, Pastor, Wapping, London
Robert Steed, Pastor, Broken Wharf, London
Leonard Harrison, Pastor, Limehouse, London
George Barret, Pastor, Mile End Green, London
Isaac Lamb, Pastor, Pennington-street, London
Richard Adams, Minister, Shad Thames, Southwark
Benjamin Keach, Pastor, Horse-lie-down, Southwark
Andrew Gifford, Pastor, Bristol, Frvars, Som. & Glouc.
Thomas Vaux, Pastor, Broadmead, Som. & Glouc.
Thomas Winnel, Pastor, Taunton, Som. & Glouc.
James Hitt, Preacher, Dalwood, Dorset
Richard Tidmarsh, Minister, Oxford City, Oxon
William Facey, Pastor, Reading, Berks
Samuel Buttall, Minister, Plymouth, Devon
Christopher Price, Minister, Abergayenny, Monmouth
Daniel Finch, Minister, Kingsworth, Herts
John Ball, Tiverton, Devon
Edmond White, Pastor, Evershall, Bedford
William Prichard, Pastor, Blaenau, Monmouth
Paul Fruin, Minister, Warwick, Warwick
Richard Ring, Pastor, Southhampton, Hants
John Tomkins, Minister, Abingdon, Berks
Toby Willes, Pastor, Bridgewater, Somerset
John Carter, Steventon, Bedford
James Webb, Devizes, Wilts
Richard Sutton, Pastor, Tring, Herts
Robert Knight, Pastor, Stukeley, Bucks
Edward Price, Pastor, Hereford City, Hereford
William Phipps, Pastor, Exon, Devon
William Hawkins, Pastor, Dimmock, Gloucester
Samuel Ewer, Pastor, Hemstead, Herts
Edward Man, Pastor, Houndsditch, London
Charles Archer, Pastor, Hock-Norton, Oxon

In the name of and on the behalf of the whole assembly.

 IX. The 1677 Second London Baptist Confession Adopted in 1689

• It is called the Second London Baptist Confession as the previous London Confession of 1644 preceded it.
• It is called the 1689 London Baptist Confession, because even though it was composed in 1677, the official adoption of it by  the London General Assembly was not until 1689.  The known dates of its publication are 1677, 1688, and 1699.  Probably the more correct date associated with the “1689″ Confession should be the 1677, but at this point the 1689 date is what most associate with this confession. 
• It is the most popular confession of Calvinistic Baptists in English. 
• It has been slightly altered as time and different groups have adopted it. 

Here are some examples:

1. The Philadelphia Confession of Faith

• Late 1600’s Benjamin Keach and another minister added two short articles dealing with Laying on of Hands and the singing of Psalms. 
• Eventually this was adopted in 1744 by the Calvinistic Baptist Churches of North America, and called the Philadelphia Confession of Faith.  This Philadelphia Confession of Faith was printed by Benjamin Franklin.  This is the name of the confession in the Northern states.  In the Southern states it is called the Charleston Confession.

This was the confession used throughout the Colonial and early United States period.

• Associations in Virginia 1766
• Rhode Island-1767,               
• S. Carolina – 1767
• Kentucky-1785,
• Tennesse-1788

It became known in America as The Baptist Confession.

2. Charles Spurgeon

• 1855 Charles Spurgeon reissued the 1689 Second London Confession shortly upon his starting the pastorate at New Park Street Chapel in London.  He did so to strengthen doctrinal foundations.
• Regarding his issuing of the 1689 Confession, Spurgeon wrote: ”I have thought it right to reprint… this excellent list of Doctrines, which were subscribed to by the Baptist Ministers in the year 1689. We need a banner because of the truth; it may be that this small volume may aid the cause of the glorious gospel by testifying plainly what are its leading doctrines.
  This little volume is not issued as an authoritative rule, or code of faith, whereby you are to be fettered, but as an assistance to you in controversy, a confirmation in faith, and a means of edification in righteousness. Here the younger members of our church will have a body of divinity in small compass, and by means of the Scriptural proofs, will be ready to give a reason for the hope that is in them.
  Be not ashamed of your faith; remember it is the ancient gospel of martyrs, confessors, Reformers, and saints. Above all, it is the truth of God against which the gates of hell cannot prevail.
  Let your lives adorn your faith, let your example recommend your creed. Above all live in Christ Jesus, and walk in Him, giving credence to no teaching but that which is manifestly approved of Him and owned by the Holy Spirit. Cleave fast to the Word of God which is mapped out for you.”

 The Declension of the 1689 Baptist Confession

• Familiarity with the 1689 Second London Confession declined in the mid 1800’s to mid 1900’s. 

The Resurgence of the 1689 Baptist Confession

• Interest has since been revived. Many reprints have occurred:

                        1958, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1972, 1974 and even as late as May 2010 by ARBCA and Solid Ground Books.

