PRO T EST ANT REF 0 R M E D

Transcription

1 m'l PRO T EST ANT REF 0 R M E D THE 0 LOG CAL J 0 URN A L Ths Jounal s publshed and dstbuted n lmted quanttes, at no chage, by the Theologcal School of the Potestant Refomed Chuches. nteested pesons desng to have the names on the malng lst should addess the Edto, Pof. H. Hanko, at the addess of the school, 4949 vanest Ave., S.W., Gandvlle, Mchgan THEOLOGCAL SCHOOL of the PROTESTANT REFORMED CHURCHES Gandvlle, Mchgan Apl, Volume X, No. 2

2 ' l TABLE OF CONTENTS. l F Edtoal Notes v Pof. H. Hanko Exegess of James 5:13-20 (3) Pof. H. Hanko The Smplcty of God's Wll and the "Fee Offe. u Pof. H. C. Hoeksema The Place of Women n the Chuch Pof. R. D. Decke ' l - -

3 F. ' l l EDTORAL NOTES -- Pof. H. Hanko Fom tme to tme we eceve coespondence fom ou Jounal eades n whch you expess you opnon of the vaous atcles whch. appea. Sometmes you wte questons concenng the deas expessed. We appecate such coespondence and pomse to answe those lettes whch ask fo an answe. Let us hea fom you. * * * * * n ths ssue we have somethng unque. The exegess of the mpotant passage n James 5 smmpleted n ths ssue. Pof Decke s contnung hs sees on the petnent queston of the place of women n the Chuch. You may look fo addtonal atcles on ths subject. Pof. Hoeksema s begnnng a new sees on the queston of the smplcty of God's wll. Ths sees wll be dealng wth the vexng queston of the legtmacy of the dstncton between God's socalled hdden wll and evealed wll; o, as t s sometmes called: the dstncton between God's wll of decee and God's peceptve wll. Ths dstncton s expecally mpotant wth espect to the whole queston of the geneal offe of salvaton. * * * * * Pof. Decke wll be lectung shotly on the queston of the place of women n the Chuch n the Gand Rapds aea. f you lve wthn dvng dstance of Gand Rapds, watch fo announcements and attend ths publc lectue. f you ae not aleady a subscbe to the Standad Beae, you wll want to get ths magazne to ead a sees of atcles on the geneal offe of the gospel. Ths sees s wtten by Rev. Engelsma. You may wte to us fo a subscpton and we wll see to t that you equest gets to the pope offce. 1 l F - v -

4 l l Exegess of James 5:13-20 (3) -- Pof. H. Hanko -- n ou last two Jounal atcles, we pesented a detaled exegess of that mpotant and sgnfcant passage n James 5: We ended ou last atcle wth a dscusson of vs. 16 and ponted out that James s speakng hee patculaly of the elatonshps n whch the sants ve wth each othe n the chuch on eath. These mlatonshps belog to what th Scptues efe to as the communon of the sants. Wthn the communon of the sants the chld of God fnds the cente of hs lfe as a membe of the chuch of ou Lod Jesus Chst. The fellowshp whch he has wth the people of God s one of the geatest blessngs whch he possesses. Nevetheless, although ths fellowshp s ndeed a communon of the sants, the people of God, as long as they lve on the eath, ae stll snnes. And the sns whch the people of God commt ae foces whch wok fo the destucton of the chuch and the destucton of the fellowshp whch the sants have togethe. Just because the Qommunon of the sants s emphatcally a communon of sants, that communon can,contnue as a ealty only n the sphee of holness. Sn woks fo the destucton of these elatonshps because sn destoys ths fellowshp. And t s fo ths eason that James wtes n vs. 16 of chapte 5: "Confess you faults one to anothe, and pay fo one anothe, that ye may be healed. The effectual fevent paye of a ghteous man avaleth much." When the apostle speaks of the fact that the effectual fevent paye of a ghteous man has powe, he means by ths to encouage the people Of God to heed the admonton whch he has just made. The people of God mght be tempted not to pay fo one anothe because they mght have the opnon that paye s useless, o that pehaps paye has no sgnfcance o mpotance as fa as the communon of the sants s concened. But James wants to assue the people of God that paye s not useless and s not n van, but athe that paye wll. always accomplsh that fo whch we ask. We need not fea that ou payes wll neve bng about the desed esult. When we pay fo one anothe, the bond whch untes beleves togethe wll eman stong, and the communon of the sants wll floush. We must not doubt ths, but we must be assued that ou payes wll accomplsh ths goal. * * * * - 1 -

5 l L \ t ' n ths pesent Jounal atcle we ntend to teat the est of ths chapte. Vss. 17 and 18 ae dectly connected wth VB. 16. Vss. 17 and 18 ead as follows: "Elas was a man subject to lke passons as we ae, and he payed eanestly that t mght not an; and t aned not on the eath by the space of thee yeas and sx months. And he payed agan, and the heaven gave an, and the eath bought foth he fut." The apostle tuns now to the example of Eljah and dscusses the example of Eljah n the fst place, to llustate the tuth whch he set foth n the latte pat of vs. 16. And n the second place, t s obvous fom the language whch the apostle uses, that he means to encouage us to pay fo one,otheo Eljah s descbed n the text as a man subject to lke passons as we ae. l The wod n the Geek whch s tanslated by the phase, subject to lke passonsf, (6(.1.0 l o'1ta,ef)<; ), eally means to suffe the same thng as anothel o to suffe n lke manne wth anothe; and theefoe, to have dentcal feelngs o passons as anothe. Eljah s hee descbed theefoe, as beng a man who s smla to us wth espect to ou affectons, feelngs, and passons. The queston qute natually ases: Why does the apostle see ft to emnd us of ths? Why s t necessay fo the text to emphasze the fact that Eljah was lke us n ths espect? The answe s that the text antcpates a possble objecton on ou pat whch we mght ase. Ths objecton whch we mght ase mght take on dffeent foms. On the one hand, we mght oct to the fact that ou payes do not have the knd of powe whch James descbes. And t s n answe to ths objecton that the apostle efes to the example of Eljah. But on the othe hand, we mght also object to the example of Eljah hmself. We mght thnk the example s somewhat elevant. And we mght thnk that the example s somewhat elevant because of the fact that Eljah was a man specally chosen by God fo a geat wok. He was apponted as a pophet n sael. He t l The Geek hz s athe nteestng. t eads, 6HAtU<; flvspw'j:o<; v oloae, lv OlO'1tae, s the pedcate adjectve. v s datve of compason

