Calvin Little Book Mature Christian Life

Calvin’s Little Book, Week #10

This week we will review Ch. 3, Sec. 2, and continue to Sec.s 3-4 (pp. 62-66 D&P).

Beveridge’s translation of Calvin’s headings for these two sections are as follows:

Sec. 3. Manifold uses of the cross.
1. Produces patience, hope, and firm confidence in God,
gives us victory and perseverance. Faith invincible.

Sec. 4.
2. Frames us to obedience.
Example of Abraham. This training how useful.

 Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, p. 273). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

The Scripture cited by Calvin for Sec.s 3-4 are shown in the below pdf:

The Issue of Our “Weakness”

In Sec. 2 of this chapter, there is a key sentence that helps us further understand the need for “the cross.” As discussed in Week #9, the cross provides a “shelter” for us to escape (as much as such is possible) the enveloping arms of TRI (The Religion Industry), and to an extent TPI (The Political Industry). But why do we need such help? The answer relates to our “weakness,” even “helplessness.”

Let us return to the opening sentences of Sec. 2, which I have highlighted and reads:

2. We may add, that the only thing which made it necessary for our Lord to undertake to bear the cross, was to testify and prove his obedience to the Father; whereas there are many reasons which make it necessary for us to live constantly under the cross. Feeble as we are by nature, and prone to ascribe all perfection to our flesh, unless we receive as it were ocular demonstration of our weakness, we readily estimate our virtue above its proper worth, and doubt not that, whatever happens, it will stand unimpaired and invincible against all difficulties. Hence we indulge a stupid and empty confidence in the flesh, and then trusting to it wax proud against the Lord himself; as if our own faculties were sufficient without his grace.

Calvin, J. (1997). Institutes of the Christian religion. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software

In our D&P translation it expresses the bold phrases highlighted above as: “our weaknesses are regularly displayed,” and “drawn into foolish and inflated view of our flesh.”

In Calvin’s Latin original writing we find the following key words that were part of the highlighted portions above: “imbecillitas…oculo demonstrata,” and “virtutem…supra iustum..aestimamus.” Let’s consider these meanings as follows:

  • oculo: eye, so as to mean know by evidence as opposed to simple reasoning, which in the case of ourselves, notably our fallen selves, our reasoning is deeply flawed by nature, as is also our perceiving, but for dramatic ‘out of our reasoning’ proclamations that penetrate into us, as below.
  • demonstrata: means to reveal and even to draw attention to something, which the innermost, new nature of “me” needs to grasp fully, namely:
  • imbecillitas: means something very different than the cognate in our day “imbecile.” The Latin word means weakness, and even more feebleness (including intellectual and moral forms). Calvin likely intended this to mean feebleness as to a total condition, not just something compartmentalized or self-recoverable by efforts of self-development.
  • virtutem: means strength, power, and even worth (intrinsic value), a word that was used for “manliness” in that sense of a mature, trained man capable of some particular, notable work of accomplishment.
  • supra: means above or on top
  • iustum: means right, proper, so in that sense the obvious English word “just” (there is no letter “j” in Latin)
  • aestimanmus: the base “manus” means “hand,” leading to the idea of a collected / coordinated capability as in fist, or even team, band (so “manuscript” simply means “hand” writing; and it is interesting that our word “man” is directly from “hand,” so ‘man the tool-maker,’ or tool-worker/user).

These few words are very important as they speak to our human nature encountering and responding to God’s call to self-denial and gives context to the difficult-to-comprehend command of the Lord that His disciples are “take up…the cross.”

Drill Down on Weakness

As seen above, the key word “weakness” is a translation of Calvin’s Latin imbecillitas which semantic range includes feebleness in the sense of innate inability. This distinction between some limited impairment, which could be considered as the meaning of weakness, and a far more extensive incapacity is essential to our perspective on the cross as a personal calling.

Let us suppose that we were to use numbers on a five star rating scale as a superscript on the word “weakness” to designate the extent and seriousness of its meaning, where a “1” star rating would mean a very slight degree of it, something like a “tenderness” in bone or muscle, a “3” star rating would mean something like a serious, hobbling limp in reference to a leg, and a “5” star “weakness” score would mean needing to carried out of bed to be placed in a wheelchair. So we could have the following expressions: weakness* all the way to weakness*****.

Well, our language works a different way. In a dictionary, “weakness” might be expressed by many different definitions based on the range of extent (as our five star example), and context of occurrence. If we were to use a thesaurus it would give us a range of words that are synonyms which are another form providing a definition. Using such a thesaurus for “weakness” we can find nearly 90 synonyms, an amazing number. Some of the more interesting, and rare, examples are given below:

  • anility  adj. Unable to think clearly or infirm because of old age. [Latin anīlis, from anus, old woman.]
  • impuissance. Lack of power or effectiveness; weakness.
  • decrepitude. Source of the word “decrepit.”
  • enervation, n. A feeling of being drained of energy or vitality; fatigue.
  • inconstancy. Inability to hold ‘a course’ or direction / purpose.
  • asthenia, n (medical.) Abnormal physical weakness or lack of energy.
  • atony, n. In medicine, atony or atonia is a condition in which a muscle has lost its strength. It is frequently associated with the conditions atonic seizure, atonic colon, uterine atony, gastrointestinal atony (occurs postoperatively) and choreatic atonia.
  • errability. Liable to mistake; fallible.
  • lanquor. The state of tiredness, being inert, unmoving, often used in a non-judgmental sense.
  • unsubstantiability (or insubstantiability; “un” and “in” are often interchangeable prefixes, though “un” more often heads words with Germanic roots, and “in” Latin roots). The property of not being substantiable or substantial, holding firm, form.
  • anoxia (a medical term).  Literally the absence of oxygen, but paralleling our colloquialism of “I’m gassed,” or “out of gas.” 
  • flimsyness.  No substance, rigid form. Perhaps deriving from the word “film” and so suggesting “gauzy covering,” which obscures that there’s no ‘there’ there.
  • inadequacy.  The condition of being inadequate, that is not being equal to that which is required. Insufficient. “not equal to what is required, insufficient to effect the end desired,” 1670s; see in- (1) “not, opposite of” + adequate:  adequate (adj.)  “equal to what is needed or desired, sufficient,” from the Latin word adaequatus “equalized,” past participle of adaequare “to make equal to, to level with,” from ad “to” and aequare “make level,” The sense is of being equal to, up to, that required to work what is necessary.
  • helplessness. The condition of not being able “to help”

Why so many words that convey some aspect of “weakness?” This suggests that there is an underlying universal condition, much as the idea of “scarcity” in the field of economics, or “immoral” in social theory and ethics. There is a flaw here in our spacetime world. Weakness will not be part of heaven, just as we make sure it is not part of “bridges” and “high rise buildings.” But when it comes upon us, even “regenerated us,” there is “weakness” in its full range of application and extent. This can be seen in the biographies of God’s people, as identified individuals and groups, in the Old Testament and to an extent in the New Testament. And in can be seen inside each of us, as the text in Romans 7 expounds.

The key point of this text from Calvin is that even as regenerated beings in God’s Kingdom, we are not fully outside of the influence of our old, fallen nature. And such nature reasserts itself seemingly at every opportunity with a particular interest in corrupting what should otherwise be pure work on behalf of God. Further, as discussed in Week 9, TRI (and to an extent TPI) is a ready snare to disadvantage further such natural weakness.

Knowing Inadequacy (Weakness)

I would have preferred “inadequacy” to translate Calvin’s imbecillitas, as such choice would better fit our five star model of weakness*****. Whichever way we express the core idea, should lead us to some response about ourselves. The most natural, obvious one would be sorrow, even resentment. How could being inadequate or even weak be anything but a bad thing?

In the reverse world of God’s Calling, however, what looks bad in human terms turns out for the good. Alistair Begg, an excellent preacher and teacher, has given an excellent message on exactly this observation, available here and here:

The Alternative to Knowing Such Inadequacy

As Calvin makes clear (in the Beveridge translation) the failure to grasp such weakness / inadequacy leads, inevitably to: we indulge a stupid and empty confidence in the flesh.

God’s Use of Tribulations

As Calvin notes, the Scriptures teach us that “tribulations,” various forms of difficulty and suffering, are used by God purposefully, for our benefit. In particular, Calvin cites Romans 5:3-4. Given below is an interlinear of the context of these two verses, using a Greek manuscript format instead the usual reverse interlinear:

The true manuscript form given above shows us some important things because of its word order. Specifically, the passage begins and ends with a participle (a verb used as an adjective) that describes our condition–namely, justification (vs. 1), by receipt (vs. 5)–with the aorist tense meaning something that took place prior to the present tense of the main verbs of this passage. This is powerful because it makes clear that justification was given as a settled matter previous to the multistep explanation of the role of tribulation in our lives. It is all to easy to reach the opposite, and erroneous, conclusion that such tribulation was for the purpose of causing us to overcome such so as to reach a state of justification, based upon our own merit. This was would be a conditional life of always seeking the measure up to being worthy of such blessing by our demonstrated response to tribulation, which is the opposite of experience Grace.

Further we can see in the above very clearly the sequence from tribulations (which is in the plural) to hope (literally “the hope,” in the singular).

Additionally, there are multiple words and phrases in the dative case, which in this context is emphasizing the idea of agency or instrumentality as means by which something occurs.

The number below each word is the Strong’s G number. By doing a web search with such number, preferenced by “Strongs G” will lead to multiple resources that will give parallel uses and additional teaching. In particular the word translated “boast” can be misconstrued to being about one’s own pride, rather than the glorying in the source of the gift of justification and the means of establishing “the hope” in us, by the use, even, especially, of tribulation. Which then, as the text clearly says, should cause us to boast in the tribulation(s) themselves, an act contrary to our human nature.

Our Bearing Our Cross Produces Benefits

Calvin lists five such benefits (p. 63, the below quoting D&P’s translation):

  1. Destroys the false notion of our own strength that we’ve dared to entertain
  2. Destroys the hypocrisy in which we have taken refuge and pleasure
  3. It strips us of carnal self-confidence, and thus humbling us.
  4. Instructs us to cast ourselves on God alone so that we won’t be crusted of defeated.
  5. Such victory is followed by hope since the Lord–by providing what He has promised–establishes His truthfulness for what likes ahead.

Our Weakness, In Turn, Leads Us to Well-Being

Calvin summarizes the benefits of our resulting weakness by the work, in time, that such does in our walk and life (p. 64, again quoting D&P).

  1. We learn to despair of ourselves
  2. We transfer our trust to God
  3. We rest in our trust in God and rely on His help
  4. [We] Persevere unconquered to the end
  5. Then standing on His grace we see that He is true to His promises
  6. Finally, being confident in the certainty of His promises our hope is strengthened.

Examples of the Work of the Cross

The Example of Abraham

The Example of Peter

The Example of Believers, Generally

The resources for our Week #11 study is here:

Calvin’s Little Book, Week #9

This week’s study is on Calvin Ch. 3, Sec.s 1-2, pp. 57-62 in the D&P translation. In the Beveridge translation of Calvin’s complete Institutes, the corresponding sections are in Book 3, Chapter 8, Sec.s 1-2.

Beverage translates Calvin’s summary of Ch. 3 as below:

Of Bearing the Cross—One Branch of Self-denial

The four divisions of this chapter are,—
I. The nature of the cross, its necessity and dignity, sec. 1, 2.
II. The manifold advantages of the cross described, sec. 3–6.
III. The form of the cross the most excellent of all, and yet it by no means removes all sense of pain, sec. 7, 8.
IV. A description of warfare under the cross, and of true patience, (not that of philosophers,) after the example of Christ, sec. 9–11.

Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, p. 273). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

Specific to Sec.s 1-2 of Ch. 3, Beveridge translates Calvin’s headings as follows:

1. What the cross is. By whom, and on whom, and for what cause imposed.
Its necessity and dignity.

2. The cross necessary.
1. To humble our pride.
2. To make us apply to God for aid. Example of David.
3. To give us experience of God’s presence.

 Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, p. 273). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

Verses Cited in Ch. 3, Sec.s 1-2, D&P

The verses cited by Calvin (or possibly by D&P in their translation) in these first two Sections of Ch. 3 are given below:

The Significance of The Cross in Self-Denial

As the subject of self-denial was covered by Calvin in Ch. 2, why is this separate treatment of the subject necessary? Or, put in another way, what is distinctive of “the cross” in the context of this subject?

