From Reformation to Reformation

And so it is not at all strange that our Symbolic Formulæ also consider the Punishment of sinners as necessary, not by virtue of the divine Good Pleasure indifferently free, but by the very Righteousness of God requiring this. Thus the Heidelburg Catechism has it, question XI, “Is not God then also merciful? Answer: God is indeed merciful, but in such a way that He is also just; therefore His justice requires, that sin which is committed against the most high Majesty of God,

Now, to the extent that Judiciary Righteousness exerts itself in Punishments, it is wont to be called Vindictive, Avenging, Punishing, etc. This Righteousness is called Punishing from its effects, also Avenging and Vindictive, from Jeremiah 5:9, 29; Romans 12:19. Anthropopathically this is also called God’s Anger, Hatred, Heat, etc.; since it was proven in § 26 that Affections of this sort are not able properly to obtain in God. [And this is Natural to God in such a way that

Johannes a Marck Objection α: God punishes the children because of the sins of their parents, and the just with the unjust, Exodus 20:5; Ezekiel 21:3; John 11:3. Responses: 1. Temporal evils are treated, particularly in Ezekiel 21:3 and John 11:3, which do not befall those Evangelically righteous, except as sinners also, upon whom the matter of Punishment falls, but not in the form of Punishment; and who, having been removed from the land of the living by the temporal Judgmen

Aristotle ARISTOTLE divides Particular Righteousness into Commutative and Distributive. Commutative Righteousness/Justice, which is to be observed in contracts and commerce, does not have a place in God; since, 1. it is posited in the equality of the thing given and the thing received, with the Arithmetical proportion preserved, and, 2. by it ownership is transferred; neither of which is able to be said of God, Romans 11:35; 1 Corinthians 4:7; Genesis 32:10; 1 Chronicles 29:1

But, although this Truth of God implies the Infallibility of the Word revealed by Him; yet it does not likewise imply the Infallibility of Human Reason or Perception. If you should say, Reason is from God. Responses: 1. God is to be contemplated here, not only as Creator, but at the same time as Judge, who in the very creation of the soul inflicts upon the same punishment because of Adam’s sin. 2. Reason, with respect to its act, does not exert itself without the cooperation

Take Up and Read! Shortly after my conversion to Christ, I became a regular listener to the radio broadcast of Dr. R.C. Sproul. Through Dr. Sproul I was exposed to Reformed theology for the first time, and, from the first, I was captivated. I was quite interested, of course, when he mentioned that he thought that Jonathan Edwards’ Freedom of the Will was the most important, most theologically formative, book that he had ever read. I ordered it immediately and waited anxiou

Now, Dominical Righteousness denotes the demonstration of this Natural Holiness in all the divine Words and Deeds. To this ought to be referred the Truth of God. Now, Truth, as far as it is comprehended under the Righteousness of God, is understood, not so much as Metaphysical, as Ethical. By the former God is far separated from all Idols, by the latter from all Error and Falsehood. Metaphysical Truth is the Truth of the Divine Essence and Perfections: for, as whatever create

Righteousness is attributed to God in a manifold sense; commonly it is rightly said to be Threefold, Divine, Dominical, and Judiciary: the first is an Absolute Attribute; the remaining two involve a Relation to creatures, about which Divine Righteousness exerts itself and is revealed. According to ARISTOTLE, book V Ethicorum, Righteousness is to be divided into Universal and Particular. Under Universal Reighteousness absolutely all Virtues are comprehended, especially relativ

Finally, the Goodness of God takes the name of Patience, or Forbearance, or Longsuffering, when He does not send the punishment justly to be inflicted immediately upon the misdeed: hence, when the Name of Jehovah is proclaimed, He is also said to be in Exodus 34:6, אֶ֥רֶךְ אַפַּ֖יִם, longsuffering, slow to anger, properly long of nose: now, the nose is the seat of anger, which especially shows itself there in vehement breathing and heat. And so He is long of nose, whose nose

Mercy is also to be referred to Goodness, no less than Grace, from which it hardly differs otherwise than that this includes the Misery of the Object with which it has to do. These two accompany each other; and as Grace exerts itself concerning man as sinner, so that it might grant to him the pardon of sin; so Mercy is exercised concerning man as Miserable because of sin, so that it might relieve his misery. It denotes an Affection of God, yet not to be conceived in God after