6 \ l pm l was apponted as a pophet n a tme of geat apostasy. The geate pat of the ecod of Eljah's lfe s found ecoded n Kngs 17, 18, 19, although efeences to hs wok ae found also n late pats of ths book. Fom these passages we lean that Eljah was a man of temendous fath and was one theefoe, who towes above us n many espects.. t s because of the powe of the fath of Eljah and the temendous couage whch he dsplayed n tmes of geat apostasy n the nothen kngdom that we mght be eluctant to compae ouselves wth hm, and we mght be tempted to conclude that the example of Eljah s not a petnent example because he was so much geate than we. We who ae so weak and snful can neve hope to attan to the heght of fath whch Eljah attaned and to the vctoy whch he accomplshed on the summt of Mt. Camel. t s ths objecton whch s answeed by ths sentence. t s tue ndeed, that Eljah was a pophet; but we lean fom the Scptues that n the New Dspensaton all God's people who have the anontng of the Spt of Chst ae also pophets. 2 t s tue ndeed that we ae snful, weak, and fal men who have a daly stuggle wth ou nfmtes and sns; and who often snk n the stuggle. But ths was tue of Eljah as well. We need only look at hm unde the junpe tee wth all hope gone and the pallo of defeat on hs face as he payed to the Lod that he mght de. Lsten to hs btte complant: "t s enough; now, 0 Lod, take away my lfe; fo am not bette than my fathes." Kngs 19:4. t s wth ths n mnd that the apostle emnds us of the fact that Eljah was a man subject to lke passons as we ae. Although ndeed he was a pophet, and although ndeed he was a man of geat fath and couage, nevetheless he was lke us. Hence the queston s not: what was he? o, what ae you and? The queston s: What s the powe of God's gace whch made hm what he was, and whch can and does make us men of fath and men of paye? Hence the example of Eljah s a petnent example deally suted to spu us on n ou callng to pay fo one anothe. 1 2 See e.g., John 2:27; Heb. 8:10,

7 l j The example of Eljah s fst of all the example of hs paye t h at t. mg. h t no- t an. 3 n ode to undestand ths paye of Eljah we must fst of all bng to mnd the occason fo t as t s ecoded fo us n Kngs 17. Wcked Ahab and hs wcked Queen Jezebel fom Phoeneca sat on the thone of sael. These two godless people had nsttuted a peod of teble apostasy. Unde the nfluence of Jezebel, the woshp of Baal, the god of the Phoenecans, had been ntoduced nto sael. The naton tself had been nstucted n the woshp of Baal. Ahab and Jezebel had ted as best they could to eadcate completely the tue woshp of God. They had done ths by kllng God's pophets and by pesecutng God's people so that the chuch was, so to speak, dven undegound. Ths s evdent fom Kngs 18:7-16, whee we ead that Obadah, the stewad n the house of Ahab, had hd a hunded men of the Lod's pophets by 50 n a cave and fed them wth bead and wate. Baal woshp had become the natonal elgon. Unde these ccumstances, Eljah had appeaed on the scene. He appeaed SUddenly fom the egon of Glead clothed n camel's ha and wth an a of teble seousness about hm. One day, unexpectedly, he appeaed on the steps of the palace of Jezeel, and announced to the kng and to all sael: HAs the Lod God of sael lveth, befoe whom stand, thee shall not be dew no an these yeas, but accodng to my wod. 1f Ths was the paye to whch James n hs epstle efes. Ths was the paye whch was answeed and head. Thee ae seveal mpotant thngs about ths paye whch we must obseve. n the fst place, the paye was wthout queston the paye of a man 'ghteous befoe God. James efes, n vs. 16, to the paye of a ghteous man. Eljah was such a ghteous man. 3 The lteal eadng of the text het'e s vey nteestng: xa poceuxn poanuao ou n peak The tanslaton of ths s lteally, "and he ppayed wth a paye n ode that t mght not an." The nfntve, f3pea, s the aost actve nfntve of pexw. t s the atcula nfntve n the gentve case used hee to expess pupose. The dea s theefoe, that Eljah payed by means of a paye wth the pupose n mnd that t mght not an. Ths emphaszes vey stongly not only the content of Eljah'[ paye, but also the eason why he payed

8 l 1 l ( He was a man ghteous because he beleved n the pomse of God and because he epesented n sael God's cause. Hs vey name, whch means, "My God s Jehovah," expessed hs callng n the mdst of the hstocal development of God's covenant. The whole nothen kngdom, led by the example of Ahab and Jezebel and unde the pessue of the pesecuton, shouted, "Ou god s Baal." Aganst the whole naton of sael theefoe, stood Eljah the pophet who by hs vey name sad, lmy God s Jehovah." n the second place, the paye whch Eljah made s a paye n hamony wth the wll of God. We have no knowledge fom the sa ed text tself whethe God actually sent Eljah wth ths message to Jezeel. Most pobably God dd ths, but t makes no essental dffeence. The Scptues ae qute clea on the pont that ths was ndeed the wll of God. n Deuteonomy 28:15 ff., the Lod though the mouth of Hs sevant Moses, spoke of the teble cuses whch would come upon the naton of sael f they followed the ways of dolaty: "But t shall come to pass, f thou wlt not heaken unto the voce of the Lod thy God, to obseve to do al hs commandments and hs statutes whch command thee ths day; that all these cuses shall come upon thee, and ovetake thee. Cused shalt thou be n the cty, and cused shalt thou be n the feld. Cused shall be thy basket and thy stoe. Cused shall be the fut of thy body, and the fut of thy land, the ncease of thy kne, and the flocks of thy sheep... And thy heaven that s ove thy head shall be as bass, and the eath that s unde thee shall be on. The Lod shal. make the an of thy land powde and dust: fom heaven shall t come down upon thee, untl thou be destoyed... And thy cacase shall be meat unto all fowls of the a, and unto the beasts of the eath, and no man shall fay them away." vss ,23,24,26. Eljah knew theefoe, and all sael knew that dolaty and apostasy would nevtably esult n dought and famne and pestlence. n the thd place, even though ths was God's wll to send a dought, the dought was bought about though the paye of Eljah. n othe wods, ths paye of Eljah was essental to that end. n fact, James emnds us that t was so essental that the paye actually effected the dought. n the fouth place, ths paye was a Spt-enegzed paye