As noted in the verses of above, specifically Matt. 16:24, the Lord Himself gives that command to his disciples. To better understand the context of vs. 24, below is the text in Matt before and after this verse:

Note that Matt. 16 begins with the Lord refusing to perform sign-making for the Pharisees and Sadducees. And He gives a telling reason: that they, His inquisitors, are the leaders of an “evil and adulterous generation” (Matt. 16:4). Such a statement was the ultimate rebuke of leaders who saw themselves as God-favored. Jesus reversed the inquisition: they thought it was Jesus who was on trial, and expected to be found guilty of treason against Moses, whereas it was they who were guilty, of both failure to keep the very law they claimed to uphold, and of cosmic treason against God. Note the significance of the dramatic closing sentence, “So He left them and departed.”

Then, in the next three paragraphs we see (1) Jesus warn His disciples regarding the hidden effect of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees, (2) Jesus evoking the great realization as to His true Being and purpose, and (3) Jesus foretelling that such hidden teaching (the leaven) would result in His being judged, condemned, and killed, before rising from the dead. The disciples comprehended none of this. Further, Peter, after having made the great confession (Matt. 16:16), now speaks the words of Satan (Matt. 16:21), a manifestation of that “leaven.”

Now, the next paragraph, gives us the Lord’s command to “deny himself…take up his cross…follow Me” (Matt. 16:24). Clearly from this context, such “cross” is not in regard to some sickness, ailment, sin habit, physical or economic limitation, depression, or any other such thing. Jesus is foretelling that the forces of the Pharisees and Sadducees–The Religion Industry (TRI) of its day–will seek Jesus’s death and that of the disciples, in alignment with the Roman authorities–The Political Industry (TPI) of the time–using the tool of utter condemnation, shame, and terrorizing example, namely that of crucifixion on a wooden cross.

The Cross is a Tool of the Christian Life

Let us now consider several charts to examine how the cross is a tool that is used by God for our good and His glory.

Big Picture

First, let’s frame a big picture of the broad sweep of the Bible’s story, as below in Chart 1:

The word translated “Garden” in Genesis means a walled in, designated area. From the context it clearly suggests that such area was filled with sources of food, and the forbidden tree with its fruit. That Garden was home for Adam and Eve, a kind of shelter, a place to which they belonged.

They also belonged to God with Whom they had regular direct communion. Then there was the deception of Eve and willful rebellion of Adam resulting in God’s judgment. That judgment included the forewarning of “dying you will die” and permanent expulsion from the Garden.

The result was, and has been, an extended time period of decay and death, separated from the intimate face-to-face connection to God. In broad strokes this period is referred to as “the world” translating (in the NT) the primary word “kosmos,” meaning order, structure, even beauty, and sometimes translating another Koine word, “aeon” meaning an age, or period of time.

In the Epistle of 1 John 5:19, as shown in the above Chart 1, that although we are of God, that is we are God’s own possession by virtue of His having purchased us in redemption, but at the same time the world, the kosmos, lies in the Evil One. This last phrase, “in the Evil One,” is a Koine dative phrase, that could mean “in” in the sense of spatial location or time. However, I believe that here it means “in” in the sense of agency or instrumentality.

We see such instrumentality of “evil” or “the evil one” immediately after the Garden expulsion. The very next scene in that story takes place many decades later when the two oldest brothers, Cain and Abel, participate in a worship event toward God. For reasons outside our scope here, God accepts the sacrifice, and by implication the one making it, of Abel, but rejects that of Cain. Such acceptance of Abel leads to Cain’s violent rage and his murder of his own brother. And that leads to Cain’s own expulsion from the family of Adam, to become a lifelong homeless, shelterless, wanderer. So, in one scene, Adam and Eve lose their two sons.

At the other end of the space-time kosmos, which is yet to come, is God’s final judgment which includes the revelation of beasts, false prophets, and most-notably the Great Whore of Babylon, as from the Book of Revelation. For our purposes here we note only (1) each and every person dies, suffering Adam’s (and Eve’s) judgment, as our representative head, and (2) the kosmos itself will likewise be judged and destroyed. Chart 1 above is constructed to emphasize the inevitable fall to death and judgment, sucked in, as it were, by the Evil One and his agents.

This is, and should be, a horrifying reality, one of no human escape.

God’s Provision of Shelter

Next, let us consider how God provides shelter for His Elect external to Eden, even as they are immersed in the fallen kosmos, as shown in Chart 2 below:

After the Fall and God’s pronounced judgment of death, but prior to the Expulsion out of Eden, God does a deeply significant act: He provides a shelter for Adam and Eve. They had, apparently, been coated with light during the period of their submission to God but were now naked, ashamed, and unprotected from the elements facing them outside the Garden. God shed blood to take that which Adam and Eve were not entitled to at the cost of the life of the giver of the sheltering coat. This covering anticipates the multi-colored, favored robe of Joseph, son of Jacob, and of the seamless robe of Christ, gambled for by his crucifiers.

As shown in Chart 2 above, there is a continuous thread of shelters which God has provided for His people who are strangers and aliens here in the kosmos. Such shelters take many forms, but they have this in common: they are a provisional shelter, like that cleft in the rock, or the strong tower, or walled city references throughout the OT. They together prefigure our permanent shelter, including that of a new, glorified body, and becoming an inhabitant / citizen of the Heavenly Jerusalem.

The Kosmos Provides a False, Deceitful Shelter

Next, let us think about how The Religion Industry (TRI) of the Kosmos–sometimes with or by The Political Industry (TPI) of its time–provides an alternate “shelter” as part of its labyrinth of confusion and evil. See Chart 3 below, where below the shelters of God are reference to these deceitful shelters of the kosmos.

Calvin makes frequent, important reference to “philosophers.” Such term does not transfer well to our time. Calvin lived in the second century of what historians call the period of the Renaissance. Relevant to our topic, this period was known by the admonition “ad fontes,” to the sources (fountain), meaning rediscovery and application of the ancient Greek and Latin writers and philosophies such as Stoicism, Platonism, Aristotelian ideals, etc.. Such philosophers stood against the other major force of the period the Roman Catholic Church then powerfully allied with many political powers on the Continent of Europe.

In our own time both The Religion Industry (TRI) and The Political Industry (TPI), subjects outside our current scope, offer many forms of different ‘shelters’ to which they entice and even command obeisance. Chart 2 shows five such categories.

An interesting example of such false shelters is given by the journey narrative of Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan. The pilgrim is a man named Christian. He begins his journey responding to a call by a man named Evangelist telling him to flee his home city (shelter) named Destruction, to reach the Celestial City, his final shelter. The entire book details all the many difficulties (such as “the slough of despond,” i.e. the bog of despondency) and many false ‘shelters’ (such as “vanity fair”) to which he is exposed and tested. It is another “great book” that has been very widely republished since it’s original publication in ca. 1680.

Taking Up the Cross, Gets Us to Shelter

Finally, let us now examine Calvin’s call to action as to our self-denial by taking up our cross. See Chart 4 below:

Is “taking up the cross” a necessary ‘bad’ thing in this life, or is it a pathway to our shelter? A common interpretation of the phrase is the former. I believe it is the latter.

As discussed in a separate webpage of The Cross on this site, the cross helps us escape the labyrinth of the world’s system (the kosmos) to the present shelter of God’s provision. We’re much like the Pilgrim Christian in Pilgrim’s Progress who has to constantly avoid being waylaid on his journey to the Celestial City. So we too are lured by the various ‘shelters’ offered by the kosmos, including approval, and a place ‘at the table’ of the great conversations of the culture.

Love and The World

In the below pdf are all the NT verses that have both “love” and “world” (in the ESV):

This is an imperfect search, nonetheless three ‘hits’ are relevant to a particular question regarding “taking up the Cross,” namely this: why does God use such extreme language (the cross itself) and commonly severe measures for His own? Part of the answer is in Calvin’s Sec. 1 and 2, and more completely in next week’s Sec. 3. Another part, in my opinion, has to do with our seeking the proper, God-provided shelter as discussed here. A third point can be made that the world, contrary to our beliefs and its appearances, is our enemy. Consider the particular verses given above: John 15:19, 2 Tim 4:10, 1 John 2:15.

John 15:19 takes place in the Upper Room literally hours before Christ is condemned by both TRI and TPI, and executed by the most vicious tool of hatred and reviling, the cross. This verse says it plainly: (1) we are not of the world, (2) we were chosen out of the world, and (3), as a consequence the world actually hates us.

2 Tim 4:10 gives us a brief CV on an otherwise obscure man named Demas. (His name is closely related to “demes” which was a politically organized unit, something like a county or small state in terms of the U.S., which may give us a clue as to his interests). Here we see two coupled ideas: love of the world and desertion. This is particularly significant because Demas occurs in two other of Paul’s Epistles showing him participating in gospel work (Philemon, and Col. 4:14). So deserted (Gr. egkataleípō, G1459) is a proper, and very somber term, and should be a warning to each of us as we traverse life’s journey in and among the world and its lures.

1 John 2:15 tells us two things. First is the present active imperative command to “not love” with respect to its direct object “the world” (kosmos). The word “love” is agapáō (G25), the same word used of Demas’s ultimate desire (2 Tim 4:10). Secondly, the verse gives us the why behind the command: loving the world means not having the love of God our Father in us.

If taking up the cross does nothing else but protect us from becoming world-lovers it is clearly a great good. This is particularly so as Calvin extensively notes our natural inclination from birth to death is to love this world in a way incompatible with the love of God. Later in Ch 4 and 5, Calvin will discuss the obvious objection concerning the good that does exist in our environment, and our responsibilities living in and amongst it.

Noting again the journey of Christian in Pilgrim’s Progress, we see the many occasions whereby he was lured aside away from the path to the Celestial City. Of particular relevance is the scene known as Vanity Fair.

The Pursuit of Virtue

The subject of “virtue”–often termed “the good”–is as old as time, and has been addressed by the wisest of men, including, famously, Socrates some 2400 years ago. The further idea of “pursuit”–often termed “the quest” or “seeking”–is likewise a long and extensively considered dimension of the question of virtue.

A classic and deeply thought-providing secular story was written by Cervantes about the time of publication of the KJV, entitled The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote of La Mancha, or Don Quixote. The name “Quixote” is a play on the Latin word for searching as in “who, what…?” and from which we get words such as quarry, quest, question.

The mystery of that book is who, really, is that man after which the book is named? He appears to be an easily-dismissed loon, with a rational partner (Sancho Panza), a classic ‘buddy story’ put in multiple ‘fish out of water’ tropes. But as the narrative unfolds it can appear that Quixote is the rational one, who alone is truly seeking a true good, so that the apparent craziness of his being and activities seem such because virtue and its pursuit is so foreign to us as to appear irrational. But is what Quixote pursuing truly “good?” Or, maybe, he is only a true loon and wouldn’t recognize “good” even if he had a map to find it. These matters have been puzzled over for 400 years, making Cervantes’s book the classic that it remains.

A Monastic, Classical View on Virtue and Seeking

Thomas Merton (1915 – 1968) was a Catholic priest and trappist monk. He thought deeply of certain aspects of virtue (likely less so on the core truth of Biblical Doctrine). Below is an extended excerpt from a particular insight on how one is, or can be, moved toward virtue when it is so entirely foreign to our basic nature, and continues to be throughout our natural life.

The phrase self-conquest can come to sound odious because very often it can mean not the conquest of ourselves but a conquest by ourselves. A victory we have won by our own power. Over what? Precisely over what is other than ourself.

Real self-conquest is the conquest of ourselves not by ourselves but by the Holy Spirit. Self-conquest is really self-surrender.

Yet before we can surrender ourselves we must become ourselves. For no one can give up what he does not possess.

More precisely—we have to have enough mastery of ourselves to renounce our own will into the hands of Christ—so that he may conquer what we cannot reach by our own efforts.

In order to gain possession of ourselves, we have to have some confidence, some hope of victory. And in order to keep that hope alive we must usually have some taste of victory. We must know what victory is and like it better than defeat.