Various Divisions of divine Grace are able to be admitted, which all are chiefly referred to Grace gratis datam, freely given. Of course, that is Internal and External, which both concur in the Vocation, Sanctification, and Preservation of the Elect sinner, while External Grace is also granted to many Reprobates in supplying the means of Salvation. Hence Grace is also called Common, which pertains to all those externally Called, but does not have any certain connection with S

To the Goodness of God is also referred His Grace, Mercy, and Patience. In this way, the Goodness of God is denominated variously according to the reckoning of its diverse Objects and Effects. Of course, when one pursues with Love an Object not at all worthy of Love and thus extends undeserved Favor toward that, that Love and Goodness is wont to be called Grace. When that same Goodness is turned toward an Object miserable, and afflicted and struggling with ills, it is called

According to diverse Considerations and the variety of Effects and Objects, the Names of this divine Goodness also vary. Unto this, says our AUTHOR, Love, considered as an act flowing from Goodness, or as an Affection to be referred to Goodness, has regard. And which we here understand not a Natural Love, which is terminated on the Divine Persons themselves, etc. To this the saying of AUGUSTINE has regard, tractate CX on John, chapter VI, opera, tome 3, part 2, column 567, “G

But rather here by the Goodness of God we understand His Benignity, by which He offers Himself as Loveable/Desirable to various Creatures in various modes and degrees, since He desires and does good, to all Creatures generally, and to Men specifically, and to the Elect most especially. From this His abundance and ὑπεροχῇ/pre-eminence of Goodness, God is called יְהוָ֥ה הַטּ֖וֹב, the good Lord, κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν, par excellence, 2 Chronicles 30:18; indeed, the only Good, Matthew 19:1

The Goodness of God follows; here it is not to be understood of His intrinsic Perfection. That is, as each and every thing, as far as it has Being, also has Metaphysical Truth and Goodness, by which is understood the Conformity of its Being with the approval of the divine Will: so in this sense Goodness must have its place most perfectly in the Most Perfect Being, so that whatever of reality is necessarily contained in the Most Perfect Being, is most perfectly conformed to th

Artist's Depiction of Augustine God’s Knowledge is not properly the Cause of Things, but rather God’s Will; even if His Knowledge also precedes a thing, and is not able to fail; so that God does not receive knowledge from things posited outside of Himself, knowing all things Of Himself, and the effect also follows infallibly upon the Foreknowledge of God: which certain Scholastics appear to have maintained, who out of Augustine affirm that things are, because God knows them:

Arguments from Reason They Object, 2. Arguments; α. From the Knowledge of God extended to All Things; and so also to all Contradictories, of which one is always determinately True, the other false. But, since a matter of this sort, Future or Non-future, does not pertain to the class of Possible Things, to which the Knowledge of Simple Intelligence has regard; neither before the Decree was it able to be evident to God through the Knowledge of Vision: almost nothing else appear

They Object, 1. that there are a Great Many Passages, in which are predicted Effects, not as Possible, but as Future under Condition, yet not decreed, since they did not happen; for example, 1 Samuel 23:11, 12; Matthew 11:21; etc.: see BUDDEUS on the passages cited in his Institutionibus Theologiæ dogmaticæ, tome I, book II, chapter I, § 22, pages 297-299. I Respond: As far as Passages of this sort are concerned, to which appeal is made by our Adversaries; the text in 1 Samue

In a few words our AUTHOR comprehends many things, whereby he energetically refutes this error. 1. By this, says he in his Medulla Theologiæ, the Creature is made independent in its action, and God dependent in His Knowledge. A cause, created of itself, shall determine itself by some prerogative of its own: but the Creator shall follow that predefinition of the creature both with respect to His Knowledge, and with respect to His Will. Which things are plainly absurd and contr

Moving beyond words to the substance of the Doctrine, it is a Knowledge that is called Middle or Conditioned, whereby God knows Free and Contingent Future Things under Condition prior to the Decree. It is called Middle, because it as Middle comes between the Knowledge of Simple Intelligence and Free Knowledge, and it is, as it were, of a mixed condition. It agrees with Natural Knowledge in this, that it precedes the determination of the divine Will decreeing concerning this m