9 L "" J fll' l \. t ' m ) Ths also s emphaszed n vs. 16. The paye whch Eljah made whch bought ths dsaste upon the naton was not a paye whch aose n Eljah's own heat. Eljah dd not pesonally want to bng dsaste upon sael and see the naton suffe. He took no delght n seeng cops fal yea by yea, n seeng the cacasses of the cattle stewn upon the felds, n seeng the lades of the people empty, the chlden cyng fo food, wdows pckng up the last stcks fo a last meal befoe they ded, and he caed not to flee to a heathen land thee to be sustaned n the home of a poo wdow woman. All of the naatve concenng Eljah s but a poweful demonstaton of hs love fo the naton and hs pofound concen fo the cause of the nothen kngdom. But he was flled wth a zeal fo the cause of God; and ths zeal pompted hs paye. God had to be shown to be God, and Baal had to be shown to be an dol. The elect had to be saved and the wcked had to be punshed. Ths was hs bunng dese. And anythng whch was necessay to that end had to be done. And fo that he payed. t s fo that eason that the paye had to be answeed because God always seeks the welfae of Hs own cause and the gloy of Hs own Name. But thee s a second paye of Eljah also efeed to n the text: "And he payed agan, and the heaven gave an, and the eath bought foth he fut." Dung the 3 yeas n whch an had not fallen on the eath, Ahab looked n van fo Eljah, fo God had hd Eljah, fst by the book Cheth and then n the home of the wdow of Zaephath outsde of the boundaes of sael. But now suddenly Eljah was back -- on Mt. Camel wth all the naton and all the pests of Baal gatheed thee. t was thee on Mt. Camel that Baal was poved to be a dumb dol to whom all the payes n the wold could be made wthout any success. The taunts of Eljah wee made n utte eanestness. But at the tme of the evenng sacfce n fa-off Jeusalem Eljah, though hs paye, called down fe fom heaven whch fe consumed the sacfce and the alta and the wate wth whch the alta and sacfce had been doused. The esult of ths was that all sael ced out, "Jehovah, He s the God. Jehovah, He s the God." t was at ths pont that Eljah made hs second paye. Whle the pepaatons fo the sacfcal feast wee beng made, Eljah - 6 -

10 t P'O \ ( n m 1 ( l tok hs sevant and went to the edge of Mt. Camel ovelookng the Medteanean Sea to pay. He payed wth hs head bowed down between hs knees. The text n Kngs 18:41-46 eads as follows: "And Eljah sad unto Ahab, Get thee up, eat and dnk; fo thee s a sound of abundance of an. So Ahab went up to eat and to dnk. And Eljah went up to the top of Camel; and he cast hmself down upon the eath, and put hs face between hs knees, And sad to hs sevant, Go up now, look towad the sea. And he went up, and looked, and sad, Thee s nothng. And he sad, Go agan seven tmes. And t came to pass at the seventh tme, that he sad, Behold, thee aseth a lttle cloud out of the sea, lke a man's hand. And he sad, Go up, say unto Ahab, Pepae thy chaot, and get thee down, that the an stop thee not. And t came to pass n the mean whle, that the heaven was black wth clouds and wnd, and thee was a geat an. And Ahab ode, and went to Jezeel. And the hand of the Lod was on Eljah, and he gded up hs lons, and an befoe Ahab to the entance of Jezee1." t was theefoe, though the paye of Eljah, that the eath was wateed and bought foth he futs once agan. Agan thee ae seveal mpotant ponts to be noted. n the fst place ths paye too, was payed by Eljah as a ghteous man who clung to the hope of the pomse of God. n the second place, Eljah payed acoodng to the wll of God. God sent Eljah away fom the home of the wdow of Zaephath wth the expess statement, "1 wll send an upon the eath. 1f Nevetheless, although t was obvous to Eljah that t was God's wll to send an upon the eath, ths an was bought about by means of the paye of Eljah. Eljah's paye was the means by whch God bought about ths end to the dought and famne. So tue s ths that t can be sad that Eljah's paye bought the an. Although t was God's wll to send ths dought and although t was God's wll to end t, ths paye was essental to that end; so essental that James emnds us that Eljah's paye bought t nto beng. n the thd place ths was the wll of God as God's means to accomplsh Hs pupose n the savng of Hs people. Ths was not mmedately evdent to Eljah, and ths explans hs despa unde the junpe tee n the deset south of Judah. But when Eljah fnally aves at Mt. Sna and the t

11 t f'" \ L,M" ) m' ( v l '" ( pm Lod eveals Hmself to hm, the Lod assues Eljah, "Yet have left me seven thousand n sael, all the knees whch have not bowed unto Baal, and evey mouth whch hath not kssed hn. u ( Kngs 19:18) The payes whch Eljah made both to bng the dought and to end t wee theefoe answeed n ode that the Lod mght accomplsh Hs pupose n sael. Ths pupose, t s tue, had a negatve sde to t as well as the salvaton of the chuch. Also at Sna God tells Eljah: tgo, etun on thy way to the wldeness of Damascus: and when thou conest, anont Hazael to be kng ove Sya: And Jehu the son of Nnsh shalt thou anont to be kng ove sael: and Elsha the son of Shaphat of Abelmeholah shalt thou anont to be pophet n thy oom. And t shall come to pass, that hm that escapeth the swod of Hazael shall Jehu slay: and hm that escapeth fom the swod of Jehu shall Elsha slay." Kngs 19: And the pont theefoe, whch s so emphatcally made s ths that wheneve ou payes ae accodng to the wll of God and fo the welfae of the cause of God and the comng of Hs kngdom these payes wll cetanly be answeed, fo God wll use these payes to fect that whch He deses to do fo Hs chuch. Hence, we come to the concluson of the matte. The enegzed paye of a ghteous man s the paye whch we as the people of God must make. That s, we must pay ths paye clngng to the coss of Jesus Chst, fo ou ghteousness s only n the coss. We must pay always accodng to God's wll as that wll s evealed n the Scptues. And we must pay fo that whch s necessay fo the welfae of God's kngdom. As ths apples patculaly to the case at hand, we who lve n the mdst of the household of fath and n the fellowshp of the sants of God n ou own congegatons, n ou denomnatons, and as membes of the chuch of God thoughout the wold, must lve out of a eal zeal and concen fo the cause of God. And that zeal must expess tself n ths, that the wckedness of the dolates of ou jay and the apostasy whch uns the vneyad of Chst be destoyed n ode that the chuch may be gatheed and saved. t s out of that zeal fo the cause of ou Lod Jesus Chst that we must lve wthn the sphee of the chuch of whch we ae membes. But we must emembe all the tme that we have ou own pesonal sns, sns whch hobly affect ou lfe togethe as - 8 -