There is no hope for the man who struggles to obtain a virtue in the abstract—a quality of which he has no experience. He will never efficaciously prefer the virtue to the opposite vice, no matter how much he may seem to despise the latter.

Everybody [really??? EVERYbody??? See Rom 7 passage below] has an instinctive desire to do good things and avoid evil. But that desire is sterile as long as we have no experience of what it means to be good.

(The desire for virtue is frustrated in many men of good will by the distaste they instinctively feel for the false virtues of those who are supposed to be holy. Sinners have a very keen eye for false virtues and a very exacting idea of what virtue should be in a good man. If in the men who are supposed to be good they only see a “virtue” which is effectively less vital and less interesting than their own vices they will conclude that virtue has no meaning, and will cling to what they have although they hate it.)

But what if we have no virtue? How can we then experience it? The grace of God, through Christ Our Lord, produces in us a desire for virtue which is an anticipated experience of that virtue. He makes us capable of ‘liking” virtue before we fully possess it.

Grace, which is charity, contains in itself all virtues in a hidden and potential manner, like the leaves and the branches of the oak hidden in the meat of an acorn. To be an acorn is to have a taste for being an oak tree. Habitual grace brings with it all the Christian virtues in their seed.

Actual graces move us to actualize these hidden powers and to realize what they mean—Christ acting in us.

The pleasure of a good act is something to be remembered—not in order to feed our complacency but in order to remind us that virtuous actions are not only possible and valuable, but that they can become easier and more delightful and more fruitful than the acts of vice that oppose and frustrate them.

A false humility should not rob us of the pleasure of conquest which is due to us and necessary for our spiritual life, especially in the beginning.

It is true that later on we may be left with faults we cannot conquer—in order that we may have the humility to fight against a seemingly unbeatable opponent, without any of the satisfaction of victory. For we may be asked to renounce even the pleasure we take in doing good things in order to make sure that we do them for something more than pleasure. But before we can renounce that pleasure, we must first acquire it. In the beginning, the pleasure of self-conquest is necessary. Let us not be afraid to desire it.

 Merton, T. (1997). Thoughts in Solitude (Third Edition, pp. 31–33). New York; London: Burns & Oates.

Who Truly Seeks the Virtue of God?

 Merton’s view of the pursuit of virtue does not distinguish two categories of “virtue” and two categories of pursuers. Consider this important passage from Scripture on the regenerated man and that virtue which is the righteousness of God:

7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”8 But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. 12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

13 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. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. 15 For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

Romans 7 (ESV)

The Two Virtues and The Two ‘Seekers’

So we can consider four possible situations:

  1. The unregenerate man seeking virtue as he sees it, namely that of the world’s
  2. The unregenerate man seeking the virtue of God
  3. The regenerate man seeking the virtue that is of the world
  4. The regenerate man seeking the virtue of God.

All four possibilities involve “the seeker,” a favorite phrase of our time. But Scripture tells us something important about each case.

  1. In God’s eyes, this case is sin: A high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin. Prov. 21:4 (KJV)
  2. In God’s eyes, no unregenerate man seeks the virtue of God: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. Rom. 3:11 (KJV)
  3. This is the great temptation of the world’s system (TRI and TPI), which the Cross aids in inhibiting.
  4. This is the ideal, and is the desire of that inner being of Romans 7:22 above.

A View of the Significance of Calvin’s Little Book

As discussed previously, Calvin’s Institutes, and the five chapter excerpt we’ve referred to as the Little Book, have been intensely studied and used since their earliest publication in the mid-16th Century. An interesting example of such study is evident in a vintage copy of the Institutes given below.

The top left of the above is Sec. 2 of Chapter 8 of Book 3 of the Institutes, which is Ch. 3, Sec. 2 of D&P at the top of p. 60.

From Calvin’s original Latin text, those beginning sentences which can be compared to the above marked up edition, are as follows;

2. Adde quod Dominus noster crucem ferendam suscipere nihil necesse habuit, nisi ad testandam approbandamque Patri suam obedientiam: nobis vero multis rationibus necesse est sub assidua cruce vitam degere. Primum, ut natura nimium propensi sumus ad omnia carni nostrae tribuenda, nisi nobis imbecillitas nostra velut oculo demonstrata fuerit, facile virtutem nostram supra iustum modum aestimamus, nec dubitamus, quicquid eveniat, contra omnes difficultates infractam fore et invictam. Unde in stolidam et inanem carnis confidentiam evehimur: qua freti, contumaciter deinde superbimus in Deum ipsum, perinde acsi propriae nobis facultates citra eius gratiam sufficerent. 

Calvin, J. (1834). Institutio Christianae religionis (Vol. 1, p. 453). Berolini: Gustavum Eichler

I have underlined in the above text from Calvin the very words that our mystery owner/annotator of the 16th C book has done.

Beveridge and D&P translate these sentences as below, where I’ve highlighted the words underlined above:

2. We may add, that the only thing which made it necessary for our Lord to undertake to bear the cross, was to testify and prove his obedience to the Father; whereas there are many reasons which make it necessary for us to live constantly under the cross. Feeble as we are by nature, and prone to ascribe all perfection to our flesh, unless we receive as it were ocular demonstration of our weakness, we readily estimate our virtue above its proper worth, and doubt not that, whatever happens, it will stand unimpaired and invincible against all difficulties. Hence we indulge a stupid and empty confidence in the flesh, and then trusting to it wax proud against the Lord himself; as if our own faculties were sufficient without his grace.

 Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, p. 275). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

Mystery man’s next highlight in our study Sec. 2 is below with Beveridge’s translation:

Sic humiliati discimus invocare eius virtutem: quae sola sub pondere afflictionem consistere nos facit.

thus humbled learn to invoke his strength, which alone can enable us to bear up under a weight of affliction.

Calvin’s Latin, and Beveridge’s translation of the second underlining of Mystery Man’s edition, Sec. 2

Mystery Man’s third highlighted phrase, and Beveridge’s translation is below:

prosperis obstupefactos fuisse suos sensus, ut posthabita Dei gratia

in prosperity his feelings were dulled and blunted, so that, neglecting the grace of God

Calvin’s Latin, and Beveridge’s translation of the third underlining of Mystery Man’s edition, Sec. 2

Finally, the fourth underlining by Mystery Man in this Sec. 2 is given below.

inquam, documentis admoniti suorum morborum fideles, proficiunt ad humilitatem: ut prava carnis confidentia exuti, ad Dei gratiam se conferant

 Believers, I say, warned by such proofs of their diseases, make progress in humility, and, divesting themselves of a depraved confidence in the flesh, betake themselves to the grace of God

Calvin’s Latin, and Beveridge’s translation of the fourth underlining of Mystery Man’s edition, Sec. 2

Whoever mystery man was, he identified the crux of our fallen nature (and yes, “crux” comes from the word “cross”). How cool it would be if he could by a major miracle appear in our Zoom conference so as to share his thoughts (which miracle would also require him to speak English) as to his underlining as well as all of his many marginal notations. I wonder what he is up to right this moment. When I get ‘there,’ I will try to look him up to share this experience: a very famous saying quoted from Virgil’s Aeneid, “Forsan et haec olim [once, formerly] meminisse [remember[ iuvabit [pleasure, happiness],” translated (by Robert Fagles) as “A joy it will be one day, perhaps, to remember even this.”

Week #10 study is here:

Calvin’s Little Book, Week #8

This week we will cover the final two sections of Calvin’s Ch 2 on “self-denial:” Sec.s 9 and 10.

Calvin Cited Verses So Far

A pdf of the key passages cited by Calvin previously and all the new ones in the present study is below:

Calvin Chapter 2.9 (D&P p. 49ff)

Beveridge translates Calvin’s Summary for 2.9 [with my additions] as follows:

9. We ought not to desire wealth or honours without the divine blessing,
nor follow the arts of the wicked.
We ought [instead] to cast all our care upon God,
and [so] never envy the prosperity of others.

Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, p. 260). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

Rule / Model of the Mature Christian Life: The Principle of Perspective

Recall that the Little Book began with the idea of formulating a “rule” or “model” for the Christian life, or as some have titled the Little Book, for the “mature Christian.”. Such reference to rule / model is not about law-keeping but, rather, some universal guidelines that we can draw upon to help our day-to-day walk in a fallen world with a still indwelling fallen nature.

Here’s the D&P translation in this section 2.9.

On the contrary,
we should always look to the Lord,
that by His care
we might be led to whatever lot in life He provides for us.

Calvin 2.9, D&P p.48

“Contrary” is a recurring Biblical watch-idea expressed by various words. Recall the opening phrase of the opening Psalm [with my emphasis on “not” or “nor,” which in this context are watchwords]:

1 Blessed is the man who walks
not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
2 but [in the contrary] his delight is in the law of the Lord,
    and on his law he meditates day and night.

Psalm 1 (ESV)

In the above quoted text from Calvin 2.9, “contrary” references one’s life-seeking “without God’s blessing” leads to an end that has “every kind of misery and misfortune.” And indeed it is so. We can examine the counter-example of the “wise” man throughout all of Proverbs and see the “fool” in his folly and its consequences as a life-choosing category to be avoided. (The etymology of “folly” is “fool;” if one sees “folly” there’s a “fool” somewhere doing it, and vice versa). And we need to recognize that that “fool” can be, and often is, us, and its consequences (folly) on us and that which we touch. Thus God’s call to a rule / model of a mature Christian Life, whose exposition is the very purpose of Calvin’s Little Book, in contradistinction to the life of a fool, our natural bent. (The irony is that “high IQ” persons are in no way invulnerable to live as a fool immersed in folly, and showering it everywhere; perhaps such are even more so inclined because of the arrogance of their self-intellect).

There is a famous quote by a famous ancient secularist, Cato the Elder. The English translation of his observation is below:

Wise men profit more from fools than fools from wise men;
for the wise men shun the mistakes of fools,
but fools do not imitate the successes of the wise.

Cato the Elder, from Plutarch, Lives
Roman orator & politician (234 BC – 149 BC)  

Cato stumbled onto one of the central truths of the Book of Proverbs.

Crush a fool in a mortar with a pestle along with crushed grain,
yet his folly will not depart from him.

Proverbs 27:22 ESV

Ordered Conducive [to] Salvation

In the closing paragraph of Calvin 2.9 (D&P p. 51) we read this essential point: “he [the mature Christian] knows that his affairs are ordered by the Lord and, as such, promote his salvation.”

Let us dig down into three key words: ordered, sufficient, and salvation.

Beveridge translates this passage in Calvin as follows:

For he [the mature Christian] has a solace [D&P, “comfort”]
in which he can rest more tranquilly [D&P, “greater security”]
than [a self-achieving man, even] at the very summit [D&P, “peak”] of wealth or power,
because he [the mature Christian] considers [D&P, “knows”] that
his affairs are ordered by the Lord
in the manner most conducive [D&P, “promote”]
to his salvation

Beveridge (1845) translation of Calvin Ch. 2.9 (D&P p. 51)

Conducive

Calvin’s Latin original uses the verb conducit, from the Latin root conduco. When used in a sentence with a direct object (“transitive”), conduco means to draw or bring together, assemble, unite, join together. When used intransitively, as here, such meaning becomes: to be proper, fitting. Think of our derived everyday word conductor as the person with the baton in front of an orchestra. The conductor uses a plan, the musical score, and all the multi-varied sound sources, the instruments, while knowing the end from the beginning and every step between, all brought together to tell one coherent, beautiful, satisfying, complete (teleological) musical story. For those classic symphonies such musical story expresses great complexity using the multi-varied voices of individual instruments, of ever varying tonal intensity and color, and tempo, that in the end completes a whole, great idea.

Calvin’s use of the Latin word derived from conduco was likely to call us to see that the Lord is such a conductor ordering the events and circumstances of our lives, and in His Providence, that of the entire world including how it all affects us.

Ordered

How does such a life journey-story happen? How could it, given all the randomness, vagaries, evil, and so forth, of this world, this life? The answer drives us into the very depth of Who God Is.

Calvin’s Latin used the verb ordinari, derived from the root verb ordino. Ordino means to set in order, compose, ordain, appoint, regulate. Ordino is what the composer-orchestrator of the symphony has done in the creation of the script, and what the conductor has done in assembling and disciplining the performers and performances, and what the conductor is doing before our ears and eyes in time.