In the words of Charles Spurgeon regarding the 1689 Confession :

• “Cleave fast to the Word of God which is here mapped out for you.”  AMEN

If they are Biblical, Creeds and Confessions map out the word of God for us.  

This was just a brief sketch of the history of the 1689 Confession that I hope might be helpful to some. 

• As of February 2011, I have updated this history as my knowledge has grown.  There are two main sources here for me: I took a Baptist history class with Dr. James Renihan at our church, I read the preface by Dr. Renihan of the recent May 2010 publication of the Baptist Confession of Faith.
• [1]William L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith (Valley Forge, Judson Press), page 239.
• Here is the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession on-line: http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

The Savoy Declaration is a Confession of the Congregationalists 

“They agree substantially with the Westminster Confession, or the Calvinistic system of doctrine, but differ from Presbyterianism by rejecting the legislative and judicial authority of presbyteries and synods, and by maintaining the independence of the local churches. In the course of time the rigor of old Calvinism has relaxed, both in England and America. ‘New England theology,’ as it is called, attempts to find a via media between Calvinism and Arminianism in anthropology and soteriology. But the old standards still remain unrepealed. The first and fundamental Congregational confession of faith and platform of polity is the Savoy Declaration, so called from the place where it was composed and adopted.”[1]

“…the Savoy Declaration is merely a modification of the Westminster Confession to suit the Congregational polity,”…[2]

The Elders and Messengers of the Congregationalist indicated no desire for novelty and desired to show how much they agreed with their Presbyterian brethren in the Westminster Confession, but did for conscience sake make their modifications.

As with most denominations, there have been down-grades, splits, and off shoots; it would be inaccurate to think that all present Congregationalist all hold to the Savoy Declaration.  

It is important to note that in many places where the 1689 Confession varies from the Westminster Confession, it follows the Savoy Declaration almost word for word.  This is evident in the 1689 Confession’s text. 

• [1] Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (Grand Rapids, Baker Book House), Vol. 1, pg. 829.     http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds1.x.iii.html
• [2] Ibid., Vol. III, pg. 718.
• Here is the Savoy Declaration on-line: http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html

IV. The Westminster Assembly and the Westminster Confession of Faith

 On June 12, 1643 Parliament passed an Act entitled:

“An Ordinance of the Lords and Commons in Parliament for the calling of  an Assembly of Divines and others, to be consulted with by Parliament for the setting of the Government and Liturgy of the Church of England, and clearing of the Doctrine of said Church from false aspersion and interpretations.”

The Assembly first met on July 1, 1643.

 A. Who made up the Assembly?

 The Assembly had as participants many who had varying degrees of view as to church governments:

• Episcopalians
• Presbyterians
• Independents
• Erastians

 B. The Fruit of the Assembly’s Work

On December 4, 1646, The Westminster Confession of Faith was completed.  The Parliament sent it back asking for Scriptural references to be cited stating “Assembly should attach their marginal notes, to prove every part of it by Scripture.”  This was completed April 29, 1647.

November 5, 1647, The Shorter Catechism was completed and presented to Parliament.

April 14, 1648, The Larger Catechism was completed and presented to Parliament.

March 22, 1648, the Parliament met to consider their response to the Westminster Confession of Faith.  It was accepted with a few changes regarding discipline.

Ultimately it was not permanently held to for the Church of England due to mostly political reasons.

Consider this:

Even though the land was in a great time of turmoil politically and in matter of religion, you can not see a trace of it in the Westminster Confession.

• They met for 5 years, 6 months and 22 days
• They held 1,163 sessions
• The Westminster Confession of Faith has 33 detailed chapters of doctrine and is a marvelous work of Reformed Theology.
• It is specifically Presbyterian in terms of views of civil government’s involvement in Church matters and Paedo-Baptist (Infant Baptism).
• But by enlarge all Reformed Church agree with it’s contents.
• Many that differ have still used the Westminster Confession of Faith as their standard, but have made a few changes relatively speaking, and changed its name.  Those who did so are the Congregationalists and the Particular Calvinistic Baptists.
• Congregationalists named their revised document The Savoy Declaration.
• Baptists named theirs the 1689 (or 1677) Second London Baptist Confession of Faith.

 In the next post I will give the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession historical information which in part is mentioned in this post due to the contribution of the Westminster Confession.

____________________

Here is the Westminster Confession of Faith on-line: http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html

The Long Parliament

The Reformation in England had two distinct phases:

1.  I.  Political
2. II. Ecclesiastical

I. A Genuine Work of Grace

 The publication of the Word of God in England was of foremost importance in the reformation of England. Erasmus published the Greek New Testament in Oxford on 1517, and Tyndale translated the Bible into English.  It was sent from Worms, Germany into England in 1526.

Godly men in clergy and laity such as the following were also an important factor in the :

• Cranmer
• Ridley
• Hooper
• Latimer
• Jewell
• All these men were Calvinistic in doctrine.