12 ( l F" (, ('1'll, L t l sants. They can be emoved only though confesson and fogveness. f they ae not emoved, these ae the sns whch tea apat famles, congegatons, chuches, denomnatons and whch make lfe dffcult wthn the sphee of the chuch. Sn always bngs had feelngs, ceates dstust, btteness and stfe. And the esult s that the Spt s geved and paye goes unansweed; fo ou toubles and sns ntude on ou payes, and the lfe of the congegaton and denomnaton suffe. Hence we must always be eady to confess ou sns one to anothe. But we must pay fo each othe. And we must pay fo each othe that we may be healed. And we must pay n the conscousness that the effectual fevent paye of a ghteous man has powe. t comes foth fom the Spt fo t s enegzed by the Spt and t goes to God Who s able to gve us beyond what we ask o thnk. t s the paye fo the mpossble that can and wll be woked fo us by ou heavenly Fathe. t s a paye whch wll heal us and heal the chuch of whch we ae membes, fo the sckness of ou soul shall be healed by the balm of Glead and sns shall be fogven n the blood of Calvay. The weaness of sn and gult wll fade away, the peace of God wll etun, the angels wll sng beyond the stas, and we wll bng ou pases and thanksgvng to ou God. 1 l (Tl "Bethen, f any of you do e fom the tuth, and one convet hm; Let hm know, that he whch conveteth the snne fom the eo of hs way, shall save a soul fom death, and shall hde a multtude of sns. 1 James 5:19,20 The connecton between these two veses and the foegong s evdent. We notced epeatedly n connecton wth ou dscusson of the pevous veses that the apostle was dscussng the elatonshp n whch we lve togethe mutually n the chuch of ou Lod Jesus Chst. Ths s stll the man subject of hs dscusson n vss. 19 and 20. Moe patculaly, the apostle s dscussng those elatonshps whch exst between the sants fom the vewpont of the sns whch ase n ou lves and whch dsupt those elatonshps. n connecton wth that the apostle dscusses n these two veses ou esponsblty towads those who e. n vs. 16 he talked about ou pm (

13 l l 1 L \ t esponsbltes wth espect to ou own sns: 'Confess you faults one to anothe." n ths passage he dscusses ou esponsbltes towads the sns of ou bethen. t s well to emembe at the outset that the ode hee s also pope. t s mpossble fo us to ad ou bothe who has eed fom the tuth and to be an nstument n hs conveson unless we have fst of all confessed ou own sns both to God and to one anothe. We must not evet ths ode by any means. And ndeed we must always ccme to ou bothe to lead hm fom the way of hs sns only afte we have fst of all confessed ou own sns. Ths s not meely good psychology, but ths s absolutely essental f we ae to be the means wheeby ou bothe s saved fom the eo of hs way. n a boade sense howeve) ths passage stands connected to the whole of James' epstle. We notced n an eale atcle that the man thought of ths ente epstle s the contast between a dead fath o a fath whch does not wok, and a lvng fath whch s the bond whch untes the beleve to Chst and whch poduces good woks. n a cetan sense of the wod, the good wok whch s descbed n vss. 13 and 20 s the chefest of all good woks, fo by t we dect ou lvng fath n Chst towads the sptual well-beng of ou fellow sants. To tun then to the text tself, the text speaks of eng fom the tuth. The fgue s that the tuth s consdeed as a path o as a way n whch one must walk. Many, many tmes n Scptue ou lfe s pctued as a path o a way whch we walk fom the moment of ou bth to the moment of ou death. To quote but one example, we ead n Povebs 3:5,6: "Tust n the Lod wth all thne heat; and lean not upon thne own undestandng. n all thy ways acknowledge hm, and he shall dect thy paths." n geneal theefoe, the apostle has n mnd a oad upon whch the people of God walk. t s a oad howeve, whch, n ths case, the people of God walk togethe. t s a clealy maked way. t s a way Whch has a begnnng -- n the lfe of egeneaton. But t s a way whch also has a destnaton -- ou home n heaven. t s a way whch we walk as plgms and stanges n the eath. And t s a way whch ncludes

14 m F' pm m " all the ccumstances and expe.ences of all ou lfe hee n_the mdst of the wold. Moe patculaly, ths way s defned as the way of the tuth. God s Hmself tuth and s the standad of all tuth. Ths tuth s evealed n the Scptues whch s the "oadmap" of the Chstan. The Scptues ae the ule fo all of fath and all of lfe. t s wth ths n mnd, fo example, that the Psalmst confesses n Psalm 119: 105: "Thy wod s a lamp unto. my feet, and a lght unto my path." That tuth of God whch s the oadmap accodng to whch we must walk n ou pathway n lfe has as ts cental featue the gloy of God. Most fundamentally, ou calln all of lfe s to seek the gloy of God. But ths tuth s the lvng confesson of the chld of God. Theefoe the tem efes also to the way of ghteousness whch the chld of God s called to walko Hence, the efeence n the text s not smply to the way of tuth as fa as doctne s concened, but t efes also to the way of tuth as fa as ou ente lfe s concened. t s possble to depat fom that way. The text eads: nlf anyone among you be led away fom the tuth...,,4 The passve dea of the veb, f ths dea s ooect, does not mean that the snne hmself s excused of hs esponsblty. Cetanly, as James expesses t n Chapte 1 of hs epstle, evey man s tempted when he s led away of hs own lust and entced. But the dea s nevetheles that when a man es fom the tuth and stays nto the path of eo, he does so because othe nfluences ae bought to bea upon hm whch lead hm away whe-the that be n doctne o n lfe. Thus the fgue of the text s that of othe oads leadng away fom the way of the tu dl. They ae ways of eo n doctne and n lfe. And because they dvege fom the staght and naow path 4 The veb TAaVen s used hee. Ths veb s the aost passve subjunctve thd peson sngula fomaavaw. t s pobably tue that the veb, ethe' n the actve o n the passve, can have an actve meanng. Stctly speakng, n the actve the" veb means,"to cause to stay," o, "to lead astay"; but t s qute possble that both n the actve and n the passve voce the veb can mean, "to go astay." Nevetheless, we pefe hee the passve meanng. The possblty s suggested by the thd -class condton. The su.bjunctve mood of the veb AavT)ef s n a thd-class condton whch expesses possblty o pobablty