We don’t often think of God as “Creator,” though of course we all know that such is the case. But God has made every molecule in the vastness of the universe with all their interconnections for all place and time, including every atom of one’s own body and environment. One aspect of such creation is “ordering,” hinted at in Genesis chapter 1 as living beings were created after their “kind,” and all of creation itself was done in distinct categories of time, specified by each “day.”

In a direct parallel, God “ordered” the events and circumstances for our “salvation” and do so until our days’s end.

“Ordered” in all its forms is such an important Bible word, that I’ve created a separate page on the word, here:

Salvation

Salvation is an important Biblical word. It is commonly interpreted as meaning deliverance from the condemnation of hell upon one’s death into the eternal blessing of heaven. And it does mean such in some contexts.

But the root meaning of “saved” is “deliverance,” as a broad idea. The context reveals the matter in which deliverance occurs. So, such deliverance can mean solely a temporal rescue.

What did Calvin mean by his use here of “salvation?”

  1. All the necessary life trials and experiences that will cause us to grow to a state of righteousness such at at our death, but only then, we can be truly justified and thus admitted to eternal life?
  2. As above, but as God’s Plan of our growth, sanctification, to bring us to maturity, become an ever clearly image of God, because we have already been adopted as His child and declared “righteous?“

To ‘get’ Calvin’s answer we need to examine the other 75 chapters of his 80 chapters of Institutes from which our Little Book has been excised. To summarize, Calvin says, and the Scripture he records clearly supports, the second case above, and not the former. Such is the huge doctrinal divide between Arminianism / Pelagianism / Semi-Pelagianism (the first answer above), and the Reformed / Westminster Confession (the second answer above). This huge subject is beyond the scope of Calvin’s Little Book and our discussion here. What is directly relevant is that Calvin is not, definitely not, teaching here that such conductive and order is for the purpose of creating a possibility (if we cooperate) of our gaining eternal life only by producing our own righteous merit at the end of our days here.

Calvin Chapter 2.10 (D&P, pp. 51)

Beveridge translates Calvin’s summary of this section as follows:

10. We ought to commit ourselves entirely to God.
The necessity of this doctrine.
Various uses of affliction.
Heathen abuse and corruption

 Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, p. 260). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

“His [The Mature Christian] Lot in Life”

D&P translates Calvin by the phrase “his lot in life.” This occurs on p. 48 and at the bottom of p. 51. Such phrase is an English idiom similar to “luck of the draw.” These expressions are about what seems to be the utter randomness of life. Even situations that we are experiencing that appear to be the result of our own intentional acts can be later seen as a “lot in life” not at all envisioned by those earlier acts (or thoughts). But, here we each are, in some present condition, that bounds us in some way.

Is this “lot” then just the net result of thoughtful and random steps, likely more of the latter and less of the former? When we think back on our bigger choices in life, we recognize the “road not taken” as the line goes in the famous poem by Robert Frost, and wonder what our “lot” would presently be had we instead taken that other road at such past major junctures. (In Frost’s poem he evokes that exact idea by putting us at that moment of choosing and saying, inwardly, “sorry I could not have taken both”). How did we make that choice? Was it really an independent choice? Was it really more random than “choice?”

It our life is framed by a conviction of atheism, or by a God who is only the distant, uninvolved Creator-Observer, which is the essence of Deism, then we must understand that our life as it unfolds is mostly, if not entirely, just the random running downhill from birth to death like a pinball in one of those old style machines, bouncing off various bumpers and levers. But, as Calvin has been teaching from the Scriptures, and specifically considering the “Hand” we used to summarize five key points in the opening of Chapter 1 of The Little Book, the Bible teaches that our life has been under the oversight of our Heavenly Father. Life has not been random.

Our Responses to God’s Sovereignty of our “Lot in Life”

Our Present “Lot” has been designed by God. And, so? Calvin leads us to four responses we should then have:

  1. We should not pursue after wealth and honors by unlawful acts and such seeking to advance our self-interest by any means. (D&P, bottom of p. 48)
  2. We will be self-restrained so not to “burn with untamed lust” for riches and honors we have not experienced. (D&P, middle of p. 49)
  3. If our hopes for a certain level of prosperity are unrealized, we are at peace with knowing God Who could have made it so, made it better, just as it now is. (D&P, bottom of p.49, and p. 50).
  4. On the other hand, if we do prosper as had been hoped, we do not attribute such to our self effort and talents (contrary to President Thomas Jefferson’s claim that man’s fruition is the natural result of industry and talent).

Calvin cites John 3:27: “A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven.” And, Psalm 131:1-2:

1 O Lord, my heart is not lifted up;
    my eyes are not raised too high;
I do not occupy myself with things
    too great and too marvelous for me.
2 But I have calmed and quieted my soul,
    like a weaned child with its mother;
    like a weaned child is my soul within me.

Psalm 131:1-2 ESV

Resolving the difference, however great, between our “lot” (as it is, so far) compared to what we had thought or hoped it would be, occurs when (1) we are humble before our creator, and (2) appreciate that as a loving Father He has ordered our life toward achieving our salvation and His Glory, which will lead ultimately to our greatest joy. There’s even a country and western song that says “I thank God for unanswered prayers” (Unanswered Prayers; song writers: Patrick Alger / Garth Brooks / Larry Bastian).

Calvin Ch 2.10 (D&P p. 51)

This final section of Ch 2 deals with the “what about?” questions of life. We inwardly believe, and are commonly mis-taught, that embracing God as our Father will lead only to (really) good times, pretty much all the time, for a really long time. A brief inspection of the life of most people in the Bible’s narratives clearly reveals that such was not their experience, humanly speaking. And we can readily see many adversities in the lives of those around us, and our own lives too. And, then, we all die, many not propped up with many down pillows surrounded by a squad loved ones humming “Glory Glory Hallelujah ….” Some of us, many of us, will die alone, and between now and then, which could be soon, there will be many experiences we would not have freely chosen.

But we can freely choose to see God’s hand even in the adversity. That was Job’s greatest moment in responding to the charges of his three friends.

Calvin expresses this rightful perspective:

Indeed, the believer should accept whatever comes
with a gentle and thankful heart,
because he knows that it is ordained by Lord.

Calvin, Ch 2.10, D&P p. 53.

We will examine “order” and all its forms including “ordained” as used above and “orderly” below by Calvin on a separate page, here:

Calvin closes Ch 2 on Self-Denial with following:

…the rule of godliness is to
recognize that God’s hand is the sole judge and governor of every fortune,
and because his hand is not recklessly driven to fury,
it distributes to us both good and ill
according to his orderly righteousness.

Calvin, Ch 2.10, D&P, p. 54

Self-Denial Parody

A popular song today, has an entirely different take on Calvin’s long chapter on “self-denial,” one much more ‘in tune’ with our time and culture.

Oh Lord, it’s hard to be humble
When you’re perfect in every way
I can’t wait to look in the mirror
‘Cause I get better lookin’ each day
To know me is to love me
I must be a hell of a man
Oh Lord, it’s hard to be humble
But I’m doin’ the best that I can!

Chorus of song “It’s Hard to be Humble,” (c) Mac Davis

It’s a long way from “saved a wretch like me” in the hymn vastly more in tune with Calvin Ch. 2: “Amazing Grace.”

Next week’s study, Week #9 is here:

“Doing Good”

In the study of Calvin’s Little Book we came to a consideration of the call to “doing good.” This arose in Week’s #6 and #7, and in the context of Galatians 6:10 (pdf repeated again below).

Small sidebar: Calvin wrote (in his Latin original) exercendae erga ipsos beneficentiae*. “Erga” is “therefore,” “ipsos” means “themselves,” and “exercendae” means “that which is to be done,” namely that which is “beneficentiae,” from which we get our (rarely used) word “beneficence.” The prefix “bene” simply means “good” (in French it’s “bon” as in bon voyage, or good voyage). The final word, “beneficence,” or benefit, derives from the Latin word for “to do” or “to make.” So, “charity” in its Old English / King James context is an excellent translation. Today, “love” does not work well because its many other uses and contexts. So, “doing good” is about the best we have, though perhaps something like “really helping” might work as well. D&P chose “kindness,” which sounds a little passive to my ear, something like what being a passenger on a bus or plane should generally be. Though in the context of a fractious church members meeting, even “kindness” would be a good thing, and perhaps good enough.

 *Calvin, J. (1834). Institutio Christianae religionis (Vol. 1, p. 450). Berolini: Gustavum Eichler. This phrase is in the final sentence of Book 3, Chapter 7, Section 7, which in D&P is Chapter 2, Section 7, p. 45, there translated as “kindness.”

So a prevailing question of the mature Christian life, what exactly is before me that calls for my “doing good,” “really helping?” The answer always will hinge on the meaning and context of each of these four words: doing, good, really helping. And, as we discussed earlier in our study, our life in this world is in Christ, to be an image of God, which can universally be considered to be the context of any admonition made of us in Scripture, or in the expression of our archaeological metaphor, it is the provenance. So the answer to what specifically is my “doing good?” in some context, has to emanate specifically from that context and God’s ultimate purpose of conforming us to His image. The summary on this point from the Westminster Confession, Chapter 16, discussed below, is a helpful guide.

Doing Good in the Context of Self-Denial

In Week #7 of Calvin’s Little Book, we saw these examples:

  • Emergency, short term care (the Parable of the Good Samaritan)
  • Enduring injustice with grace (Sermon on the Mount)

We could add other examples of Scripture’s call such as the extraordinary circumstances of sharing that was prompted by the persecution of followers of Christ which included their being shut out of opportunities to work, and perhaps also housing. (Acts 2)

Yet, Doing Good Does Not Supplant Personal Responsibility

Yet, we know that God has commanded each of us to work, provide for our own needs and even to excess so that we can provide for others:

The man who does not work, should not eat at the church’s shared buffet, or at the hands of the church’s charity (2 Thes. 3:10. For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. ESV)

The Book of Proverbs is filled with admonitions to work, and productivity (e.g., Prov. 6:6ff, and Prov. 24:20ff). I have a separately created an extended writing of “Diligence vs. Indolence” (not yet posted here).

Doing Good Was / Is Part of the Foundational Westminster Confession

The Westminster Confession of 1647 has been widely recognized and adopted for having set forth the essential elements of the Christian Faith as given in the Scriptures. There are alternative Confessions–some earlier (e.g. Heidelberg), some later (1689 Second London Baptist Confession), some taking exception to certain aspects. But, nonetheless the Westminster is an important point of reference and has been for close to 400 years.

One of its chapters is on this matter of “doing good.” In the format of all the chapters, it is very succinct and heavily cites key relevant Scriptures. A pdf on Chapter 16 of the Westminster Confession–“Good Works”–is given below. This version is in “modern English.” The highlights are mine to identify the portions most relevant to our present discussion.

Heidelberg Confession

The Heidelberg Confession (1576) is in a FAQ format. Below is a relevant Q&A on doing good:

Q & A 91
Q. What are good works?
A. Only those which are done out of true faith,1
conform to God’s law,2
and are done for God’s glory;3
and not those based on our own opinion or human tradition.4

1 John 15:5; Heb. 11:6
2 Lev. 18:4; 1 Sam. 15:22; Eph. 2:10
3 1 Cor. 10:31
4 Deut. 12:32; Isa. 29:13; Ezek. 20:18-19; Matt. 15:7-9

Heidelberg Catechism https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/confessions/heidelberg-catechism

The verses cited in the above Heidelberg Confession are given in the pdf below (from the ESV):

Proclaiming the Gospel as Doing Good

Recall that the five chapters comprising Calvin’s Little Book are extracted from an 80 chapter publication on systematic theology known as Institutes of the Christian Religion. So, it is easy to miss a big picture observation: surrounding the practical walk issues of The Little Book, there are 75 other chapters on doctrine. Further, any search of online resources for writings of John Calvin will find that he wrote massive numbers of books.

The motive of such writing, and that of so many gifted Christian authors over the centuries is proclaiming the Gospel. There is an important NT Koine word for such proclaiming: kērússō:

Kērússō (kay-russ-SO) in the NT

In the pdf below are the NT occurrences of the Koine word kērússō. It is often translated “preaching” because it is distinguishable from another forms of proclaiming such a teaching and witnessing. “Preaching” (kērússō) is freighted by a forceful claim of an important, particular truth being expressed.