15 m m" " j t ' of the tuth, the longe one walks n these ways the fathe one depats fom the way of tuth. t s mpotant to emembe howeve, that doctne and lfe stand closely elated to each othe. Afte all, all the lfe of the chld of God as he s called to lve to the pase and gloy of God, s ooted n doct'ne. f ths pont s not emembeed, tue elgon s educed to mee moalsm. But because doctne and lfe ae connected to each othe, t follows also that only a study mantenance of sound doctne whch s accodng to the Scptues can esult n a lfe whch s accodng to the law of God. And ndeed, depatue fom tue doctne wll nevtably esult also n depatue fom tue godlness. But because thee s a mutual elatonshp, the opposte s also possble. t s possble n tems of dead othodoxy fo example, fo the chuch to slp nto the eos of woldlness and canalty whle extenally mantanng the tuth. But f these sns of woldl_tness ae not epented of, the nevtable esult wll be coupton also n doctne. Howeve, the fact of the matte s that the way whch leads fom the tuth s a way whch leads to sepaaton fom the communon of the sants and to the loss of Godvs favo and love. Ths s a possblty the lves of all the sants. Ths s stessed by James: f any among you... " Ths s a geneal statement of the apostle and mples -that ths could and does happen to all God's people. And that ths s a possblty fo any of God's people s because of the own snful flesh. Thee s, of couse, the fnal apostasy of the unegeneate, and ths apostasy of the unegeneate, though they be bon and ased wthn the sphee of the chuch, wll neve esult n epentance and confesson and etun to the tuth. That apostasy leads ultmately to evelastng destuctono But thee s also an apostasy of the people of God who n the lves can and sometmes do depa\t fom the tuth ethe n doctne o n lfe. Because the Scptues teach the cetan peseveance of the sants we know that God wll always bng them back. But hee the apostle speaks patculaly of ou esponsbltes towads those who s-tay away. Hence the text speaks of etunng such a one. Thee s hee a mutual esponsblty mpled whch the sants have towads each

16 l F' ' \ : othe. Ths esponsblty s because of the communon of the sants. t s the unty of the body of Jesus Chst. t s the unty of the chuch of Jesus Chst whch s ceated by Chst though Hs suffeng and death and whch s bought nto beng by the soveegn and effcacous opeaton of the Holy Spt. Ths unty wought by the Spt s a unty of one fath and one hope and one callng. Ths unty s a pecous gft of gace. Thus, thee s an effect upon ths unty when one of the membes of the body sns. We ae not alone n lfe, but we stand connected wth all of God's people. We ae one n such a way that ou lves touch the lves of all the othe sants. We cannot escape t, no ndeed would we want to f we could. t s a gft to be eceved wth thanksgvng. But the fact of the matte s nevetheles, that when one of the membes of the body sns, ths sn offends the est of the body, ceates a beach n the communon, and has ll effects on the fellowshp of the people of God. And t s because of ths that we have an oblgaton ove aganst the snne, We must emembe that n the fnal analyss only God can estoe the eng snne. We can neve do ths. We can neve do ths n the fst place because estoaton nvolves conveson. And conveson nvolves the change of heat and mnd whch manfests tself n soow fo sn and whch esults n a fleeng to the coss of Jesus Chst fo fogveness. These thngs ae mattes of the deepest heat, and we ae unable by anythng we do to each nto the heat of ou fellow sants and alte the heats o bng about the necessay change whch esults n epentance and conveson. Only God can do ths, and only God can do ths by the soveegn and esstble opeaton of Hs Spt. That opeaton must also be soveegn and effcacous because we ouselves ae snful. f we stay away fom the path of the tuth t s because of ou own sns. And ou own sns whch set us aganst God and aganst Hs tuth ae sns whch ase out of ou own depaved flesh. We ae unable to effect such conveson even n ouselves apat fom the gacous opeaton of the Holy Spt. And t s exactly fo all of these easons too, that the apostle says n vs. 16: lpay fo one anothe." Unless we pay fo one anothe we can neve expect to heed the admonton of ths text. When we pay fo one anothe we humbly confess that only God can change the heat and bng the snne to epentance

17 m,l F" F'" po Yet all of ths does not mean that we st n ou lvng oom n ou ockng chas payng fo ou fellow sants who walk n the ways of sn and dong nothng else about t. All the sants of God have mutual callngs n ths egad. And ths s because God s pleased n Hs gace to use us. He uses Hs Wod to bng to epentance; and t s that Wod of God whch we must bng. Ths s the esponsblty of all the sants towads each othe. The objecton could concevably be ased that the esponsbltes fo etunng a snne fom the eo of hs ways ests upon the offcebeaes n the chuch of Jesus Chst and patculaly upon the eldes. And t s tue that the eldes ae apponted n the chuch of Chst as those who ule n the Name of Chst, and theefoe, as those who execse Chstan dscplne wthn the sphee of the chuch. They ae called to the offce by Chst Hmself and gven the powe of -the Wod of God whch Wod of God alone s able to estoe the snne. Nevetheless, ths does not alte the fact that all the sants mutually have also such a esponsblty. The esponsblty s thes as membes of the chuch of Chst. They ae able o pefom ths wok only n connecton wth the chuch of Chst, so that, ogancally connected to that chuch and unde the Wod themselves, they ae able to bng that Wod n such a way that tha Wod s used by God to estoe the snne fom hs sn. Hence the callng that comes to each membe of the chuch of Jesus Chst s the callng to follow the snne nto the path n whch he has stayed, take hm by the hand, and lead hm back. But the powe to do ths s always and only the powe of the Wod of God and of paye. Although the text does not specfcally go nto ths matte, t s appaent fom the est of the Scptues what ou manne must be. n the fst place we ae called to convet a snne fom the eo of hs way only by means of the Wod of God whch s ou ule of fath and lfe and whch s the powe of ou salvaton. Neve must we ely upon the wods of men, Neve must we make use of vaous psychologcal technques o vaous methods of counselng. Neve must we n any espect ely upon the powe of agumentaton o put ou tust n the convncng weght of ou agument. The Wod of God