Below is an a lexicon definition of kērússō:

Danger of Losing kērússō by the Focus on More Tangible Forms of Doing Good

The wants and needs of people are without bounds. Some, perhaps many or most of such, are the endless manifestation of greed and covetousness extending to lust and envy. Others may not be in that category yet still characterized as vast, and more particularly as far afield from the focus of the Christian Call.

What about so called “global climate change?” Sea levels rising? War and threats of war? Pollution? Disease? Are these the ‘jobs’ of the church as a body of Believer’s, or more specifically, me? And if so, does such become the complete priority of life outside of what necessity binds one to work to provide for oneself? Who determines that, and on what basis?

YMCA, YWCA

Let us consider a simple relatively recent 100 year example: the YMCA and YWCA. These two organizations–the Young Men’s (and Women’s) Christian Association–arose with the migration from the farms to the cities, begun in massive numbers early in the 20th Century. The cities then were large, foreign places with many dangers and temptations, and still are. These two associations arose to provide a safe venue for young Christian men and women moving to the city to find work, and create their own pair-bound family units and ministry. Let’s consider how the ca. 100 year history of these two organizations have now evolved by looking at where YWCA now stands in terms of its purpose and mission:

WYCA TBD

Colleges and Universities

There are many colleges and universities that were founded to advance God’s work and the Gospel by the education of students in Biblical languages (Hebrew and Greek and, additionally Latin), Theology, and missions. Among the notable examples are Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, all of which are today bereft of any such mission, or even (it seems) tolerant of any such expression by individual students or faculty. How did that happen?

COLLEGES TBD

Evangelicalism

Early in the 20th Century there emerged the term “evangelical” to identify a category of ‘real’ Christians who could be distributed across many different denominations and traditions. However, the term never quite got defined precisely, in part because there was an interest in being “inclusive,” a term with almost a magical power, which got in the way of defining well-prescribed boundaries such as the Westminster Confession (or most of it).

For a time, even with such ambiguity, the category “evangelical” appeared to be useful, bringing together people of like faith, usually serious about what the Bible has to say, and living God-honoring lives. But over time, as with other the examples here, such core meaning has blurred to diffuseness. Two small books have in their own way chronicled the decay, Mark Noll arguing that the “evangelical mind” lost the “mind” part and, more recently Carl Trueman that there’s no ‘there’ there as to “evangelical.” CITATIONS

Mainstream Denominations

The loss of Christian distinctiveness in many mainstream and other churches and associations of churches is so well publicized that further comment is not needed here. I would, however, add four points:

  1. Martin Luther is quoted as having said that wherever God starts a church, the devil builds one next door,
  2. G Robert Godfrey, noted church historian, adds that the devil’s church is or becomes bigger,
  3. And, I would add that the devil’s church is much more entertaining, and
  4. Finally, the devil’s church ‘swallows’ what is left of God’s church, even the physical structure, signage and all.

Whatever gets built, physically or organizationally, that is toward the cause of Christ, elicits a violation of all 10 Commandments against it led by the devil himself, including #10, Coveting. And he will use, as they say, every trick in the book, that is the corrupted book, to gain control either to his own benefit as an outpost, or to extinguish it entirely. So the devil seems to win innumerable skirmishes, and yet God’s work, Christ’s building His church, has never been stopped, nor will it ever, though it keeps ‘moving on,’ as on its own journey in both space and time, as it will until that Final Time.

Calvin’s Little Book, Week #7

This Week #7 we will review Calvin’s Little Book, Chapter 2, Sections 7-8 on pp. 42-48 in the Denlinger and Parsons (D&P) translation.

The Beveridge (1845) translation of Calvin’s Latin original includes the following useful summary of these two sections:

7. Christian life cannot exist without charity.
Remedies for the vices opposed to charity.
1. Mercy. 2. Humility. 3. Modesty. 4. Diligence. 5. Perseverance.

8. Self-denial, in respect of God, should lead to equanimity and tolerance.
1. We are always subject to God.
2. We should shun avarice and ambition.
3. We should expect all prosperity from the blessing of God, and entirely depend on him.

Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, p. 260). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

The above word “charity” used by Beveridge is the King James English for our word “love.” Today, “charity” conveys the idea of welfare payments or care. Unfortunately, “love” as we use the word today is misleading in other ways. So here is an example where we are better served by learning and using the Koine Greek word, charis, than experiencing the confusion that results from reading either of the two commonly translated English words, charity or love.

An update of Bible references cited by Calvin is below:

Does “All” Mean “All?”

Last week, we examined Gal. 6:10, which passage is repeated below. The key text in question is: “let us do good to everyone [Koine: pas, usually translated “all”] and [de, usually translated “but”] especially to those who are of the household of faith.”

As shown above, the meaning of “all” depends on the context. In Galatia, the Judaizers were troubling the new converts by requiring they first become Jewish proselytes. Paul makes clear in the Epistle that we are all one in Christ, by Christ’s regenerating work. No one has less standing regardless of their race, or whether they are slaves or free, male or female. And, so, “all” means all categories and classes of people that have come to faith in Christ. Such word is not here teaching (nor does it or other words elsewhere) a universal redemption, as some have claimed through the ages and continues to this day (as in the term “love wins” which is so applied).

What Does “Doing Good Especially” Mean if “All” is Limited?

Then, what do we do with the phrase “especially?” Last week we saw that 1 Cor 13 and other passages stressed the significance of Spiritual gifts used to build up the body of the church. So “doing good” has a particular significance in such context.

But Calvin Claims “All” is “All”

However, in Sec. 6, Calvin sees “all” as a universal reference. Calvin expands that universal interpretation in Sec. 7.

This difference in interpreting the meaning of “all” determines the boundary of our Christian duty:

  • believers before and after becoming part of the local church body, or
  • everyone regardless of their faith, or even interest, in Christ?

The second bullet above is Calvin’s understanding of Gal. 6:10. Supporting Calvin’s position are other Bible texts. For instance, consider the Lord’s parable responding to a “lawyer’s” (insincere) question: who is my “neighbor?” asked in the context of such duty to love (Luke 10:29ff). Any reasonable application of the Lord’s parable must lead us to understand that “all” includes any person, any circumstance, any kind of aid, and further shames the priests and levites who avoided even being near the innocent man striped and beaten by robbers.

The Good Samaritan Parable

An excellent message on this Good Samaritan parable is by the late Haddon Robinson, noted seminary professor of homiletics, available on YouTube here: Dr. Robinson’s succinct summary is this:

“My neighbor is anyone whose need I see, whose need God has put me in a position to meet–it’s as simple and difficult as that.”

Dr. Haddon Robinson

It is worth watching Dr. Robinson’s masterful homiletic on this parable. He was a wonderful teacher of teachers and preachers, and was a living example of kindness and compassion in words and manner as well as deeds.

The Sermon on the Mount

Another example passage that teaches a universal “all” is part of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. Ch. 5-7).

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39 But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew Ch 5 (ESV)

And, so Jesus, Calvin, and Dr. Robinson all say “all” is in such context a universal reference. I believe that makes the case and carries the day. But, it leaves us with a very difficult calling.

Is Doing Good Unbounded?

Calvin’s point, and our focus here, is that doing good necessitates in some way a spirit of self-denial. Without self-denial, such “doing” is really only on behalf of self, leading perhaps to feelings of charitable superiority.

But an important follow-up issue is what are the limits of “good” both in terms of the nature of such “good” and the extent of the “doing” of it? Calvin does not directly address this question. However it is an important idea. So I have created a separate webpage that addresses it, here:

Self-Denial, Doing Good, and Repentance

In this chapter on “self-denial” we here find this idea connected with “doing good,” discussed above, and now “repentance.” How so?

“Doing Good” is Not Possible without Self-Denial

Recall that “doing good,” i.e. the classic word “charity” (better than the modern word “love”) is about benefitting someone other than oneself. In this very particular sense, and calling, one is not “doing good” for an exchange of some kind. There may be a self-beneficial return, and there often is. But it cannot be part of one’s act itself. The “charity” must be solely, fully unidirectional, and unmerited (otherwise “charity” has another twist, namely repaying some kind of debt, doing what justice requires, or creating a debt in the receiver for which one as the giver, is actually anticipating a return as an act of “justice” for a good done).

So, for such “charity” to occur from me, it must be from a condition of self-denial. Is it no wonder that charity / doing good is so difficult and rare? It is because genuine self-denial is so contrary to our nature and lifetime of practice. Recall that Jesus said the whole of the Law can be summed up with loving God wholly–which is clearly something we understand, though do not do–AND loving one’s neighbor as one’s self–which is truly difficult to grasp for the purpose of a life of so doing because it requires self-denial.

Self-Denial Necessitates Repentance

What prompts, enables self-denial? Of course we must go back to the truth of “regeneration” discussed in the opening words of Chapter 1 of Calvin. But, practically, what has to precede within us for genuine self-denial?

Calvin

Calvin’s response is that it must lead us to repentance. Repent and repentance (the condition of being repentant) are part of foundational texts of the NT. “Repent” in its various forms in the ESV, occurs 75 times in the Bible, 53 in the NT. It occurs in each of the synoptic Gospels, and in Acts, and five different Epistles, and concludes with 10 occurrences in Revelation. The NT begins with “repent” (“Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand.” Matt. 3:2) and ends with the final judgment of the unrepentant:

8 The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and it was allowed to scorch people with fire. 9 They were scorched by the fierce heat, and they cursed the name of God who had power over these plagues. They did not repent and give him glory. 10 The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and its kingdom was plunged into darkness. People gnawed their tongues in anguish 11 and cursed the God of heaven for their pain and sores. They did not repent of their deeds.

Revelation 16:8-11, ESV

Calvin’s Text on Repentance

In Sec 8, p. 45, the D&P translation gives us a footnote reference to Calvin’s Book 3, Chapter 3, Sec.s 2-3. (Recall that the Little Book comes from this same Book 3 of Calvin, Chapters 6 through 10). Below is that footnoted text from the Beveridge translation:

Repentance is a Consequence of Proclaimed Forgiveness

2. …. For when our Lord and John begin their preaching thus, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” (Matth. 3:2,) do they not deduce repentance as a consequence of the offer of grace and promise of salvation? The force of the words, therefore, is the same as if it were said, As the kingdom of heaven is at hand, for that reason repent. … we only wish to show that a man cannot seriously engage in repentance unless he know that he is of God. …

Then, according to the passage in the Psalms, “There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared,” (Psalm 130:4,) no man will ever reverence God who does not trust that God is propitious to him, no man will ever willingly set himself to observe the Law who is not persuaded that his services are pleasing to God. The indulgence of God in tolerating and pardoning our iniquities is a sign of paternal favour.

This is also clear from the exhortation in Hosea, “Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up,” (Hos. 6:1;) the hope of pardon is employed as a stimulus to prevent us from becoming reckless in sin…. that repentance, which in every Christian man lasts as long as life,…

 Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, pp. 152–154). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

Repentance is: First Contrition, and Then Joy

3. Certain learned men, who lived long before the present day, and were desirous to speak simply and sincerely, according to the rule of Scripture, held that repentance consists of two parts, mortification and quickening.

By mortification they mean, grief of soul and terror, produced by a conviction of sin and a sense of the divine judgment. For when a man is brought to a true knowledge of sin, he begins truly to hate and abominate sin. He also is sincerely dissatisfied with himself, confesses that he is lost and undone, and wishes he were different from what he is. Moreover, when he is touched with some sense of the divine justice, (for the one conviction immediately follows the other,) he lies terror-struck and amazed, humbled and dejected, desponds and despairs. This, which they regarded as the first part of repentance, they usually termed contrition.

By quickening they mean, the comfort which is produced by faith, as when a man prostrated by a consciousness of sin, and smitten with the fear of God, afterwards beholding his goodness, and the mercy, grace, and salvation obtained through Christ, looks up, begins to breathe, takes courage, and passes, as it were, from death unto life.

I admit that these terms, when rightly interpreted, aptly enough express the power of repentance; only I cannot assent to their using the term quickening, for the joy which the soul feels after being calmed from perturbation and fear. It more properly means, that desire of pious and holy living which springs from the new birth; as if it were said, that the man dies to himself that he may begin to live unto God.

 Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, pp. 152–154). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

Repentance from What?

The idea of repentance requires a context. Calvin follows his citation of Matt. 6:10 (“…Your Will be done…”) with the following:

Our lust is furious and our greed limitless in pursuing wealth and honors, chasing after power, healping up riches, and gathering all those vain things which seem to give us grandeur and glory.
[While at the same time] On the other hand, we greatly fear and hate poverty, obscurity, and humility, and so we avoid these realities in every way.

D&P, Ch. 2, Sec. 8, p. 46.

Thus, Calvin addresses us “not to be entangled in such snares…[but] hold this course:”

First of all they [the mature Christian] must neither desire nor aspire, nor expect to prosper for any other reason than the Lord’s blessing.
Therefore, let them safely and confidently cast themselves on and rest in that blessing.

D&P, Ch. 2, Sec. 8, p. 47, emphasis mine.

We may readily assent to such admonition, yet inwardly we hold to alternatives that we believe also ‘work,’ and likely even ‘work’ better. That leads to Calvin’s second admonition:

Second, we are admittedly able to secure for ourselves, entirely apart from His blessing, something of glory and riches, just as we often see great honors and wealth piled up by ungodly men.
Yet, whatever we obtain [by such means] will turn to evil [and, so, deep sorrow] without His blessing, since those on whom God’s curse remains do not taste even the smallest amount of true happiness.”

D&P, Ch. 2, Sec. 8, p. 47-48, emphasis mine.

Happiness versus Pleasure

Some of the (many) pathways of deceit we each face is the illusion of “happiness” by the false face of “pleasure.” (An alternative word for “happiness” is “joy”). There is a recurring parallel in the Book of Proverbs on the alluring way of the adulteress:

Proverbs 2:16 So you will be delivered from the forbidden woman, from the adulteress with her smooth words, 6:24 to preserve you from the evil woman, from the smooth tongue of the adulteress. 7:5 to keep you from the forbidden woman, from the adulteress with her smooth words. 23:27 For a prostitute is a deep pit; an adulteress is a narrow well. 30:20
This is the way of an adulteress: she eats and wipes her mouth and says, “I have done no wrong.”

From a word search in the Book of Proverbs using the search term “Adult-“, on the ESV translation

Further, such adulteress the tongue of “smooth words” of enticement. That enticement has perpetuated more ruin than any weapon exercised in any act of hatred.

RC Sproul in his famous, and wonderful book, The Holiness of God, has an extended discussion of this happiness-pleasure distinction: chapter 8 of that book entitled “Be Holy Because I Am Holy.” There is a chain of reasoning that one’s call to be “holy” as an image-bearer of God both honors God but also brings us true joy as said in the very first Q&A of the Westminster Catechism:

Question 1: What is the chief and highest end of man?
Answer: Man’s chief and highest end is to glorify God, and fully to enjoy him forever. 

Westminster Catechism, 1648

“Pleasure” as a governing rule of life is (almost invariably) the enemy of such happiness / joy. Yet, we must be careful here, as the call of God is not to the philosopher of Stoicism, against which Calvin repeatedly warns us. This distinction will be clear in Calvin’s chapters 4 and 5.

Beveridge’s Translation on These Two Final Admonitions (Calvin Ch 2, Sec. 8)

Beveridge’s translation is more formal and may provide further insight on these two key claims by Calvin and aid our extinguishing our natural “lust” and “greed” in pursuing “wealth and honors,” etc., while trying to avoid “poverty and humility” (p. 46 D&P). Given below is the Beveridge translation [which I have excerpted and edited]:

1. [The course which the mature Christian] must follow is this: they must not long for, or hope for, or think of any kind of prosperity apart from the blessing of God; on it they must cast themselves, and there safely and confidently recline.

2. [Without this blessing from God as given above] we may be able to acquire some degree of fame and opulence, (as we daily see wicked men loaded with honors and riches,) yet since those on whom the curse of God lies do not enjoy the least particle of true happiness, whatever we obtain without his blessing must turn out ill.

Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion (Vol. 2, pp. 269–270). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.

Our studies in Week #8 are here:

Calvin’s Little Book, Week #6

Chapter 2, Sec.s 4 and 5 (pp. 35-42 in D&P).

Scripture Cited in Calvin Ch 2, Sec.s 5-6 (ESV)

Bible texts cited in the D&P translation for Sec.s 5-6, and carrying forward key citations from our prior week’s studies is given in the pdf below:

Deeds Not Creeds?

A theme of our time, and perhaps all time, is the devaluation of authority and specifically, under various categories, devaluing also the foundational truth from such authority, namely: doctrine, “bible,” theology, creeds and confessions, etc. This is a broader topic than ours here but prevailing view is often expressed by: “deeds not creeds.” Such might be more bluntly expressed as “scents not words,” scents as in following any smells of interest emitted by one’s own interests and spacetime environment.

Such admonition then devolves further in various forms that what one does, one’s moral / ethical code(s) of life, is more meaningful than any “doctrine” (or, apparently, even worse: “creed”). Because? Well, there’s another common phrase that “doctrine divides,” meaning, in essence, such could lead to conflict or even division (yes, indeed) when the only thing that is truly important is how we all behave, get along, help our fellow human, heal the planet, and so forth.

Another variant (there are so many, but all from the same source) is “love is love,” or “you have to follow your heart.” (Prov. 28:26 says something about this: One who trusts in his own heart is a fool, But one who walks wisely will flee to safety. ESV)

Underlying such views is the belief that there can exist a true morality not underpinned by an ultimate reality founded in God’s Law and Holiness. But humans, do not like to be solitary, nor unanchored, so arises the need to establish an alternative morality / ethic, and find fellow travelers who hold the same, or vice versa; either way ‘works.’

One of the dangers of reading only Calvin’s Little Book is that it can appear to be about “deeds not creeds.” This impression can occur because, as discussed previously, such Little Book is little for a reason: it is an extraction from his four substantial volumes (“Books”), which were published as The Institutes of the Christian Religion. Specifically the Little Book is just Calvin’s Chapters 6 through 10 of his Book 3 of the 80 chapters comprising the Institutes.. So, what we know as his Little Book, is embedded in a major book of “doctrine,” that has been so recognized since its publication (final edition was 1559). It stands along with one or two others as the crowning books on Christian systematic theology which is as “doctrine” as one can get.

But, we should remind ourselves, Calvin, as all the Reformers and later Puritans and still later true scholars of the faith, were also about “deeds,” doing, living out the Christian Life. As we saw in Weeks #1-3, Calvin himself claims that the Scriptures fulfill for us the necessity of a “model” (framework) of the mature Christian Life. So the Little Book is indeed about that important subject. But underneath there was and is, “the doctrine.” We will see later in our studies how important it is to look back in Calvin’s Institutes to get key background teaching to understand certain practical issues being addressed. To an extent we have done exactly this previously in looking back to his Book 3 on the subject of “regeneration” which idea is expressed by Calvin in the very first sentence of the first chapter of the Little Book (where “regeneration” was translated there by D&P as “God’s work” as we discussed).

Spiritual Gifts and Self-Denial

These two Sections, 5-6, deal primarily with spiritual gifts but in the context of self-denial, not the full expression of the doctrine of such gifts themselves. So, what then, is the connection with self-denial?

Two Essentials Regarding Spiritual Gifts

Calvin addresses two primary points about such gifts: their true origin (source) and their ultimate purpose (telos). So, first, it is essential to know and keep in mind, that gifts are special enablements given by God to his children, and, so, they are another element of our continuing reference to “The Image of God.” Second, these gifts are for the primary purpose (telos) of serving and so blessing the community of people that God seeks to affect. Gifts to each of us from God are His Doing for His Purpose, which ultimate Purpose is to exhibit His Glory in manifold ways and situations, including most obviously, within the community of fellow believers.

What are our individual responsibilities as gift-recipients? Much could be said about recognition of the gifts themselves, their development / maturation, realizing full potential of and in them, etc. Calvin’s concern, and ours, here, is focused on the necessary aspect of “self-denial” in relation to the possession and use of such gifts.

As Calvin develops in his Chapter 2 and again further in Chapter 3, “self” is the old, fallen self, not yet fully extinguished as to existence even in a regenerated believer, and so is part of a Christian’s day-to-day reality yet in this life. As a recipient of such gifts we all too readily think of them as belonging to ourselves, much like finding some cast-off valuable perhaps as received by an inheritance. Once we see something as “ours,” we naturally lean toward a perspective of self-sovereignty of whatever has been given. But the Scriptures make clear, as Calvin makes clear, we are not the end purpose (telos) of God’s gift but an agent of God, in the most humble way, to affect others for the glory of God, the Great Giver. For this to happen even at all, let alone well, “self” has to be denied, something exceedingly difficult to do, and delicate to navigate when doing, particularly with the more public gifts which naturally draw attention to its human agent.

Calvin reminds us, by his cited Bible texts as given in the pdf above, that we are to think of gifts as something like the astonishing enablements of various organs or parts of human body. We are all overwhelmingly sentient beings with extraordinary capabilities by the faculties endowed for sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch, and capabilities for outward expression of speech, creations of the hand, and mobility of legs, and all the internal ‘overhead’ automated functions of breathing, digestion, life sustaining heart pumping, and (there’s more, much more) the mental processing of all the conscious and unconscious process control functions, memory, and reasoning. All of this works as an integrated whole, as a network, as a system. No one element would have any meaningful existence or function separate from being connected and live-‘wired’ to all the others. The connection to self-denial, then, is this: no human, or other being, could function if each part operated by some hyper-sovereignty whereby it ‘works’ only when it ‘feels’ like doing so or ‘works’ in a purely organ-preferring way. To have such a body would be, literally, disintegration leading to chaos and ruin.

1 Corinthians 13

One of the best loved chapters in the NT, and most misunderstood and misapplied, is the so-called “Love Chapter,” 1 Corinthians 13. Its poetic beauty has been used in countless wedding ceremonies even in non-Christian contexts and beliefs. But, alas, this chapter has nothing, as in zero, to do with marriage ceremonies, though of course the commendations to “be patient,” “be kind” is generally and universally good advice and should be, part of every driver’s license training manual and test exam, and some thousand other contexts.

As discussed elsewhere, context is extremely important to grasp what the Scriptures teach. So, 1 Cor 13 sandwiched between two adjoining chapters on the subject of gifts is most-reasonably understood as also speaking to gifts. Further, there is nothing in 1 Cor 13 providing any context for applying its admonitions to marriage or wedding ceremonies, so its use in that regard is, in my view, teaching error.

Now let us look at 1 Cor 13:5 cited by Calvin, and the verse that precedes it, in the pdf directly below:

The text shown in the pdf above is in interlinear form where each word of the ESV translation has below it five lines beginning with the “Lemma” of the original Koine Greek word from which manuscript form the ESV was translated, next the transliteration of the Lemma (meaning that insofar as possible an English alphabet equivalent is substituted for each letter of the Greek alphabet in the shown lemma), then the transliterated “root” word from which the lemma may have derived (if it is not itself its own root), the CODES that are used by Logos software to tell us the specific grammatical job the word does in the sentence, and finally the Greek Strong’s G number which allows us to find many resources on additional nuances of meaning of the word, and where else in the Bible the Koine word occurs, regardless of how it is translated.

Note that verse 5 has four “not’s” (Strong’s G3756), though the ESV, regrettably, translates two of them as “or” which preserves the sense but, likely was chosen to read more smoothly. The base meaning of such word, “ou” as shown transliterated, is simply “not!” Preceding verse 4 is shown in the left upper corner and also contains two more uses of exactly such “not!” word.

A further ‘fix’ to the translation is that in verse 4 there is no word “and” between “patient” and “kind;” so it would read in a literal translation as follows: “Love is patient kind”…. Again the ESV opted for smoother reading. I think seeing the direct pairing as these words occur in the mss is helpful because it suggests that they are one, a unity, as the chief characteristic of what “love” is. Then all the six following “not’s” further refine what such word pair look like in the real world of life.

Further as shown the word for “kind” is more than an attitude, but an action, a help.

Galatians 6:10

Self-denial has a broader application than only (though importantly) having to do with spiritual gifts. Calvin points us to Galatians 6:10, given in the pdf directly below:

Because verse 10 begins with “so then,” I’ve also shown the preceding verse for context.