18 F" pm. F f"" F'l J \ s the only means whch wll eve estoe such a snne. n the second place, we must estoe such a snne by pontng to the coss as the supeme evelaton of the tuth as t s n God and as the powe of atonement and fogveness. Thee s no othe way back fom eo than the way of confesson of sn and epentance and soow, fo thee s no othe waymck than the way of the coss of ou Lod Jesus Chst. n the thd place we must always do ths n humlty. We must nevesume ove aganst the snne a hole-than-thou atttude, but we must always go n the full conscousness that we can and do also stay away. And n ths way we must do all we can to tun the snne fom hs sn and be sue that we do not send hm to the coss but that we go hand n hand wth the snne to Calvay that we may kneel togethe at the foot of the coss and fnd fogveness. When God s pleased to use us to convet a snne fom the eo of hs ways then we may know that we have saved a soul fom death and that a multtude of sns ae hdden. n geneal, thee ae a couple of thngs to notce concenng ths. n the fst place, the Roman Catholc chuch has an eoneous ntepetaton of ths vese. The common ntepetaton n Roman Catholc ccles s that the efeence s to the convete, not to the conveted. The dea s theefoe, that f we estoe a snne, we save ou own soul and cove ou own sns. That s, by beng the means wheeby the snne s estoed we gan to ouselves cetan wok-ghteousness met whch wll ad n the payment of the debt of ou own sns. Ths s n hamony wth the ente theoy of wok-met as poposed by the Roman Catholc chuch. But ths dea s not coect; the efeence s to the conveted snne. n the second pla8e, we must emembe that we ae not always successful n tunng a snne fom the eo of hs way. Ths also s emphatcally suggested n the text. n the latte pat of vs. 19 we ead: "and one convet hm." The way ths s fomulated n the Geek means that the possblty only s suggested. 5 t s possble ' : 5 The constucton hee s also a thd-class condton. The wod eo. v belongs not only wth 'TCAU VT)Sf, but belongs also wth e'tc o'tp ljtn ento'tp n s also the aost actve subjunctve thd peson sngula fomtcpw. And the subjunctve mood of the veb s because the ente constucton s a thdlass condton suggestng possblty

19 \ ' t. ( ' t pm l P'l'1, pl1 pm j J'1"l 1, ' \: that the snne contnues to go astay n spte of what we do. t must then be emembeed that also ths s accodng to God's pupose, and that ultmately ths s poof that those who go astay ae not eally of the chuch. Ths s the tuth whch the apostle John expesses n hs fst epstle, chapte 2:19: "They went out fom us, bu they wee not of us; fo f they had been of us, they would fave no doubt/contnued wth us: but'tthey went out, that they mght be made manfest that they wee not all of us." But then too the blood of the snne wll not be equed of ou hands. The ponts whch ae mentoned n vs. 20 ae ntended to seve as an ncentve to the sants to fulfll ths callng. n the fst place, he who convets the snne fom the eo of hs way saves a soul fom death. The wod "snne l1 s used hee because the wod ndcates, "one who msses the mak. The whole lfe of the chld of God must be dected towads the goal of God's gloy. When a man walks n the ways of eo, whethe that be n doctne o n lfe, he walks n a way whch s not dected towads the goal of the gloy of God but whch s dected towads some othe goal of sn whateve that goal may be. Ths mssng of the mak theefoe, becomes evdent fom hs walk n the way of eo. t s a way theefoe whch s n contast to the way of the tuth whch leads to heaven. As we sad befo only God can tun a snne fom the eo of hs way. Hs gace and the effcacous opeaton of Hs Spt ae ndspensable. Nevetheless, God s pleased to use us n ths callng; hence the emphass of James. Because God uses us t can coectly be sad that we have saved a soul fom death. t s exactly be-. cause we ae only nstuments n the hand of God howeve that we must always pefom ths callng n the conscousness of ou complete dependence upon God. But when God s pleased to use us and the snne etuns fom the eo of hs way, the snne s tuned fom a way of eo whch leads to hell. And t s fo that eason ndeed that a soul s saved fom death. Ths s a wondeful thng because then the congegaton s healed and peace and unty s once agan estoed n the chuch of Chsto See vs. 16. Even the angels n heaven ejoce accodng to the paables of ou Lod ecoded n Luke 15. How much moe then does not the congegaton as well ejoce when a snne s tuned fom hs ways and a soul s saved fom But p::

20 f'l'm F" l \ ị death. Secondly howeve, the apostle gves also ths added ncentve that f the snne s tuned fom the eo of hs way a multtude of sns s coveed. Most pobably the plual, "sns", s used hee because walkng n the way of eo always nvolves many othe sns. One sn leads to anothe and the way of eo s the way whch s flled wth evey manne of sn both n doctne and n lfe. The dea s emphatcally that the sns of the snne ae coveed. Ths does not mean that the chuch smply ovelooks these sns o wnks at these sns and makes beleve that these sns do not exst. Neve can econclaton be accomplshed n the chuch of Chst n such a way. But these sns ae coveed n such a way that they cease to exst as fa as the elatonshps whch exst between the sants ae concened. When the snne s tuned fom the eo of hs way these sns ae foeve hdden and fogotten. Ths s qute dffeent fom that whch so often happens n the chuch of Jesus Chst whee the sns of the sants becomes the subject fo choce gossp and whee these sns ae shouted fom the housetops and ae spead lke wldfe by means of the telephone. Rathe, these sns ae coveed n the sght of God. They ae, though the way of epentance and fogveness, fogotten and cast nto the sea of evelastng fogetfulness. Ths s ndeed the thought whch the apostle has stessed thoughout ths ente secton. But at the same tme they ae coveed also wthn the chuch of Jesus Chst. They exst no longe. And he who tuns a snne fom the eo of hs ways s the one who s nstumental also n coveng ths multtude of sns. When ths happens the fellowshp of the sants s once agan estoed. What an appopate way fo the apostle to close hs epstle"

21 The Smplcty Of Godts Wll and the "Fee Offe" - Pof. H. c. Hoeksema - l \ m pm -n n ths and futue atcles, the Lod wllng, we popose to study the doctne of the smplcty of' the wll of God fom vaous ponts of vew. Thee ae some mpotant aspects of ths tuth whch ae desevng of study. Thus, fo example, thee s the dstncton between the "evealed" and the "hdden" wll of God. The queston S fst of all: s ths a vald dstncton? And f t s, wheen does ts valdty consst? But, futhe, f t s vald, how s t to be conceved n elaton to the tuth of Godts smplcty? O agan, the dstncton s sometmes made between the "decetve" and the lpeceptve" wll of God. Ths s a dstncton not unelated to the fome one; nevetheless, t s not dentcal. Hee, too, we mb3'" nque nto the meanng and legtmacy of ths dstncton, but also nto ts elaton to the tuth of the smplcty of Godts wll. Anyone who s acquanted wth the development of the eoneous doctne of the so-called "tee otfe," o l1geneal, well-meant offe of gace and salvaton" to all who hea the gospel wll also know that fequently the dstnctons mentoned above have been used n an attempted patal explanaton, o at least, justfcaton of the teachng that thee s a wll of God whch puposes the salvaton of the elect only, but also a wll of God fo the salvaton of all men. We pupose also to touch upon the valdty of the use of those dstnctons n connecton wth that matte. Thee ae seveal questons that can be ased n that context. But one of the most mpotant s, suely, whethe t s at all coect -- even apat fom the queston of a dualty of wlls n God -- to speak of the alleged wll of God fo the salvaton of all men as peceptve, n dstncton fom Hs wll fo the salvaton of the elect only as beng decetve. And the same queston may be ased wth espect to the dstnctons evealed and hdden. Howeve, even apat fom the queston of the legtmacy of the above dstnctons and the queston of the elaton to the doctne of dvne smplcty, t s smply a fact that the matte of Godts smplcty s nextcably nvolved n the ente ssue concenng the "geneal, well-meant offe" o "fee offe" of the gospel (the expessons ae lagely synonymous n contempoay theologcal palance). Ths has been tue hstocally. t was, and s, tue n Pesbytean ccles, as s plan fom the fact that the late John Muay hmself ecognzed ths -- mplctly n the booklet of whch he was co-autho wth Ned Stonehouse,

22 m 1 m 1""""1 pm", F Offe Of the Gospel, and explctly n hs book, Calvn On Scptue and Dvne Soveegnty, p. 69. The Evangelcal Pesbytean Chuch of Austala vey peceptvely ecognzes ths also as a fundamental ssue n the polemc enttled UNVERSALSM AND THE REFORMED CHURCHES, A Defense of Calvn's Calvnsm. But t was tue long befoe the developments just mentoned n the contovesy whch gave se to the Potestant Refomed Chuches. No s ths mee concdence. On the contay, t s axomatc. t s axomatc because all of dogmatcs 1s pncpally theology; and theefoe one s necessaly postng somethng about theology, about the doctne of God, whethe he speaks n the ealm of Anthopology, of Chstology, of Soteology, of Ecclesology, o of Eschatology. Ths s unavodable. The ssue of the "fee offe" les especally n the ealm of Soteology; but the soteologcal ponouncements on ths subject -- both po and -- wee necessaly, ethe mplctly o explctly, at the same tme ponouncements n the ealm of the fst locus of Dogmatcs, Theology. Moeove, ths was vey dectly and concetely tue n the actual contovesy cca 1924, whethe t was always ecognzed and admtted, o not. Theologans made ponouncements about the wll of God. They spoke about a wll of God to save all men and a wll of God to save only the elect; o they nssted that God's wll was solely to save the elect only. But the pont s: they spoke about the wll of God. That s undenably Theology And nevtably, too, t was Theology whch concened the mpotant subject of the attbute of God's smplcty. Thee wee some who seemed athe ntutvely to ecognze ths aleady n the pe-synod contovesy n 1924 n the Chstan Refomed Chuch. The "geneal, well-meant offe" was not yet an explct ssue at that tme; t only enteed the pctue when Synod ncopoated t n the dual ponouncement of the Fst Pont of Common Gace. But moe than one of Heman Hoeksema's attackes at that tme attacked hm fo hs "Gods-beschouwng (velv of God)," suggestng that he peached a had, tyanncal God. Thee was moe tuth than fcton at the bass of that attack -- not n the sense that Hoeksema's vew of God was evl, but n the sense that these attackes ocognzed, pehaps athe ntutvely, that the undelyng ssue was a theologcal ssue, a contest between two conflctng vews of God. Somewhat late, n some of the polemcal wtngs about the ssue of the "geneal, well-meant offe," ths became abundantly clea; and thee was shap debate whch focused pecsely on the tuth of the smplcty of the wll of God. And a lttle analyss of contempoay wtngs wll show that the ssue s stll, at bottom, a theolobcal ssue, not only a soteologcal ssue. Ths becomes abundantly plan,