Here are some observations on this passage:

  • The Koine word “pros” occurs twice, translated “to,” but which word carries the weight of “toward,” namely that of a directed vector than a general trend or leaning. In some Biblical contexts it carries the weight of “face-to-face” which may not be fully meant here. But this does raise the question of our electronic age whether to “do good” can be adequately ‘done’ by texting and email only, as we are increasingly inclined to do.
  • The word “opportunity” is translated from one of two common Koine words relating to time: chronos and kairos. The first is more “clock time,” and is the root of our word “chronometer” (literally, time-measure). The latter, our word here, is more about opportunity. So the text isn’t suggesting when one has “time” to “do good,” but more about “the opportunity” of so doing.
  • Now let’s deal with “everyone,” which translates a very very common Koine word “pas” (or “pan,” both mean the same, but the slight spelling difference is like our indefinite article forms “a” and “an,” just two ways of ‘saying’ the same thing). “Pas” (“pan”) means “all,” but “all” is always bounded by context. “Pas” rarely, if ever, means “all” in the sense of “universality,” namely every and any possible example. Because this verse is in the concluding chapter of Galatians it is especially important to consider what has been expounded in the prior chapters and verses. Shown in the top right of the above pdf is Gal. 3:27-29 which captures the essence of Galatians on this matter, namely: that the distinctions we may naturally or historically or religiously have had (were we Galatians at that time, or behaving as such, presently), has been wiped out because, in Christ, we are “all” one, as children of Abraham, who is now the father of both a racial line of people and the people of faith in Messiah (Christ).
  • The particular emphasis of doing good is on the “household of faith.” In our culture, “household” has a wide semantic range and much of it does not overlap the the root meaning of the Koine word from which it was translated (oikeios). As shown in the definition given on the pdf, the word strongly suggests an intimate familial relationship, usually multi-generational, living together, and frequently working together particularly in agricultural or ranching contexts. Metaphorically, then, it pictures all of us of the faith of Christ, identified with Him (“baptized” from 3:27) being of one family, regardless of where we may put our heads down at night.
  • Finally, let us consider the important word “do,” or actually two different Koine words in Gal. 6:9-10 for “do:” poieo (vs. 9) and ergazomai (vs. 10). The base definitions for each word is as shown. Here is perhaps a useful way of understanding the distinction of meaning. If a football coach were to ask one of his lineman what he assignment was or is on some particular play, the lineman could simply say: “block x,” where “x’ might be the defensive end or tackle. “Block x” would be “poieo,” namely what is to be “done.” Alternatively, the lineman could have replied: “fight with x, and push x with all the energy I’ve got to make an opening for our running back.” That would be the word “ergazomai,” (and which makes for a happy football coach). The root of this word is “ergon” (as shown) and from this in modern times was chosen as a unit system of energy (the “erg”). It carries the weight of action, movement, making something happen, bringing into existence, at the cost of some effort, perhaps a lot of effort.

Stewards, Stewardship

The D&P translation has multiple occasions to use the word “steward” (see three examples on D&P p. 37). This was their translation of Calvin’s Latin word “administrati,” obviously related to “administrator.” The ESV translation of the Calvin cited text of 1 Peter 4:10 also has the word “steward.”

Well, “steward” is not an everyday term these days and may even be misconstrued by the first syllable “stew” might be expressing inner frustration (which is not the case). Below is the etymology of “steward” that will be helpful to our understanding:

Old English stiward, stigweard “house guardian, housekeeper,” from stig “hall, pen for cattle, part of a house” (see sty (n.1)) + weard “guard” (from Proto-Germanic *wardaz “guard,” from PIE root *wer- (3) “perceive, watch out for”). …The sense of “officer on a ship in charge of provisions and meals” is first recorded mid-15c.; extended to trains 1906. This was the title of a class of high officers of the state in early England and Scotland, hence meaning “one who manages affairs of an estate on behalf of his employer” (late 14c.). Meaning “person who supervises arrangements” at a meeting, dinner, etc., is from 1703.

Source here:

An interlinear pdf of 1 Peter 4:10 is directly below:

Let us observe the following with regard to the above:

  • The passage has the root word “chairo” twice, once in the third row, “has received a GIFT,” and once in the bottom row, “of God’s varied GRACE.” This text is telling us that what we have received, a gift, is what we freely give to others, grace (a gift expressed freely, without cost, or drama). That is what “stewards” of God’s gifts do.
  • We have here two words relating to to exercise or giving of God’s gifts: “diakoneo” and “oikonomos” (one a verb used as noun, translated “serve,” and the other a noun, “stewards”). The first word is clearly the origin of our word “deacon,” a traditionally used word in churches. The second word is another form of “oikos” which we considered in Gal. 6:10 above, but here combined with “nomos” having to do with distribution as shown in the definition of the above pdf. These two words together give us the sense of what we are to do with whatever has been given to us on behalf of the body of Christ.
  • Although in the present culture of local church assemblies, the word “deacon” is freighted with honor, organization chart priority, importance. One is thus ‘elevated’ to become a “deacon” in our modern times. As shown in the definition above, that is not the basic meaning. On the contrary, it is closer to being designated servant such as a “table waiter.” It is a humble position of a servant of the provision of God’s gifts, in this context.

Our studies in Week #7 are here:

Calvin’s Little Book, Week #5

Here we will begin this week’s session on D&P p. 28, beginning with “In another place…” which was identified by Calvin as Sec. 3.

Key Verses from the Bible

The Biblical texts that are cited in D&P Sec.s 3 and 4 are attached below, together with the key texts from Ch 1, and Ch 2, Sec.s 1 and2:

Image of God

As discussed below, we continue to update the separate page on the “Image” / “Imitation” of God, located here:

Titus 2:11-14

Given below is the text Calvin uses to begin this section, Titus 2:11-14 (shown here in the ESV) below:

11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

Titus 2:11-14 (ESV)

Calvin makes reference of two “obstacles” to our expressing the model of the Christian life, that being the image of God: (1) “our natural inclination toward ungodliness,” and (2) our “worldly desires that see to ensure us all the more.”

Ungodliness

Calvin here uses two key words translated by D&P as “superstition” and “contends” with respect to our natural response against godliness.

Superstition

Calvin’s Latin original has indeed the word superstition, specifically: “superstitiones.” Clearly our English word is a transliteration of such Latin original; however, it does not mean in English what it meant in Latin at the time of Calvin. So let’s dig a little with Calvin on this.

The Latin word comes from its root of “superstare,” made up from two further roots “super” and “stare,” both of which look familiar to our English reading eyes but, alas, these roots mean something different than we expect, and the difference is important. “Super” in Latin means “over” in the sense of “on top of” or “above.” So this is close to how we use the term in cases like “Superman,” but not in the sense of “superior” or something really great as in high value. “Stare” in Latin means “to stand,” deriving almost directly from the ancient language word (Proto Indo-European PIE) root. So “superstition” at the time of Calvin’s writing was holding to (standing on) a position (perspective, worldview) superior (over) “the fear of God.” Such “superstition” is fundamentally in opposition to any such fear of God, or “fear of the Lord” which phrase occurs 28 times in the NKJV, in addition to “fear of God” occurring 10 times.

So, we have two big ideas that stand in opposition: “superstition” and “fear of” God or the Lord. Which one is primary? And, so what? From the above deeper dive on “superstition” we should be able to recognize that as Calvin used the term it is about a person’s claim of personal sovereignty above the alternative which is a person’s utter humility, “fear,” confronted by the realization of a Holy, Sovereign, Creator-God and my rebellion by nature and will in violation of my Creator’s Will, and to Whom I am presently and eternally accountable. Calvin is observing, what the Scriptures clearly teach in many places, that all us, by nature, choose self-sovereignty under which God is (by our deranged judgment) in subjection to us. To cohere such an perverted view (and it is literally “perverted” as the word means to “turn away”) requires all manner of mental gymnastics and fabrication such as: “this is how I feel about X, and since God made me, and God is basically love love love, what I feel must be morally right and even praiseworthy in God’s eyes,” or “if God even exists, He, or She, or It, relinquished any rightful claim on me, as I am a sovereign after all, so if it feels right to me, it is right for me, and it is not the business of anyone else, even God…if there is such a thing…and even if there is, such a thing then on Judgment Day I will tell God exactly this and God will have to agree with me.” “Superstition” as Calvin uses the term, is about me ruling the universe of God’s Creation by whatever powers and opinions I may have about whatever I am thinking or feeling.

Contends

The second word translated by D&P on p. 28 is “contends,” as “anything that contends seriously with the fear of God.” This word “contends” translates Calvin’s Latin “pugnat.” As one can almost guess, “pugnat” comes from the Latin root that means “to fight” particularly by hand to hand combat. (We do get the English word “pugilist” which means a person who fights with their fists, i.e. a boxer, and comes from a PIE root that means “five” as in reference to five digits of the hand). So the image being conveyed by Calvin, which again captures the essence of many places in Scripture, of all of us actively fighting even down to our last ‘weapon,’ our fists, against God, something like the raised fist of a political or social protestor or the expression of road rage against another driver. It captures that propitious night on the boundary of the Promised Land, when Jacob was returning from a 14-year exile and meeting up with his brother Esau who he had cheated and fled. We learn from Scripture that on that last night, an angel of the Lord appeared to Jacob, in a parallel situation to his 14-year earlier experience of “Jacob’s Ladder” when he was leaving the Promised Land in flight. That appearance and direct apprehension of a pre-incarnate Christ was not a lovely fireside chat, as part of a “welcome home” from God Himself. On the contrary, it was an all night warfare whereby Jacob fought against God, as was his nature from birth, and ours too. At the morning, God did two things: He permanently disabled Jacob’s hip creating a lifelong limp as a sign, and, as another sign, He gave Jacob a new name: Israel, which means one who contends with God (“-el”). It is interesting that when the nation of Jacob’s descendants was ‘re-born’ in the Promised Land in May 1948, their first President (David Ben-Gurion) chose the name “Israel” for that nation we know by that name today; until the Tribulation when many then will become Messianic Jews, that nation continues to contend against their Messiah.

Self-Denial

So, putting “contends” with “superstition” we get the essence of a very important realization: we, by nature, put ourself above God as self-sovereign and from such position engage in direct combat with God about everything: God’s justice (the doctrine of Theodicy), God’s (rightful) claim to Sovereignty, His judgment on our thoughts and acts of sin by our nature and choice, the inadequacy of His provision and even what we may perceived is His proper / unjust management of the universe.

This total inversion of rightful perspective brings us all face-to-face with what must be our proper response, namely: self-denial. This has been recognized by believers as the most-difficult and most-necessary of first steps, again derived from ‘digging’ into the Scriptures. A more elegant term, and the basis of much ancient writing, is self-abnegation, often just “abnegation.”

Hence, in Calvin’s Little Book, he immediately follows his opening chapter of “the call” (summarized previously by the five-finger charts presented in Week #3), by two chapters on self-denial, Ch 2 and 3, subsequently comprising the major portion of the Little Book. No work is more difficult, nor does it ever end (in this life). Hence, Jacob, now Israel, had his “cross” to bear which would bless him as an ever present reminder of the price of life in the Promised Land, and God’s Sovereign control of same.

Greek Annotated Interlinear of Titus 2:11-14

A pdf personally annotated for deeper thinking about this important text used by Calvin is given below:

Our studies in Week #6 are here:

Calvin’s Little Book Week #4

Calvin Chapter 2, Sec.s 1-2: Self-Denial

In Calvin’s archaeology, what follows The Call of Chapter 1 is “self-denial.” In the below text we will examine the first two sections of Chapter 2. In the D&P translation, Sec. 1 begins on p. 21, and Sec. 2 on p. 24 extending to the bottom of p. 27. So we will cover pp 21-27 of Chapter 2.

Significance of Self-Denial

Why is self-denial so essential, or essential at all, to our response to The Call? In short, the vandalized fallen man within us has not been eradicated, nor will he be entirely in this life. Calvin makes that point explicitly in the closing sentence of Ch 1. So we have within us a force of no legitimate power but, apparently, still enabled deceptive force, that must be set aside, as part of our day-to-day walk.