23 """ _. F fl"1 F f"lll' J 1 fo example, n James Daane's The Feedom of God, n whch he fumes and fulmnates aganst all alleged "decetal t1201gsyu of oeksema. and othes. All of ths seves to undescoe the seousness of ths ssue. To make soteologcal ponouncements s seous enough;. when we take nto account that those soteologcal ponouncements ae at once theologcal ponouncements, then mattes become much moe seous stll. theologcally s henous, fo then we spe To e soteologcally s bad; to e the le about God Hmself, about Hs Beng, Natue, Mnd, Wll Attbute3, Woks. Kal Bath wote somewhee about those who magne that they say "God" whle all the tme they ae loudly sayng "MAN" That s dolaty. And that s the basc ssue -- a sptual, ethcal ssue -- n all theologzng. n ou theology we must bewae that we do not busy ouselves n makng ::tdols We must bewae that "Te do not say "Man" when we pupot 'to say "God." And ths n tself s a suffcent justfcaton fo a seous examnaton of ths subject of the smplcty of God's wll and of vaous elated aleady mentoned. questons One of ou puxposes n these atcles s to consde what vaous theologans have had to say about both the geneal subject of the smplcty of God's wll and the specfc subject of the "fee offe tl and the s:.mplcty of God's wll. And n ths consdeaton we wll begn at home. Pof. Wm. Heyns was fo many yeas a teache at Calvn College and Semna, aleady befoe t became a full-fledged and accedted college and semnay. fact, he was one of Heman Hoeksema's nstu.ctos when the latte was pepang fo the mnsty n the Chstan Refmed denomnaton po to Pof. Heyns was also, moe than any othe Ch1 stan Refomed theologan, the fathe of tp.._vew._. -.._... _... 4.; &o, _ whch became offcal chuch doc:_n 1924 when the doctne of the "geneal, well-meant offe" was nco't'pog"ed n the Fst Pont of Common Gace. n , yhen "he" wa'aleady' pofef,.sc;.:e;ts: -:;ns- ;- e a sees of atcles n De Wachte, the Duth the subject, "The Gospel." doctne of the "geneal offe. 1 language weekly of the Chstan Refomed Chuch,on These atcles wee nt.ended to be a defense of the Suely, thee was no one bette qualfed to wte un ths subject fom a Chstan Refomed vewpont than Pof. Heyns: was afte all, the fathe of ths yev; anf had taught t fo many yeas. Needless to say, Heman Hoeksema epled n the Standad Beae language. n he also n the Dutch He also wote unde the tt.e, "The Gospel," wth the SUb-ttle, "The Most Recent Attack Aganst thp. Tuth of Soveeg Gace." late gatheed n a 255-page bpok. These atcles wee atly because Pof. Heyns, hs opponent, was

24 f'"' F" '"l J \ " : a vey neat and well-oganzed wte, "'ho was athe capable of settng foth hs vews clealy, ths patcula polemca.l wtng of Heman Hoeksema s also one of hs cleaest, unclutteed by many sde-ssues and tangental dscussons. And n ths book the ssue of the smplcty of God and the "foffe" comes nto shap focus. Fo ths eason, and also n ode to make ths mateal avalable to those not at home n the Dutch language, we pesent, fst of all, - - a tanslaton of a lengthy secton of ths boq The fst chapte s enttled, "So Many Wlls, So Many Gods." have omtted the fst of the thee sectons of ths chapte, n ode to tun dectly to the petnent dscusson of the ssue. "'._..._...,. &.'f. -".--";..."':...z.> ", l":'.):'''''' Hee follows a tanslaton of Sectons 2 and 3 of Chapte. and al of Chapte. * * * * * Chapte So Many Wlls, So Many Gods 2 Heyns' Two-Wlls Doctne We shall fst attempt as much as possble to fom and to offe to the eade a coect concepton of the vew to whch the pofesso hself s commtted. Hs basc pncple s that 'hee ae n God two wlls. Two wlls n elaton to the same matte: the salvaton of men. Two wlls whch as fa as the content s concened stand dametcally ove aganst one anothe. F'o accodng to the one wll, God wlls that all men be saved. Accodng to t.he othe wll, God wlls that some men be saved, and that othes go lost. Ths the pofesso teaches vey planly. Note the followng: Ht s of ths latte concluson whch js cetanly not founded on God's Wod (that thee can be next to the wll n God whch does not wll the salvaton of the epobate no wll n God whch ndeed wlls the salvaton,h.h.) that we would have nothng. n ou estmaton that s an agument whch a Refomed man must not even thnk of usng and that s totally devod of all poof. Whee 1s the poof that wheea thee s n God a wll whch does not wll the salvaton of the epobate thee can be n Hm no lot11 whch ndeed wlls the salvaton? Does God's Wod say that? No, God's Wod does not say that, but ou undestandng says that. That would be a flagant contadcton, and thee s n God no contadcton. Yes, ndeed:l thus speaks ou undestandng, but what does that mean? Has ou undestandng fathomed the nfntely pefect God n ode to be able to make out what s possble n the Dvne Beng, and what not? Ae the thngs of God subject to ou undestandng fo the possblty o mpossblty? And

25 ', ' m nm how do mattes stand wth ou undestandng? s t not tue that ou undestandng s dakened and confused thl ough sn s stll n many espects the undestandng of the unegeneate, because egeneaton ndeed emoves hs blndness fo sptual thngs, so that he sees, but hs seeng s stll only a seeng, not of the sptual. thngs themselves, but as the seeng of a vague, engmatc mage of those thngs n a faultyt :tneta mo, wth the consequence that wth espect to the detals they can see no hamony and can even thnk to see contadcton whee thee s no contadcton? Shall then a man who acknowledges these thngs come wth the agument: My undestandng says so, as f ou poo undestandng could be qualfed and capable of judgng concenng Dvne thngs? Can one actually thnk. that such an agument would hee "be of any sgnfcance, that t would. pove anythng hee?" (De Wachte, Januay 11) wsh to emak at ths junctue that hee dffe adcally wth Heyns on two ponts. n the fst place dffe wth Heyns n egad to the pesentaton that man though sn has become nsane. Ths afte all s the pesentaton. Hs eason s affected, so that be fom a atonal vewpont sees thngs ncoectly. He has become so nsane that he sees contadcton whee thee s hamony, that what he calj.s Yes can also be No, that f he 'says that God does not wll somethng, he cannot tust hs undestandng to say that He theefoe also cannot ndeed wll t. By ths the subject vf all evelat,on s annhlated. f ths s so, then thee s no knowledge of God possble, then evey attempt to develop a theologcal concepton s senseless. Then thea can be an electon, but ths stll does not say that some ae saved; then thee can be a epobaton, but that Sll does not say that some go lost. Then thee can be a God, but theeby t s stll not sad that the asseton that thee s no God also s not tue. Heyns does not expess hee that the snne s sptually dakened; no does he say that ou undestandng s fnte and can neve compehend the nfnte; but that man, the natual and the egenea.te man, s nane. He puts all theology at loose ends. And ove aganst ths vey decdedly hold that man s ndeed sptua11y dakened and blnd, that he has also lost many of hs ognal gfts, so that he also can no moe know thngs as Adam. knew them n the state of ecttude, but that he s nomal n hs undestandng and not nsane. n the second place do not go along v.th Heyns n hs attack upon Holy Scptue He assets that we see n a faulty metal mo. And that metal mo s cetanly Holy Scptue. But although t s tue that n that mo we do not see face to face, but a eflecton of God nevetheless also mantan that