There is a further key point, namely: that to be the “image” / “imitator” of God it cannot be the old, fallen life, now doomed to death, and who is utterly incapable of doing so; it must be the regenerated life of God which, in some way can be obscured by the activity of the vandalized old one. Perhaps this metaphor helps. Consider a painting being constructed on a huge wall. It is incomplete both as to content but also as to time in that it is expressing a storyline in time along with an in-depth perspective of a state of being along the way of time. But some evil actor has an array of huge panels of his own ‘art’ that he seeks to slide in front of the wall painting as an obscurant. Some of these panels obscure only parts of the wall, some obscure all of the wall but they are semi-translucent so they create two images, the fuzzy panel and the painted wall behind it. Self-denial is about making such obscuring panel translucent, literally translucent so that what is visible is the wall with the Artist’s work, so far as it has been done. Further, the wall painting of the Artist is not a solitary thing. The wall is infinite in scope that portrays God’s work everywhere in space-time and outside of space-time throughout all of God’s Creation, not just the “me,” though in some way and place, the “me” is only the tiniest part of that infinite painting, but is in some way relevant to God’s revelation. And so, de-obscuration is an important part of the response to The Call.

The Image of God

As linked in previous week’s studies, we have been considering the scope of what the “image” of God should be understood to be. The enumerated section at the end of the attached is here:

Key Verses Cited in these Sections of Ch 2

A passage list of the key verses covered in previous weeks and the verses cited in Chapter 2, Sec.s 1-2 to be reviewed this week is given below:

Romans 12 Renewing Your Mind

An interlinear of the important opening verses of Romans 12 is shown below. Each word is shown by six rows:

  1. The top row is the ESV translation of the Koine Greek mss, in the so-called “reverse interlinear” format, meaning that the word order follows the ESV translation, not the word order of the Koine mss.
  2. The second row is the Koine “lemma” from which the ESV word shown has been translated. The “lemma” is the Koine uninflected form of the mss word, commonly known as the “dictionary form,” as one would look up the English word “running” by searching for “run” (the lemma of its inflected counterpart, running).
  3. The third row is the English transliteration of the Koine lemma, making the word more readily pronounceable by someone unfamiliar with the Greek alphabet.
  4. The fourth row is the “CODE” provide by Logos Bible Software that enables an understanding of what is, in the original mss, the morphology (form) the lemma shown, giving it’s role / purpose in the respective verse. So, for example, the ESV word “appeal” translates “parakaleo” (literally, called or standing alongside) which in the mss its form told a Koine reader that it was a verb (V), in the present tense (P), active voice (A), in the indicative mood (I), and first person singular (1S). A fuller explanation of such CODE is given elsewhere on this website and by Logos Software.
  5. The fifth line is the Strong’s G number (G because it is a Greek word). This can be used in a search engine like Google to obtain a full definition and a concordance of all the other occurrences of such word.
  6. The sixth and final line is the Louw Nida number (LN). LN is a special kind of Greek lexicon in which words that do a common job are grouped into families. Here, “parakaleo” is part of Group 33, and subgroup 168. Again, doing an internet search reveals that such grouping collects similar Greek words relating to asking for something, earnestly, with propriety.

Of particular note with respect to the above portrayal of Romans 12:1-2 are the two verbs in verse 2: [not to be] conformed and [but to be] transformed. From the CODE we see that both verbs have an “M” in the fourth letter position. This designates that the respective verb is in the imperative mood, that of a command / reasonable expectation. In contrast, the verb “appeal” discussed above from verse 1, which is in the indicative mood, the ordinary expression of a fact, or existing condition. So the contrast given for us is that Paul toward the Roman letter recipients, and us, is indeed standing alongside us with an appeal, which such appeal is for us to do two, related acts: be un-conformed [to this world] and transformed [by the renewal of the mind].

Further, these two commands are introduced by an important little Koine Greek word, kai, which the ESV translators elected to ignore, and connected by another Greek word alla commonly translated “but” as shown. The contrast conveyed by the word alla is straightforward, namely: the two commands of being that follow are opposites, on the one hand away from the world and on the other hand of, or in a sense toward, one’s mind. The word kai is commonly translated “and,” though it often (in my view) means “and” not in the sense of “plus” (as one would say peanut butter and jelly) but “and” in the sense of “unto.” In that sense, this makes better sense of the point of verse 2 following the last phrase of verse 1, namely that our spiritual worship is unto something, namely the twin imperative verbs shown above.

One other point, is the Koine word translated “world.” It is not the expected Koine word “kosmos” which commonly is translated “world,” or even the Koine word “gay” or “gayce” (for earth). Here it is the word “aion,” from which we get the English word “eon,” and more typically is translated “age” or “time” or even “era.” So the command not to be conformed is with reference to whatever is the spirit of the time and place in which God’s child finds himself.

Doctrine & Piety: Balance and Priority

A common Christian tension is between getting “doctrine” (Bible truths) well understood, to some point of maturity, though it is never a final, completed state, and, on the other hand, living uprightly in the eyes of God, commonly termed piety.

The obvious error is to claim one, or the other, doctrine or piety, as all that matters. However, obvious such error, it has been a regular form of error over the ages and in our own lives depending in part on our inclinations.

It may not be totally clear in Calvin’s Little Book the importance he gives to doctrine because, as discussed previously, the five chapters of such Little Book are taken from chapters 6 through 10 of his Book 3 of his 80-chapter Institutes (systematic theology). So, the Little Book is primarily about Christian Living, which one can think of as piety. But it comes after a significant overview of doctrine and continues after the final chapter from which the Little Book was taken out of Institutes Book 3. So Calvin indeed held to the view that doctrine was not optional, and, further, I think it fair to say that he understood doctrine at a fundamental level as primary, though not the end all (hence the Little Book itself).

An excellent lecture by Richard Reeves on the Puritans observes this same balance and order, as was clearly present at the time of the Reformation and the century after as reflected by numerous writings of the Puritans. His introductory lecture on the Puritans was part of a Ligonier program and is available here (and highly recommended). In a second lecture on the Puritans he introduces one notable individual, Richard Sibbes, and two of his books: Bruised Reed, and The Tender Heart (links shown to freely available texts). This second Richard Reeves lecture is available here and is also highly recommended.

A large collection of Sibbes’s inspirational observations is given here:

Our Week #5 studies are here:

Calvin’s Little Book Week #3

Reviewing the Five Key Words (Themes) from p. 3ff

As discussed in Weeks #1 & 2, Calvin introduces five key ideas that will be essential for us to put the whole book together:

  1. The Holiness of God
  2. A Model for living the Christian Life
  3. Life (Spiritual Life that we have by virtue of God’s Work of Regeneration)
  4. Image (that we are to be the image of God)
  5. The Philosophers

An Illustrative Graphic of the Five Key Words

Below are a series of graphics that are given as a potential aid in thinking about the significance and interaction of the above five key words.

Graphic 1: The Hand Where The Mind Meets the World

Shown below is the hand representing the expression of life, where the mind, the inner being (soul), encounters the world, expresses life. Each of the five key words is used to designate each digit of one’s hand. The digit known as the thumb (which we’ll also term a finger) represents the “Holiness of God” which Calvin refers to by his word “righteousness.” Calvin’s claim, from the very first sentence of the Little Book is that God has called us to a life in agreement with His “righteousness.” I understand that to mean something much deeper than merely than God’s character is without unrighteousness, that is He is absent any flaw or even sin, hence the use below of the “Holiness of God,” as discussed in Week #2.

The index finger is used to represent Calvin’s idea of a “model” for the mature Christian life. As described in previous weeks by “model,” Calvin means a framework, an always-oriented heading, even one’s fundamental purpose of being. The Latin word from which we get “index” (indicare) means a discloser or discoverer, which is appropriate for a life-model. As will be discussed, such model is discovery not (self-) design. (When we get to Ch 5, the D&P translation will express the idea of a “model” as a “rule” of life).

The middle and ring finders are as shown “life” and “image” where life in D&P was expressed as “God’s work” translating Calvin’s Latin word for “regeneration,” and “image” is the key word “imitators” of Ephesians 5:1 cited by Calvin as what one’s life should reflect. The most important reality of a Christian’s life is that he or she has God’s very “life” itself, regenerated from one’s fallen condition of death. Such is the work of God, not of ourselves. “Image” captures better the idea than “imitators” which tends to convey the idea of fakery. The idea of “image” is that we reflect God in some way into space-time, genuinely but not as to His unique God-attributes such as omniscience and omnipotence. “Image” goes back to the very beginning of God’s Creation pre-Fall in Genesis 1:25-26 wherein man was made in such form, and the Great Vandal of Genesis Ch 3 drew Eve, then Adam, away toward the lure of their own self image by the great lie…”you shall be as gods” (Gen. 3).

Finally, the pinky finger represents Calvin’s repeated reference to “philosophers.” Calvin’s century (the 16th) was rife and riddled during a period of time referred to by historians as “the Renaissance” (ca. 1350 – 1700). Among the many features of such period was the rebirth of interest and passions of ancient Greek philosophy and ethics (Aristotle, the Stoics, etc.) and other historic texts. So Calvin lived between two worlds: the strong, centralized Roman Catholic religious and political system on the one hand, and the “philosophers” make independent claims of ultimate reality and meaning of life, metaphorically surrounded as it were by both the forces of Rome and Athens.

Graphic 2: The Life of the Hand of Life Comes from Outside the Hand

Graphic 1 above would be inoffensive in almost every part of our present culture, primarily because it suggests that the hand is merely the agent of self-determined, self-measured life which, may, as it chooses, take note of various deeper realities as shown by the identification on the digits. That graphic suggests that the pen writes one’s own story, as in the song “I did it [or am doing it] my way” or Walt Whitman’s famous poem, “Song of Myself,” either of which could be the theme song of our culture. But Graphic 1 is not the picture given to us by the Scriptures, nor by Calvin.

Below, in Graphic 2, shows passages of Scripture from the Upper Room Discourse where the Lord is in communion with His Apostles, that give advance notice that His physical absence will be transitioned to the inner being of our regenerated life through the ministry of “The Helper” (also translated “Comforter” or “Advocate”), clearly referencing the Holy Spirit God (not a force, but a Being of the Trinity).

Graphic 3: Using “TULIP” as a Summary of the Five Key Words

As shown below, we can remember this imagery by the use of TULIP, though a different form and context than the well-known TULIP derived from the answers from the Council of Dort (1620) to the false claims (so called “remonstrances”) of the followers of Jacob Arminius (1609).

Graphic 4: The Call of the Philosophers is Always with Us

Scriptures give us many examples of “philosophers’ giving messages opposite to the revelation of God. (Recall that “philosopher” does not mean “professor” or some ivory tower type, but, literally from the meaning of the word, a lover of wisdom, and in the context of Calvin’s Little Book a form of ‘wisdom’ that is independent of, and actually contrary to, the Wisdom of God).

Walk in the Spirit

A common word used in the New Testament to describe our life is “walk,” and a particular form of “walk” as in “walk around” or more literally “a circumscribed walk,” that is a looping walk whereby one returns after some journey of a day back to home. The word so translated is shown below in the Epistle to the Ephesians:

Image of God

What is the pen (shown in the graphic above) writing and who is doing the writing? The “who” is easiest to answer though complex to experience, namely: it is God Who is at work in us both to will and to do, though it seldom feels that way, and in practical terms is primarily obscured by “us” and our agendas of life. The “what” is even more difficult to discern. We like to think that such is our prosperity, flourishing, including health, wealth, happiness, etc.. But God is painting a much bigger picture that has a deeper version of flourishing in mind.

Our thoughts on being the “image” of God, the picture being portrayed, is here:

Verses Cited by Calvin in Chapter 1, Sec. 1-2

The below chart includes the verse cited by Calvin in the Beveridge translation (1845) and in the D&P translation we have been following:

Verses from Calvin Ch 1, Sec 3

Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones (MLJ)

Martyn Lloyd Jones (MLJ) taught the Epistle to the Romans over a period of some 13 years, ending in 1968, at the church in London where he was senior minister. There are many wonderful messages, all available at no cost at the website established to preserve such teaching. Of particular relevance here is his message on the consequences of sin from Romans Ch 7 as to making us utterly powerless not only to self-save (as to regeneration) but also as to self-sanctification. A link to that message is here:

Week #4 of our study resources for Calvin’s Little Book is available here: